Quick Demo: On Ruining a Classic Text

Kaufman (author more than translator, I feel) boasts: In this work you will learn how people are to be treated and dealt with. The work was written for men in command and leaders of states. It is for the ambitious and strong spirited; do not seek morality lessons here.

Sun Tzu has been translated and interpreted countless times by people with little knowledge of true combat reality on either the physical or mental level.

Most of the available translations and interpretations maintain a poetic approach that really doesn’t pertain to the times we are living in. There is a tendency to maintain a “mystique” regarding ancient knowledge. This is quaint, relative to today’s aggressive personality. We are living in a global network and must think in decisive terms if we are to succeed.

He also chooses to leave out the valuable commentaries, which are supposed to be as much a part of the work as the original.

He says: In reality, who cares what Ch’en Fu thinks about Sun Tzu’s hidden meaning about the jade stalk in the midst of the enemy’s goldfish pond? We are grown-up and intelligent enough to develop our own understanding without the need for quaint allegories. There is nothing sacred here. I find that approach unnecessary, limiting, and a waste of time to the educated reader.

And here is a fun fact:

As an acknowledged and world-recognized martial arts master, a Hanshi (which is the highest rank attainable), I am thoroughly aware of my responsibility for the interpretation of this doctrine, and I have made it incumbent upon myself to explain Sun Tzu’s tenets as I perceive them in a definitive manner. 

— Must have recently taken a crash course on how to prepare a CV!

Well, the book is a bore and a complete failure. It does no justice to Sun Tzu’s masterpiece and is worse than the regular self-help fare because it has only pretentiousness (of being tough, goal-oriented, warlord-like, if you please) and no real intention of even trying to 'help' any non-delusional executive.

There is a reason why The Art of War is always presented poetically — it is so that the metaphors can be interpreted by the reader and applied as they want, so that they can understand the spirit of planned and prepared combat/conduct and apply that in life. That is why Art of war is an enduring and much loved classic.

The author obviously has no clue about all this. He thinks it is a good idea to just present the text as-is, without ornamentation, without poetry, without any hints at broader applications beyond the battleground — Because the global corporation IS a battleground! Hello!

Not realizing that once you strip away the poetry, you also strip the power of metaphor and what you have left is a dated txt that talks of war and claims to be for managers. It makes no sense to be told in plain prose to poison your enemy and insult his wife. Idiotic, without even being entertaining. Takes all the fun out of reading a bad book.

Now I'm ready to invade Poland
.
.
.
Okay, I understand that is not the kind of reaction Sun Tzu would have liked(best victories are won without fighting) but it makes a nice heading. His philosophy is simple - be good even if it means looking bad and to know your surroundings while you fight. He is against pretentious heroism, plunder or useless bloodshed whether that is blood of his own men or his opponents. Yet he wants you not to miss the opportunities where you can find them or to break the old moral laws where it is of advantage to you.

Not that I'm looking to lead an army or pretend that I can but there is something so honest in there that you just love it. Perhaps it is book's realism (as against the bookish morality) - something comparable to Machiavelli's 'The Prince'.

This was written hundreds of years after the death of it’s author around 25 hundred years ago, and then translated into English recently. It is obviously an important piece of writing, but it is more important to know about than it is interesting to read. If I was to start over, I would have just read the quotes from The Art of War that are listed on goodreads and stopped reading when I got bored somewhere around the middle of the first page.

Easily the oldest piece of writing I have read to date, that has lost none of its importance, however, I was disappointed to learn the copy I read was only a hyper condensed version focusing almost entirely on military conflict, where it encompassed the subject of conflict more so than actual military warfare. What was included was interesting to read, but I have heard the full version works like a manual for life skills and social interactions as well, guiding and leading others in the pursuit of objectives, so I guess I missed out. Not bothering to read the full version now though.

Simply put, Sun Tzu says that it is better not to fight than to be involved in a conflict, but if you are going to have to fight, then you have to do it to win, and these are the various strategies, often brutal, that will get you that result.

Niccolò Machiavelli, in The Prince says if you are in a position of power and seek to maintain it, it is better to be loved and respected, but if you can't achieve that, then at least enforce respect and these are the, often brutal, strategies that will get that result.

I say, if you are going to be a politician in the generally-winning party and you don't like reading much, The Prince is for you. Very sly. If however you see yourself in opposition, arguing your point, try Sun Tzu first.

For the rest of us the books are short and make interesting historical and somewhat philosophical reading but they aren't going to change your life other than giving you a leg up on the intellectual book ladder, always a plus for the pseuds!
Who, me? Yah think...

It is hard to speculate that this book has been written for one single era...When you read it you realise it meant to stay and teach all the humanity, a book that needs to be taught in schools, teaching kids how to THINK....How it is SIMPLE to THINK....Now THAT`S somthing they don`t usually teach us to know when we are nothing but small lads....Such a damn complicate world :(

Here`s a small taste of what you may find in this small book :)
-----------------------
- According as circumstances are favourable, one should modify one's plans.
- All warfare is based on deception.
- Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.
- Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
- Now in order to kill the enemy, our men must be roused to anger; that there may be advantage from defeating the enemy, they must have their rewards.
- In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.
- It is the rule in war, if our forces are ten to the enemy's one, to surround him; if five to one, to attack him; if twice as numerous, to divide our army into two.
- To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
- In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack — the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of manœuvres.
- Energy may be likened to the bending of a crossbow; decision, to the releasing of a trigger.
- Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.
- The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him.
- Appear at points which the enemy must hasten to defend; march swiftly to places where you are not expected.
- Rouse him, and learn the principle of his activity or inactivity. Force him to reveal himself, so as to find out his vulnerable spots.
- Manœuvring with an army is advantageous; with an undisciplined multitude, most dangerous.
- If you march thirty Li with the same object, two-thirds of your army will arrive.
- Disciplined and calm, to await the appearance of disorder and hubbub amongst the enemy: — this is the art of retaining self-possession.
- Do not pursue an enemy who simulates flight; do not attack soldiers whose temper is keen.
- Do not swallow bait offered by the enemy. Do not interfere with an army that is returning home.
- When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.
- Reduce the hostile chiefs by inflicting damage on them; make trouble for them, and keep them constantly engaged; hold out specious allurements, and make them rush to any given point.
- Camp in high places, facing the sun. Do not climb heights in order to fight. So much for mountain warfare.
- In crossing salt-marshes, your sole concern should be to get over them quickly, without any delay.
- All armies prefer high ground to low and sunny places to dark.
- When the higher officers are angry and insubordinate, and on meeting the enemy give battle on their own account from a feeling of resentment, before the commander-in-chief can tell whether or not he is in a position to fight, the result is ruin.
- If asked how to cope with a great host of the enemy in orderly array and on the point of marching to the attack, I should say: “Begin by seizing something which your opponent holds dear; then he will be amenable to your will.”
- Rapidity is the essence of war: take advantage of the enemy's unreadiness, make your way by unexpected routes, and attack unguarded spots.
- How to make the best of both strong and weak — that is a question involving the proper use of ground.
- Unhappy is the fate of one who tries to win his battles and succeed in his attacks without cultivating the spirit of enterprise; for the result is waste of time and general stagnation.
- No ruler should put troops into the field merely to gratify his own spleen; no general should fight a battle simply out of pique.
- Knowledge of the enemy's dispositions can only be obtained from other men.
- Hence it is only the enlightened ruler and the wise general who will use the highest intelligence of the army for purposes of spying, and thereby they achieve great results. Spies are a most important element in war, because on them depends an army's ability to move.

Degno della Gialappa's



Ho cambiato l'analista dopo che mi ha consigliato questo libro.
Forse avrei dovuto farlo prima.

Spassoso, esilarante, demenziale.
Il manager come il nuovo condottiero, wow.
L’audiobook (primo e ultimo della mia vita) è il massimo perché lo speaker prende tutto sul serio, usa tono impegnato. Non ha capito che è una burla.
O sono io che non ho capito?

I wanted to read "The Art of War" for a long time because I saw it referenced in quite a few shows and movies. Now that I finished it, I don't understand what the hype is about!

I'm not saying the book is useless per se, but I didn't think anything mentioned in the book is helpful to survive in today's world where small wars are being fought in everyday life while big wars go on in the peripheral vision.

I thought, perhaps, the book would provide me wisdom that would help me in my daily life or change my perspective about things, but that wasn't the case.

However, the book holds some profound words that would make you think about war and its evil consequences. Sun Zhu stresses the importance of some form of trickery in winning the war, which renders how contemptible the act truly is.

For the most part, I did enjoy reading about different strategies you can use in war, various types of battlegrounds, how to control an army, when to use offense and defense, how to use the resources to your benefit, and the treacherous ways to subdue your enemy.

However, most of the advice on how to successfully win a war was clichéd, for example, know yourself and the enemy, plan before going in blind, don't show your cards, don't get carried away by emotions. And other statements were about things that you should do in order to win rather than how to do them.

All in all, it's an interesting book if you want to learn more about war, but I didn't think any of the information is relevant in today's age.

Instagram

The Art of War by Sun Tzu is an ancient Chinese generals' instructions on war. Having listened to this book left me with feelings of calmness. Everything is strategically and logically explained. I could transfer myself to the ancient world of China and see how they applied all the suggestions. Sort strong, yet calm and thoughtful.

I read the Chinese version with English translation. I was most impressed with this observation: that winning every war is not the best scenario; the most ideal scenario is where one manages to repel an enemy without fighting. The other theory I found convincing is that a shrewd fighter would choose his men wisely and would know how to ride the prevailing situation. Most of the contents would seem to be practical common sense.

The keynote of the first chapter ~ all warfare is based on deception ~ seems to tally with the last chapter, which is about the use of spies.

3.5 ⭐


Master Sun said:
Ultimate excellence lies
Not in applying false subtext to my teachings
To suit your corporate self-help douche-baggery
But in defending their integrity
By acknowledging them for what they are
Military Stratagems, through and through


For the purpose of review, my edition of ‘The Art of War’ is the Penguin Classics Deluxe Edition. Edited, translated and with an introduction by John Minford. This was a really great way to experience this 2500-year-old military treatise. It begins with about a 50-page section reserved for the introduction, notes on text, list of dynasties and historical events as well as a list and description of the various canon commentators ranging from the Pre-Tang era (as early as 155-220) to the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911). You are then given the treatise, unadorned, to read and make your own presumptions as to it’s meaning, followed by the same treatise with extensive commentary.


Beginning with the work itself, as not everyone’s copy will have the commentary included, Sun Tzu’s treatise, in my opinion, is to be taken as nothing other than military strategy. The foundation of this work is exploitation and deception or “Success through cunning”. This is why I can appreciate its genius in the context of war and even individual combat (Bruce Lee applies many of the same underlying Taoist principles to his philosophy of ‘Jeet Kune Do’ with devastating effect) but can’t understand why anyone would want to introduce such dishonest tactics of subterfuge to their personal or work life. If I took anything beneficial from a personal perspective it was from the Taoist ideas which seem to permeate both Sunzi’s thoughts and those of the commentators. The treatise places huge importance on the planning and gathering of information through espionage, understanding the forms and dispositions of both yourself and the enemy army at any given time, unpredictability (formlessness), the benefits of advantageous terrain and both the virtues of an effective general as well as the pitfalls of a poor one.


I’ve seen Sunzi’s work taken out of context and used in countless personal and corporate self-help books. The idea of taking pure ideology and twisting it, almost beyond recognition, to suit your own needs is nothing new. In fact, even Sun Tzu himself abuses a number of the basic notions of Taoist teachings to support his own ideas. As did the so-called “legalists” (Chinese fascists) of the warring states period who derived a perverted justification for their Orwellian State through certain Taoist principles.


One of the more horrifying examples of distorting well-intentioned philosophies are the Chinese teachings regarding the “Art of Love”. These somehow take the wholesome lessons of the Tao and use them to justify a “relentless quest for sexual power” in which women are reduced to “objects for the enhancement of male potency and long life”. Get a load of this insane shit:
n   “The man should defeat the enemy in the sexual battle by keeping himself under complete control… while exciting the woman till she reaches orgasm and sheds her Yin essence which is then absorbed by the man.”n
Well, ladies, if that doesn’t get you up and about, I don’t know what will. I mean, as long as you’re cool with being perceived as a sexual enemy by your loved-one, objectified and having your precious “Yin essence” absorbed, the rest sounds ok, right?!... Doesn’t sound like the Tao that I know.


I was concerned but not entirely turned away by the fact that this kind of philosophical distortion might leak into the commentary of this translation but I needn’t have worried. The commentary given here is completely literal. A number of the commentators themselves were generals in the centuries closely following the time in which these stratagems were allegedly compiled. Minford compiles these commentaries brilliantly. At times he has ordered them so as to be a sort of commentary on commentary. One philosopher will comment on Master Sun’s work, followed by another philosopher commenting on what the previous commentator said. Often this reads like a multi-generational conversation between strategists which I really enjoyed. You also really begin to get a feel for the personality traits of a number of the commentators. For example, there’s Du You, lover of cat analogies, or Cao Cao, the brutal general and strict disciplinarian who was prepared to take his own life upon breaking one of his own trivial rules. These were the things I liked about the commentary.


On the other hand, there were times when the commentary became repetitive and at times felt redundant due to the fact that a lot of Sunzi’s information is quite literal and unclouded by metaphor. In stark contrast to something like the ‘Tao Te Ching’ by Lao Tzu whose teachings are infamously intangible and elusive. Sun Tzu already has a habit of repeating some ideas in an educationally beneficial manner. On a number of occasions, the exact phrase is repeated. Whether this was actually him or the way the bamboo strips have been compiled, I don’t know. The point is, when you pile on additional, unrequired clarification and expansion, it does begin to get a little tiresome after a couple of hundred pages.


Sun Tzu: ”Deadlock” means that neither side finds it advantageous to make a move.
Du You: What Sunzi means is that neither side finds it advantageous to move, and the situation remains deadlocked.
Sun Tzu: Yeah bro, that’s literally exactly what I just said! Du You even listen?


I enjoyed this, despite the last 100 pages becoming a bit of a battle of attrition, and am now really looking forward to reading the ‘Tao Te Ching’ and the ‘Analects of Confucius’ in the next month or so. Happy reading amigos!


n  ”Know the enemy,
Know yourself,
And Victory
Is never in doubt
Not in a hundred battles.”n

فکر می‌کردم خودشناسی و خودسازی در این نوشتار بسیار پررنگ‌‌تر باشد و برای خواننده‌ی امروزی آورده‌ی بیشتری داشته باشد. ولی اصل مطلب واقعاً درباره‌ی جنگ و لشکرکشی است. بخشی دیگری از مطالب نیز برای انسان امروز، جدید نیستند. در مجموع نخواندید هم نخواندید.

مهمترین اصول مطرح شده در کتاب متمرکزند بر سودگرایی، هوشمندی، و موقعیت‌شناسی. فکر می‌کنم، همه‌ی ما در مقایسه با انسان‌های دیرین، آگاهانه یا ناخودآگاهانه، چنین اصولی را بهتر می‌شناسیم و به کار می‌گیریم. در نتیجه می‌توان گفت بخش زیادی از مطالب، چیز جدیدی ندارند. از طرفی علم مدیریت، روان‌شناسی، تجارت، و یا حتی برخی کتاب‌های خودشناسی، سلف-هاپ، و «عمومی» به صورت اصولی‌تری اندرزهای این کتاب را پوشش می‌دهند.

بخش‌هایی از کتاب منحصراً در مورد لشکرکشی، بودجه‌بندی جنگ، محاصره‌ی شهرها، بکارگیری جاسوسان و ... است که احتمالاً برای اکثریت ما جذابیتی ندارد.

به سبک اندرزنامه‌ها و پندنامه‌های قدیمی، نویسنده غالباً مشغول صدور حکم‌هایی قطعی و کلی‌ست که از جایگاهی رفیع دیکته می‌شوند و لزوماً منسجم و خالی از تضاد نیستند.

نمی‌دانم چقدر باید چنین کتاب‌هایی را از منظر یک خواننده‌ی امروزی بررسی کرد، یا چقدر منصفانه است اگر چنین کنیم. به هر صورت، من چنین کردم و این کتاب را چندان نپسندیدم.