At the first beginning of the story “Tian Qilang”, Wu Chengxiu had a dream. He dreamed someone said to him: “You have made lots of friends across the land. But you make friends without discrimination. Now there is a man with whom you can share weal and woe. Why don’t you make him your friend?” Wu asked:”Who is he?” The voice answered: “It’s Tian Qilang.”
Although Wu Chengxiu made friends far and wide, when he faced crisis, not a single one came to his aid. In contrast, Tian Qilang, a poor friend, was willing to risk his life to save him.
Of course, the relationship between Wu Chengxiu and Tian Qilang was not genuine friendship either. We will discuss this topic further in this article.
Based on the nuanced analysis of the story, we found the relationship between Wu Chengxiu and Tian Qilang cannot be considered true friendship. Rather, it embodies a tragic transaction rooted in class inequality.
The Essence of Their Relationship
Insurmountable Class Divide:
Wu Chengxiu, a wealthy scholar, actively befriends Tian Qilang (a poor hunter) due to a prophetic dream warning of future peril.
Tian’s mother explicitly rejects Wu’s monetary gifts, declaring: “The rich repay others with wealth; the poor repay others with righteousness”. This highlights the inherent impossibility of equal friendship across classes — wealth allows the rich to “purchase” loyalty, while the poor can only “pay” with their lives.
Kindness as Moral Debt:
Wu’s “benevolence” (e.g., rescuing Tian from prison) is a calculated investment. Tian is forced into a debt that demands ultimate repayment.
Tian’s mother laments: “Your body and life now belong to Master Wu”, transforming Tian into a bonded instrument of “righteousness” rather than a free agent of friendship.
Transaction Over Emotional Bond:
Wu seeks Tian’s martial prowess to resolve his crises; Tian’s sacrifice is a settlement of dues, not voluntary loyalty.
Their dynamic mirrors social predation: Wu trades wealth for security, while Tian trades his life under the guise of “righteousness” — devoid of mutual trust or equality.
Controversy: Is There Any Element of Friendship?
Superficial Praise vs. Critical Reality:
While Tian’s sacrifice is romanticized as “dying for one’s benefactor”, Wu’s orchestrated generosity exposes manipulation. Contrasted with Wu’s fair-weather “elite friends” who abandon him, Tian’s actions stem from compulsory duty, not genuine affection.
Tragedy as Social Critique:
The fantastical ending (Tian’s corpse avenging Wu) symbolizes righteous fury against corruption, yet underscores the story’s core message: in a feudal society, “righteousness” is weaponized by the rich to exploit the poor. True friendship cannot flourish amid structural oppression.
Pu Songling’s Deeper Message
The story dismantles conventional notions of “righteousness”:
The Perils of Imposed “Kindness”: Wu’s patronage is a tool of control. Tian’s fate warns: “Beware unearned favors — they incur unpayable debts”.
Inequality as Destiny: The class chasm reduces relationships to transactions. Had society been just, life-for-debt exchanges would be unnecessary.
To conclude, their bond is a hierarchical contract:
Wu secures protection through wealth. Tian pays with his life under the weight of “righteous debt”, stripped of autonomy.
Absent equality, mutual choice, and emotional reciprocity, their relationship epitomizes how class systems corrupt human connections — transforming potential camaraderie into fatal exploitation.
“The rich repay with wealth; the poor repay with righteousness — this is the iron law of a broken world.”
— Pu Songling’s silent indictment in Tian Qilang.
Leave a Reply