“A Simple-minded Boy and His Touched Wife”: Images of Madness in Pu Songling’s “Xiao-cui”

1 Manifestations, Causes, and Cure of Yuan-feng’s Madness

While both Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui are described by their families and servants as abnormal and simple-minded, their representations of madness are different. The same age, joint activities, and the same experience of being regarded as insane make the couple mirror images of each other, but the differences in gender and identity give rise to divergent manifestations and causes of their respective forms of madness. By comparing Yuan-feng’s and Xiao-cui’s insanity, we gain insights into the association between gender and madness, as well as the nature and causes of madness.

Yuan-feng’s madness is expressed in the text in two dimensions: first, unawareness of gender difference and lack of sex knowledge (XC: 1113), and second, simple-mindedness and childishness. At the beginning of the text, it is mentioned that because “at the age of sixteen [Yuan-feng] didn’t know the difference between male and female” (XC: 1113), Censor Wang, Yuan-feng’s father, believed that his son was a “simpleton”; he was even more angry and ashamed that “no one of his own class was willing to marry their daughters” to Yuan-feng (XC: 1113). Yuan-feng’s ignorance of sex and gender deprives him of the initiative to choose a spouse and the majesty of being an authoritative husband. And as the only son of the Wang family, Yuan-feng’s wifelessness means that the Wang family not only loses a qualified heir to Mr. Wang, but also loses the possibility of the family’s reproduction. Arguably, none of these were appropriate or normative practices to the ancient Chinese society. At that time, there was a strong adherence to a Confucian culture that espoused the “Patriarchal Clan System” (宗法制), which placed significant emphasis on the succession of the lineage and wealth of a patrilineal family.

Consequently, the “diagnosis” of Yuan-feng is imposed over Xiao-cui after she joins the Wang family. Mr. Wang’s worries about Yuan-feng’s unawareness of sex difference then converts into exploitation of Xiao-cui’s body: compared with Yuan-feng, Xiao-cui literally takes on more responsibility for the fact that there is no heir to the Wang family, and she is considered mad because of infertility. In other words, all the stress of reproduction is placed on the female body. Yuan-feng’s madness was essentially a temporary deposit of patriarchal oppression of women. When Yuan-feng was single, he was in a subordinate position to his father; and when Xiao -cui married Yuan-feng, Xiao-cui was to be even more secondary to her husband. Their marriage makes Xiao-cui the dominated. This young couple is automatically naturalized, marginalized, and labelled as “being crazy.” It is predictable that Yuan-feng would become the heir to patriarchy, the next Mr. Wang of the family.

The second portrayal of Yuan-feng’s insanity is his simple-mindedness. For nine times, Yuan-feng is explicitly referred to as a “simpleton” or the “simple-minded” (XC: 1113–1114, 1116–1117). He is consistently observed engaging in playful activities with Xiao-cui, characterized by laughter and commotion in the room (XC: 1114). On occasion, he becomes the unwitting victim of Xiao-cui’s mischievous hazing due to his lack of intelligence, picking up the ball for her (XC: 1114) and nearly suffocating in the tub at her hands (XC: 1117). In comparison with his father, who “did indeed pass the metropolitan examination at a young age” and “rose from the post of county magistrate to become a Censor” (XC: 1113), Yuan-feng is a late bloomer who is unable to bring prestige or distinction to honor his own family. His incompetence further reinforces the family’s impression of him as a simpleton, and this label not only serves as a rationalization for his misfit behavior but also as “a right of families seeking to escape dishonor” (Foucault 2001, 63). From the perspective of his parents, who adhere to the traditional Confucian paradigm emphasizing education and renown, Yuan-feng’s spontaneous and juvenile conduct is perceived as markedly deviant, even as manifestations of insanity. In this way, Yuan-feng’s insanity represents a diagnosis proffered by Censor Wang as a universally accepted rationale for his son’s incongruence with the tenets of Confucianism.

Accordingly, Confucianism has become the criterion for the Wang’s diagnosis of insanity and madness. For instance, Confucianism emphasizes that “[t]here are three things that are considered as unfilial, and the worst of them is to have no posterity” (無後為大) (Legge 2011, 313), so no heir was at one time a reason why Mr. Wang regards Yuan-feng as insane. In addition, Confucianism emphasizes “becoming official” (入仕 Chan 1963, 41), or rather, male heirs in the family are required to study and becoming state officials as their first career. As the only son of Censor Wang, Yuan-feng is the sole male heir in the Wang family who could succeed his father’s official post and continue the family’s honor. But when the emperor meets Yuan-feng, who has no intelligence, no understanding of bureaucracy, and no knowledge of class difference, he treats him as an idiot.

Constructing Confucianism as a moral code and defining practices that do not conform to the Confucianism as madness exemplifies what Foucault refers to as “the classical experience of madness” (2001], 31). Therefore, the objective of treating Yuan Feng’s insanity is to render him “normal” in accordance with the standards of the Confucian tradition. Ostensibly, Yuan-feng’s insanity was cured by Xiao-cui’s magic:

[Xiao-cui] poured more scalding hot water into the tub, took off his robe and pants, and then with a maid helped [Yuan-feng] to get in […] After a while he ceased to make any more sounds, and when they opened it to look, he had expired […]

After a little while longer the sweat stopped, and he suddenly opened his eyes and looked all around, scrutinizing each member of the household as if he didn’t recognize them. Then he said, “When I think back on the past, it all seems like a dream – why is that?” Since his speech no loner seemed simple-minded, Mrs. Wang was amazed […] and on being questioned repeatedly, [Yuan-feng] was in fact no longer simple-minded. (XC: 1117)

Here, Mrs. Wang tentatively draws the conclusion that Yuan-feng is no longer insane through Yuan-feng’s speech. The original text does not elaborate on how the test is conducted, but from Yuan-feng’s first words when he wakes up, it can be seen that even though he cannot recognize the people around him, he utters a poem rather than the intermittent response to other people’s words as a child. The fact that he manages to make his words harmonize proves that he possesses the intelligence to learn.

But this is only a preliminary judgment. Since Yuan-feng was initially considered a fool because of his inability to understand sex, the Wangs particularly checked if Xiao-cui still “slept apart from Yuan-feng […] [and] had intimate relations” (XC: 1116):

When evening came, they moved his bed back to where it had been, and again made it up with covers and a blanket to watch what he would do. When Yuan-feng entered the room, he sent all the maidservants away. When they looked in the next morning, [Xiao-cui’s own] bed had not been slept in. From that point on there was no more simple-mindedness on his part or craziness on her part; all was rosy between husband and wife, and the two were inseparable. (XC: 1117)

The couple’s intimate relationship suggests the possibility of offspring, which convinces Wang’s family that Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui are no longer crazy. This showcases that marriage and procreation are among the criteria by which madness is evaluated. The treatment of this type of insanity is essentially a revocation of the diagnosis and the removal of the diagnosis of insanity depends on whether the individuals’ practices are in accordance with societal norms.

2 The Manifestations of Xiao-cui’s Madness: Extraordinary Practices

In both the original and the text in translation, Pu Songling and Stephen Owen employ different wording to distinguish between Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui’s madness. For instance, Yuan-feng is described as “simpleton” (癡), which Frances Weightman defines as “naiveté” (Weightman 2006, 206); while Xiao-cui is sequentially depicted as “befuddled” (憨), “touched” (顛, seen in XC: 1116) and “crazy” (狂, seen in XC: 1117), through which we see the varying intensities of multifarious accounts for Xiao-cui’s madness. In light of the aforesaid expressions, Yuan-feng is tellingly more akin to what Foucault calls an unreasonable “fool” (2001], 11), whereas Xiao-cui is portrayed as an insane and mad woman. The distinct terms indicate that Yuan-feng’s and Xiao-cui’s madness have different implications, with the former emphasizing age-inappropriate immaturity and poor knowledge, while the latter stressing rebelliousness influenced by “the liberal climate in late imperial China” (Wong 2016, 16).

Xiao-cui’s madness is specifically manifested in her inappropriate emotions and deeds. First off, Xiao-cui intermittently expresses extraordinary alienation and passion, which renders the Wang family “upset and annoyed” (XC: 1115). For example, when Xiao-cui’s fox mother left her, “Xiao-cui didn’t seem to miss her at all, but at once went to the dressing table and began to play around with various ways of making herself up” (XC: 1113). She reacted indifferently to her mother’s departure and did not develop feelings of dismay or sadness, but immediately turned her attention to her own recreational activities, suggesting a lack of traditional emotional attachment. Although this may stem from her solitary habit as a fox and her mission to repay the Wangs, from the Wangs’ point of view, the girl is somewhat “befuddled,” which has led to gossips among relatives that Xiao-cui is a madwoman (XC: 1113).

A particular example of Xiao-cui’s strange emotions is her laughter. For a total of sixteen times Xiao-cui’s smiles are recorded in the text. In Figure 1 as listed below, the sixteen smiles are categorized into three types, namely mysterious smiles, playful smiles, and smiles in response to scolding.

Figure 1:

Xiao-cui’s laughter.

These three kinds of smiles have different functions, and together they shape a complete and multi-faceted image: Xiao-cui’s mysterious smiles hint at her non-human identity, with intelligence and supernatural abilities; her playful smiles point to her joyful and free personality, and also one of the reasons why she is diagnosed as insane, because as a wife she leads her husband to indulge himself with games; her smiles in response to scolding have multiple meanings such as forbearance, silent resistance, and mockery. To forbear her parents-in-law is because she needs to repay Mr. Wang’s kindness for her mother, silent defiance is because she avoids a fierce confrontation, and mockery is her counterattack when she can no longer stand it. As time passes, Xiao-cui’s laughter becomes more frequent, which contributes to an overall impression of her as being somewhat unhinged.

It is noteworthy that Xiao-cui’s smile does not only represent passion, but also an alternative of speech. When Xiao-cui is unable or unwilling to respond to the Wang family, or when she is misunderstood and scolded, she smiles in silence. In this case, Xiao-cui’s smile can be considered an example of what Foucault refers to as “implicit delirium”:

In cases of no more than silent gestures, wordless violence, oddities of conduct, classical thought has no doubt that madness is continually subjacent, relating each of these particular signs to the general essence of madness. James’s Dictionary expressly urges us to consider as delirious “the sufferers who sin by fault or excess in any of various voluntary actions, in a manner contrary to reason and to propriety […] when a patient acts against his custom and without cause, or when he speaks too much or too little against his normal habits.” (2001], 93)

Xiao-cui’s smile aligns with Foucault’s description, which contravenes both social norms and her typical demeanor. In the Qing Dynasty, a mother-in-law is more of a supervisor than a mother in the traditional sense (Lu 1998). The objective of this tutelage was to prepare the daughter-in-law to assume the role of assisting her husband to be a qualified successor. But when Mrs. Wang asks Xiao-cui to “mend her ways” at Mr. Wang’s request, Xiao-cui still “answered her with a smile” (XC: 1115). Smile at this point serves as a substitute and buffer for “correction,” which underscores her detachment from family expectations and societal norms.

On top of that, smiling is de facto not Xiao-cui’s habitual pattern. When Xiao-cui completes her five years of gratitude, she curtails her smiles, and “from that point on, there was no more […] craziness on her part” (XC: 1117); and she does not resume “laughing and talking” happily until she leaves the Wang family and moves into the garden of a gentry household with her sisters (XC: 1117). Xu Xuening suggests that Xiao-cui’s change from “laughing” to “not laughing” is not a process of “humanization” but a way to show her complete disappointment with the patriarchal family, and her rebellion reaches its climax at this point (2016, 52). By this token, her reactivation of the smile means that she is no longer in a state of delirium, physically and mentally freeing herself. Her smiling afterward is out of happiness, not a mask to cope with the Wangs.

Moreover, in terms of behavior, Xiao-cui’s madness, taking shape in the Confucian society with rigid etiquette, is de facto the performance of her rebellion against ancient China’s monarchy, patriarchy, and Confucianism, which are condensed into the “Three Cardinal Guides” (三綱; Gu 2013, 49). These are the paramount doctrines dealing with the fundamental Confucian social structure at the end of the Han dominated monarchical dynasty (King and Bond 1985). Heavily underscored by Neo-Confucianism in the Song dynasty, this term designates the three most essential social relationships: ruler and subject, father and son, and husband and wife. Notwithstanding its initial intention of promoting reciprocal duties inherent in human relationships, it is gradually enshrined as the cosmological principle to underpin the patriarchal hierarchy (Walton-Vargo 1978). That is to say, the subject, the son, and the wife, being trivialized as subordinates, must obey their superiors, namely, the ruler, the father, and the husband unconditionally.

As a fox spirit representing nature and the most pristine desire, Xiao-cui cannot tolerate the doctrinaire Three Cardinal Guides governing human thought, so she boldly rebels against it by deliberately disregarding the authority of the monarch, her parents-in-law, and her husband. As a civilian, Xiao-cui disrespects the emperor. She dresses her husband in “imperial dragon robes and a crown of jade” (XC: 1116), which is always forbidden to be worn by ordinary people because it was the symbol of the emperor. Furthermore, she addresses herself with the monarchical title “the daughter of the Jade Emperor in Heaven” (XC: 1116). This can be seen as a provocation to the status of emperors, as they have been called “the Son of Heaven” since the Zhou Dynasty. As a daughter-in-law, she often disobliges her in-laws’ requests, playing tricks on her simple-minded husband Yuan-feng, and even “killed” him regardless of reprimands and chastisement from his parents (XC: 1114). Other behaviors, like masquerading as Censor Wang and breaking the jade vase, also lead her in-laws to scold her. Their dissatisfaction culminates when Xiao-cui is unable to “bear a child,” and they come thus far that they curse her to die (XC: 1119). As a wife, Xiao-cui always makes fun of her foolish husband naughtily and even smothers him in the tub and “cover[s] him over with a blanket” until “he cease[s] to make any more sounds” (XC: 1117). Though her intention is to cure his foolishness with her magic, Mrs. Wang considers her the murderer of his son. Xiao-cui’s outrageous behaviors, in the view of ossified Confucianism, are abnormal and are regarded as her rebellion against the Three Cardinal Guides; and this abnormality is seen as a sign of madness.

It is also worth noting that in the text, Xiao-cui is not characterized as purely insane; instead, she is depicted as a paradoxical “angelic mad woman” (Zhu 2020, 10), featuring a beautiful and gentle angel when she is sane, and a madwoman when she is insane. Gilbert and Gubar emphasize that the “angelic mad woman” is also defined by the patriarchy (Gilbert and Gubar [1979] 2020, 17), which means that in literature whether a woman is angelic or mad depends on her relationship with patriarchy and men. When Xiao-cui marries into the Wang family to perpetuate the family’s reproduction, she is considered “the highest order” (XC: 1113); and when Mrs. Wang mistakenly reckons that she has killed Yuan-feng, she is called a “crazed girl” (XC: 1117). Angelic women refer to those who are submissive and favorable to the patriarchy, while madwomen are the opposite. The madness of the madwomen is not merely mentally identified as abnormal, but is also an excuse to criticize, confine, and punish them. The image of the madwoman becomes a pattern of punishments and rewards that are used to discipline other women.

Hence, in the text, Xiao-cui’s madness is relative and variable, but the ideological evils about having her madness diagnosed is persistent, so is the necessity of having her madness explained by the patriarchal norms.

Nevertheless, unquestioning adherence to these norms is detrimental, as norms are established by a particular class according to their own requirements and do not necessarily align with the individual will of all. What’s more, norms are not consistently reasonable and effective, as their definitions and interpretations vary over time, across cultures, and in different locations. It follows that norms are not always rational or effective. It is important to acknowledge that even “universal” norms do not always apply to all individuals. Each person’s perceptions and behaviors are shaped by the unique combination of their experiences and circumstances. Classifying behaviors that do not align with norms as “madness” reflects a monist and totalizing perspective. This approach to understanding mental illness is detrimental to effective treatment and will contribute to the stigmatization of mental illness as “abnormal.” This would polarize and antagonize society further.

3 The Causes of Xiao-cui’s Madness: Being an Animal and a Woman

The preceding analysis reveals that Xiao-cui’s madness stems from a profound rebellion against societal norms, which are established and imposed by the patriarchal society and family structure. In contrast, during the feudal period in China, animals and non-humans, as with women, wives, and daughters-in-law, were largely subordinate to men and excluded from the discourse of power. Therefore, Xiao-cui, a fox spirit, an assemblage of animal and woman, Yuan-feng’s wife, and the daughter-in-law of the Wang family, has consistently been marginalized and dominated. As the “Other” within the social and familial structures, Xiao-cui challenges the established norms in order to assert her personal autonomy. However, her actions are perceived as aberrant and irrational by those in positions of power. It can thus be seen that Xiao-cui’s madness is highly related to her identity, especially her dual identity as an animal and a woman.

On the one hand, Xiao-cui’s madness arises out of her intrinsic bestiality. Although some of Xiao-cui’s strange behaviors are against human cultural practices, they are sensible from an animal’s point of view. Animality emerged before humans embraced civilization and social norms and returns once they are divested of civilization and social norms; in other words, animality is both a pre-human and post-human manifestation. From this perspective, animality is continuous while humanity is relatively contingent. When reason begins to falter, one will enter a state of unreason. As Foucault argues, “Animality has escaped domestication by human symbols and values; and it is animality that reveals the dark rage, the sterile madness that lie in men’s hearts” (2001], 18). But animality frightens the ordinary because it encapsulates a challenge to norms and order and it has the potential to generate social upheaval, so the manifestation of animality is labeled and stigmatized as madness.

Xiao-cui’s animality is inherited from her fox mother, where she acquires the ability of metamorphosis and partial knowledge of humanity. However, the humanity taught by her mother contradicts the humanity that Xiao-cui perceives in the Wang family. Although there is a scant description of Xiao-cui’s mother in the story, we can readily find that her mother thinks to repay a kindness done by sending her daughter to the Wang family to look after their foolish son. Before she leaves, she tells her daughter to “serve [Wang Yuan-feng’s parents] conscientiously” (XC: 1113). Her mother educated Xiao-cui according to the Confucian principles of “filial piety” (孝) and righteousness (義), making her a filial daughter who honors her in-laws.

In the brief five years of imitating humans, despite her endeavor to suppress her bestiality with human nature, assisting her father-in-law to survive the official crisis and restoring her husband’s sanity, Xiao-cui still exposes her animalistic habits at times, such as her strange sleeping postures: putting her feet and thighs on Yuan-feng’s belly and poking around a person’s thighs (XC: 1115). However, realizing that her forbearance will only be reciprocated with endless whipping and beating, she no longer subscribes to human standards of behavior, unleashes her repressed animality, and shows the rage of a ferocious animal. For example, when Xiao-cui was insulted for smashing the valuable jade vase by accident, she accused the Wangs:

I have been spat upon, I have borne curses, and more hairs have been pulled from my head than I can count. The reason I didn’t go off immediately was because our five years together were not up. But now, how can I stay here one moment longer! (XC: 1117–1118)

She finally “went out in temper” (XC: 1118) and never came back again. Xiao-cui then returns to her animal identity as well as the fox’s solitary habits, isolating her territory from human living space. While being found in Wang’s garden in the countryside, she refused to “have anyone else around” (XC: 1119) except two of her former maids and an old housekeeper, which shows that she reckons with her personal space and intentionally make efforts to protect it from intrusion.

On another front, Xiao-cui’s madness is thought to be related to her womanhood. Although Yuan-feng is also noted as insane in the text, in the history of madness, there is a category of madness that has been considered to be uniquely female, that is, “hysteria” (Foucault 2001, 128). The word “hysteria” originates from the ancient Greek word “hysterikos,” which means the “wandering womb,” first proposed by Plato. Unusable or incorrectly used uteruses were assumed to be the cause of many medical pathologies in women at that time. Therefore, hysteria is deemed to be unique to women, which could be characterized particularly by a sensation of fullness in the abdomen and chest, often followed by choking or breathlessness (Meigs 1848, xxxvi). Ancient Chinese medicine likewise believed that this type of mental illness was triggered by organs in the female body as well. In the light of interpretation by the Department of Internal Medicine, Affiliated Outpatient Clinic of Shanxi Provincial School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, hysteria was originally recorded in the “Miscellaneous Diseases of Women” chapter of the Chinese medical work written by Zhang Zhongjing in the Eastern Han Dynasty, Jin Kui Yao Lüe （金匱要略 · 婦人雜病篇 Synopsis of Prescriptions of the Golden Chamber) (臟躁癥) (You 2015, 651-652). Despite later advances in medicine and the renouncement of the hypothesis that hysteria actually arose from the female organ, scholars such as Joseph Raulin (1758]) continued to argue that hysteria derives from an exaggerated female imagination.

With that said, our intention is not so much to explore how hysteria established a connection with women as to investigate the effect of naturalizing hysteria as a female disease. Foucault (2001) argues that hysteria is a reckless means by which ignorant but mincing doctors diagnose indifferently the problems of women they do not understand. Gilbert and Gubar likewise point that hysteria is “caused by patriarchal socialization in several ways” (Gilbert and Gubar [1979] 2020, 53–54). Whether formulated by doctors or patriarchy as a whole, the coinage of hysteria demonstrates that women are often believed to be engaged with madness, women’s issues tend to be defined by the patriarchal system, and that women’s identities are bound to be interpreted by patriarchal language.

A major factor in Xiao-cui’s diagnosis of insanity by the Wangs is that she does not give birth to a child. Mr. Wang was “over fifty and always felt troubled at not having any grandchildren” (XC: 1116). In the second half of the original text, Xiao-cui asks Yuan-feng to marry another woman for the following reason:

Before, when I lived at your house, your father said that I would die without bearing any children. Your parents are old, and I truly cannot bear a child; I’m afraid that this will ruin the succession of your family line. Please marry someone and set her up in your home. (XC: 1119)

This statement reflects the contradiction between the idea of women’s reproductive freedom and the exploitation of women’s bodies by patriarchy. In ancient China, because of underdeveloped medical technology, the short lifespan of the ordinary, and the state’s huge demand for (male) labor, fertility was the family’s most important task and having many sons was the family’s honor. Women in the family were expected to take on the task of reproducing, nurturing, and assisting the male heirs. If the family had no heir, the women of the current generation were considered to have violated the Confucian rituals and committed the first sin according to “the seven conditions of divorcing the wife” (七出), namely, “childlessness” (Qin 2018, 96). Since Xiao-cui “would die without bearing any children” (XC: 1119), she is identified as insane by Mr. Wang naturally. Even though Xiao-cui has “protected and preserved” this whole family dozens of times, she is still seen as crazy and severely scolded by her in-laws when she makes the slightest mistake (XC: 1117–1118). After all, not having children is the cardinal reason of the diagnosis of Xiao-cui’s so-called “madness.”

4 The Treatment of Xiao-cui’s Madness: Escape from Confinement

Since Xiao-cui’s insanity has nothing to do with mental illness, the treatment of it does not rely on medical technology, but rather is related to social and cultural aspects. Xiao-cui’s insanity is treated in the text in two ways, one being the confinement she receives from the Wang family. This act of confinement makes the Wang family akin to the medieval European asylum, a system of partial coercion, bondage, and whipping of the physical body, with dual functionalities of “Surveillance and Judgment,” as well as a place where “only the nearness of observation that watches, that spies, that comes closer in order to see better” (Foucault 2001, 238).

The Wangs confine Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui within the Wang mansion, only to show their madness to the servants, who then report to the Emperor that this couple consists “a simple-minded boy and his touched wife who spent their days playing games” (XC: 1116). In order to avoid the Emperor’s condemnation for making and wearing the Emperor’s exclusive clothing, the dragon robe (龍袍), the Wangs bring the demented Yuan-feng before the Emperor, who becomes the object of spectacle and ridicule for the Emperor and his other courtiers. From the Wang family’s point of view, the confinement of the insane Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui is a way of “protecting” them from gossips and potentially greater dangers.

However, confinement is essentially a way of safeguarding family honor by obscuring the actions of those deemed insane; it does not aim to cure madness, nor does it address the underlying causes of madness. As Foucault emphasizes, confinement more approximates an “exhibition,” which imprisons the bodies and restricts activities of the mad while showcasing their differences and strangeness to those considered “normal”:

Confinement hid away unreason, and betrayed the shame it aroused; but it explicitly drew attention to madness, pointed to it […] Madness had become a thing to look at: no longer a monster inside oneself, but an animal with strange mechanisms, a bestiality from which man had long since been suppressed. (2001], 65–66)

The exhibition of Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui’s madness is a way of preventing the family from being punished and earning rewards from the Emperor. From this perspective, confinement, i.e., providing an enclosed space for healing, may seem to be a way to protect Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui on the surface, but essentially serves to protect the family effectively, which by no means functions as a cure.

By comparison, it is the second treatment that truly “heals” Xiao-cui’s “madness,” which is her escape from the Wang family. Xiao-cui’s flight encompasses two aspects: to flee from the Wang family and from the identity as their daughter-in-law. Despite her efforts to aid the family with financial and employment endeavors, Xiao-cui still has to confront with unfair treatment and chronic bullying from her in-laws. In the text, she contends that “[t]he things [she has] protected and preserved have been way more than a single vase […] Yet she has been spat upon, [borne] curses, and more hairs [have] been pulled from [her] head than [she] can count” (XC: 1118). As a result, her breakout reasonably represents her long-suppressed defiance of both the family and the patriarchal structures that confine and oppress her.

However, this escape is ephemeral and incomplete, as the dutiful Xiao-cui promised her mother to protect the Wang family for five years, however, she has not fulfilled that commitment before she makes her attempted getaway. Hence, she only escapes from the Wang family’s living space, but not from her identity being Yuan-feng’s wife and daughter-in-law of Mr. and Mrs. Wang.

Before the second escape, Xiao-cui urges Yuan-feng to marry again. She says, “Your father said that I would die without bearing any children […] I’m afraid that this will ruin the succession of your family line” (XC: 1119). By now, Xiao-cui has realised that Yuan-feng will inherit the Wang family from his old parents, and he will then shift from a madman being observed and mocked to a patriarch observing and mocking others. In order to escape eternally from the Wang family and the patriarchal society that has driven her mad, she plans to find a substitute, a new wife for Yuan-feng. During their last years with each other, she gradually transforms herself into the appearance of Yuan-feng’s predestined fiancée, Miss. Zhong.

Xiao-cui is not imitating or disguising herself as Miss. Zhong, but “transferring” her identity to Miss Zhong, by way of which she can escape her identity in the Wang family and cure her madness. Miss. Zhong’s speech, appearance, and movements resemblant to Xiao-cui indicate that she will become the next madwoman in the Wang family. Xiao-cui returns to her initial territory and identity, while Miss. Zhong has to enter the cycle of Xiao-cui’s madness. The patriarchal system cannot be dissolved, and there will always be people lingering in and out.

After Xiao-cui escapes from the Wang family and the identity of their daughter-in-law, she turns back into an animal. As Foucault argues:

In the reduction to animality, madness finds both its truth and its cure; when the madman has become a beast, this presence of the animal in man, a presence which constituted the scandal of madness, is eliminated: not that the animal is silenced, but man himself is abolished. In the human being who has become a beast of burden, the absence of reason follows wisdom and its order: madness is then cured, since it is alienated in something which is no less than its truth. (2001], 71)

Foucault suggests that one of the ways to cure madness is to return to the animal nature, because madness is defined as opposed to “human nature,” which represents rationality. If one returns to animality and eliminates “human nature/rationality,” the definition of madness will eventually be abolished. In other words, the cure for madness is not a treatment for the “patient” (Xiao-cui), but a demand that the “doctors” (Mr. and Mrs. Wang) eliminate the norms and rationality that bind and exploit human nature. The Wangs regulate Xiao-cui’s thoughts with the three Cardinal Guides and bind her body with confinement, both of which reflect their anti-human nature inclination. With that in mind, it is also arguable that animality is not the opposite of human nature, as animality is the root of human nature and the oppression of power. However, Xiao-cui cannot change the deep-rooted Confucian rituals in the minds of the Wang family by herself, so the only thing she can do is return to the animal world, return to the animal nature, and regain her life.

5 Conclusions

This paper examines the manifestations, causes, and treatments of the protagonists Xiao-cui’s and Yuan-feng’s madness in Pu Songling’s “Liaozhai–Xiao-cui,” which presents a profound exploration of the constructs of madness within the confines of feudal Chinese society. Both Yuan-feng and Xiao-cui are diagnosed as mad by the Wang family. However, their madness does not stem from psychiatric disorders but rather from their individual reactions to the oppressive patriarchal and monarchical structures. Their non-conformity to societal norms, particularly those dictated by Confucian culture, results in their being labelled as “simple-minded,” “crazy,” and “touched” by the Wang family to safeguard their family honor.

Despite both being diagnosed as mad, the manifestations and treatments of Yuan-feng’s and Xiao-cui’s madness differs significantly. Yuan-feng’s madness is connected with his naïvety and ignorance about sex and gender. And his madness is “cured” once he transforms into a qualified heir who meets the family and societal expectations. In contrast, Xiao-cui’s madness has much to do with her laughter, unconventional behavior, and her inability to bear children. Her madness is rooted in her alienation from human society as a fox spirit and her rebellion against the patriarchal family’s discipline to make her a qualified wife and daughter-in-law. Therefore, the treatment for Xiao-cui does not lie in the patriarchal family system per se, but rather in the eventual, ultimate liberation of her identity as an animal.

An analysis of Pu Songling’s story through the prism of Foucault, Gilbert, and Gubar reveals the cultural universality embedded in the narrative, which is grounded in a universal human nature. These universalities include the exclusion and marginalization of the heterogeneous, as well as the oppression of women under patriarchy. The paper emphasizes that madness is in a way constructed socially and culturally, so it is crucial to develop a more nuanced understanding of madness that transcends a simplified taxonomy, and call for an embracing of diversity and individuality as inherent aspects of human experience.