In both the Introduction and Chapter One, Xing Lu lays the groundwork for a historically based portrayal of classical Chinese rhetoric. Before she can present her argument, however, she must first draw the reader’s attention to the notion of “Orientalism” and dispel several common myths regarding Chinese rhetoric held by Western scholars and rhetoricians.  One important claim she makes several times over is the importance of contextually placing information before interpreting it. As simple as this concept sounds, it is, in fact, much harder to physically or mentally accomplish.

Lu stresses and highlights anthropological approaches, and in doing so, she mentions Geertz and his “actor orientation” approach. Having previously read Geertz’s “Thick Description,” I was already privy to this idea of stepping into the shoes of the person whose thoughts, emotions, and culture you are trying to make claims about or even understand. What I find interesting is that in both of these cases, I found myself asking how? This idea sounds brilliantly simple, but neither of these authors offers any tools or suggestions for actually stepping into another’s shoes. Lu, in particular, stresses that “Western domination and colonization” are so prevalent in our culture and educational systems that we often portray the “other” in negative, demeaning, and stereotypical ways (22). She does, however, explain that “multicultural hermeneutics” is a pursuit that is definitely on the right track towards understanding Chinese rhetoric as it actually existed in the past, and what it has to teach us in the present.

Lu is multicultural linguistically, racially, and culturally. If any person is qualified to accurately and fairly examine the role of Chinese rhetoric in the development of rhetoric as a discipline, it is probably someone who has a Western and Eastern outlook on life, family, custom, education, and culture, yet, again, my question is where does that leave someone who is not privy to this sort of equal representation? How does someone, like myself, who is aware of biases, both in information and in culture, begin to take that next step? Is there even a next step to be had without multicultural identity? How do we, as individuals, get to a point where we share information–unbiased, factual, and relevant–without first having to dispel prevalent, unjust, and generalizing myths?