1. 1
Running head: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
A Critical Analysis of “The Fifth Relationship: Dangerous Friendships in the Confucian
Context”
Nicole Horton
University of California San Diego
Making of the Modern World 21, Section B01
CRA
Professor Edmond Chang
October 16, 2012

2. 2
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Abstract
The intent of this essay is to give an analytical synopsis of the article by Norman Kutcher
which is titled, “The Fifth Relationship: Dangerous Friendships in the Confucian Context”. The
article discusses the way in which hierarchical Confucian society dealt with friendship in
philosophy, writings and practice throughout various dynastic periods.

3. 3
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Within Confucianism, societal relationships are comprised of five bonds (Kutcher, 2000,
p, 1615). Further background given is that hierarchy was a fundamentally vital notion in
Confucian society, being intrinsically related to the cosmos (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1616). A counter-
argument to hierarchy by Westerners is that hierarchy is burdensome, with the rebuttal that the
extensive practice of it in China suggests some find it uplifting (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1617).
The fifth is the topic of this article: the bond of friendship (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1615). This
is a significant topic in that it has not been the focus of most writings on Confucianism hitherto
(Kutcher, 2000, p, 1617). Unlike the other bonds friendship was not hierarchically mandated,
was attained through mutual agreement, and was not comprised of family or state (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1615-1616). Kutcher expresses three claims: that Confucian authors simultaneously
expressed esteem and mistrust of friendship, that this partially stemmed from the view that it
held great potential towards tearing down or reinforcing hierarchical society, and that while
friendship could offer fulfillment of man’s craving for equality, it was beneath the other bonds
because of its non-hierarchical and temporary nature (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1618). The problem this
article examines is how Confucian authors guided friendships in support of hierarchical life in
society (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1617). The thesis of the article is that authors tended to express a dual
notion that a friendship should have beneficial results and also be aimed at the service of the
other bonds (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1618).
The background is that hierarchy was a fundamentally vital notion in Confucian society,
being intrinsically related to the cosmos (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1616). A counter-argument to

4. 4
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
hierarchy by Westerners is that hierarchy is burdensome, with the rebuttal that the extensive
practice of it in China suggests some find it uplifting (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1617).
Most written guidance on friendship was directed towards upper class males, and notions
on what was acceptable flexed according to the cultural dynamics of period (Kutcher, 2000, p,
1617). Prior to the Song period, stipulations were more lax (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1620). However as
economic realities grew more fierce, more pressure was placed on friendship reinforcing the
individual and the four higher bonds and those which ran abreast were seen as selfish and
immoral (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1624). Writers cautioned that poorly chosen peers could contaminate
and in turn lead to societal detriment whereas a positive peer would reinforce society (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1619).
Five hundred years after the Song period, Weng Fanggang wrote that friendship should
improve knowledge with emphasis that it shouldn’t be at the cost of hindering oneself (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1621). Pursuing advancement in friendship was more noble than standing firm on one’s
beliefs (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1625). The powerful potential of friendship was further curtailed
through chiding that it should mimic specific aspects of the various hierarchical bonds (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1622-1623). While some held fast to the contemporary views on friendship, others
deviated and sought equality in friendship as a way to cope with the acridness of their society
(Kutcher, 2000, p, 1625). Thus in the sixteenth century, friendship through equality did in fact
began to degrade the hierarchical underpinnings of society, paving the way for companionship in
marriage in the 17th century (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1625).
In the Zhou period, a tale of infamous friendship arose and came to be known as the
Guan-Bao friendship (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1626). The story was one of childhood friends who

5. 5
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
exhibited self-sacrifice for one another later in life (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1626). Later when Bao fell
ill, Guan refused food and drink in concern for his friend (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1626). This was
immoral because it exalted friendship over hierarchical demands of family and state (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1626). Despite the negative reviews, the Guan-Bao story inspired many other similar
friendships and accounts (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1626).
Some writers tried to address the threatening new trend by comparing close friends to
brothers, while implicating the possibility of friendship being higher as it held the potential of
equality, whereas brothers had hierarchy assigned to birthright (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1627). The
new acceptable range of friendship was reconciled with Confucianism by writers who stressed
that friendship was temporary (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1627) . In this environment, a new genre arose.
It was termed the songbie poem (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1628). It held that masculine friendship was
strongest when friends knew that life was about to take them in separate directions (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1628) .
The article concludes that writers who tried to reinforce state values did not try to
eradicate society of friendship because it would be a futile undertaking (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1628-
1629). Instead they recognized the capacity of such relationships to be bent towards reinforcing
societal ideals (Kutcher, 2000, p, 1629).
I think that it would be beneficial for me to consult some other authors who are recognized as
authorities on the subject of friendship and hierarchy. As I have not yet read any other authors on
the subject, I cannot yet form an opinion as to the accuracy of Kutcher’s views. He wrote that the
prevalence of hierarchy was evidence that those who practiced it found it assuaging (Kutcher,
2000, p, 1617). I would be interested in finding out if there is counter evidence to this claim.