When Prof. Norman passed away last summer, at 76, he must have worn an avuncular, affable smile on his face like he always did while sharing his views with young scholars, mind at peace with mission accomplished. His smile can be deceptive when it comes to the core issue of Chinese linguistics. On this one-year anniversary of his death, as I reflect on his path, two of his conspicuous views come to the fore: one on Chinese historical phonology and the other on Chinese dialectology.He is a Gladiator in his tenacious, Herculean attempt to put an end to the myth surrounding Karlgren. The myth is a mix of misrepresentation of the written records and the resulting unorthodox exercise of the comparative method. To that end, it takes not just courage it also takes profound mastery of Chinese dialectology. His maverickism has yet to win wide and loud applause, but it struck a chord with me long before his monumental Chinese appeared. He is lonely but not alone-the czar of Chinese linguistics in Beijing, Li Rong, can be viewed as his ally.He is a trailblazer in the study of Chinese dialectology. His academic debut, titled Tonal development in Min, was and still is a sensation in the circle. While everyone else indulged himself in vertical comparison, he had opened a new horizon doing, fittingly, horizontal comparison, producing a ”bizarre picture” about Chinese linguistic history. It was a work out of the modus operandi of historical linguistics, but proved unsuited for the taste of the general audience. He came under fire, but he felt undaunted throughout his lifetime, because his colleagues were not as skilled in the techniques (basic procedure) and the so-called ”dualism” about that discipline. Like Karlgren before him, he has now become the center of gravity. Criticism of him may be easy but, to be fair, amid the gun-smokes he has inspired many in the field: we can do it in a very different manner, more fruitful and academically more significant.In his stellar research career, Norman has left splendid footprints. He is a terminator of a long tradition in the field of Chinese historical phonology; he is also a bellwether in the field of Chinese dialectology. With his genius and relentless pursuit, he has made far more contributions than can be depicted in a concise paper. For many years to come, my assessment is, his great book will continue to serve as a constant source of inspiration; it is a crystallization of decades' whole-hearted devotion. The Chinese like to say, open the book, peruse it, and you are sure to benefit. If you are to grasp the essentials of Chinese linguistics, you have got to spend some time munching, chewing and digesting this cornucopia, the best introductory survey of its kind.