關于“中國文學古今演變”的討論(筆談)

?

關于“中國文學古今演變”的討論(筆談)

[主持人語] 在20世紀末到新世紀初的文學史重構討論中，章培恒先生倡導的“中國文學古今演變研究”作為“重寫文學史”思考的延伸，產生了較大影響。繼章培恒先生之后，黃霖教授、梅新林教授、廖可斌教授、黃仁生教授等都相繼提出了啟人思路的討論。盡管這一研究，以明代中后期到民國文學間聯(lián)系溝通較為直接可行，但的確還可以從更寬泛的角度來理解、踐行。這里選編的4篇短文，從不同角度，繼續(xù)把該話題“接著說”。許結教授《賦體論述與古今之變》從文體特征角度巡覽，強調了賦體文學源起、演變的階段性特征，對近百年來賦體研究的史學化、“兼才學”帶來的缺失等，提出了自己的思考。普慧教授《文學經(jīng)典的形成與傳承》從文學作品的流傳接受史角度，關注其經(jīng)典化過程的動態(tài)性變化問題，諸如陶淵明、《文心雕龍》、杜甫、張玉娘等，都有一個被人們認可價值的過程，期間人格魅力、接受趣味、時代風尚、政治家提倡等，都會一定程度地介入其中。因此，文學作品創(chuàng)作時的價值，與若干年后被認知的價值，不可同日而語。他提醒的是，“演變”未必由此及彼地變更了作品對象，而是不同觀照主體所處的時代環(huán)境、審美標準、趣尚觀念變化了。湯哲聲教授《不變與變：中國通俗文學批評的原則性和適應性及其思考》也關注到評價標準的問題，以其通俗文學的評價標準更應該引起注意，更費琢磨。該文指出在古今通俗文學三個演變階段中，應遵循“不變”(原則性)與“變”(適應性)的批評原則，這當是對錢鍾書先生“一”與“不一”哲學的發(fā)揮，而在通俗文學作品這里，大眾性、商業(yè)性和類型模式構成了中國通俗文學性質的“三足鼎”，成為其批評標準原則性的基本要素，因而，用分析魯迅等新文學作家作品的方法批評通俗文學作品是不符合實際的。王立教授《中國文學古今演變研究的幾點思考》從章培恒先生弟子張勇博士新著《中國小說古今演變舉隅》說起，強調了該著在古今演變格局中的新創(chuàng)獲，在文本細讀與多元拉伸的同時，不僅比較了若干古今小說人物類型，還集中在一些“負面”人物類型的系列沿革中闡發(fā)出文化反思的意義?；仡櫹嚓P學術史，也可以對于古今演變研究的學理價值加深認同感。

A Discussion about the Evolution of Chinese Literature

Host’s words：Speaking of the evolution of Chinese literature study and ancient literary history reconstruction and its academic significance in the literary history reconstruction discussion from the end of 19thcentury to the beginning of the 20thcentury，“the evolution of Chinese literature study” raised by Mr.Zhang Peiheng，as an extension of “rewriting literary history”，has a relatively significant influence.Chinese ancient literature research center in Fudan University opened this new discipline and a doctoral degree program.It also collaborates with Zhejiang Normal University and other universities and held many national academic seminars centered this research，publishing several collections of theses.HebeiJournalopened a new column about this research and gained excellent opinions.After Mr.Zhang Peiheng，Professor Huang Lin，Professor MeiXinlin，Professor Liao Kebin，Professor Huang Rensheng，etc.put forward brilliant ideas.Despite its direct access to literature of middle and post Ming dynasty to ROC，a wider understanding and practice is indeed possible.Here we have 4 different articles continuing this topic.From a stylistic perspective，DiscussiononFuanditsevolutionby Professor Xu Jie emphasizes characteristics of FU in its origin and evolution stages，and also raises some questions about the deficiency caused by historization and scholarization of FU study.From the perspective of circulation and acceptance history of literature，Professor Pu Hui’sFormingandPassingofLiteratureClassicsfocuses on dynamics in its process of becoming a classic.For example，Tan Yuanming，WenXinDiaoLong，Du Fu，Zhang Yuniang，etc.all shared a time when personal charming，acceptance interest，time fashion，politician appeal got involved.Therefore，the value of a literature work in its creation time can be different from its later value.What he wants us to know is that “evolution” is not referring to the literary work itself；it is the environment，aesthetic standard，and the interest ideal that change with time.Professor Tang Zhesheng’sUnchangingandChanging:PrincipleandAdaptationofChinesePopularLiteratureCriticismalso talks about aesthetic standards，and the aesthetic standards of popular literature worth more noticing.This paper points out that in the three stages of Chinese popular literature，the aesthetic standards should be “unchanging” (principle)，and “changing” (adaptation)，reflecting Mr.Qian Zhongshu’s philosophical “one” and “no one”.In popular literature，popularity，commerciality，and type mode are three important factors，so，it would be wrong and impractical to access a popular work using the standard we use in Lu Xun’s works.Opening withExamplesofChineseNovelEvolutionby Zhang Peiheng’s student，Dr.Zhang Yong，Professor Wang Li’sSeveralThoughtsaboutChineseLiteratureEvolutionResearchemphasizes the breakthroughs by Zhang Yong’s new book and in the meantime makes a comparison between several character types by close reading and multiple extensions.He also focuses on some negative characters and concludes some cultural significance.Reflecting relative academic history can help increase the sense of identity in the evolution research theory.