瞿秋白与"文腔革命"

“文腔革命”的概念来自于瞿秋白。“文腔革命”思想是瞿秋白文学革命和语言改革思想的重要组成部分。瞿秋白提供“文腔革命”的动因是基于对五四文学革命的否定性判断、对创建“新中国文”的展望和对底层劳苦大众的深切关注。究其内容 ,既有积极的进步作用 ,也有明显的历史局限。客观分析和评价瞿秋白“文腔革命”思想 ,对于深入了解瞿秋白的文学思想 ,促进今天的语言改革都有一定的认识和借鉴作用。     

五四文学传统与三十年代文学转型

＂五四＂作为中国现代文学的开端,是绕不开和说不尽的一个传统和话题。文章选择从20世纪30年代文学界对五四文学传统的反思入手,通过对五四文学与30年代文学的阐释和评价,探究其背后所隐含的不同言说目的、方式和观照视角,由此来透视言说者和评价者基于不同历史阶段所持的不同的文学思路。五四文学秉持的是一种人文学科的思路,而30年代文学信守的则是一种社会科学的思路,而对于两个时代的不同阐释和评价以及其间的种种复杂纠葛,在此都可找到准确、合理的解释。另外,通过30年代与＂五四＂所持文学思路的差异,还可以反观五四文学传统以及把握30年代文学的转型,总结五四文学传统和30年代文学传统的经验和教训。     

五四文学革命的历史功过

五四文学革命已经有 85年的历史 ,功过是非 ,理应给予理性的学术评价。对于五四文学革命 ,既有“新儒学派”的根本否定 ,受“新儒学派”影响的传统文化维护派的指责与否定 ,也有“国学派”、“鸳鸯蝴蝶派”、“新鸳蝴派”等的挑战 ,他们的一些批评指出了五四文学革命的缺点与失误 ,往往不无道理 ,但相对于五四文学革命的伟大功绩而言不过是九牛一毛。五四文学革命的主要功绩有 :( 1 )以白话取代文言 ,完成了文学语言由古典向现代的转型 ;( 2 )揭开了中国“人的文学”的新篇章 ;( 3 )彻底扫荡了“鸳鸯蝴蝶派” ;( 4 )取法欧美文学的经验 ,实现了中国文学与世界的首次接轨。     

Rethinking the Modern Transformation of Classical Chinese Literary Theory

Though it is not new, the topic of the modern transformation of classical Chinese literary theory still holds profound significance for China’s current efforts in carrying forward the essence of classical literary theory and constructing a new literary theory that conforms to the spirit of our times. Today, Chinese scholars have to handle two traditions: one is the classical literary scholarship up to the 19th century, distant in time and space from today; the other is the modern tradition that started in the early 20th century. These two traditions involve not only rupture and heterogeneous change but also continuity and partial homogeneous preservation. Taking our stand on the modern and contemporary tradition, we should consciously pursue research on classical literary theory, using modern consciousness to scrutinize, reorder, discover, select, interpret, activate and absorb its finer elements, those that are still vital, so as to creatively promote its modern transformation and further integrate it as an organic component of the construction of modern Chinese literary theory. Over the past two or three decades, Chinese scholars have been advancing this great project in a systematic and solid way, achieving gratifying progress. We must strengthen our efforts and make further progress with this great undertaking.     

May Fourth Writers’ Reconstruction of Traditional Chinese Literary Classics

The classics are at the heart of traditional literature, and play an important role in its transmission. May Fourth writers did not totally reject traditional literary classics; rather, they selectively preserved and reinterpreted them, setting up a new canon based on the criteria of evolution, humanism, human relationships, popular culture, etc. To a certain extent, the May Fourth reconstruction of the classics inherited late Qing thought and views of literature, but it was more of an embodiment of new intellectual horizons; a modern spirit acting through the rediscovery and recreation of traditional literature. The reconstruction of the classical canon revealed a close connection between the New Literature and traditional literature, thereby effectively facilitating the acceptance of New Literature by the masses. It also provided writers with national resources for literary creation, thus preventing New Literature from descending to nihilistic understanding of Chinese tradition. This mode of discovering and creating the modern while being rooted in their native soil enabled such writers to step out of the binary opposition between “making China Western” and “Sinicizing the West,” and thus has methodological significance for the relation between Chinese and Western cultures from the late Qing on. Literary classics have a profound meaning for writers’ creations and for literature and cultural tradition. Despite its shortcomings, the May Fourth reconstruction of the traditional classics can inspire us even today.     

对中国现代文学批评理论的世纪回顾和总结

清理和研究现代文学的理论批评 ,带有文学史和学术史研究的双重品格。现代文学理论批评起码有四种历史作用 :1.推动中国文学走出古典向现代转型 ;2 .促进新兴文学的发展和文学流派的繁荣 ;3.引导中国现代文学精品的产生和现代文学创作的成熟 ;4.在广泛的实践中舒展丰富的思维角度 ,为后世留下成败得失 ,可供反复思考的多样智慧。     

Literature,Literary Criticism and the Historical Index of the Readability of Literary Texts

The German scholar Sigrid Weigel takes issue with Professor Zhang Jiang’s view on the “correct understanding of a text,” which holds that literary interpretation should be objective and should reflect authorial intention. She raises four points to rebut Zhang’s criteria for determining whether an interpretation of literature is correct. Firstly, the central concern of literary interpretation is not authorial intention, but rather the dissection of the creative ideas in the text. Secondly, it is impossible to identify a single objective “authorial intention” when readers’ backgrounds, perspectives, methods and purposes vary dramatically. Thirdly, with the concept of the “historical index of readability,” Weigel attempts to establish an optimal meeting point between history and modern interpretive perspectives. Finally, Weigel makes it clear that literature and literary criticism in China today cannot eliminate the influence of Western theories and that the key to the development of Chinese literary theory lies in the combination of tradition and modernity.     

《扬鞭集》：永远清新的野花香

刘半农是最早向民族歌谣学习的白话诗人,他对于民歌体新诗歌内容与形式的理论探索及其创造性的实践,对五四以来的白话自由新诗的创作有着开拓性的贡献,对30年代的苏区文艺及40年代延安文艺运动中的新民歌体诗歌的形成,产生过积极的影响。重读刘半农先生的新民歌体诗集《扬鞭集》,解析蕴涵其中的思想艺术特质,对于把握中国白话自由新诗艺术形式的形成脉理,体认刘半农先生的诗学地位,有着极其重要的认知价值。     

意境与中国影视创作

作为凝聚着华夏民族审美理想的中心范畴的意境,在现代中国的各门艺术中依然有所传承。在电影艺术领域,营造意境同样是提升其艺术境界的重要手段。《小城之春》、《卧虎藏龙》和《花样年华》都是化用中国古典意境的佳作,而各自的风格又全然不同,体现了独特的民族文化特色。中国电影创作在吸收本民族的古典美学精华的同时,也应该注意融入时代精神。     

“言志”诗学对中国现代文学的内在影响(英文)

否定与批判“言志”诗学,曾是中国现代文学转型的标志。但从五四新文学开始,“言志”诗学不仅没有被剔出中国现代文学的审美范畴,相反,却借助于西方话语得到合理的传承。“言”救亡图存的启蒙之“志”,与“抒”忧国忧民的个人之“情”,中国现代文学都未摆脱“志”者“大情”、“情”者“小志”的传统思维,具体表现在：主“思”派提倡文学创作的功利意识,进而以“志”代“情”回归“道”统;主“情”派则提倡文学创作的真情实感,进而以“情”传“志”,回归“道”统。中国现代文学的理论与实践,虽然涂抹着光怪陆离的“西化”色彩,但其重新“释道”与巧妙“言志”的本质特征,恰恰表明了它对传统文化的价值认同,而不是简单地抛弃“传统”后走向了“西方”。     

On the Development of a Chinese Discourse in Literary Studies Based on Current Practice

There are two mistaken tendencies in the development of a Chinese literary discourse in academia. One is the “red dancing shoes” phenomenon, where scholars run helter- skelter after the latest developments in Western literary theory; the other is the “bound feet” phenomenon, where tradition-bound scholars believe that tradition must be kept unchanged and that Chinese literary theory should be cleansed of all alien elements. Neither approach is desirable. Contemporary Chinese literary theory should be grounded in present realities and should distinguish between substance and function. “Substance” has to consist of China’s present literary creation and critical practice; only thus can we appropriate Western and traditional Chinese literary theories in the service of today’s needs, and make the ancient serve the modern and the foreign the Chinese. This will enable us to develop a literary discourse that is both contemporary and Chinese.     

文学世家的历史还原(英文)

文学世家历史还原的过程,也是一个逻辑建构的过程。以政治文化制度变革为核心动力,通过家族史与文学史演变的双重梳理,可以对中国通代文学世家发展演变历程进行历史还原,即前中后三大时段三重形态的相互衔接与有序推进：两汉至南北朝“经学一文学世家”与“门阀一文学世家”双重形态的衔接与演进;隋唐时期“门阀一文学世家”与“科宦一文学世家”混合形态的交替与演进;两宋至明清“科宦一文学世家”主流形态的承变与演进。在上述主体形态之外,尚有其他类型文学世家的多元存在。文学世家史学术范式的建构,需要通过特定个体、时代、区域以及通代文学世家史四个层级的链接而融合为有机整体。     

文学语境的实践表征

文学语境是在文学经验、文学传统、文学知识和文学批评理论等文学场域之中达成的一种动态性共识的范畴。在此场域之中的文学创作、文学阅读和文学交往活动,文学话语形式生产和意义赋予以及语境差带来的文学音乐、图像和情感性审美都是对文学语境的具体实践。文学语境的此种具体实践所趋向的目的不在自身之外,而就在其自身,正耦合了康德对艺术审美判断“无目的的合目的性”的思想。     

新旧之间:北大“三刊”与五四新文化运动

北大"三刊"是"五四"时期在中西文化思想跌宕中生发的社团刊物,它们在中国文化的转型时期发挥了重要的作用。然而,在现代文学史的叙述中对《国民》、《国故》的研究和评价存在明显的失语。无疑,"三刊"在办刊宗旨、文化选择、文学旨趣等方面存在着差异,但作为五四时期知识分子群体精神的一种表现形式,它们对新旧文化所采取的不同立场和选择,在文学创作中表现的不同个性和审美风格,正是建立在民族文化所形成的民族意识和力图重构民族文化的民族国家观念的基础上的。在刊物之间的张力中,展现出中国现代文学开创初期的复杂风貌和多元构成因素,因而对研究新旧文学共生共存的复杂历史是具有参照性和代表性的文化空间。     

政治文化视角:20年代中国文学的接受阐释

选择政治文化的视角 ,重估 2 0世纪初新文学建设 ,有三种文学接受方式值得注意。一是新文学运动传递的信息 ,是发动者组织者的政治观念的文学显现 ;二是新文学的创作者和一般阅读者文学价值的寻找 ,在于政治与现实问题密切联系中的文学期待 ;三是新文学的生产者经营者经济利益与文学关系的调节 ,形成了一种特殊的文学接受形式 ,整合的政治经济驱动了文学的生产过程。由此 ,文学与政治不再是简单的五四启蒙者与接受者之间的被动关系 ,而是多重政治文化因素的互动和影响。新文学的发生发展将在大的文化语境中获得新阐释 ,呈现丰富现象和形态     

May Fourth Literary Tradition and the Transformation of Chinese Literature in the 1930s

“五四”作为中国现代文学的开端,是绕不开和说不尽的一个传统和话题。文章 选择从20世纪30年代文学界对五四文学传统的反思入手,通过对五四文学与30年代文 学的阐释和评价,探究其背后所隐含的不同言说目的、方式和观照视角,由此来透视 言说者和评价者基于不同历史阶段所持的不同的文学思路。五四文学秉持的是一种人 文学科的思路,而30年代文学信守的则是一种社会科学的思路,而对于两个时代的不 同阐释和评价以及其间的种种复杂纠葛,在此都可找到准确、合理的解释。另外,通 过30年代与“五四”所持文学思路的差异,还可以反观五四文学传统以及把握30年代 文学的转型,总结五四文学传统和30年代文学传统的经验和教训。

关键词: 五四文学传统?30年代文学?文学转型?人文学科思路?社会科学思路

The May Fourth movement that ushered in China's modern literature constitutes a central and inexhaustible tradition and topic. This paper proceeds from the Chinese literary community's reflections on the May Fourth literary tradition to explore the different aims, methods and perspectives of the May Fourth and 1930s literature through the interpretations and evaluations of each period. May Fourth literature followed a humanist approach while that of the 1930s took a social sciences approach. This point can provide us with a correct and rational explanation of the different interpretations and evaluations of the two periods and their complex entanglement. Furthermore, by examining the differences in approach of the two periods, we can look back over the May Fourth literary tradition and gain a better grasp of the transformation of literature in the 1930s, and thus sum up the experience and lessons of the literary tradition of both periods.     

鲁迅文学史思想综论

鲁迅的文学史思想深刻而独特,以1927年为界可分为前后两个阶段,前期以天才主义为核心,具有强烈的功利色彩;后期努力运用历史唯物主义的观点和对立统一的规律研究文学史,注重对文学史自身发展规律的探寻,敢于冲破儒家正统观念,在文学史研究中贯穿强烈而深刻的批判精神和鲜明的现代意识,重视作品的艺术审美研究。在文学史研究方法上将中国传统学术方法与西方现代研究方法相结合。这一切均对我国新世纪的文学史理论与学科建设具有深刻的启迪与借鉴意义。     

The Relational Attributes of the Meaning of Literary Works

The meaning of literary works arises from the reception and transformation of the works by their receivers. It is through understanding via experience that this work-receiver relationship is realized in literary reception. In literary reception, meaning assumes multiple forms, including the perceptual and experiential form, the universal and general form, and the historical and continuous form. The realistic foundation of meaning is pluralistic; it is the unfolding of structurality and contextuality of the real history in literary reception and transformation. The reality’s deconstruction and construction of the historical structure appear in the form of specific issues and draw the attention of reception, and give rise to the expectation of meaning in this reception. The reception of meaning is based on such an expectation, so the meaning is constrained by the already existing expectation. Meaning has non-linguisticity, which comes from the non-linguisticity of the implications of literary works and that of literary reception, and is revealed in the interaction of the two in the receptive relations. The non-linguistic meaning is universal.     

On the Intrinsic Inevitability of the Birth of May Fourth New Literature

Recent years have witnessed a phenomenon in Chinese academia, which denies the inevitable connection between May Fourth New Literature and the New Culture Movement during the May Fourth Movement period, and often views fragments of civilization before the New Culture Movement as the real form of kernel culture of New Literature. In fact, the emergence of New Literature had to depend upon the intense and profound revolutionary movement of new culture, and the May Fourth New Culture Movement fostered a totally new literary form with its combined strength, and constituted the new ideological qualities of New Literature by recourse to the values of New Culture centered on democracy and science.