On “Imposed Interpretation” in Literary Criticism: The Issue of “French Theory”

This paper is a response to what Professor Zhang Jiang of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) terms as “imposed interpretation.” In his article “On Imposed Interpretation,” Professor Zhang sees imposed interpretation as a fundamental feature and basic defect of contemporary Western literary criticism. The author analyzes some of the interpretations, as criticized by Professor Zhang, imposed on some literary classics by feminist, eco-critical, psychoanalytical, structuralist and deconstructivist methods. She reviews the sources and the limitations of the so-called “French theory” in cultural studies courses in American universities before raising the critical practice she endorses: a synthesizing critical methodology that is based on the specificity of the text, uses multiple applicable theories in relation to the socio-temporal context in which the work was produced, while bearing in mind the author’s intentions and the reader’s active participation. Through rigorous textual analysis, literary criticism can identify some new perspectives offered by the text which enable construction of the meaning of the text and of life. This can highlight the functions of literary reading in enriching people’s lives and enhancing the role of reality and man’s spiritual realm.     

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。     

The Reconstruction of Chinese Literary Theory: Environment and Resources

A common symptom of the blanket coverage of Western literary theory was the way Chinese intellectuals “kept harping on Greece,” to the neglect of their own literature’s distinctive features. Even worse were attempts to force Chinese literature into the Procrustean bed of Western literary propositions. How can Chinese literary theory be used more effectively to interpret native literature and culture, or Chinese experience? How can it throw off Western theoretical models and become a component of the Chinese nation’s own narrative? Reconstruction of the discourse system of Chinese literary theory must be a high priority. It is a complex project, one that necessarily entails stepping on to the discourse platform of modernity, accepting various kinds of open dialogue, and thence envisioning a new form of discourse system set amid multilayered overlapping perspectives and even the challenge of different ideas.     

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.     

A Brief Discussion of the Generation of Meaning in Literary Works: A Hermeneutic Examination

The sources of meanings of literary works can be reviewed from various angles, one of which should be hermeneutics. Since the mid-20^th century, Western hermeneutics developed two important types of theories: one was the ontological hermeneutics from Martin Heidegger to Hans-Georg Gadamer, orientated towards the reader-centered theory in terms of the view of meanings; the other was the “hermeneutics as the general methodology of the Geisteswissenschaften” represented by Italian philosopher Emilio Betti, which affirmed that the author (subject) was one of the important sources of meanings of works. Due to intricate reasons, the latter exerted less influence, and Gadamer’s ontological hermeneutics firmly stuck to a mainstay position in European and American academia. Since the 1990s, the circle of literature in China has also been greatly influenced by the hermeneutic theories from Heidegger and Gadamer to reception aesthetics, and Betti’s impact almost can be neglected. Consequently, the view of meanings of literary works from the perspective of the reader-centered theory has been widely accepted, and the role of the author to endow initial meanings to his works was belittled and even denied. Since Zhang Jiang advanced the theory of “imposed interpretation” in 2014, academia has begun to reflect upon the one-sidedness of the reader-centered theory (relativism and subjectivism), and pick up the significance, which cannot be denied, of the author’s meaning in the generation of meanings of literary works. In reference to Betti’s hermeneutic train of thought and methodology, this essay, based on the practice of literary creation, concludes that the meaning of a literary work is created by the author and readers together in their interaction, and constantly generated in the dynamic process of the three factors of author, literary texts and readers, rather than by the author alone, or by readers solely.     

On the Innovation of Literary Theory in China

Abstract

China’s rise has increased concerns about innovation in China’s indigenous literary theory. How to create theories with a “China style” and global influence has become a serious challenge for the development of contemporary Chinese literary theory. Three strategies are noteworthy in meeting this challenge. First, “amateurism in professionalism” can be used to offset the constraints of increasing disciplinization and professionalization in literary theory. Second, critical rationality needs to be cultivated among researchers and in institutional forms in order to alter the present lack of rational and vigorous debate, criticism and dialogue. Third, we need to reconstruct “grand narratives,” so as to make a unique contribution to the world in terms of universal values, meanings and ethics through transforming and advancing traditional Chinese thought.     

The Profound Influence of Linguistic Change on the Development of Modern Chinese Literary Forms

Literature is the art of language, so in the light of the profound influence of linguistic transformation on the development of modem Chinese literary forms it is appropriate to present the history of the development of modern Chinese literature as the art of language. Modern Chinese literature starts with the linguistic transformation of the May Fourth Movement’s rejection of classical Chinese and promotion of the vernacular. This language revolution and the transformation of literary language during each subsequent historical period have exerted a profound inf1uence on the overall development of modern Chinese literature, including literary forms, and hence have become an inner source of the development and evolution of modern Chinese literary forms and of the shaping of their main characteristics. An in-depth discussion of the interaction between linguistic transformation and the development of modern Chinese literary forms as well as the rules governing this process will not only disclose the universal linguistic context of literary creation created by the transformation of language but will also enable us to find the historical sources of the phenomena of literary genres and forms, writers’ choice of literary styles, the formal characteristics of literary works, etc., and will offer a correct explanation and evaluation of the May Fourth vernacular movement and the subsequent series of new literary forms and styles. This is instrumental to achieving a better summation of the experience and lessons of the development of modern Chinese literary forms and to finding historical clues to the development of our present-day literary forms.     

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。     

难解百年情怀--五四文学传统与俄国文学关系再认识

在五四文学传统中 ,应包含如何接受外来影响的内容。这一传统在其流程上经历了由欧美文学向俄国文学转移的过程 ,并在对俄国文学特点的归纳和解释中完成了对新文学创作规范的制订。这使得新文学在文学观念和创作实践中形成了以俄国文学为范本 ,以民族意识为轴心 ,以文学参与民族解放为半径 ,而以作家个人审美意识为潜流的特征     

The Academic History of Literature and Art as a “ Disease of Interpretation”: On the Paradoxical Nature of Interdisciplinary Boundaries

This article represents an academic response to Professor Zhang Jiang’s article “On Imposed Interpretation” published in Russian in the journal October (no. 1, 2015). It argues that the problems observed by Zhang arise from the reality of Western literary criticism over the past decades, and are associated with the contention between philosophy and philology that had its orgins in the West’s Platonic heritage. In outlining the complex symbiotic relationship between the two disciplines in Western literary history, this article finds that two theoretical motive forces catalyzed the process: the “philologization of philosophy” and the “philosophization of philology.” The writer argues that based on a full understanding of the paradoxical relationship between philosophy and philology, which are distinct from and yet attracted to each other, contemporary literary criticism can adopt the principles of “practical conservatism” and “cutting back of methodologies” as a means of healing the ever worsening “disease of intepreretation” in literary history.     

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.     

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.     

Literary reading in the context of media culture

1980年代中国曾掀起文学阅读的高潮,但从1990年代始,文学阅读则进入一个缓慢的衰退期,新世纪以来,其衰退步伐进一步加快。在文学阅读式微的过程中,新媒介扮演着重要角色,其影响主要体现在：因文字转换成图像,接受者的感知结构得以重塑;因读屏代替了读书,阅读过程的沉思冥想无法启动。同时,新媒介还破坏了“孤独”的阅读状态,削平了接受的深度模式。从媒介文化角度看,文学阅读的式微是印刷文化遭到视觉文化重创后的结果,但由于新一代人已生活在视觉文化的环境中,他们游离于文学阅读将变得在所难免。此种阅读状况既会影响文学生产也会波及文学研究。而守护文学阅读并抵制新媒介的人,其私人记忆、感知结构甚至身体习惯恰恰是被印刷文化建构而成的。因此,游离或守护文学阅读的背后,其实隐含的是一种媒介文化的冲突。     

论文学批评的审美评判功能

关注文学作为语言艺术的审美价值,是对文学展开有效研究的关键所在。文学批评理应根据一定的审美观点对文学作品的艺术审美价值作出深入分析和准确评判,而分析和评判本身亦昭示着艺术创造过程的新进展。所以,当代批评家至少应该具备三种基本素质:充分关注文学作品中审美价值的主导地位,正确处理文学批评和文化理论之间的关系,充分重视语言文字自身的审美特征。其具体的批评实践既应该涉及作品的某些为人公认的审美特点,使批评具备价值判断的力量,又应该从个体性的审美体悟出发,使批评体现出艺术创造的特征。     

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.     

《国语》的编撰意图及其文学价值

在中国文学史上,《国语》一向不被人重视。其实不论是从史学角度,还是从文学角度,《国语》都是很值得深入研究的。本文通过对《国语》编撰意图的分析,认为其文学史料不是简单的拼凑,而是紧紧围绕礼治、民本、忠恕、正名等思想选择的。此外,《国语》一书结构的安排,也不只是遵循周王室与各诸侯国关系远近、先华夏后蛮夷的原则,而是另有深意,即反映礼乐崩坏的前因后果。《国语》一书因此成为有机的整体,文学和史学价值也进一步提高。     

论文学研究的人文范式

文学研究应该本着对时代进行精神超越的原则厘清其固有的研究范式,这样既可以保证文学研究自身的独特性,又可以为文学研究的拓展提供一个稳定的研究思路。文学研究应该把文学看作一种特殊精神现象,从中分析总结人类情感中的各种类型以及情感所体现的不同文化背景和人的价值认同。     

Complexity: Some Remarks about a Classical Aesthetic Concept

The connection between autonomous art and complexity has been extensively and deeply studied in literary theories in the 20th century. The rise of aesthetic autonomy implies the complexity of literary work as the concept of a sealed container arises from the relationship between the parts that make it up. In this model, the interpretation subject works to directly face literary texts. Instead of pursuing the author’s intention, it aims to reproduce the richness and subtlety of the aesthetic state, and consider the richness and subtlety revealed in the maximum amount of text details in literary works, even if procedurally deviating from the way of mainstream understanding. There is increasing skepticism about the consequences of the autonomous aesthetics, which has been coerced by the development of contemporary capitalism, and it is necessary to develop new forms of aesthetics to reflect the changing social situation.     

文学研究:终结还是再生?--米勒文学研究"终结论"解读

米勒根据电子化和全球化时代文学形态的变化和文化研究转向的事实,提出和阐发了文学研究“终结论”,但另一方面又相信传统的文学研究仍有意义并将继续存在,这是一个充满深刻矛盾和张力的悖论式命题。通过对这一理论命题的解读,我们可以领悟到:文学及其文学研究是否走向终结,未必由某些现实条件(如电信技术)所决定,重要的是有对文学与人的生存之永恒依存关系的深刻理解,有建立在这一基础之上的坚定信念,以及与时俱进、顺时变通的开放性态度。这样就有可能使文学和文学研究绝处逢生,获得新的生机和开辟新的前景。