俄国形式主义的文学本质论及其美学基础

俄国形式主义的"纯形式"文学本质论基于康德美学.但这种"纯形式"概念是依据感觉("陌生化"感觉)经验来确定的,因而剥离了康德美学"形式"概念中的主体性意蕴.这说明这种文学本质论的美学基础中还有经验主义美学的成分.

Russian Formalism: Its Literary Essence and Aesthetic Foundation

To quote Victor Shklovsky, one of the representatives of the Russian formalistic literary criticism, "literature is a pure form rather than a substance. It is the ratio between materials rather than the material itself ." Compa red with the other two propositions on literature, "literature as a technique" (also offered by Victor Shklovsky) and literature being defined by "literariness" (proposed by Roman Jakobson, another representative of Russian Formalism), lite rature as a pure form is a more adequate and representative summary of the Russian formalistic views on the nature of literature. Kant's aesthetics has provided a basis for this view in two ways. For one thing, by separating beauty from truth and good, Kant gave independence to beauty, which later provided strength for aestheticism and many formalistic literary theories. In fact, the Russian formalistic view on the nature of literature is a theory about the autonomous and self-sufficient literature. For another, by arguing "beauty as a matter of fact should only concern form", Kant gave a straightforward support to the Russian formalistic idea of literature being a pure form. Some Russian formalists actually confessed their being influenced by the Kantian aesthetic formalism. Nevertheless, Kantian aesthetics has rich connotations. It is both formalistic and subjective. As a result, beauty is both expressed through the form and by the subject. The Russian formalistic theory on literary essence, on the other hand, only followed the formalistic component of Kantian aesthetics. As time grew, this theory highlighted this component and stripped itself of the subjective implications. In addition, Russian formalists also designed an aesthetic foundation for their theory on the formalistic essence. This is known as the "anomalous" perception, which does not aim to know the object. Perceiving is the goal of perception, which is therefore a form. As a technique and form, literature attempts to invoke this anomalous aesthetic perception. This theory differs from Kantian aesthetic in that Kant defined beauty as a transcendental experience of a rationalistic nature, although he also said beauty does not exist without perceptual ex periences. In contrast, Russian formalists regarded beauty as an experiential entity having nothing to do with reason, nor with activities like emotion and imagination. They looked at beauty from the perspective of perceptual experience and believed that beauty was determined by that experience. As a result, Russian Formalism is to some extend an experientialist aesthetics. However, it is still distinguished from real experientialist aesthetics. The latter gives great attenti on to both physical perceptual experiences of the subject and his mental perceptual experiences like imaginations and emotions, whereas Russian Formalism eliminates both reasoning and the mental ingredients of aesthetic perceptions. Its adherents argued that "emotions are other than the form", only acknowledging the ex istence of physical responses and pleasures or pains to stimuli. In their eyes, aesthetic perception is only a pure form devoid of content. Beauty is therefore a pure form.aesthetics .However,itisstilldis