论文部分内容阅读
“文坛回春”之路步履维艰,这种艰难历程不仅显性地表现为1980年代的多次论争和批判,而且,从同一人物在不同时期编撰的文学史书里的变化,也能被人隐约感知。1980年代多种文学史书中对施蛰存的评论明显有两条线齐头并进:一条前期文学史阶级论中的施蛰存书写模式旧痕犹存,一条展现博得合法性的新姿。同时,海外文学史中,施蛰存因大陆文学史中具有的“反动”性质转变为赞扬的进步性质,成了横空挑战的第三条线。通过这种较为隐性的、动态的文学现象,来看“文坛回春”之路是怎样一步步地进行,现在能够成为“常识”地存在在当时所经历的艰辛。
The difficult journey of the “literary rejuvenation” struggled hard. This difficult process not only showed itself as multiple controversies and critiques in the 1980s, but also changed from the literary history books compiled by the same person in different periods. Perception. Appreciation of Shi Zhecun in the Literary History Books of the 1980s clearly shows that two lines go hand in hand: the writing mode of Shi Zhecun in the class theory of early literary history still exists in old ways and shows a new attitude of winning legitimacy. Meanwhile, in the history of overseas literature, Shi Zhecun has become the third line of cross-examination challenges due to the “reactionary” nature of the history of Chinese literature turning into the progressive nature of praise. Through this relatively implicit and dynamic literary phenomenon, we can see how the “literary rejuvenation” is progressing step by step. Now it can become a “common sense” that there was a hardship at that time.