论文部分内容阅读
傅小平:在你的很多小说中一以贯之的该是国民性的问题。我总感觉,鲁迅之后,国民性的问题是被有意无意淡化了的,尤其到了当下,对国民性的理解,实际上已被所谓共通的人性所替代。以此看,你对国民性的持续发问,看似有些不合时宜,却特别让人钦佩。在你看来,谈论国民性在当下有何必要?袁劲梅:你这个问题提得很深刻。为什么鲁迅之后,国民性的问题就被淡化了?是不是鲁迅提出的那些国民性问题已经不存在了呢?我觉得不是。中国人还是中国人。吃白菜炖肉,喝“二锅头”;吃完饭要抽支烟,不把朋友灌醉不过瘾;见了领导要用“有件事跟你汇报一下……”这样句子开头;为了子女出国留学,卖掉房子;遇到是非问题,立马就用相对主义自己糊弄自己;对邪恶能宽容,对不同却不能;对男人养二房、供小姐理解,对女人一过三十就要歧视,叫人家“剩女”……这些不就是我们的国民性吗?用所谓“共通的人性”所替代国民性的问题,要分开看。哪国人都是人,男男女女也都是人,作为“人”当然是有共通的人性,比如说,爱情,欲望,英勇,胆小……写这些共通的人性,当然是好的,也是文学应该做的,说不定,也是对“文革”中的文学,把人分作阶级来写的那种“革命八股”的否定。写共通人性的作品一定会有很好看的,很有价值的。但是,“共通的人性”不能代替国民性问题,否则就是一种回避历史、回避现实的态度。因为,如上所说:文学不光有休闲娱乐的功能,还有探讨生命和承担社会责任的功能。如果一部文学作品光描述性爱的细节,它不可能成为《查泰莱夫人的情人》那样的名作。既然是中国人,中国人国民性就应该是一个永远可以发掘的写作资源。
Fu Xiaoping: In many of your novels, it is a question of national character. I always feel that after Lu Xun, the problem of national character has been deliberately and unconsciously played down. Especially nowadays, the understanding of national character has in fact been replaced by the so-called common humanity. From this perspective, your continued questioning of the national character may seem particularly outdated, but it is particularly admirable. In your opinion, what is the necessity of talking about national character in the moment? Yuan Jinmei: You mentioned this issue very profoundly. Why did the issue of national character be diluted after Lu Xun? Did the questions of national character that Lu Xun put forward no longer exist? I do not think so. Chinese are still Chinese. Eat cabbage stew, drink “Erguotou ”; after dinner to smoke cigarettes, not friends drunk not fun; met the leaders to use “something to tell you about ...” For children to study abroad, to sell the house; Encounter the non-issue, immediately use relativism to fool themselves; tolerant of evil, but not the same for different; for men to keep two rooms for the lady to understand that a woman must be thirty Discrimination, called people “left women ” ...... These are not our national character? With the so-called “common humanity ” instead of national character, we must look separately. Of course, people are all human beings, for example, love, desire, bravery, cowardice ... Of course, it is good to write these common humanities. What literature should do, maybe, is also the negation of the “revolutionary eight-part” style of writing in the “Cultural Revolution” and the division of people into classes. Writing works of common humanity will certainly be very good looking, very valuable. However, “common humanity ” can not replace the issue of national character, otherwise it is a way of avoiding history and avoiding the reality. Because, as mentioned above: Literature not only has the function of leisure and entertainment, but also explores the functions of life and social responsibility. If a literary piece describes the details of sex alone, it can not become a masterpiece like “Lady Chatterley’s Lover.” Since it is Chinese, Chinese nationality should be a writing resource that can be explored forever.