论文部分内容阅读
两汉时代,屈原批评成为文学批评的焦点,观点纷纭而论争激烈。但汉代的屈原批评所遵循的模式则是一致的,即围绕着《史记·屈原列传》所开创的历史形象和文学形象两个维度而展开,历史形象适用于总体上阐述屈原文学创作情形,也就是作者论;文学形象则表现为有关屈原作品内容的批评,即作品论。屈原自我塑造的文学形象,给汉人提供了多重阐释的空间和可能。屈原之外,汉代赋家本身已不再为文学批评所关注,这与汉赋不同于屈骚的“实”而采取“虚”的创作倾向有关。汉代赋家游离于汉赋作品之外,并没有为文学批评提供再度阐释文学形象维度。
During the Han dynasty, Qu Yuan’s criticism became the focus of literary criticism. However, the patterns followed by the Qu Yuan criticism in the Han Dynasty are the same, that is to say, they revolve around the two dimensions of the historical image and the literary image created by the Biography of the Book of Records by the Historian Qu Yuan. The historical image is suitable for the general description of Qu Yuan’s literary creation. Is the author’s theory; while the literary image shows the criticism about the content of Qu Yuan’s work, that is, the work theory. Qu Yuan’s self-shaping literary image provides the Han with more room for interpretation and possibility. Apart from Qu Yuan, the Han Dynasty’s Fu family itself is no longer the focus of literary criticism, which is related to the creation tendency of “Fu” which is different from “Fu” in Qu Yuan. Apart from Han Fu’s works, the Han writers did not provide literary criticism with the dimension of re-interpretation of literary images.