论文部分内容阅读
在上世纪80年代的英美文化界和文学界诞生的新历史主义对旧历史主义和形式主义文学批评方法加以批判,在张扬“主体”、“历史”和“意识形态”中,使“历史的文本性”与“文本的历史性”成为文学批评的主要范畴。海登·怀特用“文本性”填平了历史文本与非历史文本之间的鸿沟,也拉近了历史客体与当代主体间的距离。格林布拉特提出的“颠覆”与“抑制”说明了文学所表现出的社会功能;统治者允许并鼓励颠覆与抑制同时存在。因为‘协和’过程就显现于‘颠覆’与‘抑制’的动态关系之中。本文试以新历史主义的相关理论来解读《大捷》,透视“历史”的本质。
In the 1980s, the new historicism born in the British and American cultural circles and the literary circles criticized the old historicism and the formalistic literary criticism methods. While criticizing “the subject”, “history” and “ideology” , Making “the historical textuality” and “the historicity of the text” the major categories of literary criticism. Hayden White filled the gap between historical texts and non-historical texts with “textuality ” and narrowed the distance between historical objects and contemporary subjects. The “subversion” and “inhibition” put forward by Greenbrats illustrate the social function of literature. The rulers allow and encourage the coexistence of subversion and repression. Because the process of “concord” appears in the dynamic relationship between “subversion” and “inhibition.” This paper tries to interpret the “Great Czech” theory and the essence of “history” with the relevant theories of New Historicism.