回归民族文化原本 探究中国悲剧精神——百年来“中国悲剧有无”问题讨论
|
摘要
"中国悲剧有无"问题讨论经历了近代启蒙话语、现代启蒙话语和民族本土话语三种不同话语形态。蒋观云、欧榘甲着眼于"戏剧改良",从戏剧类型视角提出"中国无悲剧"的问题,偏向于近代社会启蒙话语。王国维第一次把"中国有无悲剧"问题带进悲剧精神层面,鲁迅、胡适受到王国维的影响,从"国人之精神""国民性"视角分析"大团圆"戏剧结构。熊佛西、朱光潜、钱钟书依据西方经典悲剧作品和西方经典悲剧理论,用西方的"绳墨"量度中国古代戏剧,认为中国古代没有严格意义的悲剧。20世纪30年代以后,戏剧理论研究中的民族话语逐渐觉醒,20世纪80年代以后,王季思、张庚、陈瘦竹等学者悲剧美学、戏剧精神、戏剧形式结构等层面,回归本民族文化立场,基于中国戏剧发展实践,参证西方悲剧美学成果,揭示中国古代悲剧"悲喜相乘""崇高""悲愤"等美学特征,肯定中国古代悲剧的美学价值和社会教育价值。由此可见,研究中国古代文学艺术,应该基于中华民族数千年来的文艺实践,将"悲剧"放置在中华民族长期的社会变迁中,放置在中国人的文艺创造心理机制,放置在中国观众长期养成的文艺欣赏心理机制,参证西方经典悲剧作品和悲剧美学成果,方能真正揭示中国古代悲剧独特的艺术特征和美学价值。
The discussion of ‘whether china has tragedies or not' has gone through three different discoursal stages, i.e., the modern(1840-1949) enlightenment discourse, the contemporary(1949-) enlightenment discourse, and the indigenous ethnic discourse. Jiang Guanyun and Ou Jujia raised the question ‘whether china has tragedies' from the perspective of modern‘dramatic improvement'. Wang Guowei brought this question into the academic field for the first time. Influenced by Wang Guowei, Lu Xun and Hu Shi focused on ‘happy ending' from the perspective of ‘spirit of the people' and ‘national character',claiming that China had no tragedy. According to western classical tragic work and western classical theories of tragedy, Xiong Foxi, Zhu Guangqian, and Qian Zhongshu assessed Chinese ancient dramas by the western rules, believing that China technically has no tragedy. After the 1930s, ethnic discourse gradually woke up in the studies on the theories of drama in China.After 1980s, Wang Jisi, Zhang Geng, Chen Shouzhu and other researchers went back to the standing point of ethnic culture in regards of the academic history, dramatic reform, and aesthetics of tragedy. They brought aesthetic traits of Chinese ancient tragedies like ‘mix of sorrow and joy', ‘greatness', and ‘grief and resent' to light, as well as confirmed the aesthetic and social educational value of Chinese ancient tragedies. Therefore, when it comes to the study on the Chinese ancient literature and art,only in these ways can unique artistic features and aesthetic value of Chinese ancient tragedies be uncovered: the studies being rooted in the thousands' years of Chinese literary and artistic practice, the ‘Tragedy' being put into the context of long-term social changes of the China, taking the psychological mechanism of Chinese artists, as well as the psychological mechanism of Chinese audiences into consideration, and lastly, referring to the western classical tragic works and tragic aesthetic achievements.
The discussion of ‘whether china has tragedies or not' has gone through three different discoursal stages, i.e., the modern(1840-1949) enlightenment discourse, the contemporary(1949-) enlightenment discourse, and the indigenous ethnic discourse. Jiang Guanyun and Ou Jujia raised the question ‘whether china has tragedies' from the perspective of modern‘dramatic improvement'. Wang Guowei brought this question into the academic field for the first time. Influenced by Wang Guowei, Lu Xun and Hu Shi focused on ‘happy ending' from the perspective of ‘spirit of the people' and ‘national character',claiming that China had no tragedy. According to western classical tragic work and western classical theories of tragedy, Xiong Foxi, Zhu Guangqian, and Qian Zhongshu assessed Chinese ancient dramas by the western rules, believing that China technically has no tragedy. After the 1930s, ethnic discourse gradually woke up in the studies on the theories of drama in China.After 1980s, Wang Jisi, Zhang Geng, Chen Shouzhu and other researchers went back to the standing point of ethnic culture in regards of the academic history, dramatic reform, and aesthetics of tragedy. They brought aesthetic traits of Chinese ancient tragedies like ‘mix of sorrow and joy', ‘greatness', and ‘grief and resent' to light, as well as confirmed the aesthetic and social educational value of Chinese ancient tragedies. Therefore, when it comes to the study on the Chinese ancient literature and art,only in these ways can unique artistic features and aesthetic value of Chinese ancient tragedies be uncovered: the studies being rooted in the thousands' years of Chinese literary and artistic practice, the ‘Tragedy' being put into the context of long-term social changes of the China, taking the psychological mechanism of Chinese artists, as well as the psychological mechanism of Chinese audiences into consideration, and lastly, referring to the western classical tragic works and tragic aesthetic achievements.
引文
[1]龚刚.谁首先提出了中国无悲剧说?--蒋观云《中国之演剧界》发表年份小考[J].华文文学,2015(4):41-42.
[2]邬国平,黄霖.中国文论选:近代卷(下)[M].南京:江苏文艺出版社,1996.
[3]鲁迅.鲁迅全集:第九卷[M].北京:人民文学出版社,2005.
[4]胡适.胡适文存(一集)[M].合肥:黄山书社,1996.
[5]朱光潜.悲剧心理学[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社,1989.
[6]熊佛西.写剧原理[M].上海:中华书局,1933.
[7]钱钟书,陆文虎.中国古代戏曲中的悲剧[J].解放军艺术学院学报,2004(1):5-8.
[8]王季思.悲喜相乘--中国古典悲、喜剧艺术特征和审美意蕴[J].戏剧艺术,1990(1):75-79.
[9]王季思.中国十大古典悲剧集·前言[M].上海:上海文艺出版社,1982.
[10]张庚.张庚文录·自序:第一卷[M].长沙:湖南文艺出版社,2003.
[11]张庚.张庚文录:第五卷[M].长沙:湖南文艺出版社,2003.
[12]张庚,郭汉城.中国戏曲通论[M].上海:上海文艺出版社,1989.
[13]朱栋霖,周安华.陈瘦竹戏剧论集(上)[M].南京:江苏教育出版社,1999.
[14]陈瘦竹.当代欧美悲剧理论述评[J].当代外国文学,1983(2):136-152.
[15]陈瘦竹.论悲剧精神[J].文艺报,1979(5):54-58.
[2]邬国平,黄霖.中国文论选:近代卷(下)[M].南京:江苏文艺出版社,1996.
[3]鲁迅.鲁迅全集:第九卷[M].北京:人民文学出版社,2005.
[4]胡适.胡适文存(一集)[M].合肥:黄山书社,1996.
[5]朱光潜.悲剧心理学[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社,1989.
[6]熊佛西.写剧原理[M].上海:中华书局,1933.
[7]钱钟书,陆文虎.中国古代戏曲中的悲剧[J].解放军艺术学院学报,2004(1):5-8.
[8]王季思.悲喜相乘--中国古典悲、喜剧艺术特征和审美意蕴[J].戏剧艺术,1990(1):75-79.
[9]王季思.中国十大古典悲剧集·前言[M].上海:上海文艺出版社,1982.
[10]张庚.张庚文录·自序:第一卷[M].长沙:湖南文艺出版社,2003.
[11]张庚.张庚文录:第五卷[M].长沙:湖南文艺出版社,2003.
[12]张庚,郭汉城.中国戏曲通论[M].上海:上海文艺出版社,1989.
[13]朱栋霖,周安华.陈瘦竹戏剧论集(上)[M].南京:江苏教育出版社,1999.
[14]陈瘦竹.当代欧美悲剧理论述评[J].当代外国文学,1983(2):136-152.
[15]陈瘦竹.论悲剧精神[J].文艺报,1979(5):54-58.