占卜术:柏拉图《伊安篇》新解
摘要
由于缺乏对柏拉图时代占卜术的研究,国内学者对《伊安篇》的解读大都在"灵感说"与"技艺说"间各执一词。在《伊安篇》中,灵感与技艺的矛盾是从占卜领域挪移过来的。占卜术与诗之间并不是简单的例证关系,而是相互关联的类比关系。故此,诗的天赋灵感说被柏拉图更新为神灵附体的迷狂说,并与以技艺为语境的模仿说相对立。理解这一延展的过程是解决二者矛盾对立的关键。在当时的占卜领域,已经出现同时占据灵感与技艺的直观预言家,他们可以成为伊安回击苏格拉底的最好例证。
Due to the lack of research on divination during Plato's time,Chinese scholars' interpretation of the Ion is mostly an "inspiration account"or a "techne account". In the Ion,the contradiction between the inspiration account and the techne account comes from the divination field. It is not a simple relationship between divination and poetry,but an interrelated analogy. Therefore,inspiration is said to be updated by Plato to the madness of the possession,and to the opposite of the imitative theory of the art. Understanding the process of this extension is the key to resolving the contradiction between the two.
Due to the lack of research on divination during Plato's time,Chinese scholars' interpretation of the Ion is mostly an "inspiration account"or a "techne account". In the Ion,the contradiction between the inspiration account and the techne account comes from the divination field. It is not a simple relationship between divination and poetry,but an interrelated analogy. Therefore,inspiration is said to be updated by Plato to the madness of the possession,and to the opposite of the imitative theory of the art. Understanding the process of this extension is the key to resolving the contradiction between the two.
引文
① 美国学者弗兰科(Franco)将其总结为三个方面,具体论述,参见Franco V.Trivigno,“Technē,Inspiration and Comedy in Plato’s Ion”,Apeiron,Vol.4,2012,297页。
② 朱光潜:《柏拉图文艺对话集》,人民文学出版社2008年版,249页。
③ Tigerstedt指出,柏拉图最早将诗歌灵感表述为“神灵附体”;他认为“灵感”在当时是一个常见的主题,但并不是“神灵附体”。参见E.N.Tigerstedt,Plato’s Idea of Poetical Inspiration(Helsingfors:Societas Scientiarum Fennicai,1969)。
④ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece(Berkeley:University of California Press,2008),p.8.
⑤ 本文柏拉图作品的中文译文均取自《柏拉图全集》,王晓朝译,人民出版社2012年重印版(以后引用按照惯例注明篇目行数);引文括号中出现的英文概念均参考Plato,Complete Works,ed.J.Cooper(Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Company,1997)。
⑥ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,p.72.
⑦ 古希腊历史学家希罗多德提及希腊大陆上的戴尔波伊、波奇斯的阿巴伊、多铎那、阿姆批亚拉欧斯、特洛波尼亚欧斯等五家神托所以及小亚细亚米利都的布朗奇达伊家神托所。参见希罗多德:《历史》,王以铸译,商务印书管2001年版,21页。
⑧ M.Flower对技艺占卜术进行更为详尽的解释。参见M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,24页。
⑨ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,p.85.
⑩ 荷马:《奥德赛》,王焕生译,人民文学出版社2003年版(以后引用均按照惯例注明卷数行数)。
(11) K.O’Nolan,“The Proteus Legend”,Hermes,Vol.88,1960,p.129.
(12) Fineberg Stephen,“Plato’s Euthyphro and the Myth of Proteus”,Transactions of the American Philological Association,Vol.112,1982,p.67.
(13) 王晓朝译本采取意译的手法将与 “bacchic possession”有关的概念都译作酒神附身,陈中梅在谈论相关问题时则音译为“巴科斯舞蹈”。王晓朝和陈中梅对待巴科斯舞蹈的态度都较为负面,称之为“笑剧”、“荒诞或滑稽剧”,而通行英译本则较为谨慎,没有为这种舞蹈定性。显然,前者在译介时可能忽略了巴科斯舞蹈作为神灵附体的迷狂形式在柏拉图哲学中的积极含义。见陈中梅:《柏拉图诗学与思想研究》,商务印书管2002年版,269页;柏拉图:《柏拉图全集》第四卷,王晓朝译,322页;J.Cooper ed.,Plato,Complete Works,1482页。
(14) Lillian B.Lawler,“Proteus Is a Dancer”,The Classical Weekly,Vol.36,1943,pp.116-117.
(15) D.Roochnik,Of Art and Wisdom:Plato’s Understanding of Techne(University Park:The Pennsylvania State University Press,1996),pp.44-52.
(16) John P.Harris,“Plato’s Ion and the End of his Symposium”,Illionis Classical Studies,Vol.26,2001,p.91.
(17) Aaron Landry,“Inspiration and Techne:Divination in Plato’s Ion”,Plato Journal,Vol.14,2014,pp.87-89.
(18) 荷马:《奥德赛》,陈中梅译注,译林出版社2003年版,15页。
(19) 转引自E.N.Tigerstedt,“Furor Poeticus:Poetic Inspiration in Greek Literature before Democritus and Plato”,Journal of History of Ideas,Vol.31,1970,p.165.
(20) Franco V.Trivigno,“Technē,Inspiration and Comedy in Plato’s Ion”,p.297.
(21) Franco V.Trivigno,“Technē,Inspiration and Comedy in Plato’s Ion”,p.303.
(22) Aaron Landry,“Inspiration and Technē:Divination in Plato’s Ion”,p.87.
② 朱光潜:《柏拉图文艺对话集》,人民文学出版社2008年版,249页。
③ Tigerstedt指出,柏拉图最早将诗歌灵感表述为“神灵附体”;他认为“灵感”在当时是一个常见的主题,但并不是“神灵附体”。参见E.N.Tigerstedt,Plato’s Idea of Poetical Inspiration(Helsingfors:Societas Scientiarum Fennicai,1969)。
④ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece(Berkeley:University of California Press,2008),p.8.
⑤ 本文柏拉图作品的中文译文均取自《柏拉图全集》,王晓朝译,人民出版社2012年重印版(以后引用按照惯例注明篇目行数);引文括号中出现的英文概念均参考Plato,Complete Works,ed.J.Cooper(Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Company,1997)。
⑥ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,p.72.
⑦ 古希腊历史学家希罗多德提及希腊大陆上的戴尔波伊、波奇斯的阿巴伊、多铎那、阿姆批亚拉欧斯、特洛波尼亚欧斯等五家神托所以及小亚细亚米利都的布朗奇达伊家神托所。参见希罗多德:《历史》,王以铸译,商务印书管2001年版,21页。
⑧ M.Flower对技艺占卜术进行更为详尽的解释。参见M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,24页。
⑨ M.Flower,The Seer in Ancient Greece,p.85.
⑩ 荷马:《奥德赛》,王焕生译,人民文学出版社2003年版(以后引用均按照惯例注明卷数行数)。
(11) K.O’Nolan,“The Proteus Legend”,Hermes,Vol.88,1960,p.129.
(12) Fineberg Stephen,“Plato’s Euthyphro and the Myth of Proteus”,Transactions of the American Philological Association,Vol.112,1982,p.67.
(13) 王晓朝译本采取意译的手法将与 “bacchic possession”有关的概念都译作酒神附身,陈中梅在谈论相关问题时则音译为“巴科斯舞蹈”。王晓朝和陈中梅对待巴科斯舞蹈的态度都较为负面,称之为“笑剧”、“荒诞或滑稽剧”,而通行英译本则较为谨慎,没有为这种舞蹈定性。显然,前者在译介时可能忽略了巴科斯舞蹈作为神灵附体的迷狂形式在柏拉图哲学中的积极含义。见陈中梅:《柏拉图诗学与思想研究》,商务印书管2002年版,269页;柏拉图:《柏拉图全集》第四卷,王晓朝译,322页;J.Cooper ed.,Plato,Complete Works,1482页。
(14) Lillian B.Lawler,“Proteus Is a Dancer”,The Classical Weekly,Vol.36,1943,pp.116-117.
(15) D.Roochnik,Of Art and Wisdom:Plato’s Understanding of Techne(University Park:The Pennsylvania State University Press,1996),pp.44-52.
(16) John P.Harris,“Plato’s Ion and the End of his Symposium”,Illionis Classical Studies,Vol.26,2001,p.91.
(17) Aaron Landry,“Inspiration and Techne:Divination in Plato’s Ion”,Plato Journal,Vol.14,2014,pp.87-89.
(18) 荷马:《奥德赛》,陈中梅译注,译林出版社2003年版,15页。
(19) 转引自E.N.Tigerstedt,“Furor Poeticus:Poetic Inspiration in Greek Literature before Democritus and Plato”,Journal of History of Ideas,Vol.31,1970,p.165.
(20) Franco V.Trivigno,“Technē,Inspiration and Comedy in Plato’s Ion”,p.297.
(21) Franco V.Trivigno,“Technē,Inspiration and Comedy in Plato’s Ion”,p.303.
(22) Aaron Landry,“Inspiration and Technē:Divination in Plato’s Ion”,p.87.