从“受苦”出发的主体实践——武田泰淳文学中的中国历史与“吃人”问题以及反思日本现代性的契机
|
摘要
武田泰淳是日本战后文学的代表性作家,也是以其渊博的中国古典文学造诣及与竹内好一起推动日本早期中国现代文学研究著称的知识分子。他在二战时期所写的成名作《司马迁》中提出重要命题,即《史记》的历史叙事为"无中心"的世界构想,暗示了日本文化世界化构想必将挫败。同时,此种历史意识勾画了负载着耻辱与罪责相交的复杂主体观念,为他战后的文学创作极富反思性的思想深度提供了来源。本文通过诠释武田《司马迁》以及战后的相关作品,分析武田泰淳的历史意识,指出其相关思考正是针对日本战后现代化历程的深刻反思与批评,并认为,武田试图借此对冷战格局下出现的现代性种种困境进行回应。本文将从武田的历史意识推导出来的主体观念称作"受苦的主体性",武田在日本现代性的深刻反思之上,形构此种主体观念,为我们展示不囿于国家而向无数个体生命开放的人文精神纽带,即"文"的共同性之可能性。
Takeda Taijun is a representative writer in post-war Japanese literature. He is also well-known for his erudition on Chinese classical literature and his joint effort with Takeuchi Yoshimi to advocate study of Chinese modern literature in early Japan. In his book,Sima Qian,which he wrote during the Second World War and which brought him reputation,he puts forward an important thesis,namely that the historical narrative in Sima Qian's Historical Records is based on his conception of a"center-less"world,and suggests that any attempt ofturning Japanese culture into a world culture would be doomed to failure. In the meanwhile,his historical consciousness posits a complex subjective thinking burdened with shame and guilt,which gives profoundly reflective depths to his post- war literary creation. This article analyses Takeda Taijun's historical consciousness through an interpretation of his Sima Qian and related works after the War,with a view to revealing his deep reflections and critiques on the modernization process of post-war Japan. The author argues that Takeda attempts to respond to the various dilemmas of modernity that emerge in the cold war pattern. He terms Takeda's idea of subjectivity inferred from his historical consciousness as"suffering subjectivity. He continues to argue that Takeda's reflections on Japanese modernity,with them the formation of his idea of subjectivity,demonstrate before us a spiritual bond of humanism that is accessible to innumerable individual lives,thus making the commonality of"culture"possible.
Takeda Taijun is a representative writer in post-war Japanese literature. He is also well-known for his erudition on Chinese classical literature and his joint effort with Takeuchi Yoshimi to advocate study of Chinese modern literature in early Japan. In his book,Sima Qian,which he wrote during the Second World War and which brought him reputation,he puts forward an important thesis,namely that the historical narrative in Sima Qian's Historical Records is based on his conception of a"center-less"world,and suggests that any attempt ofturning Japanese culture into a world culture would be doomed to failure. In the meanwhile,his historical consciousness posits a complex subjective thinking burdened with shame and guilt,which gives profoundly reflective depths to his post- war literary creation. This article analyses Takeda Taijun's historical consciousness through an interpretation of his Sima Qian and related works after the War,with a view to revealing his deep reflections and critiques on the modernization process of post-war Japan. The author argues that Takeda attempts to respond to the various dilemmas of modernity that emerge in the cold war pattern. He terms Takeda's idea of subjectivity inferred from his historical consciousness as"suffering subjectivity. He continues to argue that Takeda's reflections on Japanese modernity,with them the formation of his idea of subjectivity,demonstrate before us a spiritual bond of humanism that is accessible to innumerable individual lives,thus making the commonality of"culture"possible.
引文
(1)武田泰淳的代表作还有:《风媒花》、《光苔》、《森林与湖泊的祭礼》以及《富士》等。竹内好(Takeuchi Yoshimi,1910-1977)是他于东京帝国大学就读中国文学专业时的同学,并和他一起建立了“中国文学研究会”。两个人可谓是毕生的盟友。
(2)川西政明「解説」、武田泰淳『評論集滅亡について他三十篇』岩波書店、1992年、361頁。
(3)武田泰淳「司馬遷」、『武田泰淳全集』(第11巻)築摩書房、1971年、78頁。
(4)同上,第113页。
(5)同上。
(6)桶谷秀昭『昭和精神史』文藝春秋、1992年、637-638頁。
(7)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、42-43頁。
(8)同上,第76页。
(9)武田泰淳「ひかりごけ」、『武田泰淳全集』(第5巻)築摩書房、1971年、205-206頁。
(10)武田泰淳「秋風秋雨人を愁殺す」、『武田泰淳全集』(第9巻)築摩書房、1972年、250-251頁。
(11)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、6頁。
(12)同上,第15页。
(13)同上,第18页。
(14)同上,第77-78页。
(15)武田泰淳「滅亡について」,『武田泰淳全集』(第12巻)築摩書房、1972年、92頁。
(16)同上。
(17)武田泰淳·堀田善卫『私はもう中国を語らない』朝日新聞社、1973年、185頁。
(18)同上,第187页。
(19)《孔子世家》第十七,载《史记》卷四十七,北京:中华书局1959年版,第1921页。
(20)同上,第1922页。
(21)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、56-57頁。
(22)同上,第58页。
(23)同上,第85页。
(24)同上。
(25)俞樾:《群经平议》卷三十,《论语》一,载俞樾:《春在堂全书》,南京:凤凰出版社2010年影印本,第497页。
(26)和辻哲郎『孔子』岩波書店、1988年、138頁。
(27)同上,第83页。
(28)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、94頁。
(29)同上,第97页。
(30)同上,第78页。
(31)同上,第24页。
(32)同上,第94-95页。
(33)同上。
(34)同上,第112页。
(35)同上,第106-107页。
(36)同上,第107页。
(37)武田泰淳「講談社1965年版『司馬遷』新版序文」、『武田泰淳全集』(第16巻)朝日新聞社、1972年、553-554頁。
(38)前揭武田泰淳「滅亡について」、95頁。
(39)同上,第94页。
(40)同上。
(41)同上,第96-97页。
(2)川西政明「解説」、武田泰淳『評論集滅亡について他三十篇』岩波書店、1992年、361頁。
(3)武田泰淳「司馬遷」、『武田泰淳全集』(第11巻)築摩書房、1971年、78頁。
(4)同上,第113页。
(5)同上。
(6)桶谷秀昭『昭和精神史』文藝春秋、1992年、637-638頁。
(7)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、42-43頁。
(8)同上,第76页。
(9)武田泰淳「ひかりごけ」、『武田泰淳全集』(第5巻)築摩書房、1971年、205-206頁。
(10)武田泰淳「秋風秋雨人を愁殺す」、『武田泰淳全集』(第9巻)築摩書房、1972年、250-251頁。
(11)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、6頁。
(12)同上,第15页。
(13)同上,第18页。
(14)同上,第77-78页。
(15)武田泰淳「滅亡について」,『武田泰淳全集』(第12巻)築摩書房、1972年、92頁。
(16)同上。
(17)武田泰淳·堀田善卫『私はもう中国を語らない』朝日新聞社、1973年、185頁。
(18)同上,第187页。
(19)《孔子世家》第十七,载《史记》卷四十七,北京:中华书局1959年版,第1921页。
(20)同上,第1922页。
(21)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、56-57頁。
(22)同上,第58页。
(23)同上,第85页。
(24)同上。
(25)俞樾:《群经平议》卷三十,《论语》一,载俞樾:《春在堂全书》,南京:凤凰出版社2010年影印本,第497页。
(26)和辻哲郎『孔子』岩波書店、1988年、138頁。
(27)同上,第83页。
(28)前揭武田泰淳「司馬遷」、94頁。
(29)同上,第97页。
(30)同上,第78页。
(31)同上,第24页。
(32)同上,第94-95页。
(33)同上。
(34)同上,第112页。
(35)同上,第106-107页。
(36)同上,第107页。
(37)武田泰淳「講談社1965年版『司馬遷』新版序文」、『武田泰淳全集』(第16巻)朝日新聞社、1972年、553-554頁。
(38)前揭武田泰淳「滅亡について」、95頁。
(39)同上,第94页。
(40)同上。
(41)同上,第96-97页。