接受主体“负”问题之“强制阐释”论
|
摘要
接受的高级阶段是阐释。阐释的负面问题一般有三类:漠视阐释、过剩阐释与"强制阐释"。有论者指出,强制阐释会带来"致命的伤害"和"根本性缺陷",但也应该看到,"强制阐释"还有其历史的必然性、合理性与可取性。台湾资深批评家白灵在诗歌阐释中对科学主义的引入,乔琦以符号学辨析诗歌的研究思路,多恩诗歌中的跨学科研究,都说明在阐释中,不必太在意所谓的"禁用""戒用""慎用",关键是阐释主体在所谓的"强制"中,运用得是否得当,同时不放弃最低限度的"自律性"。
The higher phase of reception can be regarded as interpretation. The negative aspects of interpretation includes:ignorance of interpretation,excessive interpretation and compulsory interpretation. One has noted,the compulsory interpretation will bring in fatal damage and fundamental defect to literary interpretation. However,we must understand,the compulsory interpretation has its historical inevitability,necessity and advisability. Bai Ling,a famous literary critic based in Taiwan, leads the scientism into poetry interpretation,Qiao Qi investigates poetry with semiology,and the John Donne poetry has already inspired cross-disciplinary studies. These examples make clear that we shall not over care to forbid the compulsory interpretation. The point is the receptive subject shall not give up the essential standard of "aesthetic autonomy" of the text,even in the so called "compulsory interpretation".
The higher phase of reception can be regarded as interpretation. The negative aspects of interpretation includes:ignorance of interpretation,excessive interpretation and compulsory interpretation. One has noted,the compulsory interpretation will bring in fatal damage and fundamental defect to literary interpretation. However,we must understand,the compulsory interpretation has its historical inevitability,necessity and advisability. Bai Ling,a famous literary critic based in Taiwan, leads the scientism into poetry interpretation,Qiao Qi investigates poetry with semiology,and the John Donne poetry has already inspired cross-disciplinary studies. These examples make clear that we shall not over care to forbid the compulsory interpretation. The point is the receptive subject shall not give up the essential standard of "aesthetic autonomy" of the text,even in the so called "compulsory interpretation".
引文
[1]张江.“强制阐释”论[J].文学评论,2014(6).
[2]张江.强制阐释论书札[J].社会科学战线,2015(6).
[3]陆杨.评强制阐释论[J].文艺理论研究,2015(5).
[4]张江,等.关于“强制阐释论”的对话[J].南方文坛,2016(1).
[5]陈定家.文本意图与阐释限度——兼论“强制阐释”的文化症候和逻辑缺失[J].文艺争鸣,2015(3).
[6]陈仲义.现代诗:语言张力论[M].武汉:长江文艺出版社,2012.
[7]白灵.新诗十家论[M].台北:台湾秀威资讯科技股份有限公司,2015.
[8]乔琦.形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辨[M].成都:四川大学出版社,2015.
[9]和庆鹏.评乔琦《形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辨》[EB/OL].http://www.semiotics.net.cn/index.php/publications_view/index/4882,2015-11-25.
[10]赵宝明.符号学作为理论工具的“元诗话”——评乔琦《形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辩》[EB/OL].http://www.semiotics.net.cn/index.php/publications_view/index/4943,2015-12-13.
[11]沈杨.科学与文学关系视域下的多恩诗歌研究[D].杭州:浙江大学,2012.
[12]董丽云.重建文本阐释的约束理论——从艾科和罗蒂之争谈起[D].福州:福建师范大学,2008.
[13]宋宪琳.全球化、文革后新诗和“西方主义”[J].东方丛刊,1999(1).
[14]张江.批评的伦理[J].求实学刊,2015(5).
[15]王侃.理论霸权、阐释焦虑与文化民族主义[J].文艺争鸣,2015(5).
[16]丹尼斯·斯密斯.齐格蒙特·鲍曼——后现代性的预言家[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2007.
(1)迄今为止,出版符号学丛书近20部,编辑《符号与传媒》12辑(中英文半年刊),建立全国首家《符号学论坛》等。
(1)见2016年2月26日赖彧煌回复笔者的信。
[2]张江.强制阐释论书札[J].社会科学战线,2015(6).
[3]陆杨.评强制阐释论[J].文艺理论研究,2015(5).
[4]张江,等.关于“强制阐释论”的对话[J].南方文坛,2016(1).
[5]陈定家.文本意图与阐释限度——兼论“强制阐释”的文化症候和逻辑缺失[J].文艺争鸣,2015(3).
[6]陈仲义.现代诗:语言张力论[M].武汉:长江文艺出版社,2012.
[7]白灵.新诗十家论[M].台北:台湾秀威资讯科技股份有限公司,2015.
[8]乔琦.形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辨[M].成都:四川大学出版社,2015.
[9]和庆鹏.评乔琦《形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辨》[EB/OL].http://www.semiotics.net.cn/index.php/publications_view/index/4882,2015-11-25.
[10]赵宝明.符号学作为理论工具的“元诗话”——评乔琦《形式动力:新诗论争的符号学考辩》[EB/OL].http://www.semiotics.net.cn/index.php/publications_view/index/4943,2015-12-13.
[11]沈杨.科学与文学关系视域下的多恩诗歌研究[D].杭州:浙江大学,2012.
[12]董丽云.重建文本阐释的约束理论——从艾科和罗蒂之争谈起[D].福州:福建师范大学,2008.
[13]宋宪琳.全球化、文革后新诗和“西方主义”[J].东方丛刊,1999(1).
[14]张江.批评的伦理[J].求实学刊,2015(5).
[15]王侃.理论霸权、阐释焦虑与文化民族主义[J].文艺争鸣,2015(5).
[16]丹尼斯·斯密斯.齐格蒙特·鲍曼——后现代性的预言家[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2007.
(1)迄今为止,出版符号学丛书近20部,编辑《符号与传媒》12辑(中英文半年刊),建立全国首家《符号学论坛》等。
(1)见2016年2月26日赖彧煌回复笔者的信。