钟嵘《诗品》“清”内涵初探
|
摘要
钟嵘在《诗品》中提及"清"字凡18处,先后评价了李陵、班婕妤、嵇康、刘越石、陶潜等十五人的五言诗。这18处"清"字,主要用于描述所评诗歌的声律与辞采、诗情与气质以及诗歌风貌,其核心内涵是明晰省净、纯而不杂和典雅醇正。通过对"清"字在《诗品》中不同用法与含义的细致梳理可以发现,"清"与钟嵘"自然英旨"的诗歌美学理想相互照应,正是这一诗歌美学理想落实到具体批评实践的重要体现。
In Grades of Poetry, Zhong Rong mentioned the "Qing" character in 18 places, and successively evaluated the five-word poetry created by fifteen poets, such as Li Ling, Consort Ban, Ji Kang, Liu Kun and Tao Yuanming. In these illustrations, "Qing" are mainly used to describe the rhythm and quotation of poetry, poetry and temperament, and poetic style. The core connotation is clear and pure, pure and not mixed and elegant. Through the meticulous combing of the specific meaning of "Qing" in Grades of Poetry, It is clean that the aesthetic ideals of poetry between "Qing" and Zhong Rong's "natural intention" are mutually responsive. It is precisely this aesthetic ideal of poetry that is embodied in the concrete practice of criticism.
In Grades of Poetry, Zhong Rong mentioned the "Qing" character in 18 places, and successively evaluated the five-word poetry created by fifteen poets, such as Li Ling, Consort Ban, Ji Kang, Liu Kun and Tao Yuanming. In these illustrations, "Qing" are mainly used to describe the rhythm and quotation of poetry, poetry and temperament, and poetic style. The core connotation is clear and pure, pure and not mixed and elegant. Through the meticulous combing of the specific meaning of "Qing" in Grades of Poetry, It is clean that the aesthetic ideals of poetry between "Qing" and Zhong Rong's "natural intention" are mutually responsive. It is precisely this aesthetic ideal of poetry that is embodied in the concrete practice of criticism.
引文
[ 1 ] 姜晓云.“清”与“怨”的历史传承与钟嵘《诗品》[J].文艺理论研究,2000(3):62-66.
[ 2 ] 胡艳娜.论钟嵘《诗品》中的“清”[J].语文学刊,2010(7):30-31.
[ 3 ] 李建松.钟嵘以“清”论诗探析[J].长江大学学报(社会科学版),2012(7):5-6.
[ 4 ] 蒋寅.古典诗学的现代阐释[M].北京:中华书局,2003:32.
[ 5 ] 钱钟书.管锥编(第一册)[M].北京:中华书局,1986:76.
[ 6 ] 曹旭.《诗品》集注[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1994.
[ 7 ] 梁启雄.《荀子》简释[M].北京:中华书局,1983.
[ 8 ] 张怀瑾.钟嵘《诗品》评注[M].天津:天津古籍出版社,1997.
[ 9 ] 徐文雨.钟嵘《诗品》讲疏[M].成都:成都古籍出版社,1983.
[10] 胡应麟.诗薮[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1979.
[11] 遍照金刚.文镜秘府论[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1975:128.
[12] 周振甫.《文心雕龙》注释[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1981.
[13] 余嘉锡.《世说新语》笺疏[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[14] 郭绍虞.中国历代文论选(一)[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2001:188.
[15] 许慎.说文解字[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[16] 任继愈.《老子》新译[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1982:144.
[17] 陈鼓应.《庄子》今注今译[M].北京:中华书局,1983:449.
[18] 刘安.淮南子[M].高诱,注.上海:上海古籍出版社,1989:28.
[19] 李建松.论“清”从人物品藻到诗文品鉴的流变[D].开封:河南大学,2010.
[20] 何文焕.历代诗话[M].北京:中华书局,1981:436.
[21] 王世贞.艺苑卮言[M].陆洁栋,周明初,注.南京:江苏:凤凰出版社,2009:48.
[22] 沈约.宋书[M].北京:中华书局,1997:1662.
[23] 罗根泽.中国文学批评史[M].上海:上海书店出版社,2003:247.
[ 2 ] 胡艳娜.论钟嵘《诗品》中的“清”[J].语文学刊,2010(7):30-31.
[ 3 ] 李建松.钟嵘以“清”论诗探析[J].长江大学学报(社会科学版),2012(7):5-6.
[ 4 ] 蒋寅.古典诗学的现代阐释[M].北京:中华书局,2003:32.
[ 5 ] 钱钟书.管锥编(第一册)[M].北京:中华书局,1986:76.
[ 6 ] 曹旭.《诗品》集注[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1994.
[ 7 ] 梁启雄.《荀子》简释[M].北京:中华书局,1983.
[ 8 ] 张怀瑾.钟嵘《诗品》评注[M].天津:天津古籍出版社,1997.
[ 9 ] 徐文雨.钟嵘《诗品》讲疏[M].成都:成都古籍出版社,1983.
[10] 胡应麟.诗薮[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1979.
[11] 遍照金刚.文镜秘府论[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1975:128.
[12] 周振甫.《文心雕龙》注释[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1981.
[13] 余嘉锡.《世说新语》笺疏[M].北京:中华书局,1980.
[14] 郭绍虞.中国历代文论选(一)[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2001:188.
[15] 许慎.说文解字[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[16] 任继愈.《老子》新译[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1982:144.
[17] 陈鼓应.《庄子》今注今译[M].北京:中华书局,1983:449.
[18] 刘安.淮南子[M].高诱,注.上海:上海古籍出版社,1989:28.
[19] 李建松.论“清”从人物品藻到诗文品鉴的流变[D].开封:河南大学,2010.
[20] 何文焕.历代诗话[M].北京:中华书局,1981:436.
[21] 王世贞.艺苑卮言[M].陆洁栋,周明初,注.南京:江苏:凤凰出版社,2009:48.
[22] 沈约.宋书[M].北京:中华书局,1997:1662.
[23] 罗根泽.中国文学批评史[M].上海:上海书店出版社,2003:247.