摘要
自从出现文学史这种记载文学发生和发展变化的史书体裁以来,国内外各类文学史著作数量之多编写体例之杂芜、混乱已非同一般。但文学史究竟是怎样的一部史书,其性质、写作方法等如何,仍是个值得深思的问题。韦勒克和沃伦合著的《文学理论》一书至今对我们的文学研究和文学史撰写依然有着巨大的影响,有人甚至奉为圭皋。该书从不同的侧面详细探讨了文学史的性质、文学史的写作方法等,在阐明自己文学史观的同时并指出了某些已有的文学史观的错误。韦勒克文学史观的理论继承了艾略特所开创的那种从历史的维度、宏观且动态地考察文学作品的传统,而且就其理论的本质而言,他的包括文学价值观在内的一整套文学史观,就是在综合了艾略特与兰瑟姆的本体论诗学和艾略特的"有机整体观"以及"非个性化"理论的基础上提出来并发扬光大的。从这一观点出发,韦勒克构建了自己的文学史框架:文学史是在对文学这种意向性存在的"经验客体"进行的批评中,归纳或"提炼"出表达"决定性结构"或价值体系(包括文学的原理、文学的范畴和判断标准等)的文学理论,然后在此理论的指导下,以文学系统内的、"一个与时代同时出现的秩序"的前后逻辑关系,在综合通过读者、批评家等人头脑的文学批评的基础上,构成文学史的写作框架。当然,韦勒克文学史观也有其自身的缺陷:首先,从总体上看,韦勒克对文学存在的认识是偏颇的;其次,韦勒克的文学史观中其实还杂糅了阐释学和新历史主义的一些基本观点;最后,韦勒克的文学进化观也是值得商榷的。韦勒克的文学史观说到底,其实还是坚持对文学内部的研究,而不是与其相关的历史的、社会的、思想史的或心理等背景的研究,没有超出"新批评"对文学的认知范围。这是我们需要注意的。
Numerous literary histories have been turned out since there appeared the genre of literary history that records literary happenings and developments. The styles of extant literary histories are, to a great degree, mixedup and unsystematic. Yet, the questions that need to be seriously considered remain unan- swered： what is a literary history？ What is the nature of it？ And how to write a literary history？ Ren6 Wellek and Austin Warren argues in their Theory of Literature, which remains quite influential on us and is even regarded as a Bible of literary theory from various aspects the nature of literary history and the methods for writing it, and criticizes the faulty notions of literary history in the past and at present. In a sense, Wellek inherits the historical sense of literary history initiated by Eliot, a tradition that looks at literary works macrocosmically and dynamically. In reference to the theoretical nature, Wellek develops his notion of literary history, including a systematic notion of value, on the basis of Eliot^s and Ransom＇s ontological poetics and Eliot＇s ＂organic whole- ness＂ and ＂ impersonal theory of poetry＂. Starting from this point, Wellek constructs a theoretical framework of literary history ： literary history is a kind of literary theory in a sense that expresses structure of determination or system of value synthesized or ＂refined＂ in the criticism of an object of experience. The framework of literary history is thus structured under the guide of this theory and on the basis of logic relations between the internal literary system and ＂a simultaneous order＂ and synthesis of readers＇and critics＇literary criticism. As a matter of fact, Wellek＇s notion of literary history is not perfect. First, on the whole, Wellek is biased in terms of literary existence; second, his notion is also mixed with some basic ideas proposed by hermeneutics and new historicism; last but not least, Wellek＇s notion of literary evolution is problematic. In the final analysis,
出处
《上海大学学报（社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2009年第3期74-87,共14页
Journal of Shanghai University(Social Sciences Edition)
基金
上海外国语大学重大项目(KX161023)
211三期重点学科建设项目(211YYQGQ01)
关键词
韦勒克
文学史
文学理论
文学批评
“透视主义”
“文学重建论”
新批评
Wellek
literary history
literary theory
literary criticism
“perspectivism”
＂literary recon-structionism＂
New Criticism
