摘要
近年来,历史学界,特别是社会史取向的研究选题越来越"小"、越来越"微观"和具体,从而在一定程度上导致了史学研究的碎片化现象。于是乎,多有学人将"碎片"等同于碎片化。事实上,"碎片"是碎片化的前提,但碎片化并不一定是"碎片"研究的必然结果。王笛《茶馆》一书就是一个很好的例证。书中的成都茶馆,无疑是一个很"小"、很微观的研究对象,但作者利用其搜集来的各种有关成都茶馆的资料,将茶馆进行重新"包装",让二十世纪上半叶的成都茶馆活灵活现的呈现在读者面前,让读者对当时国家权力冲击下的成都社会以及地方与国家的互动有了一个深入的了解,这种"小题大做"的史学研究成果恰恰证明了"碎片"并不等于碎片化。
Recently,the historical research topics, especially more specific in the domain of history, which results in the socially oriented ones, are becoming smaller and fragmentization of history study. Therefore, many scholars hold the view that fragments are equivalent to fragmentization. In fact, the fragment is the premise of fragmentization, but the fragmentization is not the corollary of fragments. Tea House, written by Wang Di, is a good example. In the book, Chengdu Tea House is undoubtedly a small and tiny object, but the author repack- aged it by making full use of all the relevant information he collected, presenting the readers a picture of the Chengdu tea houses in the first half of the twentieth Century vividly. Meanwhile, it let the readers have a deep understanding of the local customs, and interactions between nation and society under the state power. By doing more with less, such a research achievement evidence that fragments are not equivalent to framentization.
出处
《攀枝花学院学报》
2017年第4期54-58,共5页
Journal of Panzhihua University
关键词
社会史
碎片
碎片化
《茶馆》
王笛
social history
fragment
fragmentization
Tea House
Wang Di
