摘要
《围城》与《历史人》都是著名校园讽刺小说。其代表人物李梅亭与霍华德·科克都是生活在动荡时期相对平静的大学校园"围城"中的高级知识分子,他们在日常生活中言与行的矛盾、表与里的抵牾,在职场生涯中道貌岸然的显性身份表象与其庸俗无聊、滑稽可笑的隐性角色扮演形成的伦理悖论,无疑具有强烈的喜剧效果和深刻的反讽性质。由于人物所处经济、政治、文化背景不同,其伦理悖论又各具特点,李梅亭身上散发出陈腐的朱熹式伪道学气息,霍华德·科克则是在激进外表下包裹着极端利己主义。李梅亭与霍华德·科克形象蕴含的伦理悖论在知识分子中具有一定典型性,其形象既为历史存照,也对今天重塑大学灵魂、重塑知识分子健全人格具有一定镜鉴意义。
Both Fortress Besieged and The History Man are popular campus novels with satirical hue,the representative figures of which,Li Meiting and Howard Kirk are senior intellectuals living on comparatively quiet campus during turbulent historical times. Ethical paradoxes revealed by contradictions of their words and actions,differences of their appearance and inner being,conflicts between their explicit decent identities and ridiculous implicit role playing in career,are undoubtedly of strong comic effect and profound ironic nature. Due to diverse political,economic and cultural backgrounds,they show ethical paradoxes with respective characteristics. The image of Li Meiting smells of a stale Chinese scholar bureaucrat who advocates Zhu Xi＇s style of pseudo-Confucianism,while Howard Kirk＇s extreme self-interest is hidden under his radical appearance and mask. Ethical paradoxes implied in images of Li Meiting and Howard Kirk are of certain typical significance among intellectuals. Characterization of these images helps to make historical records,and it contributes to rebuilding soul of universities and remolding sound personalities of intellectuals in the sense of reflection and reference.
作者
张媛
翟哲
ZHANG Yuan;ZHAI Zhe(School of Foreign Languages,Jiangsu University of Science and Technology,Zhenjiang 212003,China;School of Humanity,Soochow University,Suzhou 215123,China)
出处
《重庆邮电大学学报（社会科学版）》
2018年第3期135-141,共7页
Journal of Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications(Social Science Edition)
基金
江苏省政府留学奖学金资助(苏教外[2016]111)
江苏省本创省级重点项目:赛珍珠中国题材小说的通俗化价值研究(201710289071Z)
江苏科技大学外国语学院高水平科研培育项目:20世纪中英学院派小说比较研究--以<围城>与<历史人>为例(WGYGSP1608[PY])
关键词
《围城》
《历史人》
李梅亭
霍华德·科克
伦理悖论
镜鉴意义
Fortress Besieged
The History Man
Li Meiting
Howard Kirk
ethical paradoxes
significance for reflection
