【作者】 朱羽；

【导师】 张旭东；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 中国现当代文学， 2011， 博士

【副题名】以1950-60年代中国的文艺实践和美学论争为中心

【摘要】 中国社会主义实践有着求新求变的历史冲动,“新人”、“改造”、“移风易俗”等词汇指向的正是这一冲动的具体表现。本文关注的则是“社会主义与自然”这一问题式,具体言之,本文试图呈现内在于社会主义实践的“历史”与“自然”之间的辩证关系：一方面,社会主义实践将许多原本被视为自然而然的观念、制度和生活方式转化为有待超越和克服的对象；另一方面,它有着将新人、新的制度和新的生活世界确立为“自然”的要求,即将之进一步普遍化。这一实践不但涉及到外在自然形象的意义重建,也关系到人的内在自然、人性的改造以及具有伦理实体性的“第二自然”的创造。1950年代中期社会主义改造基本完成(所有制改造)之后,内外自然的进一步改造继续展开。而此一时期的文艺实践与美学话语在塑造内外自然的过程中扮演着关键角色,它们集中反映了新的生活世界追求自我证成的努力与难度,因此成为本文具体的研究对象。第一章首先以肇始于1950年代的国画改造与继承民族遗产问题为脉络,探讨政治与山水之间的互动,追问新的政治意义如何渗入自然表象,即劳动群众的翻身、新中国的建成与“山水画”改造之间有着何种关联。世界观的改造可以读解为世界直观的变迁,其印证在新山水画实践之中,就表现为“社会主义山水”或新的政治共同体之“自然”形象的发现。新山水画实践触及了一种新的“视觉世界”的生成。讨论其他媒介脉络里的社会主义风景需要注意到这一背景。周立波的《山乡巨变》是农业合作化小说叙事中尤重“风景”的一部。其对于风景的描绘一方面关联着“社会”同“自然”相和解的冲动,另一方面小说所采用的现实主义“观察”机制带来了一种对于乡村风景、风俗的独特呈现。这并不能简单视为环境描写或主观移情,而是通过形式的中介表征出一种把握农业合作化实践的态度。“风景”与不可化约的新旧混杂有关,其背后是对于社会主义实践之自然肌体的思考——希望新的实践能够在更高的层面上恢复生活世界的慰藉能力。这恰是通过抵御叙述声音之完全渗透的无言风景来进行暗示的。随着社会主义实践的展开,青年的社会流动带来了自然形象的再次出现。观察的机制无法回应将“外在”的主体立场转化为“内在”的集体认同的要求。作为一部具有普遍意味的教育-成长剧,《朝阳沟》呈现了另一种自然形象。自然美景首先经历了一次劳动所施予的否定,而在女主人公对于劳动以及伦理世界的回忆中,自然形象在更高的层面上复归了。这一“人化的自然”在“政治说理”暂时失效的基础上提供了一种审美解决,也烙刻着一代人的集体经验。本章即从以上三种自然形象和社会实践入手,尝试呈现自然表象在社会主义条件下重建自身意义的过程。第二章首先回答了为何1950年代的中国会出现美学讨论以及为何讨论要强调客观美：这一系列问题涉及社会主义在更高的层面确立普遍性(不仅仅是“好”而且是“美”)。在这一脉络中,“自然美”议题的出现意味着客观美问题的深化。这也呼应着第一章所提出的自然的意义重建。美学讨论中各派对于自然美问题的论述呈现出不同的关切。一方面是蔡仪所谓超历史的自然美带出“常识”问题——凸显出内在于社会的自然面向。另一方面,朱光潜在自我改造过程中通过美学话语保留了对于审美主体性的坚持。这尤其体现在他对待自然及自然美的态度上。朱光潜所谓意识形态化的自然美实质指向的是文化或教养。李泽厚则以马克思主义政治经济学为依托构筑了自然与历史的辩证关系,从而在新的层面上将自然美问题提了出来。由此“自然”与社会主义实践获得了更为内在的联系。同时李泽厚也回应了教养的问题。在他看来,自然美关乎劳动群众的解放,最终关乎劳动时间结构的改造。从而李泽厚将自然美与共产主义理想连接了起来。不过,李泽厚的“自然美”关联着长时段的沉淀,甚至是人类的“感官”演变,因此难以回应社会主义实践在当下改造内在自然的迫切要求。新与美的问题由此被提了出来,姚文元对于美学讨论的介入呈现出此一诉求。在“大跃进”语境中,姚文元将无私劳动纳入了审美领域。新、美与新的劳动主体建立了关联。在1960年代初,朱光潜则在更为严格的美学脉络里对于劳动作为人的自然需要进行理论论证,并引发了客观论者的猛烈批评。争论焦点在于劳动分工以及劳动主体的自然性限度。本章将社会主义美学讨论关于劳动-艺术的争执与大跃进文艺实践对于劳动主体的设想视为历史经验的两个必要环节。第三章从社会主义“文化革命”克服劳动群众臣属性的角度切入,展开对于大跃进时期的群众文艺实践——新壁画、新民歌的讨论。我们需要在具体历史脉络和政治冲动中来理解其征服自然的修辞,也需要首先从“生产”而非“作品”来思考此一实践的历史意味。一方面,大跃进文艺实践确实刻画了超强的劳动场景和劳动主体。另一方面,在向共产主义社会进行过渡的历史氛围中,劳动群众通过参与同劳动紧密相关的文艺生产,构造出了突破劳动分工和劳动等级的历史瞬间。大跃进群众文艺实践的“浮夸”特征与其征服自然或必然性的修辞有关。“大跃进”文艺中现实与幻想、愿望的“拼贴”确实带来了一种幻象,但是修辞性的夸张也带来了种突破幻象的可能性。工农群众在想象性地克服“自然”的过程中,打开了一个主体生成的瞬间——“我”/“我们”的到来。通过对于新民歌和新壁画的可视觉化以及难以视觉化特征的分析,我们可以看到一种不稳定的、瞬间性的新的内在自然的生产。这不仅仅是超强劳动主体的赋形,而且是自然限度之中的自由的呈现。“大跃进”落潮后,社会主义实践依旧试图保留大跃进的正面能量,设想一种具有更为稳定的内在自然或者说自发性的形象。由此第四章转入对于1950年代末1960年代初新喜剧电影实践的讨论。其中的关键问题即新人、更高的人成为喜剧主体及其所引发的关于全新的笑的争论。喜剧主体具有相对稳定的内在自然以及自发性,但并不身处劳动生产和革命斗争的脉络。“歌颂性喜剧”《今天我休息》和《五朵金花》引发的核心争论是喜剧的分类问题和矛盾问题,两者暗示出美学内部的政治分歧。“社会主义现实主义”对于完整的人、真实的人的要求与喜剧形象并不一致。本章将喜剧主体放在黑格尔美学及其阐释脉络里,考察新人与喜剧主体之间的内在联系。在歌颂性喜剧中,新人的道德表现具有喜剧形式,其喜剧感则来源于一种自足的生命的“裂隙”,来自新人“不仅仅是人”的部分。然而,新人所引发的笑是否为全新的笑则是可以争辩的。这一难题凸显出一种复杂的情形：一方面喜剧本身有其界限,即喜剧氛围依托于矛盾的弱化、琐细的日常性和原有的“自然”因素一恋爱、家庭等。另一方面,观者从喜剧主体身上见出不自然,这一点成为其可笑的根源。喜剧主体无法摆脱主观性,而且喜剧经验没有真正触及“第二自然”的改造。在这个意义上,歌颂性喜剧表征出一种独特的历史瞬间。在更为激进的历史运动中,喜剧所暗示出的“裂隙”会向“矛盾”转化。内外自然的改造也将呈现另一种面貌。在那一过程中,1950至60年代初文艺实践和美学话语所触及的一系列问题——自然美、劳动、教养、生产时间/闲暇时间,笑与喜剧经验都将发生转化或被改写。更多还原

【Abstract】 There was a historical impulse within Chinese socialist practice, actualization of which was designated by the words or expressions such as "new man", "reconstruction" and "to change customs and habits" etc. However, this dissertation focuses on the problematic which could be stated as "socialism and nature". To state it concretely, this dissertation attempts to show the dialectics between "history" and "nature" within Chinese socialist practice:on the one hand, socialist practice regarded many ideas, institutions and life-styles which had been considered as "natural" as the objects to transcend and overcome; on the other hand, it had a tendency to elevate new man, new institution and new life-world to the level of "nature", i.e. a tendency to universalize. This practice not only referred to the reconstruction of meaning of images/representations of outer nature, but also had a close relationship with transforming human"s inner nature or humanity and constructing "second nature" that had ethical substance. After accomplishing socialist reconstruction (esp. reconstruction of ownership) on a basic level in the middle stage of 1950s, Chinese socialist practice proceeded to reconstruct outer and inner nature, in which practices of art and aesthetic discourses played a pivotal role. It is significant to point out that these practices of art and aesthetics reflected possibilities and difficulties of self-affirmation of new life-world and political community. Hence, they are the concrete objects of this dissertation.Chapter one tries to discuss the interaction between "politics" and "landscape"/Shan Shui by means of the issues of reconstruction of Chinese painting and inheritance of national legacy since 1950s, i.e. to pursue how new political significance penetrated into representations of nature and what was the relationship between "turning over" of working class and establishment of People’s Republic of China and reconstruction of Chinese landscape painting. In this context, reconstruction of world-view could be read as transformation of intuition of "world". This process was presented as "discovery" of "socialist landscape" or image of nature within new political body. We could say the practice of new Chinese landscape painting grasped the formation of new "visual world" which provided a necessary context to understand socialist landscape within other medium. Zhou Libo’s Shanxiang Jubian could be regarded as a novel which paid unusual attention to "landscape" or scenery within the context of novels about agricultural cooperativization. On the one hand, its representation of scenery related to the political urge that society should reconcile with nature ("turning over of the world"). On the other hand, the mechanism of "observation" resulting from realistic aesthetics brought about a unique presentation of scenery and custom in the countryside, which could not be simply interpreted as "description of surroundings" or "empathization of subject" but showed an attitude toward the practice of agricultural cooperativization by mediation of "form". Here, "scenery" had a relationship with irreducible co-existence of the old and the new, which showed a sort of rethinking about the natural body of socialist practice:it should recover the ability of solacing of life-world. It was the presentation of mute scenery which resisted the total penetration of narrative voice that formalized this implication. However, with deployment of socialist practice, the social move of the youth made "nature" reappeared. Within this context, the mechanism of observation could not respond to the urge of transforming "outer" subject-position into "inner" identity of collectivity. As an educational-formation drama with universal significance, Chao Yanggou brought a new sort of image of nature:the beautiful image of nature had been negated by working at first, and then it reappeared at a higher level through the heroine’s memory of working and ethical world. According to the temporary inefficiency of "political persuasion", this kind of "humanized nature" offered a sort of aesthetic solution and crystallized a sort of collective experience. This chapter attempts to show the process of reconstruction of meaning of representation of nature under the condition of socialism.Chapter two first answers why Chinese debates on aesthetics appeared in 1950s and why the objectivity of beauty was emphasized in the debates:these issues referred to the establishment of universality of socialism on higher level (not only "good" but also "beautiful"). In this context, the issue of "natural beauty" meant the deepening of objective beauty, which also responded to the problem that chapter one put forward: reconstruction of the meaning of nature. However, the statement of "natural beauty" put forward by every faction of the debates presented different concerns. On the one hand, the natural beauty beyond history emphasized by Cai Yi implied the problem of "common sense", i.e. implying the natural facet within society. On the other hand, Zhu Guangqian sustained aesthetic subjectivity in his aesthetic discourse although he actively involved in self-reconstructing, which showed its trace in his attitude to nature and natural beauty. What’s at stake is that the ideologized natural beauty stated by Zhu connected with mediation of "culture". In addition, Li Zehou constructed the dialectical relationship between nature and history by virtue of the model of Marxist political economy, and elevated the problem of natural beauty to a new level. In this respect, nature gained an inner relationship with socialist practice. At the same time, Li’s construction also answered the issue of "culture" within natural beauty. In his opinion, natural beauty pointed to liberation of working class and finally to reconstruction of structure of time of production. Hence, Li juxtaposed natural beauty and communist society. However, Li’s natural beauty related to long-term sediment, even the "evolution" of sense of human being. Then, it was difficult to respond the urge of socialist practice to reconstruct inner nature in the present. In this regard, the problematic of "novelty" and "beauty" appeared. Yao Wenyuan’s engagement in debates on aesthetics grasped this urge. In the context of "Great Leap Forward", Yao brought selfless work into aesthetic filed. Then, novelty, beauty and new working subject constructed a relationship. In the early stage of 1960s, Zhu Guangqian attempted to demonstrate working as human’s natural need within the context of aesthetic theory, which gave rise to radical criticism of the discussants supporting objective beauty. The pivot of this debate was the division of labor and the natural limitation of working subject. This chapter regards the debates on labor-art and the vision of working subject presented by practices of "Great Leap Forward" as two necessary moments of historical experience.Chapter three discusses practices of art of working class (new mural and new folk song) in "the Great Leap Forward Movement" by right of "cultural revolution" which attempted to overcome the subalternity of working class. It is pertinent to grasp the rhetoric of conquering "nature " of these practices within concrete historical context and political appeal and to rethink their political implication not so much from the perspective of "work" as from the perspective of "production". On the one hand, practices of art in the Great Leap Forward movement certainly presented the exaggerated scene of working and working subject. On the other hand, working class constructed the historical moment to overcome division and hierarchy of labor by virtue of participating in the practices of art which had a close relationship with working within the historical atmosphere in which socialism began to transit into communism. To some extent, the "turgid" characteristic of practices of art in the Great Leap Forward movement derived from the rhetoric of conquering nature or "necessity". We should recognize the suture of reality, ideal and wish within these practices of art unmistakably gave rise to a sort of "illusion", but the exaggerated rhetoric also brought about a possibility to overcome this illusion. In the process of conquering nature by means of imagination, working class opened a moment of formation of subjectivity----the coming of "I" or "We". Through analyzing the characteristics of visualization or the difficulty to visualize of new folk song and new mural, we could catch a sort of unstable and temporary production of new inner nature, which was not only the formalization of exaggerated working subject but also the presence of liberty within the limitation of nature.When the Great Leap Forward movement began to decline, socialist practice still tried to maintain its positive energy, i.e. to conceive a figure with more stable inner nature and spontaneity. Hence, chapter four turned to the practice of new comical movies in the late stage of 1950 and early stage of 1960s, the main issues of which were as fellows:new man or the higher type of human as comical subject and the new sort of laughter. The comical subject had a stable inner nature and didn’t act in a situation of working and revolutionary struggle. The debate caused by two "eulogistic comedies"----Jintian Wo Xiuxillt’s My Day Off and Wuduo Jinhua/Five Golden Flowers focused on two issues:the classification of comedy and the contradiction within comedy, which showed political disagreement within aesthetics. The pursuit of total and real man conceived by "socialist realism" could not come to terms with the comical figure. This chapter puts comical subject into the context of Hegel’s aesthetics and its interpretation to study the inner connection between new man and comical subject. In eulogistic comedies, new man’s moral behavior had a comical appearance and his laughability derived from a "crack" within self-sufficient life. i.e. from the part of "not only human". However, it is debatable whether the laughter caused by new man was a new sort of laughter. This aporia highlighted a complicated situation. On the one hand, comedy had its borderline, that is to say, the comical atmosphere heavily relied on alleviation of contradiction or conflict, trivial everydayness and old "natural" elements----love and family etc. On the other hand, the spectators found unnaturalness of comical figures which resulted in laughability. Comical figure could not get rid of its subjectivity and comical experience did not really enter into reconstruction of "second nature". In this sense, eulogistic comedies pointed to a unique historical moment. In the radical transformation of history, the "crack" which was implied by new comedy transformed into contradiction. The reconstruction of out/inner nature would show other features, in which a series of issues brought by practices of art and aesthetic discourses in 1950-60s----natural beauty, working, culture, productive/leisure time, laughter and comical experience would be rewritten or changed.更多还原