【作者】 陈宇航；

【导师】 罗钢；

【作者基本信息】 清华大学 ， 中国现当代文学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 本文通过考察国民革命（1923-1927）中的宣传与文艺策略，期望解释的问题是：在五四“文学革命”与1928年“革命文学”论争之间文学的存在状态是怎样的？为什么创造社和蒋光赤的文学主张当时得不到党的认同？为什么自邓中夏、恽代英很早就提出的“革命文学”要到1928年大革命失败以后才激发了“革命文学论争”而不是更早？为什么知识分子地位从“导师”、到“同路人”，最终沦为“脆弱的二元人物”与“叛徒”？论文认为：国民革命阶段是处于“文学革命”与“革命文学”之间的特殊历史时期。考察五四一代知识分子投身国民革命后的文学创作状况，必须与他们的政治理想紧密结合起来。国共合作中的宣传机构为他们提供了实现政治理想的实践平台，他们的文艺观也从五四文学革命的文学救国理念转向为社会政治革命服务，为宣传服务——宣传与文艺是相互融合和相互改造的关系。在革命实践中，知识分子们需要溯本清源，从苏俄革命理论和文艺论争中汲取斗争的养料。论文为此追溯了苏俄无产阶级文化协会和“岗位派”的历史，指出在与托洛茨基、沃隆斯基等人的论辩中，“无产阶级文学”的主张始终是苏俄政党所警觉和反对的。苏俄文艺论争史料的翻译激发了文学家们很大的兴趣，鲁迅、茅盾、瞿秋白、冯雪峰、郭沫若等人从不同的角度对之消化与吸收，并在这样的理论背景上开展文艺论争。受苏俄指导的国民革命为了维护资产阶级民主革命的合作框架，在大部分时间里不提“无产阶级专政”的口号，“无产阶级文学”的主张也因此在国民革命中遭到抑制。五卅以后，无产阶级在国共联盟阵营中夺权意识的抬头，使北伐中的政策面临着“扩大革命”与“深入革命”的摇摆，斯大林主张“扩大革命”的妥协路线再次对“无产阶级文学”产生了抑制作用，“无产阶级文学”的主张直到大革命失败后清算了“右倾”的错误后才形成有规模的论争，讨论1928年及其以后“革命文学”的论争必须在国民革命期间文艺策略所确定的框架内才能开展。更多还原

【Abstract】 By probing into the propaganda, literary tactics carried out in the first NationalistRevolution (1923-1927), my dissertation is expected to explain the followingquestions: What’s the state of literature between the period of “literary revolution”period and the period of “revolutionary literature”. Why the literary propositions ofthe Creation Society (Chuang Zao She) and those of Jiang Guangchi were notrecognized by Chinese Communist Party at that time? Why the proposal of“revolutionary literature” put forward by Deng Zhongxia and Yun Daiying in an earlytime didn’t trigger off the “controversy over revolutionary literature” until the GreatRevolution was failed in1928? Why was the status of the intellectuals reduced frombeing the “teachers” to the “fellow travelers”, then to “weak dual characters” andfinally to “renegades”?My dissertation demonstrates that the first Nationalist Revolution was a specialhistorical period between the “literary revolution” period and the period of“revolutionary literature”. The investigation into the literary and artistic creationconducted by the intellectuals during the May4th Movement, who identifiedthemselves with the first Nationalist Revolution, should be closely linked to the studyof their political ideologies. Propaganda organizations in the co-operation of theKuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party provided the intellectuals with aplatform to realize their political ideals. The outlook of the intellectuals on literatureand art shifted from the national salvation by literature during the May4th LiteraryRevolution to the literature serving the social and political revolution and serving thepropaganda——propaganda and literature should be integrated with each other andtransform each other. In their revolutionary practice, the intellectuals should trace tothe sources and get at the roots of things and should draw nourishment for thestruggle from Russian and Soviet revolutionary theories and controversies overliterature and art. My dissertation traces the history of the Soviet ProletarianAssociation of Culture and the “Post Advocators”, pointing out that in entering intocontroversy with Leon Trotsky and Aleksandr Konstantinovich Voronsky, the Soviet political party was always on the alert against the concept of “Proletarian Literature”.Translation of the historical materials on Soviet literary and artistic controversiesaroused great interest in Chinese intellectuals. Men of letters like Lu Xun, Mao Dun,Qu Qiubai, Feng Xuefeng and Guo Moruo, etc., all digested and absorbed thematerials from different perspectives and started controversy on such a theoreticalbasis. In order to defend the co-operative framework of the bourgeois democraticrevolution, the Soviet-guided National Revolution did not advocate the “ProletarianDictatorship” for most of the time and，as a result, the concept of “ProletarianLiterature” was held in check during the National Revolution. After the May30thMovement, the rising awareness of the proletariat to seize power in the alliance of theKuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party made the policies during the NorthernExpedetion to vacillate between “expanding the revolution” and “deepening therevolution”, and the line of compromise of Stalin advocating “expanding therevolution” held the “Proletarian Literature” in check once again. Under suchcircumstances, a large-scale debate on the concept of “Proletarian Literature” did nottake shape until the “Right-deviationist” mistakes were squared up in the wake of theGreat Revolution.更多还原