【作者】 罗新河；

【导师】 王攸欣；

【作者基本信息】 湖南师范大学 ， 比较文学与世界文学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 钱钟书的思想文化存在是二十世纪中西文化碰撞、汇通与交融的产物。在钱钟书各种思想中,文学思想乃重心所在。探寻人类“诗心”“文心”,摸索文学基本规律,是钱钟书学术活动贯穿始终的核心内容。他既植基华夏又旁涉异域,既立足传统又注目当下,以一种宏阔视野,对古今中外各种文化文学现象予以通观圆览,并结合自己独特审美感受和创作体验,做出了大量“散为万殊”,“聚则一贯”的理论阐述。本文在对钱钟书著作深研细读并参之古今中外各种文化典籍基础之上,以文学本质论、文学作品论、文学创作论、文学发生发展论、文学接受论等五个方面为框架,对以上阐述进行系统寻绎、整理与总结,建构为一种现代逻辑框架与理论范式,并深入探究其弥合新旧、中西等对立价值范畴的成功实践,及其在当今中华文论参与世界诗学对话中所蕴含之典范价值。全文由绪论、正文六章、结语等八个部分构成。绪论述评相关研究成果,并说明本文写作缘起、价值、方法、创新之处。第一章概观钱钟书文学思想。首先梳理钱钟书文学思想递嬗承转之演变轨迹和逻辑理路,将之区划为三个时期：学生阶段的学术尝试期、较为纯粹的具体文艺理论与比较文学研究的发展期、对整个人类文化通观圆览、平行研究的巅峰期。其次对钱钟书文学思想的型范进行阐述,指出其非体系性学术操作,实是在理论建构方法上对现代西方模式的一种有意反动,是对西方近代以来非理性主义思想潮流的呼同时又揭示其内在上完备、整一,自具体系特征。第二章考察钱钟书的文学本质观。钱钟书的文学本质论呈现出明显的层次性。他视文学为心理状态之表现,在心理层面上将文学与哲学、历史等平行的社会文化系统沟通起来。但并不因此将文学与人文学科混同,无限扩大其边界,抹煞两者差异,而是转而极其突出文学的自身规定性,与此同时又在审美的艺术系统中将文学与禅宗、音乐、绘画等艺术门类进行对比,进一步凸显文学的语言艺术特征。此种对文学的认识首先建立在“打通”上,但“打通”不是取消,而是敞开,一种更大视野的照亮,最终落脚点是对文学主体性、独立性的维护和彰显。第三章讨论钱钟书的文学作品论。文学本质观上的“文学性”强调,必然导致文本论上的形式主义倾向。但钱钟书一贯的辩证性思维方式,使之消解了走向极端化的可能。注重形式,却不轻视内容,主张两者对立统一。因而放弃对文学作品做内容与形式的外在划分,进而对文本进行层面分析,分为语言、神韵两个层面。此种文本层次论源自中国传统层次论,同时与西方黑格尔、英伽登等人的文本层次论既有相似也有区别,本质上反映的是中国文本层次论与西方层次论的(?)在钱钟书的意识中,文本包括语言到结构都呈一种辩证性构成。其根源在于世界万物以及文学创作主体心灵天然的辩证法。此种理念与西方现代英美新批评作品结构理论有着密切联系,也体现出钱钟书源自哲学维度对文学的精深思考,是“打通”论逻辑衍展的必然结果。第四章探究钱钟书的创作论。主要就钱钟书关于创作主体与创作活动过程的有关观念进行讨论。钱钟书对创作主体的认识是全面的。既强调主体之才能,也不忽视后天学习积累,同时也给生命体验与情感蕴积以相当关注。但三者在钱钟书理论中的地位并不相同,后天的知识积累似乎更占分量,对此他曾一再提倡与强调,而且结合詹姆斯的“自我”观从哲学的角度进行方法论倡导。在创作上,钱钟书反对情感过度宣泄,在对浪漫主义“执情强物”创作方法的批评中,他高度认同罗斯金的“感情误置”说。与此同时他又从传统诗学观中发掘出“即物生情”观念,扬此而抑彼。在艺术传达问题上,他的看法由对克罗齐观点的批评而生发,既强调“心”,也不忽视“物”,“执心物两端而用厥中”。第五章探讨钱钟书的文学发生发展论。钱钟书认为,“因用施艺”、“用失艺存”,这种观念与西方游戏说、劳动说都存在一定关联,是对它们的一种综合理解。文学的发生观涉及的是对文学的认识,而文学发展论则关涉对文学的态度,极具现实指向性。钱钟书强调,继承与发展、借鉴与创新、传统与现代、东方与西方等关系应辩证统一,这样文学才能获致一种开放、宽容的发展环境。这是对二十世纪文学发展的理性而冷峻的思考,对于当下文学实践仍具指导意义。第六章探讨钱钟书的文学接受论。文学接受是整个文学问题的最终落脚点。钱钟书一面从接受主体的角度强调接受者的必要素养和条件,显示出先在的知识和心理结构在接受活动中的基础性地位,一面从文本和创作的维度,表明文学文本意蕴的丰富性、增生性和不确定性,以此彰显文本阐释的必然性和重要性。在此基础上,他融贯中西、出入古今,发掘出大量阐释和接受的思想、理念与方法,并以其不计其数的经典阐释案例为我们提供经验指导。结论部分总结全文,阐发钱钟书文学思想的精神品质,表现为三个方面：高度的问题意识,思维的开阔性,实践性。如果说以上由本质论到接受论构成的六个方面是钱钟书文学思想的外在形态,那么这里的三点则是它的内在特征。更多还原

【Abstract】 Qian Zhongshu’s ideological and cultural existence is a product of Sino-Western cultural shocks and exchanges in the twentieth century. In Qian Zhongshu’s thoughts,the literary thought is the most important.Exploring the basic rule of literature, had always been the core content of Qian Zhongshu’s academic activities. He paid close attention to Chinese culture and also dabbled in foreign culture, and not only valued the traditional culture, but also concerned about the current culture. With a broad vision, He conducted a comprehensive study on various cultural and literary phenomena at all times and in all countries. Combining with his own unique aesthetic feeling and the experience of creation, he expounded a lot of literary theories, that look very fragmentary, however as a whole together. This dissertation intends to systematically search, analyze and summarize them with modern way, make them become a theoretical system.It also explores the successful practice bridging the opposite value between the old and the new, the classic and the modem,Chinese and Western, and the value of model in the dialogue between Chinese literary theory and the foreign Poetics.The full text consists of eight parts such as introduction, six chapters of body and conclusion. The introduction summarizes the related research results of the other people, and explains writing origins, values, methods, innovations.ChapterⅠis an overview of Qian Zhongshu’s literary thoughts. First, clearing development history and logical mind of Qian Zhongshu’s literary thoughts,which is divided into three periods:the period of academic attempt as a student, the development period of more pure and specific literary theory and comparative literature research, the prime of Comprehensive study on the whole human culture and parallel study. Second, it describes the manifestations of Qian Zhongshu’s literary thought which is non-systematic, and points out that it is a deliberate reaction against the modern western pattern in method and an echo to the irrationalism ideological trend in the west since modern times. At the same time state clearly that it is complete, unified, systematic in essence.ChapterⅡanalyzes Qian Zhongshu’s opinions on essence view of literature. It shows a variety of levels. He believes that literature is a performance of the psychological state, so that communicating literature and the other social and cultural system such as philosophy, history at the psychological level. But don’t confuse literature and humanities and eliminate the difference between the two. Instead highlights the essence of literature. Meanwhile he contrasts literature with other art such as Zen Buddhism, music, painting in the art system, further highlighting the literary language features. The content of the above is a general view on literature essence. It is built on "connecting" method, which is not an abolishment but an open and illumination in a wider view. At base it is an emphasis and protrusion to subjectivity and independence of literature.ChapterⅢdiscusses Qian Zhongshu’s concepts on literary works. Emphasizing "nature of literature", will inevitably lead to the tendency to formalism. But because Qian Zhongshu’s mode of thinking is dialectical, his theories don’t go to the extreme.To focus on the form, but not to despise the content, and content and form constitute a unity of opposites. So he thought that literature should not be divided into two parts:content and form. Under his theory, there are two levels of language and spiritual in the text. I consider that Qian Zhongshu’s text structure theory not only come from Chinese traditional poetics, and also is similar to the theories from Hegel and Ingarden, which essentially reflect the relationship between Chinese theory and western theory. According to Qian Zhongshu’s theory, text structure is dialectical, which is derived from the dialectics in everything in the world. It has a close relationship with British and American New Criticism, also reflects the most profound concept of Qian Zhongshu on the problem of literature in the philosophical dimension. It is an inevitable result of "connecting" method in logic.ChapterⅣdiscusses Qian Zhongshu’s opinions on writing. It mainly talks about Qian Zhongshu’s concepts on writing subject and writing process. I think that Qian Zhongshu’s understanding is comprehensive on writing subject, which both emphasize gift, also do not overlook acquired accumulation, In addition attach importance to the experience. But importance in Qian Zhongshu’s theory is different, the acquired knowledge accumulation appears to be more highly valued. And he advocated it in methodology combining with James’s idea of "self. On writing, Qian Zhongshu opposes excessive expressing feelings, in the process of criticizing the idea:" emotions lead to change in the appearance of things’" which is an creating method of the Romanticism. He highly endorsed John Ruskin’s concept "pathetic fallacy". At the same time he put forward "Seeing a thing and then having a feeling" concept. On communication of art, He criticized Croce’s view, emphasizing already "conception ", also not ignoring "expression".Chapter V discusses Qian Zhongshu’s opinions on the birth and development of literature. Qian Zhongshu thought that "The birth of art is from a practical purpose "and" practicality disappears and the art saves", which is similar with "art origin theory from game" and "theory of art origin from labor". In fact it is the integration of the two. The genetic principles of art is connected with the idea on the literary essences, meanwhile the opinion on the development of literature is related with the attitudes towards literature. Qian Zhongshu stressed that categories between inheritance and development, learning and innovation, the eastern and the western should be dialectical, only then can the literature has a open and tolerant development environment. Obviously it is a rational and cool thinking on the twentieth-century literary development, to the current literature it still has guiding significance in practice.Chapter VI discusses Qian Zhongshu’s literary acceptance theory. Literary acceptance is the last question of literature. In One side Qian Zhongshu emphasized the necessary qualities and conditions of the recipient, in the other side he thought that text implication is rich, hyperplastic and uncertain, the two highlight the importance and necessity of text explanation. Then on the basis, he connected the Chinese with the Western, went through the ancient and the modern, and talked about a great many ideas, concepts and methods on interpretation and acceptance. Meanwhile he provided us with experience guiding with large number of classical examples.The conclusion summarizes the full text, and elucidates the spirit of Qian Zhongshu’s literary thoughts, which is embodied in three aspects: the problem consciousness, the wide horizon, the practicality. The six above parts are the external form of Qian Zhongshu’s literary thoughts, and the three are its inherent characteristics.更多还原