【作者】 李新；

【导师】 贺立华；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 中国现当代文学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 “红色经典”这个概念是一个很有意味的现象：以“红色”来规定和限制“经典”、以“经典”来表述和评价“红色”,前者是政治对文学的强制规定、后者是官方对作品的硬性倡导,二者的结合正说明了“红色经典”的产生并不是读者与历史的自然选择,而完全是政党/政治意识形态对艺术/审美意识形态严重干预下的畸形产物。本文之所以继续使用“红色经典”这一概念,一方面是因为这一概念的“约定俗成”性,便于对研究对象进行命名；另一方面更是因为“红色经典”这个概念本身具有反讽的效果。本文以“复仇”为切入点,从“复仇对象的阶级化”、“复仇动机的革命化”、“复仇手段的合法化”三方面对“红色经典”文本中的“复仇”书写进行分析,研究在“阶级斗争学说”的指导下,“红色经典”作家如何用“阶级复仇”置换了“私人复仇”、用“集体复仇”否定了“个体复仇”、用“阶级解放”美化了“血亲复仇、侠义复仇”、用“武装革命”遮蔽了“暴力复仇”,从而建构起自己的道德伦理空间,完成“革命”/“复仇”的正义性与合法性言说。通过本文的分析,说明了“红色经典”之为“经典”绝不是读者与历史的选择,完全是自上而下规训的结果,从而对如何建构真正的文学“经典”提出思考。绪论部分所要解决的主要是两方面的问题,即,研究对象与研究思路。首先,在对“红色经典”的概念进行梳理后,进一步明确了作为本文研究对象“红色经典”主要是以“三红一创、青山保林”为代表的“十七年”期间的“革命历史小说”；其次,针对目前国内学术界对“红色经典”文学中关于“矛盾斗争”、“阶级复仇”等问题的研究现状,提出了自己的研究思路：以“复仇”书写为切入点研究“红色经典”文学,阐释其如何将中国传统文化与西方“阶级斗争学说”相结合从而形成自己的“革命”/“复仇”叙事,反思其对文学艺术性、真实性的伤害,并进而探讨如何建构真正的“文学经典”的问题。第一章主要阐述“红色经典”文学中的“复仇”书写是如何发生的。首先,“红色经典”文学中的“复仇”书写是中国传统文化与西方“阶级斗争学说”合谋的产物：在中国传统文化中,“儒家文化”所强调的血亲伦理、“墨家文化”所强调的“义行天下”为“血亲复仇”与“侠义复仇”提供了伦理保障,而外来文化中,马克思、恩格斯的“阶级斗争学说”则成为近代“阶级复仇”的理论支点；其次,“红色经典”文学中的“复仇”书写有着丰厚的文本积累：中国传统文学中“血亲复仇”、“侠义复仇”的书写经验,20世纪20年代“革命文学”、30年代“左翼文学”对“阶级复仇”的文本探索,都被“红色经典”作家拿来并加以改造,从而形成了我们今天所见的“革命”/“复仇”言说模式。第二章主要分析的是“红色经典”对“复仇对象”的界定。“红色经典”作家将传统文学中的“仇人”阶级化、扩大化,由传统的向“仇人”复仇扩大为向“仇人所在的阶级”复仇。首先,他们用现代的阶级标准——“贫与富”置换了传统的道德标准——“善与恶”,通过对“有产阶级”/“富者”的“贪婪的物欲”、“邪恶的淫欲”与“冷漠的亲情”的书写,成功地将传统的“为富不仁”的个别性表述上升为“为富必不仁”的阶级共性,从而将复仇对象从传统的“仇人”导向“仇人所在的阶级”；其次,“红色经典”作家分析了在“有产阶级”/“富者”的统治下,“无产阶级”/“贫者”无论是忍让还是告官都注定家破人亡的命运,从而再次将复仇对象提升,直接指向仇人所在阶级的政府、军队、政权等国家机器；最后,在这一章的两个小结部分,对“红色经典”文本中复仇对象的阶级化的处理进行了反思。首先,“红色经典”作家主观地以阶级的归属剥离了“有产阶级”/“富者”作为“人”的复杂,有意地用阶级的标签划分了“善恶”的阵营,从而为其所倡导的“阶级复仇”进行合法化言说；其次,“红色经典”作家以文本的单一化掩盖了历史的多样化,为了证明“阶级复仇”的合法性而有意片面地截取历史,文本实际上是“文学真实”与“历史真实”的循环论证,这严重地损伤了文学的艺术性真实性。第三章主要分析的是“红色经典”对“复仇动机”的包装。“红色经典”作家将传统复仇文学中的“血亲复仇”、“侠义复仇”的复仇动机提升为“为阶级情谊”、“为民族解放”的革命动机,从而赋予了“复仇”以崇高性。首先,“红色经典”作家借用了在中国有着优厚的历史与文化支撑的“血亲复仇”、“侠义复仇”的复仇动机,从而得到读者情感上的认同；其次,在这普遍认同的基础上,“红色经典”作家用“阶级情感”超越并代替了“个人情感”、用对祖国大家庭的亲情代替了“狭隘”的血缘亲情、用为了民族解放遮掩了个人仇恨的驱动,从而赋予复仇以革命性、先进性、合理性。最后,同样在小结中,对复仇动机革命化的处理进行了反思：中国传统文化中存在着“仇恨”、“尚武”等劣根性,而“阶级斗争学说”实际上是将这些劣根性张扬到了极致。“红色经典”作家将所有的“私人恩怨”都归结于“阶级”的目的,“复仇”在“阶级”的外衣下具有了崇高的命名,不能不说是一种荒诞与欺骗。第四章主要分析的是“红色经典”对“复仇手段”的掩盖。无论对象是谁、无论动机如何,“复仇”都是一种血腥的暴力行为、是应当禁止的。但是,“红色经典”作家运用“阶级斗争学说”将暴力分为两种——“革命的暴力”和“反革命的暴力”。对两种不同的暴力场面和暴力心理进行了不同的书写和评价——反革命的暴力场面是血腥的,革命的暴力场面是壮观的；反革命的暴力心理是酷虐的残忍,革命的暴力心理则是一种胜利的狂欢。在本章的小结中,同样对“红色经典”作家的这种处理进行了反思：无论“红色经典”作家如何以“阶级”和“革命”的名义进行遮掩,以“胜利”和“翻身”的形式进行表述,揭开遮蔽在“复仇”上的“革命”的面纱,“阶级复仇”与传统复仇一样是充满了暴力、血腥、残忍(实际上,“阶级复仇”因为参与者的众多而成为更加暴力、血腥、残忍)的非理智、非人性的丑恶行为。结语部分阐明了本文写作目的。本文以“红色经典”中的“复仇”书写为研究对象,通过分析它的成因,它在“复仇对象”、“复仇动机”、“复仇手段”等各个方面的表现,指出“红色经典”作家在“阶级革命”的外衣下,讲述的仍然是传统的“个人复仇”的故事。分析“红色经典”的“复仇”书写绝不是目的,它只是反思中国文学的一个途径。“红色经典”作家用以“阶级斗争”为核心的“革命”话语赋予了“复仇”以现代性的意义、赋予了“暴力”以合法性的地位,利用暴力来反抗暴力无疑会使历史陷入“冤冤相报”、“治乱循环”的怪圈之中。主流意识形态为了证明既成历史(解放战争的历史)与正在进行的历史(共产党对新中国建设的领导)的正义性与合法性通过自上而下的强制性手段赋予了“红色文学”以“经典”的地位,这势必损害了文学的独立性与审美性追求；另一方面,从“红色经典”文本对“阶级”、“复仇”、“暴力”的过度推崇和张扬来看,很大程度上也是因为作家顺服了政治意识形态对文学审美的规训而自觉地放弃了自己独立思考的结果。许多“红色经典”作家如马烽先生等,对自己当年的写作进行了深刻的反思,但是,更多的作家与评论者却将责任完全丢与历史与政治,这样的态度对文学的生存与发展来说十分可怕也十分有害的。今后的文学该如何发展,如何不断地发扬自己的生命力,这固然不是一个简单的问题,也不是一两张药方就可以解决的。但是,我认为,文学创作中,如果作家能够以真正的、非暴力的理性精神,以对人类真善美的追求与维护,以对人的生命与尊严的认同与倡导、以真正的“解放全人类”的意识去遵守文学的独立品性与操守的话,那么自然有希望创作出具有永恒生命力的、真正的“经典”作品来。更多还原

【Abstract】 According to Carl Jung’s psychoanalytic theory, the so-called ’complex’ refers to the distress and even dominates a person’s survival and the development of the deep psychological reasons. It is often an unconscious form of life value orientation and goal of survival.’Revenge complex’ means to take revenge as the standard orientation of life. In the ’Red Classics’ literature,’revenge complex’ occurs mainly due to the strong moral support of traditional vengeance culture, background of Chinas domestic trouble and foreign invasion, most of the writers’ own experience as well as legal argument for revolutionary history and new political rule by the literature form literature in area of ideology construction.This paper takes the ’Red Classics’ during the ’seventeen years’ after the establishment of New China as the research object and ’revenge complex’ as the starting point, to make a detailed analysis in the aspects of the ’Nemesis class’,’revenge motive revolutionary’,’Revenge of the legal means’. This paper make study that how the’Red Classics’ to build their own ethical space with the guidance of’the theory of class struggle’, with text written ’revolution/revenge’ the justice and legitimacy of speech.Analysis of ’Red Classics’ in ’revenge complex’ is not only objective but also a means. The excessive praise and publicity of ’revenge complex’ in ’the Red Classics’ is largely for the reason that the writer obey this statute and consciously abandoned their own independent thinking and the historical necessary respect for results besides political ideology on literature aesthetic disciplinary reasons.Today, the literature is going towards more and more depression, and the literary community and critic community cry out the question that ’what the Chinese literature lacks’. I am trying to think about the significance of the writers’ pursuit and obedience for Literary independency and Literary Ethics in Chinese literature through the analysis of ’revenge of complex’ in the ’Red Classics’.This paper is divided into six parts:the Introduction, four chapters of the main body and the Conclusion.The Introduction:the object of the significance. First of all, the’Red Classics’as the research object of the thesis is clearly pointed out after the analysis of’Red Classics’. Secondly, I put forward my own research ideas in view of the current domestic academic circles on’Red Classics’in the present research.The four chapters of the main body:the analysis is carried on from four aspects of ’occurrence of revenge complex’,’the class of the Revenge objects’,’revenge motive revolutionary’,’the legal means of revenge’. This article describes the ’Red Classics’ writer using ’theory of class struggle’ to guide the process of building their own moral and ethical space, as well as what are the problems.The first chapter:this chapter summarizes how the’revenge complex’in the’Red Classics’ literature happened.First of all, the ’revenge complex’ in the ’Red Classics’ literature has profound cultural accumulation. The genetically ethics as a ’Confucian culture’ in the traditional Chinese culture emphasized to provide moral support to the ’blood revenge’. The theory of ’walking in the world with righteousness’ in the Mohist culture provides cultural protection for’Chivalry Revenge’. Foreign culture, since the new century, Marx and Engels’s idea of class struggle and the Soviet victory in the revolution is for the modern ’class revenge’provides a new theory fulcrum.Secondly,’the revenge complex’ in the’Red Classics’literature has rich practice of text. Traditional writing practice in revenge literature on the ’blood Revenge’,’chivalrous Revenge’ is learned by the ’Red Classics’. Additionally,1920’s ’Revolutionary Literature’ and1930’s ’left-wing literature’ have made much exploration in the ’bourgeois revolution’ publicity. Its successful experience and the lessons of failure have great impact of reference value on the maturation of ’Red Classics’.The second chapter:this chapter illustrates how the enemies in the traditional revenge literature been transferred into class and expanded in the text of ’Red Classics’.First of all,’Red Classics’writers replaced the traditional moral standards-’good and evil’ with modern class standard-’the poverty and the rich’. Through the writing of ’middle class’s/the rich’s’greedy desire, evil lust and indifference of the affection,’Red Classics’writers successfully promoted the traditionally individual expression of’the rich will be cruel’ to the class nature of ’the rich must be cruel’. Thereby, the traditional enemies were extended to the enemies’ class.Secondly, the ’Red Classics’ writers analyzed that either tolerance or complaints to the official can not change the fatal destiny of ’the proletarian/the poor’ to ruin and death under the governance of ’the middle class/the rich’. Thus, the revenge object is elevated again, in other words, the revenge object changed into the government and army of the enemies’ class. Finally, there is the reflection on the processing of Nemesis class of’Red Classics’ text in the two summaries of this chapter.The third chapter:this chapter analyzed that how the motivations of ’blood feud’ and’chivalrous revenge’elevated to height of revolution’for the class friendship and national liberation’.First of all, the ’Red Classics’ writers learned from’blood revenge’ and ’chivalrous revenge’ which can provide generous support to the Chinese history and culture, leading to people’s moral emotion recognition. Secondly, based on the universal recognition of this aspect,’Red Classics’ writers replaced and surpassed ’personal emotion’ with ’class emotion’; they replaced the ’narrow’ kinship with family relations for the motherland; they veiled personal animosity drive with the motivation for sweeping the obstacles of national liberation. Thus, the revenge was endowed with revolutionary, advance and rationality. Finally, there is the reflection on the revolutionizing of revenge motive in the summary of this chapter.The fourth chapter:this chapter mainly analyzed that defense for the legitimacy of revenge of the ’bloody violence’in the’Red Classics’.’Red Classics’ writers used the theory of class struggle reformed by Mao Zedong to divide the violence into two kinds:revolutionary violence and counter-revolutionary violence.They made different description and evaluation to the scene and psychology of the two kinds of violence----counter-revolutionary violence is bloody, revolutionary violence is spectacular; psychology of counter-revolutionary violence is cruel, psychology revolutionary violence is carnival. Finally, there is the reflection on this processing in the summary of this chapter.Conclusion:the purpose of this thesis lies in the Conclusion. The ’revenge complex’ in the ’Red Classics’ is the research object of this paper. We found that the pattern of the ’Red Classics’ is due to the discipline and constraints of the political/ideological, but it is undeniable that it is also due to the subjective feelings of laissez-faire and the waiver of literary independence of the writers.Till today, many of the Red Classics writers, such as Mr. MaFeng, have made reflections on their own work. But more writers and reviewers fully shifted the responsibility to the history and politics. This attitude is very terrible and harmful to the survival and development of literature. It is not a simple question that how to develop literature and how to develop its own vitality continually in the future. It also could not be solved by one or two ’prescriptions’. I think it is very important that the writers could recognize their own responsibility and the independent character for the pursuit and maintenance of literature.更多还原