【作者】 刘云；

【导师】 赵小琪；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 比较文学与世界文学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 雅罗斯拉夫·普实克(Jaroslav Prusek,1906—1980),捷克著名汉学家,布拉格汉学派的奠基者,海外中国现代文学研究的创始人。普实克上世纪30年代即翻译了鲁迅的作品在布拉格发表。普实克的中国现代文学研究不仅开始早,而且影响深远。普实克是一位马克思主义者,他的历史决定论思想深刻影响了他的中国现代文学研究。他强调文学与社会的密切关联,把中国文学现代性的发生与中国封建社会末期社会政治经济状况联系起来,从中国社会内部寻找源头。普实克也是一个结构主义者,他早年曾认真研究过俄国形式主义和布拉格结构主义理论,在这些理论框架下,他细致研究和论述了中国现代文学的语言、风格、叙事策略、类型转换等各方面问题。普实克关于文学与社会关系的认识与其马克思主义思想、结构主义思想都密不可分,而且这二者在对于普遍规律和客观真理的认识上也有共同倾向。这些都使得普实克的中国现代文学研究带有鲜明的科学主义精神烙印。虽然他是一个马克思主义者,但他又能与庸俗的马克思主义划清界线,他结构主义的理论背景也给予他独特的研究视角,使他的中国文学研究显示出与中国本土研究不同的科学主义向度,具有重新认识与解读的价值。普实克中国现代文学研究的科学主义主要体现在其研究观念的科学性、研究方法的科学性上。本文在导言外共分四章,分别对普实克的科学主义文学研究观念和研究实践进行论述。导言部分主要总结了普实克关于文学研究的目的、态度和方法的基本看法,以及其中体现出来的科学主义倾向。普实克认为文学研究的目的应该是发现客观真理,即发现文学发展的一般规律。他把文学视为一种动态的有机存在,与自然科学一样有其变化与消长的规律。因此文学研究的目的就是要发现并正确揭示这个规律是什么,是如何表现的。这是隐藏在丰富而复杂的文学现象背后的深刻本质,也是普实克努力要去发现的客观真理。普实克认为文学研究的态度应该力求客观,要努力“克服个人偏见”,这样,文学研究者才能给一般读者提供他们不熟悉的关于文学的科学知识。文学研究者有责任带领读者客观地探索中国文学的真实面目,呈现给读者一种确凿不移的对于中国文学的正确认识,而不是被研究者个人偏见所扭曲的主观论见。关于文学研究的基本方法,普实克认为有两个：一个是历史视角,一个是系统分析。历史视角,即在文学研究的过程中始终贯穿着一种历史意识,主要表现为文学史视角和社会史视角。文学史视角是把某一独特文学现象或某一时期文学置于文学发展演变的宏观背景中进行考察,从而对其价值与地位进行准确分析与评价；社会史视角是要求文学研究者能够正确认识社会历史与文学实践的相互作用。系统分析方法强调在事物之间的关系中,而不是在单个事物内寻找事物的实在本质。它是一种与单一的、孤立的、片面的、偶然的批评方法相对立的科学方法。只有通过系统分析的方式,我们才有可能从整体上对被研究对象作出全面的而不是片面的、客观的而不是主观的、严肃的而不是随意的、能够经受多方检验的而不是可被任意更改的认识和评价,也就是一种具有科学性的普遍原则。从普实克关于文学研究的目的、态度、方法的观点我们可以初步了解普实克文学研究的科学主义倾向。第一章主要论述了普实克关于中国现代文学研究的科学观念,包括整体性观念、自调性观念、转换性观念。从中国文学的整体性出发,普实克详细论证了中国现代文学的发生是中国文学自身传统发展演变的结果,中国现代文学与中国古典文学传统之间并不是完全断裂的,而是有着深刻的内在精神的承续关系。大体而言,这种文学传统又可以分为远近两个层面：远的可以追溯到“中国文人文学的抒情传统”,近的可以寻找到清代小说中的主观主义与个人主义精神。由此,普实克展现了中国文人文学精神传承的发展脉络。从中国文学的自调性观念出发,普实克认为,中国文学从古典向现代发生的根本性的变革不是一蹴而就的,需要更长的时间,要有一系列的自我调节造成的连续变化做铺垫,包括思想文化层面的改变、小说地位的提升、文学艺术手法的创新等方面,这是现代文学发生的必要条件。而当自调达到一定程度,就会引发中国古典文学结构的转变,古典文学就转换成为现代文学。这是普实克中国文学转换观念的主要内容。普实克从作家作品、广义的现实生活和文学传统三个方面对中国文学结构的现代转换进行了细致论述。除此之外,普实克还专门论述了中国古典文学向现代文学转换过程中产生的具有“中间”性质的文学作品,向我们展示了中国古典文学向现代文学转换的轨迹。第二章论述了普实克对于中国现代文学功能的科学性研究。普实克提倡现实主义,提倡文学为人民服务,重视文学的认识功能和社会功能,但是落实在具体的文学实践上,他并未完全把文学视为政治的传声筒,也并未把文学当作社会生活的机械反映。他并未把作家的世界观或者认识现实世界的一般法则与作家所要表现现实的艺术法则混淆起来,也没有把生活真实与艺术真实混淆起来。在普实克的文学理论体系中,“现实”与“现实的艺术表现”是两个截然不同的概念,文学认识功能的发挥离不开审美功能的实现。同时,普实克在对文学审美功能的强调又与对文学社会功能的强调密不可分,他认为,文学正是通过自己独特的审美功能向人们传递关于世界的认识,这实际扩大了现实主义的内涵,使这一概念包容进更多的艺术实践。通过对文学作品认识功能与审美功能的论述,普实克对文学作品的内容与形式的关系进行了科学的辩证分析。第三章论述了普实克中国现代文学类型研究的科学性。普实克把中国现代文学分为抒情性文学与史诗性文学两种类型,一重主观,一重客观,是他对于中国现代文学特征的精辟总结,也是其理解与阐释中国现代文学的独创的理论框架。中国现代文学中的抒情性文学主要受到欧洲浪漫主义文学以及中国古典抒情文学的影响,而史诗性文学则受到西方19世纪现实主义文学及中国古典文学写实传统的影响。普实克对于中国文学抒情性与史诗性的理解与论述不是片面的、孤立的,而是辩证的、统一的。他所指的抒情性文学是一种有着深厚现实底色的抒情主义；他所言的史诗性文学是一种带着浓厚抒情色彩的现实主义。抒情性与史诗性在他的中国文学研究中呈现出一种复杂的二元并置状态。且抒情性与史诗性在普实克的论述中,都不仅仅简单地指向一种文学类型,以及与这种类型相一致的文学主题的概括,而且还指向一种与主题表达方式密切相关的艺术手法的总结。简而言之,抒情性文学中需要史诗化的现实内容作为情感抒发的依托,才不至于空洞,而史诗性文学需要抒情性内容的融入与贯穿,才能把客观现实整合、提升为审美对象,具有审美价值。普实克对中国现代文学抒情性与史诗性的理解不仅大大拓展了西方文学中原有的抒情文学与史诗文学的概念,而且通过对抒情性与史诗性的论述,普实克发现正是这两种文学结构要素的复杂交错与辩证发展,共同促进了中国文学从古典向现代的转型,成为中国现代文学发生的内在动力之一,并且在中国现代文学发展过程中继续塑造着它的形与质。第四章主要论述了普实克中国现代文学叙事研究的科学性。普实克从叙事者、叙事角度、情节结构、人物话语几个方面对中国现代文学的叙事形式进行研究。但普实克的中国现代文学叙事研究打破了结构主义叙事学原本的封闭结构,他的研究目的不在于对中国现代小说中稳定的叙事结构进行抽象的概括和说明,而是把叙事形式与社会历史、文学传统相结合,以一种发展的眼光考察中国现代小说叙事形式的形成,用比较的方法呈现中国古典小说的叙事形式与现代小说叙事形式的异同。因此,普实克对中国现代文学叙事形式的研究从一个侧面展现了中国文学观念从传统到现代的发展轨迹,并对其发生动力进行探讨和说明。这种对于叙事形式的研究是从单纯的结构主义共时性研究向历时性研究的转变。普实克着重关注的是社会历史文化语境对叙事结构的发展所起到的影响作用,从而把叙事研究从单纯的文本研究向外拓展,对叙事学研究范式的转变起到引领作用。普实克的中国现代文学研究以马克思主义与结构主义这两大思想体系为其支撑,把文学内容研究与形式研究紧密地结合在一起,显示出在整体性、系统性科学思想指引下沟通文学内部研究与外部研究的企图,体现出马克思主义与结构主义美学相融合的历史趋势。同时,普实克对中国现代文学中主观主义和个人主义的发现,对中国现代文学抒情性与史诗性交融的论述,对作家创作个性的重视也在一定程度上契合了科学主义与人文主义相交融的趋势。普实克的中国现代文学研究既充满科学的理性思辨,又不乏研究主体对文学作品的感性理解和认识,既有对知识的归纳和总结,又有对审美的体验和感悟,体现出文学研究发展的必然方向。本文着重从科学主义角度分析和考察普实克中国现代文学研究的科学主义倾向及其具体表现。在此基础上,追溯普实克中国现代文学研究的思想文化渊源,梳理其中国现代文学研究的脉络体系、理论框架以及其对中国现代文学学术发展的深刻影响,由此对普实克在中国现代文学学术发展史中的价值与地位进行重新评价。更多还原

【Abstract】 Jaroslav Prusek (1906-1980), a famous Czech sinologist, one of the founders of Prague Sinology School. He translated the works of Lu Xun and published them in Prague in1930s. Prusek’s study of modern Chinese literature started early and had far-reaching influence. Prusek was a Marxist and his historical determinism profoundly influenced his study of modern Chinese literature. He emphasized the close association of literature and society and looked for the source of Chinese literary modernity within the Chinese community. He linked the Chinese literary modernity with political and economic conditions of Chinese feudal society. Prusek was also a structuralist. He had carefully studied the theories of Russian formalism and Prague structuralism. Under the guidance of these theories, he studied and discussed the language, style, narrative strategies, type conversion and other aspects of modern Chinese literature in detail. Prusek’s understanding of the relationship between literature and society was deeply impacted by Marxism and Structuralism, which share a similar understanding about objective truth and universal law. These determine that Prusek’s study of modern Chinese literature has distinctive scientific spirit. Although Prusek was a Marxist, he was not a vulgar Marxism. He also got a unique research perspective from the theoretical background of structuralism. His scientific perspective research, which distinguishes with the native study of modern Chinese literature, is worth new understanding and interpretation.The scientism of Prusek’s study of modern Chinese literature is mainly in the scientific research concept and methods. This thesis includes an introduction and four chapters.The Introduction summarizes Prusek’s main basic views of purpose, attitudes and methods of his literary studies, as well as the scientism tendency in his research. Prusek holded that the purpose of literary studies should be discovering the objective truth, namely the general law of the development of literature. He thought we should strive to "overcome personal bias" in order to provide general readers scientific knowledge of literature which is unfamiliar to them. Prusek thought there were two basic methods of literary research:one is historical perspective, the other is system analysis. Historical perspective, including literary history perspective and social history perspective, means that we should always have a sense of history in the process of literary studies. Systems analysis emphasizes the relationships between things, rather than looking into the nature of a particular one.The first chapter discusses the Prusek’s scientific concepts on modern Chinese literature, including the concept of integrity, self-adjusting and conversion. From the Chinese literary integrity, Prusek demonstrated in detail that the occurrence of modern Chinese literature was the result of the evolution of the Chinese literary tradition, which can be divided into two levels:one is the lyric tradition of Chinese classical literature, the other is subjectivism and individualism spirit in fictions of Qing Dynasty. Thus, Prusek showed the development context of Chinese literary spiritual inherit. From the concept of self-adjusting in Chinese literature, Prusek believed that Chinese literature transformation from classical to modern was a long-term revolution. There must be a continuous series of changes caused by self-regulation, including changes in the ideological and cultural level, enhancing of the status of fiction, literary artistic innovation, etc. When self-adjusting reaches a certain level, it will change the dominant components of Chinese classical literary structure and the classic literature will be converted into the modern literature. Prusek also specifically discussed the transitional literary works produced during the process of transformation from Chinese classical literature to modern literature showing the conversion trajectory.The second chapter analyses the Prusek’s scientific research about the functions of modern Chinese literature. Prusek advocated realism and literature serving the people, and put emphasis on cognitive and social function of literature. But in his specific studying practice, literature was not seen as political mouthpiece or mechanical reflection of social life. In Prusek’s literary theory system,"reality" and "artistic expression of reality " are two distinct concepts. Additionally the achievement of literary cognitive function is associated with aesthetic functions. At the same time, he believed that literature was passing knowledge of the world to people through its own unique aesthetic features.The third chapter discusses the Prusek’s scientific study of modern Chinese literary types, including lyrical literature which is subjective and epic literature which is objective. Modern Chinese lyrical literature was affected mainly by European Romanticism and Chinese classical lyrical tradition, nevertheless the epic literature was influenced by Western literary in19th century and Chinese classical realism. Chinese Lyrical literature has realism features and epic literature has lyrical features. They are in a complicated binary juxtaposition. In Prusek’s discussion Lyric and epic features are not just literary types nor summaries of literary themes consistents with the specific type, but also arts of expression which are closely related to the summaries of themes. In short, lyrical literature needs the expression of reality to avoid empty of contents and the epic literature needs to enhance the aesthetic value with the help of lyrical contents. Prusek’s understanding of lyrical and epic literature of modern Chinese literature, which are the inherent power of occurrence and development of Modern Chinese Literature, greatly expanded the Western original concept of lyric and epic literature.The fourth chapter discusses Prusek’s scientific studies about the narrative of Modern Chinese Literature from the aspects of narrator, narrative perspective, plot structure, discourse of characters. Prusek’s narrative research of Modern Chinese Literature broke the closed structure of structuralism narratology. The purpose of his research was not giving a description of stable narrative structure in modern Chinese fictions, but studying the development of the modern Chinese fiction from the historical perspective. The study of narrative form showed the development path of the concept of Chinese literature from traditional to modern. Prusek’s research let the narrative study transform from a purely structuralism synchronic research into a historical research, concerning the influence of historical and cultural context on the development of the narrative structure. Prusek found Marxism and structuralism as support for his research on Chinese Modern Literature, His study associated the content research with the form research, demonstrating the purpose of communication between internal research and external research under the guidance of Marxism and Structuralism, reflecting the trend of fusion of Marxism and Structuralism aesthetics. Meanwhile, Prus’ek’s discovery of subjective and individualism in modern Chinese literature, discuss on the integration of lyricism and epic, emphasis on writers personalities accorded with the trend of fusion scientism and humanism to a certain extent. Prusek’s research on Modern Chinese Literature includes not only scientific analysis, but also emotional understanding of literary works. It is either a summary of knowledge or an aesthetic experience, reflecting inevitable development direction of literary studies.更多还原