【作者】 李军；

【导师】 陈炎； 傅谨；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 文艺学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 活跃在上世纪前半期的戏曲作家、理论家齐如山在戏曲理论上的贡献主要体现在他的戏曲艺术本体论、戏曲艺术改革论和戏曲艺术观众学等三方面。所以本论文的核心、亮点、价值也集中体现在对齐氏戏曲艺术本体论、戏曲艺术改革论、戏曲艺术观众学的“述”与“评”上,尤其是对他的戏曲艺术本体论的研究部分更是本论文的“核心”中的“核心”。此外,本文还简要叙述了齐如山的生平,详细考述了齐如山与梅兰芳在戏曲领域的合作情形,考述齐如山与梅兰芳的合作情形事关对齐如山戏曲导演论、戏曲改革论等的评价,在齐、梅合作情形考述方面本文有许多新发现。具体而言,本文分六大部分。导论部分包括三方面内容:其一,选题的依据,其二,综述前人研究齐如山戏曲理论的成果,并辨析其不足,进而为本论文确立一个研究起点,其三,简述本论文的研究思路与创新之处。从齐如山戏曲理论的数量、质量以及在上世纪前半期的戏曲界所产生的影响来看,齐如山无疑是一位颇有成就的戏曲理论家,他的戏曲理论是值得研究的。但遗憾的是,讫今为止对齐如山戏曲理论的研究远远不够,比如,齐如山的“戏曲的审美特征观”、“戏曲艺术改革论”、“戏曲编剧论”等至今没有引起学术界的重视。所以在深入研读齐如山原著的基础上完整、准确地呈现出齐如山戏曲理论的原貌,并将之放到相关理论的“历史河流”中抉发其理论价值、评价其实践意义,这一工作应该是有意义、有价值的。本文的第一章——齐如山的生平与“齐”、“梅”合作情形考述——包括两方面内容:其一、简述齐如山的生平,其二、详细考述齐如山与梅兰芳于民国时期在戏曲领域的合作情形。齐如山终身喜欢看戏,他新编、改编的戏曲剧本有四十余出,他研究戏曲理论五十余年,完成戏曲理论著作三十余种。与梅兰芳在戏曲领域的合作造就了“戏曲剧作家”齐如山,进而催生了“戏曲理论家”齐如山。在与梅兰芳合作编戏时齐如山是“主笔”,是“主创人员”;在与梅兰芳合作排戏时齐如山不是总导演,而是“身段设计者”,所以这些戏(他们合作排出的戏)体现出的导演意识、导演理论不是齐如山的导演意识、导演理论,但在这些戏中实现的戏曲改革是齐如山戏曲改革理论提出的实践基础;在协助梅兰芳访美演出时齐如山起到了“总策化人”般的作用:演出剧目的选择、表演风格的确定、舞台布置的设计等都有齐如山的积极参与。本文的第二章——齐如山的戏曲艺术本体论——着重研究齐如山的戏曲艺术本体论,也就是概括为“有声皆歌,无动不舞,不许真物上台,不许写实”的理论。以西方现实主义戏剧为理论参照在广泛归纳论证的基础上齐如山将戏曲的艺术语汇本体概括为“有声皆歌,无动不舞”:戏曲艺术中的每一点声音都得有歌的意味,戏曲中的“唱”是歌,戏曲中的“白”也是歌,甚至戏曲中的“哭”、“笑”、“咳嗽”等也是“歌”,但不同种类的“歌”在“歌的艺术形式”、“歌的美学性质”、“歌的音乐程度”等方面是不相同的,所以齐如山将戏曲艺术的“歌”分为四级:戏曲艺术中的每一点动作都得有舞的韵律,戏曲中的“跳加官”、“堆罗汉”等是舞,戏曲中的“走边”、“起霸”等也是舞,甚至戏曲中的“走路”、“攧手”、“掸衣”、“指示”也是舞,戏曲中的动作是对日常动作的艺术化、舞蹈化,戏曲“艺术化、舞蹈化”日常动作的主要方法是“曲线化”、“审美化”、“替代化”、“省略化”;戏曲艺术中的“歌”与“舞”不是各自为政的,而是互相阐发、和谐整一的,并且歌与舞的这种互相阐发、和谐整一性必须与故事情节完美统一在一起,不能游离于故事情节,为此同一个演员的歌与舞必须互相阐发,有机统一,同台演员之间的“歌”与“舞”也必须互相呼应、和谐整一。以西方现实主义戏剧为理论参照、在广泛归纳论证的基础上,齐如山得出戏曲艺术的美学追求实质是写意,并概括为“不许真物上台,不许写实”:齐如山发现戏曲艺术的舞台美术追求写意化,即舞台布置“不许真物上台”,服装和面部化妆“不许写实”,齐如山发现戏曲艺术的表演逻辑具有不征实性,即故事情节的演进逻辑与表现方式“不许写实”,齐如山还发现戏曲艺术内容细节超越了历史真实性,即细节往往“不必写实”,更不必“真物上台”,据此齐如山断定戏曲艺术是一种以写意、以传神为美学旨归的综合性舞台表演艺术,这种舞台艺术在写意美的总体追求中达到审美逻辑上的自足与完满。在戏曲理论史上,齐如山是第一个以综合性舞台表演艺术——戏曲的本体特征为专门研究对象的理论家,也是较早一个以跨文化视野观照戏曲艺术本体的理论家,还是第一个完整、准确地概括出了作为综合性舞台表演艺术的戏曲的本体特征的理论家,所以齐如山是中国古代戏曲艺术本体研究的集大成者。齐如山的这一学术贡献对我们认识戏曲艺术本体、进而推动戏曲艺术改革等有着不言而喻的意义。本文的第三章——齐如山的戏曲艺术改革论——重点研究齐如山的关于戏曲艺术改革的两大理论:其一,“‘能改的’、‘不能改的’”理论,其二,“戏曲艺术表现现代生活题材”理论。齐如山的戏曲艺术改革论与他的戏曲艺术本体论紧密相关,是在戏曲发展上坚持戏曲艺术本体的理论结果。针对当时的戏曲保守派,齐如山认为改革是戏曲艺术在变化了的时代里立足并取得巨大发展的必由之路:针对当时的戏曲否定派,齐如山认为改革的前提是明了“能改的”与“不能改的”,要改那些“能改的”和“应改的”,要保留那些“不能改的”和“不应改的”。“将歌、舞、故事有机整合在一起”是戏曲艺术之所以为戏曲艺术的根本所在,也是戏曲艺术自立于世界戏剧之林而毫无愧色的价值所在,所以戏曲改革应该以保留和强化戏曲艺术的歌舞性与写意性为前提,即戏曲艺术的“以歌、舞为艺术语汇,以写意为美学追求”的本体性特征是“不能改的”。齐如山的“‘能改的’、‘不能改的’”理论不但较早指出了在上世纪前半期较普遍存在的、表现为“戏曲艺术话剧化”的改革偏颇,而且为戏曲改革提供了多种可能。从戏曲艺术本体出发,齐如山顺理成章地推导出“可以用原汁原味的传统戏曲艺术表现现代生活”。但“用原汁原味的传统戏曲艺术表现现代生活”只具有理论正确性,不具有现实可行性,这是因为齐如山在此忽略了观众的认可与否对戏曲改革成败的决定性作用。虽然如此,齐如山的这一“只具有理论正确性”的理论仍然具有重大的研究价值,这是因为齐氏的这一理论本身以及他对这一理论的论证理路可以为我们在解决至今还没有完全解决的“传统戏曲艺术如何和谐顺适地表现现代生活题材”的问题时提供一种全新的思路。本文的第四章——齐如山的戏曲艺术观众学——重点研究齐如山的有关戏曲观众的三个方面的理论:戏曲与观众的关系,戏曲演员与观众的关系,戏曲编剧与观众的关系。在戏曲艺术理论史上,齐如山是较早成系统地论及戏曲艺术观众的理论家,他的《观剧建言》是中国第一部有意识地研究戏曲观众的专著,齐氏关于中国戏曲观众的论述是中国戏曲观众学业已诞生的标志。齐如山认为戏曲的教化作用与审美娱乐作用是辩证统一在一起的,戏曲雅、俗风格的时代性流变、转换与戏曲主体观众群的变化有密切关系。他认为戏曲观众和演员、戏曲观众和编剧等之间是一种辩证性的相互影响关系,戏曲演员和编剧要想取得成功必须处理好“迁就主体观众群的审美兴趣”与“发挥自己的舞台主导性”之间的矛盾关系。齐氏有关戏曲观众的这些理论不但有历史价值而且不乏现实启示。本文的最后一部分——“结语”着重对齐如山的戏曲理论的成就和局限做一总体性的简要评判。除戏曲艺术本体论、戏曲艺术改革论、戏曲艺术观众学外齐如山在演员评论、剧种历史以及研究戏曲的方法等方面也有一些可取之处。而“理论表述欠严谨”、“学理性归纳欠明晰”、“对材料的思辨性学术提升不足”等是齐如山戏曲理论的全局性局限。更多还原

【Abstract】 The contribution of Qi Rushan, who is an opera composer and opera theorist and was up and doing at the first half of the last century, lies on three respects including his ontology of opera art, reform theory of opera art and audience study of opera art. Therefore, the core, highlight and value of this dissertation are focally the "narration" and "comment" on his ontology of opera art, reform theory of opera art and audience study of opera art, especially the study on his ontology of opera art is the "core" in "core". In addition, this dissertation briefly narrates Qi Rushan’s life experience, in detail researches the cooperation in opera field between Qi Rushan and Mei Lanfang for probing into the influence on Qi Rushan’s achievements in opera aesthetics from his life experience. Evaluation on Qi Rushan’s ideas of opera direction and opera reform etc. is subject to the research on the cooperation between Qi Rushan and Mei Lanfang, and in this dissertation many new findings are put forward in the their cooperation. Concretely this dissertation consists of six parts.The part of Introduction demonstrates three issues: the first, foundation of subject choice; the second, summarization of existing academic achievements studying Qi Rushan’s opera aesthetics, analysis on their defects for founding a study point for this dissertation; the third, a profile on the thinking route of study and innovation of this dissertation. From the view of quantity and quality of his opera theory, as well as his influence in opera circle at the first half in the past century, no doubt, Qi Rushan is a greatly achieved opera theorist, and his theory of opera aesthetics is worth studying. But it’s a pity that the study on his opera aesthetics is insufficient so far, for example, there are no importance attached by the academic circle to his theories of "noumenon for aesthetic pursuance in opera", "reform of opera art", "composing of opera" etc. Therefore, it is significant and valuable to integrally and accurately present the original appearance of Qi Rushan’s theory of opera aesthetics on the base of thoroughly reading his opera theory, and put it into the "historical river" of concerned theories to excavate its theoretic value and evaluate its practice significance.The first chapter, Research on Qi Rushan’s Life Experience and Cooperation with Mei Lanfang, is to solve two issues: the first, brief introduction of Qi Rushan’s life experience; the second, detailed research on the cooperation in opera field between Qi Rushan and Mei Lanfang in the time of the Republic of China. Qi Rushan liked watching opera in all his life, composed and recomposed more than forty opera plays, studied opera theory for more than fifty years, wrote more than thirty works of opera theory. His cooperation in opera field with Mei Lanfang brought him up as "opera playwright" and further made him "opera theorist". In his cooperation with Mei Lanfang for composing, he was chief writer and chief maker; in his cooperation for rehearsal with Mei Lanfang, he was not only general director but "shape designer", so the direction idea and direction theory of these operas (rehearsed from their cooperation) are not of Qi Rushan, but the opera reform realized in these operas is practice base for his raising the theory of opera reform; in his assisting Mei Lanfang for visiting America for performance, he played the role like a "general designer" and actively took part in the choice play lists, determination of performance style, design of stage etc.The second chapter, Qi Rushan’s Ontology of Opera Art, focally studies Qi Rushan’s ontology of opera art, i.e., the theory summarized as "all sound made into music, all action made into dance, real articles on stage not permitted, realistic style not permitted". With theoretic reference to the western realistic drama and on the base of wide induction and demonstration, Qi Rushan concluded the art term’s feature of opera art as "all sound made into music, all action made into dance": every sound in opera art must be in the bearing of music, the "sing" in opera is made into song, so are "narrate", even "cry", "laugh", "cough" etc. in opera, but those kinds of "songs" are different in respect to "song’s art form", "song’s aesthetic nature" and "song’s melodious degree". So the "songs" in opera art are divided into four levels; every action in opera art must bear the rhythm of dance, the collective dances etc. in opera are dance, so are individual dances etc. in opera, even "walk", "hand pat", "gusset flirt" and "point", the actions in opera are from daily actions by making into art and dance, and the main methods of making daily actions into art and dance in opera are "making into curve", "making into aesthetic", "substituting" and "omitting"; the "song" and "dance" in opera art are not separated from each other, but elucidate each other and are harmonious and integral, furthermore, the mutual elucidation, harmoniousness and integrity of song and dance must be perfectly united with plot, and cannot be separated from plot, for this purpose, the song and dance of an single actor must elucidate each other and unite organically, and the song and dance of all actors on a stage must work in concert with each other and be put into harmoniousness and integrity. With theoretic reference to the western realistic drama and on the base of wide induction and demonstration, Qi Rushan educed that the aesthetic pursuance of opera art is impressionistic beauty, and concluded it as "real articles on stage not permitted, realistic style not permitted": he found that the stage art of opera art pressured impressionism, i.e., "real articles on stage not permitted" for stage layout, "realistic style not permitted" for garment and face dress, he found that the performance logic of opera is not for realistic pursuance, i.e., "realistic style not permitted" for the evolution logic of plot and representing way, he also found that the contents of opera art exceed historical reality, that’s to say, it’s unnecessary to be realistic for contents, and unnecessary for real articles on stage, therefore he judged that opera art is a comprehensive stage performance art which pursues for impressionism and lifelikeness and aesthetic-logically achieves self-sufficiency and perfection in the general pursuance of impressionistic beauty. In the history of opera theory, Qi Rushan is a theorist who firstly took the ontological features of opera which is a comprehensive state performance art as special study object, also a theorist who at early time researched opera art from trans-cultural view, furthermore a theorist who integrally and accurately deduced the ontological features of opera as comprehensive stage performance art, therefore, he is the synthesizer in ontological study of ancient Chinese opera art. This academic contribution of Qi Rushan is greatly valuable for us to comprehend the noumenon of opera art and further facilitate the reform of opera art and so on.The third chapter, Qi Rushan’s Reform Theory of Opera Art, focally researches Qi Rushan’s two theories on the reform of opera art: the first, the theory on what can be reformed and what cannot be reformed, the second, "opera art’s representing modern life theme" theory. Qi Rushan’s reform theory of opera art is closely concerned with his ontology of opera art, and is a theoretical output from holding the ontology of opera art in opera evolution. Aiming at the old guard of opera at that time, Qi Rushan thought that the reform is the only way for opera art to survive and greatly develop in the changing times; aiming at the denying school of opera at that time, Qi Rushan thought that the precondition of reform is to get to know what can be reformed and what cannot be reformed, the former should be reformed and the latter should be reserved. The ontological feature of opera art which is representatively in the "integration of song, dance and story", is the fundamentality for opera art being opera art, and is the reason for and precondition of art standardization of that opera art stands firmly in the world’s dramas and never gets behind, therefore, to reserve and strengthen the nature of song and dance and impressionism of opera art should be the precondition for opera reform, that’s to say, the opera art’s ontological feature "with song and dance as art term and impressionism as aesthetic pursuance" should not be "reformed". Qi Rushan’s theory on what can be reformed and what cannot be reformed has not only doctrinally at early time pointed out the partiality of reform which commonly existed at the first half of the last century and represented in "making opera art realistic", but also theoretically supplied various possibilities for opera reform. Starting from the noumenon of opera art, Qi Rushan rationally deduced that "original and traditional opera art is capable of representing modern life". But "original and traditional opera art is capable of representing modern life" is correct only in theory, and is not feasible realistically, because Qi Rushan neglected the decisive role of audience’s recognition or not on opera reform’s success or not. Anyhow, his theory being "correct only in theory" is greatly worth studying, because this theory itself and its route of demonstration may supply a brand-new thing route for us to solve the issue that "how can traditional opera art represents modern life theme harmoniously and conformingly" which has been not solved till new, for example, it’s unnecessary to use fashion in the play of opera lists in modern themes. The fourth chapter, Qi Rushan’s Audience Study of Opera Art, focally studies Qi Rushan’s three theories in respect to opera audience: relationship between opera and audience, relationship between opera actors and audience, relationship between playwright and audience. In the theory history of opera art, Qi Rushan is a person who systematically discussed audience of opera art early, his Methods for Watching Opera Art is the first monograph which consciously and theoretically carries out study in light of the status of opera audience of China, his demonstration on opera audience of China symbolized the birth of study of opera audience in China. In Qi Rushan’s opinions, opera’s educational function and aesthetic amusing function are dialectically united, the development and change of opera styles and features are closely related to the change of opera audience’s majority; audience and actors, audience and playwrights are in a dialectic and mutual-influencing relationship, the success of actors and playwrights lies on resolving the contradiction between "accommodate themselves to audience’s aesthetic interests" and "take their stage leading role of themselves into play". Qi’s theories of opera audience have not only history significance but also realistic inspiration.The last part, epilogue, focally makes a brief and conclusive comment on the achievements and limits of Qi Rushan’s opera aesthetic theory. Besides ontology of opera art, reform theory of opera art and audience study of opera art, Qi Rushan’s view on the history of other opera types including Pihuang, Kunju, Yiqiang etc., comment on opera actors as well as methods for studying opera are also in saving grace, and the overall limits of Qi Rushan’s theory of opera aesthetics may be concluded in "lack of preciseness of theory expression", "lack of clearness of academic induction" and "insufficiency of reflecting academic improvement on materials".更多还原