【作者】 郑润良；

【导师】 南帆；

【作者基本信息】 福建师范大学 ， 文艺学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 可以说,八十年代以“二十世纪中国文学论”为代表的“重写文学史”运动在其文学现代化叙事中看到了二十世纪中国左翼文学中政治对文学的钳制所带来的惨痛教训,但将此类文学完全纳入“前现代”范畴,则是一种“西方中心主义”思维的体现;它忽视了现代性问题在中国的复杂曲线,造成了文学史的某种“断裂”图景。九十年代以来借用新的“现代性反思”理论资源“重写文学史”事实上出现了三种研究向度,其中新左派文学史观的崛起特别引人注目。新左派以“现代性反思”的名义将1942至1976年间的“社会主义现实主义”作品指认为“反现代的现代”文学,并高度肯定这种文学及其主导性地位的合理性。笔者认为,所谓的毛泽东时代的“反现代的现代性”实质上是一种激进现代性与保守的前现代性的奇怪混合,这一概念包含了巨大的悖论与历史困境,“反现代的现代”文学就是这种悖论式的激进现代性与保守的前现代性在文学形式上的投射。新左派的问题就在于他们对“反现代的现代性”这一概念毫无反思,对这一概念的内在纠结与困境毫无觉察,因此在概念的使用上陷入了一种典型的“大概念迷信”。本文认为,对于八十年代“重写文学史”运动的成绩与局限、洞见与不见,已经有诸多的文章作出分析;而对“重写文学史”九十年代以来的进程、新左派文学史观的崛起却因为还在进行中、缺乏足够的理论距离等原因而缺乏系统、深入的理论分析。笔者认为,新左派文学史观给我们带来了文学研究的新视野,但也带来了诸多问题。现今,我们已经可以对这一文学史观的出现、其洞见与不见、其理论意义及逻辑困境等展开初步的分析与总结,以期文学史叙述能够有一个更健康的走向。应该指出的是,新左派文学史观的问题并不是九十年代以来“重写文学史”进程中出现的唯一问题,指出其问题并不代表与之相对立的论述一定正确。笔者只是认为这一新的倾向是更具理论与现实意义的一种倾向,必须予以更及时的理论应对。更多还原

【Abstract】 It can be said that the eighties’ "Rewriting Literary History" campaign represented by "twenty-first century Chinese literature theory" in its modernization narrative literature saw the painful lessons had brought about by the suppression of politics of Chinese left-wing literature on literature in the twentieth century, however, such literature fully integrated into the "pre-modern" areas, it is an embodiment of thinking of "Western-centrism", which has overlooked the modernity question in China’s complex curve, resulting in a certain kind of "rupture" picture in literary history. Since the nineties, using the new "modern reflection" theory of resources "to rewrite literature history" actually appeared in the three dimensions of research, of which, the rising of history view of the New Left literary is particularly compelling. The New Left refers the so-called "socialist realism" from 1942 to 1976 as "anti-modern modernity" literature, under the name of "modern reflection", and highly affirms this kind of literature and its dominant position is reasonable. The author believes that the so-called Mao Zedong era’s "anti-modern modernity", in essence, is a kind of strange hybrid of radical modernism and conservative pre-modernism. This concept contains enormous paradox and historical predicament, and "anti-modern modernity" literature is just the projection of this paradox radical modernism and conservative pre-modernism on the form of literature. The problem of The New Left lies in their non-reflection on the concept of "anti-modern modernity", and without any awareness about the inner entanglement and difficulties, and therefore, the using of concept relapse into a typical "big concept superstition." This article consider, for the eighties "Rewriting Literary History" movement scores and limitations, in sights and not, there have a lot of articles making analysis of it. As for the process of "Rewriting Literary History" since nineties, the rising of new leftist literary history, because they are still underway, and the lack of sufficient theoretical distance, result in the lack of systematic, in-depth theoretical analysis. The author believes that the new leftist literary history has brought us a new vision of literary studies, but also brought many problems. Today, we are able to make a preliminary analysis and summery on the appearance of literary history, and its insights and its out of sights, and its theoretical significance and logical difficulties, so as to expect the statement of literary history can have a healthier direction. It should be noted that the problem of new left literature history is not the only problem appeared at the process of "Rewriting Literature History" since the nineties, and point out its problem does not mean its opposite statement is correct. The author just believes that this new trend is a tendency which is more theoretical and practical significance, and should be given more timely and theoretically response更多还原