【作者】 陈彩林；

【导师】 凌宇；

【作者基本信息】 湖南师范大学 ， 中国现当代文学， 2014， 博士

【副题名】《野草》与《烛虚》比较研究

【摘要】 中国社会历史第二次大变动从技术体系到价值体系的总体性现代转型最根柢地表现为民族生命本体的形而上现代重构。这种生命重造旨在摆脱中国社会历史第一次大变动之后延续两千多年的民族生存惯性,以全新的人格样态在世界民族之林中争得“人”的价格。特殊的历史、时代、文化境遇将这一生命重造的使命过多地交由文学与文学家担承,于此鲁迅与沈从文凸显出独特的标志性,这种标志性集中见之于《野草》与《烛虚》。本文研究宏观思维格局的确立所依据的正是这种实际历史情形。相应地,将由中国现代历史而及中国现代文化思想史再及中国现代文学史最后定格于鲁迅与沈从文这一由大到小的过程倒过来,本文便获得了符合特殊历史情势的由小到大的具体研究步骤,即：由《野草》与《烛虚》而及鲁迅与沈从文重造生命的标志性再及中国社会历史第二次大变动民族生命本体形而上重构所达到的高度,以此探寻民族生命朝向现代生存的形而上终极向度。依据这种总体性历史情势与思维格局,本文分七个部分展开具体研究。第一部分为“引论”,重在概论本文研究围绕“民族生命本体的形而上现代重构”这一基点与主旨的宏观格局与具体步骤。主要回顾了晚清以来“中华民族新生”这一历史主题与主线,以及在这一历史逻辑延伸中我们在现代社会实体重构与现代人的本体重构上的偏失,进而揭示出人的本体重构之于社会实体重构乃至于中华民族复兴的根柢性意义。论述了中国现代文学对于民族生命本体重构的独特担当,于此鲁迅与沈从文凸显出对立而又统一、殊途而又同归的标志性存在,进而确立了本文研究的核心任务,即：二人所共构的精神文化结构在过去的历史条件下是如何使民族生命本体形而上现代重构在一个新的起点发生、发展的,在现在的历史条件下又为民族生命本体形而上现代重构向着未来标示出了怎样的终极向度与高度。最后确立了以凌宇先生关于《野草》与《烛虚》的论断为本文研究的“逻辑出发点”。第二部分主要论述《野草》与《烛虚》的标志性,即二者之于鲁迅、沈从文乃至民族生命本体形而上现代重构的独特存在。本文认为《野草》与《烛虚》集中再现出二人在民族生存历史转折处所展开的“自救”与“他救”。这种“自救”与“他救”呈示出“我”作为民族现代生存的践履亲证者与“人”作为民族传统生存的沿袭者的最本质身份,这一方面凸显出“我”的存在即是“人”的拯救,另一方面凸显出“我”与“人”的尖锐化生存对立,而这种尖锐化生存对立呈示出民族现代生存“无”与“有”合体、“无”中生“有”的开端状态。二人共构的伟大乌托邦正深植于“我”与“人”的尖锐化生存对立两极而诞生。第三部分主要论述《野草》与《烛虚》中的“我”,即民族现代生存之“有”一极。鲁迅与沈从文以“‘作家’的头衔”在世生存体现了创立、传播与践履新的价值体系三个层面的集中统一。作为二人最本己出场的《野草》与《烛虚》之“我”,其在世生存便是对自己所立人格样态的践履亲证,其实质是将自身“立之为极”以使“俾众瞻观”,“人亦庶乎免沦灭”。“五四”正是这样的两个“我”实体化的历史关键点。二人朝向现代生存的践履亲证即是“我”作为民族现代生存之“有”的存在确证,其间深蕴着“我”的精神超越与慰藉。第四部分主要论述《野草》与《烛虚》中的“人”,即民族现代生存之“无”一极。从以“我”“立之为极”的“真的人”出发,透视民族生命的非人性病灶本身就是民族生命本体现代重构的现实发生。《野草》与《烛虚》以真切的生命感展示出这种社会人与非人对立的内在景观,具体化为“我”作为“独异个体”之于“庸众”(鲁迅所直面的民众)、“多数人”(沈从文所直面的“上等人”)的生存突围。“奴才”与“阉寺性的人”、“看客”与“莫名其妙的人”、“聪明人”与“知识阶级”凸显出民族生命衰萎的根性与民族生命本体的缺失,共构出一面更为完整的民族生命反思自我的镜子,呈示出民族生命本体现代重构的鲜明针对性。第五部分主要论述《野草》与《烛虚》的生命哲学,即在“我”与“人”的两极观照中呈示出人之为人的应对。在独特把握社会与人这一辩证统一体两面的基础上,内应中华民族新生这一中国社会历史第二次大变动的主题,鲁迅以纵向的历史眼光在两千多年的民族主体生存史中看到的是中国社会历史发展与人之存在奴隶时代循环的“十全停滞”,进而集中关注专制主义与人之存在问题,沈从文以横向的历史眼光在“神完全解体”与“神之存在,依然如故”的生存对照中看到的是中国社会历史发展与人之存在的二律背反,进而集中关注神之解体与人之存在问题,并依据各自获得的特有“历史指示”分别作出人之为人的鲜明应对：“朕归于我”与“神在生命本体中”。《野草》实质是鲁迅以最本己之“我”的出场践履亲证“朕归于我”的生命哲学,《烛虚》实质是沈从文以最本己之“我”的出场践履亲证“神在生命本体中”的生命哲学。前者以恢复个体“‘人’的价格”为基点,以人之此在对于人的本质的真正占有确证出“自性”这一人之为人的元精神、元性质(自因本性),强调“自性”与人之存在现实性的统一,由此重构尊严、独立、个性、自由的民族生命本体。后者以恢复个体“对‘自然’倾心的本性”为基点,以人之此在对于生命内质的真正占有确证出“神性”这一人之为人的元精神、元性质(自因本性),强调“神性”与人之存在自然律的统一,由此重构至圣至美的民族生命本体。从“天人合一”到“朕归于我”、“神在生命本体中”,一方面显示出二人对于民族文化的结构性现代重构,另一方面显示出这种重构落脚于生命本体,一种对人之为人形而上本性的此在性占有与无限超越。第六部分主要论述《野草》与《烛虚》的艺术形态,即二者是以怎样独特的艺术方式“启人生之閟机”的。二者“活生生的实在的内容的形式”是一种生命的艺术,全在于开启各自独特的“人生之閟机”。地域色彩的消解显示出二者以生成终极性“形而上质”为目的的艺术形态,而剧烈同一性、极致性生命体验正是人类文化思想史上伟大思想家、文学家、哲学家殊途同归的精神现象与生命至境。象征既是呈现这一艺术形态的需要,更是呈现这一生命之“征”的需要。《野草》以“坟—绝望—反抗—自性”这一象征结构图式集中呈示出人何以为人的确证。《烛虚》则以“百合—美—生命—神性”这一象征结构图式集中呈示出生命何以为生命的确证。这两种象征结构图式最终呈示出二者在“谁是造物主”这一人之存在确证上的殊途与同归。因此,“独语”的艺术形态包涵着各自独特的现代性生命启蒙意味,于此,《野草》呈示出一种“大恐怖”的艺术,《烛虚》呈示出一种“至圣至美”的艺术。前者使人在灵魂的惊悚之中警悟于生命本体“自性”缺失的丑陋,后者使人在忘我的至圣至美体验之中恢复生命“神性”的庄严,因此,“独语”的过程实质是“我”最本己地出场向“人”开启重造生命的艺术教育。第七部分为“结论”,重在归结鲁迅与沈从文在民族生命本体形而上现代重构中的召示意义。从专制主义到民主共和,中华民族要彻底摆脱“奴隶时代的循环”,以抗拒奴性为基点,以“自性”为形而上终极建构尊严、独立、个性、自由的民族生命本体仍然具有重要的时代意义,因为要实现鲁迅所言的那种“人各有己”的“群之大觉”,马克思、恩格斯所取向的那种“人人各个有己”的“联合体”,我们还有很长的路要走。从神之解体到科学发展,人之存在要摆脱“所得于物虽不少,所得于己实不多”的二律背反,以恢复对自然倾心的本性为基点,以“神性”为形而上终极建构至圣至美的民族生命本体同样具有重要的时代意义,因为要实现沈从文所希图的人性重返自然,马克思、恩格斯所取向的“合乎人的本性的人的自身的复归”,我们同样还有很长的路要走。正是在这个意义上,我们在社会实体建构中高举“民主”与“科学”两面大旗的同时,还必须在民族生命本体建构中鲜明标示出“自性”与“神性”的形而上超越向度,使之落地生根,真正熔铸为民族生命的自因本性,由此在自身中获取一种自由自律的自我超向人类尊严与无限创生的不竭力量。更多还原

【Abstract】 The overall modern transformation from the technical system to the value system in the second great change of Chinese social history shows the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology in the root. The remake of life aims to get rid of the inertia of the national survival that have continued more than two thousand years after the first great change of Chinese social history, to achieve the price of " person " with the new personality among the nations of the world. The mission of the life’s remake had been undertaken largely by the literature and the writers because of the special circumstance of the history, age, and culture. Here Lu Xun and Shen Congwen are unique trademarks. The trademarks concentrate in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu. The macro thinking pattern of the research of the thesis is established on the basis of the special historical situation. Accordingly, if the process from Chinese modern history to the history of Chinese modern cultural ideology to the history of Chinese modern literature to Lu Xun and Shen Congwen was reversed, this thesis would get specific steps of research from small to large that conformed to the special historical situation, namely to seek out the metaphysical ultimate target that the nation survive toward the modern. The concrete research of this thesis is divided into seven parts according to the overall historical situation and the thinking pattern.The first part is the introduction that outlines the macro pattern and specific steps of the research of the thesis around the basis and the keynote about the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology. It has mainly reviewed the historical theme and the historical main line on the born-again Chinese nation since the late qing dynasty, and the partiality on the reconstruction of the entity of modern society and the ontology of modern people in the historical logical extension, and then reveals the fundamental significance of the reconstruction of a person’s ontology to the reconstruction of the entity of society and the Chinese nation’s prospect. It discusses the unique responsibility of Chinese modern literature to the reconstruction of the national life’s ontology. Here the landmarks of Lu Xun and Shen Congwen are opposite and unified, different and same, and then the core mission of the research of the thesis is established that how to make the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology come into being and develop under the condition of the history of the past, how to mark the ultimate direction and height of the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology in the future in the current historical condition. Finally the argument of Mr Ling Yu on Ye Cao and ZhuXu is established for the logical starting point of this study.The second part mainly discusses the trademarks of Ye Cao and Zhu Xu, namely the unique existence that both are to Lu Xun and Shen Congwen, even to the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology. In this thesis, the author thinks that Ye Cao and Zhu Xu show intensively that the two men saved their own and others in the national historical turning point. The salvation to their own and others shows the most essential identity that " I " am a practitioner of the national modern survival, but " he " is a routineer of the national traditional survival. on the one hand, the situation highlights that my existence is his salvation, on the other," I " and " he " are in the violent conflict, but the conflict shows the beginning that the " being " and " nothing " of the national modern living constitute a unity, and the " being " would be out of the " nothing ". The great utopia that the two men constructed together came into being between the two opposite poles.The third part mainly discusses the " I " in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu namely the pole as the " being " of the national modern living. The living existence of Lu Xun and Shen Congwen as a writer shows the close unity of three levels which are the creation, dissemination and application of the new value system. The " I " in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu shows Lu Xun and Shen Congwen’s own appearances. Their lives confirmed the form of personality that they made. The essence is that they put themselves as benchmarks for all to see to avoid the corruption of the people. The May4th Movement is the key point of history that the two " I " come true Their personal confirmations that both live toward the modern are the proof that " I " am the " being " of the national modern living, and there are the spirit of transcendence and comfort in the process.The fourth part mainly discusses the " he " in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu namely the pole as the " nothing " of the national modern living. From the start of the " real man " that put the " I " as the benchmark, the diagnosis to the national life on the lost of human nature is the reality of the modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology. The real sense of life in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu shows the internal situation of this society that humanity and non-humanity are in the conflict, namely the survival to break that the " I " as the unique individual is to the mediocre people in the face of Lu Xun, to the most people in the face of Shen Congwen. The slave and the people of impotence, the onlooker and the puzzling people, the clever men and the intellectual class show the root of the national life of impotence and the defect of the national life’s ontology, constitute together a more complete mirror for the self-reflection of the national life, present a clear pertinence to reconstruct the national modern life’s ontology.The fifth part mainly discusses the philosophy of life in Ye Cao and Zhu Xu, namly shows the rules for being human in the survey of the two poles of "I" and "he". On the basis of the unique grasp of society and people as the two sides of the dialectical unity, in harmony with the theme of the second great change of Chinese social history, Lu Xun paid attention to the same cycles of the slave era in Chinese social and historical development and the existence of the people on the main body of the national living history over two thousand years by the longitudinal historical perspective, then focused on the problem about absolutism and the existence of the people. Shen Congwen paid attention to the antinomy between Chinese social and historical development and the existence of the people through the contrast of the living between the dissolution of God and the existence of God just like before by the lateral historical perspective, then focused on the problem about the dissolution of God and the existence of the people. They respectively made a distinct response to be human according to the peculiar historical instructions that they respectively received, namely "I belong to me" and "God is in the ontology of life". The essence of Ye Cao is the philosophy of life that "I belong to me" which Lu Xun practised by himself. The essence of Zhu Xu is the philosophy of life that " God is in the ontology of life " which Shen Congwen practised by himself. The former aims to restore an individual to the price of " person ", confirme the inner self as the essential attribute of being human by the possession of the essence of man at present, emphasize the unification of the inner self and the reality of man, thus reconstruct the national life’s ontology of dignity, independence, individuality and freedom. The latter aims to restore an individual to the nature, confirme the divinity as the essential attribute of being human by the possession of the essence of life at present emphasize the unification of the divinity and the law of nature about human being, thus reconstruct the most sacred and beautiful ontology of national life. From "the unity of human and nature" to " I belong to me " and " God is in the ontology of life ", on the one hand the process shows the structural modern reconstruction of national culture of the two people, on the other hand shows that the reconstruction rests on the ontology of life, namely the real possession of the metaphysical nature of human and the infinite transcendence to it.The sixth part mainly discusses the art-forms of Ye Cao and Zhu Xu, namely the unique artistic ways that both inspired the people. The living concrete form of content is the art of life to publish respectively the unique secret of life. The disappearance of regional features shows the art-forms that both aim to produce the ultimate metaphysical materials, and the experiences of life with identities and extremes are the spiritual phenomenon and the highest state of life that great thinkers, writers and philosophers reached the same goal by different routes in the history of human thought. The symbolism is not only the need of this art form, but also presents the symptom of life. Ye Cao shows the confirmation to be human by this symbolic structure of "grave-despair-resistance-the self". Zhu Xu shows the confirmation to be life by this symbolic structure of "lily-despair-beauty-God". These two kinds of symbolic structures shows finally the different and same answers to this question about who is the creator. Therefore, the art-form of soliloquy embodies the different tastes of life with the modern enlightenment, here Ye Cao shows a most horrible art, Zhu Xu shows a most sacred and beautiful art. The former makes people in the thriller of soul alert the ugliness because of the loss of self in the ontology of life, the latter makes people in the most sacred and beautiful experiences restore the solemnity of the life’s divinity, so the process of soliloquy is in fact the art education on the reconstruction of life that the "I" told the "he".The seventh part is the conclusion that summarizes the magnetism of Lu Xun and Shen Congwen in the metaphysical modern reconstruction of the national life’s ontology. From the absolutism to the democratic republicanism, if the chinese nation want to get rid of completely the same cycles of the slave era, that construct the national life’s ontology with dignity, independence, individuality and freedom on the basis of the resistance to servility toward the metaphysical ultimate of self still has an important contemporary significance because we also have a long way to the collective consciousness that "each man has his own" that Lu Xun said, and the federation that "everyone all has oneself" that Marx and Engels said. From the collapse of God to the scientific development, if man want to get rid of the antinomy in the living that "the income in material is much, in oneself is really little", that construct the most sacred and beautiful ontology of national life on the basis of the restoration to nature toward the metaphysical ultimate of divinity still has an important contemporary significance because we also have a long way to the return to natural human that Shen Congwen hoped, to self in accord with the nature of human beings that Marx and Engels hoped. In this sense, we hold up two great banners of " democracy " and " science " in the construction of social entity at the same time, also must mark clearly the metaphysical ultimate of " self " and " divinity ", make both take root and become the essential root of national life, thus obtain an inexhaustible power in our own that we autonomously trend toward human dignity and boundless creation.更多还原