论文部分内容阅读
戏曲“危机”之声遍布剧坛。有识之士,试图廓清迷雾。然而仅就戏曲谈戏曲的“危机”,却不大容易说得明白,应该引入参照系。翻翻各种版本的中国现代文学史,几乎无一例外,戏曲文学都是一片空白。是文学史家忘了戏曲,还是戏曲超然于时代之外? 在我国漫长的封建社会里,居于统治地位的文艺观是“文以载道”。从孔子起到朱熹推至极端,“文皆是从道中流出”“文便是道”。不是把生活,而是把“道”看成文学艺术的源泉,并彻底否定了艺术性这个方面,只剩下了“道”,“道”便是艺术。这个“道”是什么?石介说得可谓分明畅晓:“两仪,文之体也;三纲,文之象也;五常,文之质也;九
Drama “crisis” sound all over the theater. Insight, trying to clear the fog. However, only the “crisis” of drama and opera is not easy to put it plainly and should be introduced into the frame of reference. Almost all versions of the history of modern Chinese literature, almost without exception, are all gaps in Chinese opera literature. Is the literary historian forget the opera, or the opera detached beyond the time? In our long feudal society, the dominance of literary view is “text to carry.” From Confucius played Zhuxi pushed to the extreme, “the text is out from the road,” “the text is Road.” Rather than taking life as a source of literature and art, Tao regarded it as the source of literature and art and completely negated the aspect of artistry, leaving only “Tao” and “Tao” as its art. What is this “Tao”? Shi Jieshi can be described as clear and clear: "Two instruments, the body of the text also; three classes, the text likewise;