论文部分内容阅读
黄裳先生在2008年9月12日《文汇读书周报》发表《鲁迅的题辞》一文,坚持认为所谓鲁迅为刘半农题赠《梅兰芳歌曲谱》一书的题辞是真的。并说自从他提出这样的看法后,“不想从6月下旬起,就读到两篇持否定意见的文章:一篇是7月16日《中华读书报》刊出的陈福康撰《如此拙劣的伪造》,一篇是6月27日发表于《文汇读书周报》的‘读者短笺’栏中王锡荣撰《关于所谓鲁迅题签》”。其实,第一个怀疑所谓的“鲁迅题签”并撰写文章的,并不是我和王锡荣,而是朱正先生,他在6月1日的《南方读书报·评论周刊》就发表了《这场拍卖与鲁迅有关吗?》一文。我最早一眼就看出这个所谓的鲁迅题签是假的的理由,与朱先生不谋而合,可谓所见略同。我至今仍认为这是判断此事造假
On September 12, 2008, Mr. Huang made a speech entitled “Lecture by Lu Xun,” insisting that the inscription entitled “Music of Meilan Fang Song” by Lu Xun for Liu Bannong is true. Saying that since he put forward this view, he “did not want to read two articles with negative views starting from the end of June: one was Chen Fukang, published in China Reading Daily on July 16,” so clumsy Forge, “a June 27 published in the” Wen Wei Book Weekly, “the reader short note column” written by Wang Xirong “on the so-called Lu Xun ”. In fact, the first one who suspected the so-called “Lu Xun inscribed” and wrote articles was not me and Wang Xirong, but Mr. Zhu Zheng. On June 1, he wrote the “Southern Review Magazine” Is this auction related to Lu Xun? At first glance, I saw the reason why this so-called Lutheran question mark was a fake. It coincides with that of Mr ZHU. I still think it is a matter of judging the fraud