论文部分内容阅读
近年来,随着对刘勰《文心雕龙》研究的深入开展,该书“体大思精,在古代文学批评著作中是空前绝后的”这一评价,已越来越为人们所肯定;有的研究者还引述鲁迅所论,“东则有刘彦和之《文心》,西则有亚里士多得之《诗学》,解析神质,包举洪纤,开源发流,为世楷式。”从比较研究角度,论述了它在世界美学史上亦占有重要地位。但是,也有的同志不同意这些看法,认为《文心雕龙》并不能代表我国古代文论的最高成就,引述例证,列举疵病,指责该书不但没有用科学方法总结前代文论成果,相反,许多重要观点都是抄袭前人,甚至还是“拙劣的抄袭”。我认为这是很值得研究的。 关于《文心雕龙》在理论上的建树,前辈和时贤早有许多精当的论述。本文仅就《神思》是否直接袭自《文赋》问题,略抒浅见。
In recent years, with the in-depth study of Liu Xie’s “Wen Xin Diao Long”, the evaluation of “Consciousness in a Sense, Unprecedented in Ancient Literary Criticism” has been more and more affirmed by people. There are The researchers also quoted Lu Xun as saying: “In the east there is Liu Wenhe’s” Wen Xin, “while in the west there is Aristotle’s” Poetics. “ Shi Kai style. ”From a comparative perspective, it is argued that it also plays an important role in the history of world aesthetics. However, some comrades disagree with these views and hold the view that “Literary Heart Carving Dragons” can not represent the highest accomplishments of ancient Chinese literary theory. By citing examples and quoting flaws, it accuses the book of not only failing to summarize the achievements of the previous literary theory in a scientific way, On the contrary, many of the key points are plagiarism and even “botched plagiarism.” I think it is worth studying. On the “Literary Mind and Carving Dragon” in the theoretical achievements, predecessors and Shixian have many elaborate expositions. This article only on the “spiritual thinking” is directly attacked from the “Fu” issue, a brief description.