明末名公子张岱在《陶庵梦忆》中讲到看阮大钺的家乐: 余在其家看〈十错认〉、〈摩尼珠〉、〈燕子笺〉三剧,其串架斗筝,插科打诨,意色眼目,主人细细与之讲明,知其义味。知其旨归,故咬嚼吞吐寻味不尽。这是传统文学批评典型的释义法:作品的意义确在,因为它是作者本人安置于文学作品内容和形式之中的。阮大钺本人对他剧本中细微结构中的“义味”和“旨归”所作的介绍,无可挑战无可怀疑地是最权威的。所以连张岱这样有修养的观众,所要做的事也就是往椅背上一靠,“咬嚼吞吐”,寻味作者的解释。要是我们没有张岱那样幸运的话,我们只能依 In the late Ming Dynasty, Zhang Dai, a famous son, talked of watching Nguyen’s family music in “Tao Nun Meng Yi Yi”: I looked at the three dramas of “Ten Wrongs,” “Moni-beads,” and “Swallows” , Gag, 意 眼 目 eyes, the owner carefully explained, know its meaning. Know its purpose, it hug and hunt Finding endless taste. This is a typical paraphrase of traditional literary criticism: the meaning of a work is definite because it is the author’s own placement in the content and form of a literary work. Nguyen Danyen’s introduction of the “righteousness” and “purport” in the subtle structure of his plays is invincibly and undoubtedly the most authoritative. So even Zhang Dai, a cultured audience, the thing to do is to rely on the back of a chair, “bite huff and puff”, find the author’s explanation. If we are not as lucky as Zhang Dai, we can only rely on