论文部分内容阅读
朱立元认为,20世纪中国文论和美学,并非“全盘西化”的过程,而是既不同于古代传统文论和美学、又不同于西方文论和美学的现代文论和美学新传统的建构、生成过程。20世纪的中国文论和美学已经形成了自己的新传统。其在当前的发展中面临的深层问题在于基本理论缺乏与“史”和批评的互动、互通。当代中国文艺学和美学走出困局的必由之路,仍在于立足于如何解决当前中国文学所面临的这一现实问题,并在解决现实问题的同时,达到理论、批评、历史三方面的协调和统一,形成整体突破。高建平则认为,我们只有来自西方的“美学在中国”和美学的史前史,没有中国美学。提出“文化多样性”口号的背后有着深层的审美的普世性与地方性之间的张力关系。今天我们需要建构真正意义上的具有普世性的“中国美学”。王建疆认为,学科首先要讲公理、范式、共性,而不是盲目追求所谓特色或个性。同时,也不能从学科发展的水平高低来论断该学科是否存在,而是要放眼现实。其发展也应该遵循自然之道,而不是盲目的重构。
Zhu Liyuan believes that 20th century Chinese literary theory and aesthetics are not the process of “total westernization” but are rather different from the ancient traditional literary theory and aesthetics but also different from the modern literary theory and new aesthetic tradition of western literary theory and aesthetics Build, build process. The 20th century Chinese literary theory and aesthetics have formed their own new traditions. The deep problem it faces in the current development lies in the fact that the basic theory lacks interaction and exchange with the “history” and criticism. The only way for contemporary Chinese literature and art studies and aesthetics to get out of the predicament is still to base themselves on how to solve this realistic problem confronted by the current Chinese literature and to achieve the coordination and unification of the three aspects of theory, criticism and history while solving practical problems, The formation of an overall breakthrough. Gao Jianping argues that we have only the prehistoric history of “aesthetics in China” and aesthetics from the West and no Chinese aesthetics. Behind the slogan of “cultural diversity” put forward is that there is a tension between the deep aesthetic universal and the local. Today we need to build a truly universal “Chinese aesthetics.” Wang Jianjiang believes that discipline should first talk about justice, paradigm, commonalities, rather than the blind pursuit of the so-called characteristics or personality. At the same time, we can not judge the existence of the discipline from the level of the development of the discipline, but on the reality. Its development should also follow the path of nature, rather than blind reconstruction.