从融合到分途:“文学之文”与“应用之文”之关系考论

发布时间：2017-12-26 17:39

本文关键词：从融合到分途:“文学之文”与“应用之文”之关系考论　出处：《文学评论》2017年05期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：五四文学革命时期,陈独秀、刘半农等新文学作家提倡"文学之文"与"应用之文"分途,其实是为文学革命张目的一种手段,这种手段不但带有二元对立的局限,而且难免陷入既偏重"文学之文"又要利用新文学("文学之文")来推广和宣传新思想新观念的尴尬。此后,为实现"文学之文""应用之文"与外来的"纯文学""杂文学"概念对接,不惜过滤了一部分骈散文。虽有梁启超、朱自清等发现偏重"文学之文"之弊,试图纠正,却没有引起时人和后人的重视,以至"文学之文"与"应用之文"融合的传统被有意无意地遮蔽。重拾被遗忘的这一脉传统,不仅有助于检讨百年新文学发展中存在的问题,而且可以为重新定义文学提供可资借鉴的历史经验。
[Abstract]:54 literary revolution, new literature writers Chen Duxiu, Liu Bannong and other advocates of "literary writing" and "practical writing" division, is a kind of means for the literary revolution arrogance, this means not only with the two opposite limitations, and will inevitably fall into both on the literary text "and using new literature (" the literary text ") to promote and publicize new ideas of embarrassment. Since then, for the realization of "literary writing" and "practical writing" foreign "pure literature" "miscellaneous literature" concept at the docking, a part of parallel prose filtering. Though Liang Qichao, Zhu Ziqing and others find the emphasis on the disadvantages of "literary literature", they try to correct them, but they fail to arouse the attention of people and later generations. Even though the tradition of integration of literary texts and applied texts is intentionally or unintentionally concealed. To regain the tradition forgotten, not only helps to review the existing literature and the development of new century problems, but also can provide historical reference for the re definition of literature.
【作者单位】：广州大学人文学院;广州大学文学思想研究中心;
【基金】：国家社科基金项目“新月派散佚作品发掘整理与综合研究”(批准号15BZW124)阶段性成果
【分类号】：I206.6
【正文快照】： 近代以降,“文学之文”与“应用之文”分道扬镳成为一种趋势:“文学之文”逐渐取得文学的正宗地位,“应用之文”被排除在文学之外。“文学之文”与“应用之文”分途后,中国文学的命运发生很大的变化。检视分途之后的中国文学发展史,不难发现,它虽然也曾有过辉煌时期,但它的辉

【相似文献】