向林冰“民族形式中心源泉”论再探析

发布时间：2018-03-24 08:43

本文选题：向林冰　切入点：民族形式的中心源泉　出处：《文学评论》2017年02期

【摘要】：向林冰在文艺民族形式论争中提出的"民族形式中心源泉"论,是他所在的通俗读物编刊社于抗战初期寻求转型的产物。通过批判自身的工具主义取向,编刊社自觉接续"五四"民间文学论的文脉,试图激活"旧形式"的文艺属性。作为编刊社的首席理论家,向林冰以历史唯物主义话语重构"五四文艺史观",在战时"利用旧形式"的大氛围下,重新确认了民间文学之于新文学创构的重要意义。但向林冰受制于通俗化实践的既定经验,对白话文学论的把握存在明显偏差,其"中心源泉"论过分拘泥于民间形式的"口头告白性质",偏离了中国现代语文变革运动的"言文一致"主线。
[Abstract]:The theory of "the central source of national form" put forward by Lin Bing in the debate of literary and artistic national forms is the product of his popular reading and publication agency seeking transformation in the early stage of the War of Resistance against Japan. Through criticizing his own instrumentalism orientation, he put forward the theory of "the central source of national form". As the chief theorist of the editor's magazine, he consciously continued the literary context of "May 4th" folklore theory and tried to activate the literary and artistic attributes of the "old form". Lin Bing reconstructs the May 4th Literary and Art Historical View with historical materialism, and under the general atmosphere of "using the old form" in wartime, It reconfirms the importance of folk literature to the creation of new literature, but Lin Bing is subject to the established experience of popularization practice, and there are obvious deviations in grasping the theory of vernacular literature. His "central source" theory is too restricted to the folk form of "oral confession", which deviates from the main line of "the unity of speech and prose" of the Chinese modern Chinese reform movement.
【作者单位】：清华大学中文系;
【分类号】：I206.6

【相似文献】