“以意逆志”说非读者反应批评论  

View of "Undoing the Goal with Volition":A Different Critical Theory From the Critical Theory of Reader Reaction

作　　者：齐效斌[1] 

机构地区：[1]陕西师范大学继续教育学院,陕西西安710062

出　　处：《陕西师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2010年第3期42-45,共4页Journal of Shaanxi Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要："以意逆志"说作为孟子诗学的关键性术语之一,在中国文学批评和理论建设中既享有"千古说诗妙诠"的美誉,又因为语词的模糊性而聚讼纷纭。笔者认为,在西方学术思想不断侵染中国理论批评界的今天,个别学者援引由伽达默尔的现代解释学催生的读者反应批评阐释"以意逆志",寻找它们之间的同一性,甚至视它们为同一论域,固然展开了一种独特的理论视野,满足了当下批评界急于进行范式变革的心理,但也因此使这种争议陷入更大范围"批评的循环"。这一理论走向,不但远离了孟子的本义和要求,违背了孟子诗学的基本精神,而且也违背了中国文化一以贯之的解释原则。A key term of Mencius poetics, the view of ＂undoing the goal with volition＂ is accepted as ＂the most intelligent interpretation of poetics in history＂ in efforts of Chinese literary criticism and theoretical construction. Also the statement has caused constant disputes for its verbal obscurity. The author of this paper thinks that under the continuous intrusion in the world of Chinese theoretical criticism, some scholars attempted to interpret the view of ＂undoing the goal with volition＂ in terms of criticism of reader reaction enlightened by Gadamer’s modern hermeneutics to seek similarity between them and even went so far as to regard them as the same critical school. This attempt has naturally extended an individual theoretical horizon and successfully satisfied the critical world’s psychology to introduce a revolutionary critical pattern. However, on the other hand, it is likely to lead disputes on this issue to a larger-scale ＂critical circulation＂. In fact, this theoretical orientation not only deviates from Mencius original intention and requirement, goes against the basic idea of his poetics and most importantly, violates the general interpretative principle of Chinese culture.

关 键 词：以意逆志 读者中心论 文学批评 

分 类 号：B222.5[哲学宗教—中国哲学]