“文学性”:应当解构还是建构?——与马大康先生商榷  

Literariness:To Be Deconstructed or Constructed?——A Discussion with Mr.Ma Dakang

作　　者：李卫华[1] 

机构地区：[1]河北师范大学文学院,河北石家庄050016

出　　处：《廊坊师范学院学报（社会科学版）》2010年第6期10-14,共5页Journal of Langfang Normal University(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金项目"从‘审美意识形态’到‘日常生活审美化’--20世纪80年代关于文学本质特征的论争及其理论探析"(07BZW010)的系列成果

摘　　要：马大康先生在《文艺争鸣》2010年第1期上发表的文章《从"文学性"到"娱乐性"——一种解构文学本质观的策略》值得商榷。首先",文学性"概念的提出,并非如马文所说的那样,是"循环论证的结果";它是人类言说文学本质的历程中一个具有里程碑意义的事件,标志着人类对于文学本质提问方式的改变。其次,马文对伊格尔顿的理解是片面的、错误的;"反本质主义"并非意味着必须将"文学"的概念随意化,甚至取消这个概念,而是意味着将"文学"这一概念作历史的、具体的理解。第三,不能用"娱乐性"代替"文学性"来界定文学活动的本质,因为文学活动带给人的审美愉悦是超越娱乐之上的"忘情之乐",即人获得解放、自由之乐。在越来越多的人沉迷于低层次的娱乐,以至"娱乐至死"的今天,更应提倡这种超越感官享乐的"忘情之乐"。The paper will discuss some ideas found in From ＂Literariness＂ to ＂Entertainment＂：A Strategy to Deconstruct the Literary Nature by Ma Dakang published on the first issue of Literay and Artistic Debates.First of all,＂literariness＂ as a concept is not ＂the result of argument in a circle＂ as indicated by the article,but a sign of the change in the manner to find the essence of literature.Secondly,the interpretation of Terry Eagleton＇s theory in this article is misleading because ＂anti-essentialism＂ does not mean to cancel the concept ＂literariness＂ but to comprehend the concept in a historical way.Thirdly,the essence of ＂literary activity＂ cannot be defined by ＂entertainment＂ instead of ＂literariness＂ because happiness gained from literary activity goes far beyond that from the entertainment.Nowadays,literary happiness should be encouraged to counter against the carnal excitement from entertainment.

关 键 词：文学性 本质主义 娱乐 

分 类 号：I0[文学—文学理论]