重读《金锁记》——且从傅雷与吴小如的分歧说起  

The Golden Lock Reinterpreted——On the Disagreement between Fu Lei and Wu Xiaoru

作　　者：程小强[1] 

机构地区：[1]宝鸡文理学院文学与新闻传播学院,陕西宝鸡721013

出　　处：《海南师范大学学报（社会科学版）》2016年第7期35-40,共6页Journal of Hainan Normal University(Social Sciences)

摘　　要：在张爱玲的研究史上,傅雷的时评《论张爱玲的小说》基于新文学的立场,吴小如的定评《读张爱玲的〈传奇〉》基于中国古典文学思想传统,二文的结论差别较大。《金锁记》是张爱玲将其自幼时及至青春以来几乎所有的负面体验高度集中的结果,透射出浓重的古典虚无气和颓废气,传达着绝望的人生感怀,且并未对这些虚无、绝望和颓废有所"超克"。实质上,《金锁记》基于金钱和情欲主题对"人的发现"并不属于中国现代"人的文学"范畴,反而和中国古典虚无主义文学思想高度一致,相应面相上的批判力多源于后来者的"发明"。作为中国现代文学史上的经典,《金锁记》实为张爱玲创作史上的偶然,是张爱玲意料之外,又是中国现代文学情理之中的收获。In the history of studies on Eileen Chang,Fu Lei＇s On Eileen Chang＇s Novels based on the position of new literature and Wu Xiaoru＇s An Interpretation of Eileen Chang＇s Legend modeled on the tradition of classical Chinese literary ideology are rather mutually diverse in terms of their conclusion. As a highly concentrated result of almost all her negative experiences from childhood to adolescence,Eileen Chang＇s The Golden Lock denotes a strong sense of classical nihilism and decadence,conveys desperate recollections of life and fails to ＂surmount and overcome＂the foregoing nihilism,despair and decadence. In essence,the ＂discovery of man＂based on the theme of money and lust in The Golden Lock is beyond the category of modern Chinese ＂human literature＂but consistent with classical Chinese literary ideology of nihilism,for the corresponding explicit critical ability is mainly a later ＂invention＂. As a classic in the history of modern Chinese literature,The Golden Lock is actually something accidental in the history of Eileen Chang＇s literary creation,which is something unexpected to Eileen Chang but a gain understandable for modern Chinese literature.

关 键 词：《金锁记》 傅雷 吴小如 文学格调 虚无主义 

分 类 号：I206.6[文学—中国文学]