《诗大序》的“后结构主义”诗论--兼谈中国古典文论的现代化  

Post-Structuralist Poetics in the Great Preface and Some Thoughts on the Modernization of Ancient Chinese Literary Theory

作　　者：顾明栋 Gu Mingdong(the University of Texas at Dallas,Guangdong Province 318060,China)

机构地区：[1]美国达拉斯德州大学

出　　处：《文艺理论研究》2018年第3期160-168,共9页Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art

摘　　要：《毛诗大序》是阐释《诗经》的纲领性文件,也是中国文学批评的第一个里程碑,尽管其非凡的洞见为中国诗学理论奠定了第一块基石,但也因其来历不明和种种"缺憾"而受到苛责和批评,并未被视为中国传统第一篇有意为之的文论。《诗大序》真的如历代学者批评的那样结构松散混乱,主旨无法一以贯之吗?从后结构主义话语理论的视角重新细读《诗大序》的文字表述、思路演进和总体结构,可以得出相反的结论:《诗大序》主旨鲜明,构思精巧,论证连贯,其独特的结构和论证形式恰恰建立在看似过时的小学(文字学)基础之上。而且,其意指结构与表现方式隐含了一个创作模式,暗合克里斯蒂娃的"互文"论和德里达的"撒播"论,因此或许可以称其为古代的后结构主义诗论。采用传统小学与后结构主义理论相结合的研究方法重读《诗大序》,旨在探讨这样几个问题:一、以传统小学为根基的古代文论与后结构主义诗论是否有本质的区别?二、历史上至今为止对《诗大序》真实价值的评判为何不够客观公正?三、结合西方古典主义和后结构主义的诗学探索《诗大序》究竟是什么性质的诗论?四、使用现代诗学的方式重新细读《诗大序》能给中国古典文论的现代化提供什么启发?The Great Preface of the Mao School of Poetry is a foundational document for the exegesis of the Shijing and a landmark for Chinese literary theory. Despite its status as the first cornerstone for Chinese poetics,it has incurred harsh criticism due to its various inadequacies and unknown origin,and is never regarded as the first self-consciously composed literary criticism. Is The Great Preface indeed a discourse with a loose structure and inconsistent thesis as the critics have suggested？ To re-examine its writing,conception,and overall structure from the perspective of post-structuralist discourse theory will draw an opposite conclusion： The Great Preface has a clear thesis,subtly conceived,and coherently argued,with a distinctive organization and reasoning predicated on the basis of ostensibly obsolete philology. Moreover, its structure and ways of signification and representation implicitly contain a creative model of writing that anticipates Julia Kristeva＇s intertextuality and Jacques Derrida＇s dissemination,thereby enabling the treatise to be viewed as a post-structuralist poetic discourse. Adopting an approach that integrates traditional philology with post-structuralism,this article investigates these concerns：（ 1） Does traditional poetics based on philology radically differ from post-structuralist poetics？（ 2） Why is The Great Preface not fairly evaluated in history？（ 3） What sort of poetics does the The Great Preface imply in comparison with Western and modern poetics？（ 4） What insights can a new reading of The Great Preface in terms of modern poetics shed on the modernization of traditional Chinese literary theory？

关 键 词：《诗大序》 诗学 互文性 “撒播”论 后结构主义 古典文论现代化 

分 类 号：I207.22[文学—中国文学]