紊乱的批评何以引导客观的历史阐释——与旷新年教授商榷  

How Can Chaotic Criticism Lead to Objective Historical Interpretation:Deliberation with Professor Kuang Xinnian

作　　者：姚新勇[1,2] YAO Xinyong(College of Literature,JiNan University,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510632,China;Huashang College,Guangdong University of Finance&Economics,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510632,China)

机构地区：[1]暨南大学文学院,广东广州510632 [2]广东财经大学华商学院,广东广州510632

出　　处：《广州大学学报（社会科学版）》2020年第2期101-108,共8页Journal of Guangzhou University:Social Science Edition

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目(18AXW008)。

摘　　要：旷新年教授的《由史料热谈治史方法》一文,认为学界现在存在一种不良现象,即“过分依赖秘密材料”,来否定农业合作化题材的小说,否定鲁迅、郭沫若等“左翼”文学家,无限抬高胡适、张爱玲等人,美化民国,否定中国革命。因此,应该批判并纠正这种不良风气,树立正确的治史方法。然而,旷文本身存在许多问题:论证跳跃,逻辑自相矛盾,批评对象指涉含混,立场、观点不清,论证态度欠缺公允。Professor Kuang Xinnian's article Talking about the Methods of Managing History from Historical Materials believes that there is a bad phenomenon in the academic circles.That is the rigorous dependence on secret materials denies the novels on the theme of agricultural cooperation,denying Lu Xun,Guo Moruo and other left-wing writers,but infinitely raising Hu Shi and Zhang Ailing,beautifying the Republic of China and negating the Chinese revolution.Therefore,we should criticize and correct this bad atmosphere and establish a correct method of history management.However,there are many problems in Kuang's works,such as jumping and confusion of argumentation,self-contradictory logics,confusing reference of criticism objects,ambiguity of standpoints and viewpoints,and unfair attitudes of argumentation.

关 键 词：旷新年 治史方法 重写文学史 商榷 

分 类 号：I206[文学—中国文学]