《诗归》对阮籍《咏怀诗》的批评及其论争之意蕴  

The Criticism of Ruan Ji's Poems by Shi Gui and the Implication of Its Controversy

作　　者：徐国荣[1] 梅嫣 XU Guorong;MEI Yan

机构地区：[1]暨南大学文学院

出　　处：《暨南学报（哲学社会科学版）》2021年第4期1-11,共11页Jinan Journal(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“中国诗歌的语言艺术原理及其历史生成规律”(18ZDA279),子课题“诗骚传统里的诗歌语言艺术原理”。

摘　　要：钟惺、谭元春在《诗归》中以“厚”“真”为标准对阮籍《咏怀》诗持批评与贬低的态度,认为其既不如此前的《古诗十九首》,又不如唐代的《感遇》。这种贬低一方面源于他们独特的诗学观,另一方面又与他们对阮籍性情、诗歌特点的认知有关。此外,还有针对七子派复古诗学——尤其是对李攀龙《古今诗删》不满的现实因素。《诗归》对阮诗的评价引起了明清诗论家激烈的反驳,这其中固然有钱谦益、陈子龙等人的影响,也有易代之际的时代因素,但批评者大多还是立足于诗学本身。他们认为钟、谭不过是“尚奇”“好尽”“浅陋”,故多重申《咏怀》有性情、多蕴藉,潘德舆则从性情之正摈斥《咏怀》和陈子昂《感遇》而扬张九龄《感遇》,客观上又扩大了《咏怀》诗接受史之丰富蕴含。Zhong Xing and Tan Yuanchun used“depth”and“truth”as the standard in“Shi Gui”to criticize and depreciate Ruan Ji's“Yong Huai”poems.They think it is neither as good as the previous“Gu Shi Shi Jiu Shou”,nor as good as“Gan Yu”of the Tang dynasty.This disparity stems not only from their unique poetic view,but also from their cognition of Ruan Ji's temperament and poetic characteristics.In addition,there are realistic factors that are dissatisfied with the retro poetics of the Qizi School,especially Li Panlong s“Gu Jin Shi Shan”.The evaluation of Ruan Ji's poems by Shi Gui has aroused fierce refutation from poets in the Ming and Qing Dynasties.Of course,Qian Qianyi,Chen Zilong and others have influenced them,and the era of change also contributes to it.However,most critics are still based on Poetics itself.They think that Zhong and Tan are just pursuing novelty,speaking out all the meaning and shallowness,so they reiterate that“Yong Huai”is impressive and implicit,while Pan Deyu denounced“Yong Huai”and Chen Ziang s“Gan Yu”from the genuineness of temperament,and promoted Zhang Jiuling s“Gan Yu”,which objectively expanded the rich connotation of the poem recognition history of“Yong Huai”.

关 键 词：《诗归》 《咏怀诗》 失真不厚 身分 门户之见 

分 类 号：I207.22[文学—中国文学]