以注解屈原抒写君国情怀——陆时雍《楚辞疏》与周拱辰《离骚草木史》注释之比较  

By Annotating Qu Yuan to Express the Feelings for the King and the State——A Comparison Between Lu Shiyong’s Chucishu and Zhou Gongchen’s The History of Lisao Plants

作　　者：李金善[1] 高晨曦 LI Jinshan;GAO Chenxi(College of Literature,Hebei University,Baoding,Hebei 071002,China)

机构地区：[1]河北大学文学院,河北保定071002

出　　处：《河北大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2022年第2期33-39,共7页Journal of Hebei University(Philosophy and Social Science)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“中国古代楚辞文献序跋研究”(18BZW083)。

摘　　要：明末士人陆时雍与清初遗民周拱辰均有价值较高的《楚辞》注疏作品传世。二人年龄相仿,又为同乡,交游甚密。陆时雍身为明末士人,周拱辰则身跨明末清初,属清初遗民,二人的《楚辞》注本表达的思想倾向亦有明显差异。在对待君王的态度上,陆时雍的注疏表现出内敛中庸的理学倾向及对君主充满拥护之情,周拱辰却不虚隐君主之过,愤慨狷急之情溢于言表;在对屈原“死节”的评价上,陆时雍认定为“悁行”,周拱辰则认可并赞扬屈原的“死谏”。Lu Shiyong, a scholar in the late Ming Dynasty, and Zhou Gongchen, a typical remnant in the early Qing Dynasty, have handed down valuable annotation works of Chu Ci.They were of the same age, fellow townsmen and close friends.Lu Shiyong was a scholar in the late Ming Dynasty and Zhou Gongchen was a remnant of the early Qing Dynasty.There were also significant differences in the ideological tendencies expressed in the annotation of Chu Ci between them.In the attitude towards the monarch, Lu Shiyong’s notes showed the philosophical tendency of introverted moderation and full of support for the monarch, but Zhou Gongchen did not hide the fault of the monarch, and his indignation and impatience were expressed in his words.In the evaluation of Qu Yuan’s “death for the sake of honor”,Lu Shiyong recognized it as “thoughtless behavior”,while Zhou Gongchen recognized and praised Qu Yuan’s “the risk of life in pressing a point on the emperor”.

关 键 词：周拱辰 陆时雍 《离骚草木史》 《楚辞疏》 

分 类 号：I206.2[文学—中国文学]