“西方中心论”的再检视--以西方二战史关于第三次长沙会战的述评为例  

Reviewing Western Centrism--Taking the Third Battle of Changsha in Historical Writings on World War Ⅱ as an Example

作　　者：陈艳辉[1] CHEN Yan-hui(School of Journalism and Communication,Hunan Normal University,Changsha,Hunan 410081)

机构地区：[1]湖南师范大学新闻与传播学院,湖南长沙410081

出　　处：《怀化学院学报》2022年第3期28-34,共7页Journal of Huaihua University

摘　　要：有学者认为,自20世纪60、70年代以来,西方关于中国的叙事完成了从“西方中心论”到“中国中心观”的跨越。但是如果将中国置于一个与西方国家并列的体系中考察,这种跨越并没有实现,“西方中心论”依然是主导。以近年出版或重版的西方二战史著述为例,依然普遍存在较少述评中国贡献、对中国负面评价居多以及凸显同盟国对中国援助而淡化中国对同盟国支持等问题。除政治利益的考量外,“西方中心论”既是历史著述本身意味着选择的客观结果,也是后现代主义影响所致。中国必须从历史叙事到现实叙事都把握属于自己的主导权,以平等姿态与西方对话,才能打破“西方中心论”。Some scholars believe that the western narrative about China has completed a leap from “Western centrism” to “China centrism” since the 1960s and 1970s. However,if China is placed in a parallel system with western countries,this leap has not been realized, and “Western centrism” is still dominant. Take Western historical writings on World War Ⅱ published or reprinted in recent years as an example. There are still many problems, such as less than sufficient comments on China’s contribution,mostly negative evaluation of China,highlighting the aid of allies to China,and weakening China’s support for allies.In addition to the consideration of political interests,“Western centrism”is not only the objective result of the choice of historical writings, but also the influence of postmodernism. China must grasp its own dominant power from historical narrative to realistic narrative and carry out dialogue with the West with an equal attitude so as to break through “Western centrism”.

关 键 词：西方二战史叙事 第三次长沙会战 战争报道 西方中心论 

分 类 号：K061[历史地理—历史学]