《子夜》经典化与去经典化的语境、逻辑及其局限  

The context, logic and limitations of the classicization and declassicization of Midnight

作　　者：井延凤[1] JING Yanfeng(School of Humanities,Political Science and Law,Henan University of Engineering,Zhengzhou 451191,China)

机构地区：[1]河南工程学院人文政法学院,河南郑州451191

出　　处：《河南工程学院学报（社会科学版）》2023年第1期73-79,共7页Journal of Henan University of Engineering(Social Science Edition)

摘　　要：《子夜》在1933年发表后即被奉为左翼文学经典,根本原因在于它从经济和阶级视角展现了20世纪30年代中国从国民革命转向共产革命过程中的复杂社会状况,有效回应了重大时代关切。由于革命情势的发展,在瞿秋白、冯雪峰等人意识形态化的评价和茅盾追求“安全”的自我阐释中,意蕴复杂的《子夜》的解读和接受逐步被限定在特定的意识形态框架之内。20世纪80年代中后期,在新启蒙思潮影响下,“审美标准”成为评判文学作品的唯一标准,《子夜》及“子夜模式”遭遇了否定性评价。这种评价的发生有其历史必然性和合理性,但这种去政治化的批评取向无疑阻断了文学介入现实、关怀现实的重要路径。只有重新检视左翼文学观和纯文学观视野下《子夜》评价的逻辑及其局限,《子夜》的价值和意义才有可能被重新发掘。Since its publication in 1933, Midnight by Mao Dun has been considered a classic of left-wing literature. It was mainly because of its reflection of the complex social situation in China from an economic and class perspective and its effective response to the major concerns of the times when China was in the transition from the national revolution to the communist revolution. As the revolution moves on, the interpretation and acceptance of the work is, however, gradually limited to an ideological framework due to the pure ideological evaluation of Qu Qiubai and Feng Xuefeng and the safety concern of the writer himself. Then in the middle and late 1980s, Midnight and the so-called "Midnight model" encountered negative evaluation because all the literary works back then were judged only based on their aesthetic value. Despite its rationality, this pure aesthetic evaluation model also prevented literature from intervening in and caring for reality. If Midnight is to be reevaluated, a reexamination must be made on the logic behind the previous two evaluations.

关 键 词：茅盾 《子夜》 经典化 去经典化 

分 类 号：I206.7[文学—中国文学]