论1930-1960年代文艺“形式”话语意指的分歧——以“民族形式”为中心  

On the Difference of Literary “Form” Discourses from 1930s to 1960s—Centered on “National Form”

作　　者：李子豪 Li Zihao(College of Art,Hebei University,Baoding Hebei 071000,China)

机构地区：[1]河北大学艺术学院,河北保定071000

出　　处：《河北科技师范学院学报（社会科学版）》2024年第2期26-33,共8页Journal of Hebei Normal University of Science & Technology(Social Sciences)

摘　　要：对1930-1960年代文艺界讨论最多的“形式”问题的研究既系统又缺失,这种缺失表现在忽视对争论过程中“形式”话语意指的考察。从文艺大众化运动的“旧形式”“民间形式”到“民族形式”,“形式”意指并不一致,它一方面被理解为门类层面的不同艺术体裁,一方面被解读为创作层面的表现技巧。话语主体对意指的区分具有目的性,包括艺术体裁的意识形态特征以及表现技巧的创作自觉性与审美独立性。意指艺术体裁造成“内容决定形式”这一根本命题的失效,内容可以左右创作层面表现技巧与原则的“形式”,但却无法真正决定门类层面艺术体裁的“形式”。意指分歧在“民族形式”争论集中凸显,随着讨论深入又趋于统一,从而区别于文艺大众化运动以来的“旧形式”。理清这种分歧与统一有助于重新认识“民族形式”的复杂构成及其超形式内涵。The research on the“form”in the literary and artistic circles from 1930s to 1960s was systematic but insufficient,which neglected the“form”discourse meaning in the debate process.The meaning of“form”was not consistent in the“old forms”“folk forms”and“national forms”of the literature and art movement.They were artistic genres at the category level,and expression skills at the creative level.The distinction of meaning by the discourse subject was directional,including the ideological characteristics of artistic genres and the creative consciousness and aesthetic independence of expressive skills,which failed the fundamental proposition that“content determines form”.Content can influence the“form”of expression skills and principles at the creative level,but cannot determine the“form”of art genres at the category level.The difference of the meaning was highlighted in the debate on“national form”,and as the discussion deepens,it tended to be unified,which was differ from the“old forms”in the literature and art movement.Complicated composition and connotation beyond forms could be understood through clarifying the difference and unification.

关 键 词：形式 旧形式 民族形式 内容决定形式 超形式内涵 

分 类 号：I206.7[文学—中国文学]