查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 臺灣後現代詩的論述 |
---|---|
作者姓名(中文) | 陳俊榮; | 書刊名 | 佛光人文社會學刊 |
卷期 | 2 2002.06[民91.06] |
頁次 | 頁105+107-127 |
分類號 | 863.51 |
關鍵詞 | 後現代主義; 崇高美學; 後工業社會; 物質性; 不相稱詩學; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 出現於一九八零年代中葉的後現代詩論述,多係斷簡殘篇,迄今仍未見有系統性的論著問世。較早有關的論述,見之於羅青、孟樊及林燿德等人的文章。臺灣後現代詩論述雖直接受之於英美詩壇的影響較小,但與其有關的主張亦多有不謀而合之處。這些後現代詩論述,各有其不同的論調與立場,惟大體上可以分為參類:一、後現代詩特徵說;二、社會/經濟反映論;三、創作美學論。其中屬第一類的論述,主要有羅青、張漢良、孟樊、廖咸浩與陳義芝等人的論點;第二類的論述鑿主要見之於羅青、陳義芝、向陽、古添洪等人的主張;至於第三類論述的代表人則有廖咸浩、杜十三及簡政珍等人。上述主要的論述多係出自詩論家與學者之手,純粹是詩人的身分發言者較少,這也是因為後現代主義本身即是包含「一群深奧難懂的聲音」,讓缺乏理論背景的詩人難以掌握之故。 |
英文摘要 | By the mid 1980s, we find a whole range of essays and articles that seek to assess the postmodern poetry in Taiwan. Most of the discourses of postmodern poetry, however, are not systematic. The carlier contributions to the debate on the postmodern poetry by Lo Ching, Meng Fan, Yao Te Lin led many to the conclusion that postmodernism had indeed arrived. Although the British and American poetics have least impact on our understanding of postmodern poetry in Taiwan, there are a number of indentifiable same themes between their postmodern poetry and ours. On the whole, these arguments that have their different viewpoints can be classified with three important types: (a) the characteristics of postmodern poetry, (b) the socio-economy reflection, and (c) the writing aesthetics Treatises from Lo Ching, Han Liang Chang, Meng Fan, Hsein Hao Liao, and I Chih Chen may be described as the main critics to the first type. Concerning the second one, we can find their argument from Lo Ching, I Chih Chen, Hsiang Yang, and Tien Hung Ku. In addition, Hsien Hao Liao, Tu Shih San, and Cheng Chen Chien are the most important critics related to the third type. Most of the postmodern discourses come from the poetic critics and academics rather than poets. Because postmodernism is not a unified intellectual movement with a definite goal or perspective, it is so difficult that the poets can not master it easily in Taiwan. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。