查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 《明史.文苑傳》歸有光、王世貞之爭重探=Re-Appraisal of the Dispute between Wang Shih-chen and Kuei Yu-kuang in the Literary Biography Section of the Ming History |
---|---|
作 者 | 許建崑; | 書刊名 | 東海大學文學院學報 |
卷 期 | 46 民94.07 |
頁 次 | 頁71-93 |
分類號 | 626.01 |
關鍵詞 | 明代文學史; 明史文苑傳; 歸有光; 王世貞; 交誼考; Literary biography section of the Ming history; Wang Shih-chen; Kuei Yu-kuang; Later seven literati; Tang-Sung school; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 在明代文學史的論述中,王世貞為模擬復古派「後七子」的代表;歸有光則為「唐宋派」的代表。兩人文學主張不同,是否因此帶來了其他的紛爭? 《文苑傳》云:「時王世貞主盟文壇,有光力相觝排,目為妄庸巨子。王世貞大憾其後亦心折有光,為之贊曰:『千載惟公,繼韓歐陽。余豈異趨,久而自傷。』其推重如此。」然則,近人錢鍾書指出:錢謙益在《初學集》、「有學集」、「列朝詩集」中,為了強調「王世貞晚年定論」,把王世貞論贊中「久而始傷」之語,改為「久而自傷」,而且反覆引用在五篇文章之中。一字之易,意義全改,也使《明史.文苑傳》的編寫者,以及後代部分的學者沿襲誤用。 本文透過文獻的重構,在方心、譜系、文集等資料的爬梳中,希望能夠依序呈現歸有光、王世貞兩人的生平、譜系、性格與行為作風,也試圖從中建立歸、王兩人在文壇、鄉里與遠盛的關係,來證明一般文學史的論述,實涉嫌誇大兩人的摩擦,來讚揚歸有光的文學成就,以及貶抑王世貞在文學史上的地位。 同時也指出歸、王兩人文學論辯的內容,並沒有精準的聚焦。期望以後的文學史論述者,能夠從明代文學主張與流變,去討論歸、王的成就與地位,不再被以往帶有成見的論述所影響,而耽泥於兩人的口角是非。 |
英文摘要 | In literary history, Wang shih-chen was seen as the representative of the “Later Seven Literati” who advocated the ancient literary style while Kuei Yu-kuang the representative of the Tang-Sung School. Is the alleged conflict between their views of literature caused the dispute in literary history? The Literary Biography Section thus states: “At the time Wang Shih-chen was the leader of literary circle. Kuei Yu-kuang, however, was against him and saw him as a man of no learning while occupying the position without shame. Wang was sorry for this. Later on, Wang was impressed with what Kuei had done and expressed his commendation as saying that ‘in the past thousand years Mr. Kuei is the only one who inherits the tradition of Han Yu and Ou-yang Hsiu. Am I so peculiar as to have a different opinion? Thinking of this makes me feel sad.’” In this article, the author has looked into the documents, including local history, family genealogy, and collected works on both sides, hoping to reconstruct the lives, personal characters, and life styles of the two important literary figures of the Ming dynasty. As we see in most literary histories, the authors usually exaggerate the alleged conflict between the two, and then put higher praise on Mr. Kuei while at the same time denigrate the literary achievements of Mr. Wang. The aim of this study is to re-establish the relationship of these two figures and to re-evaluate their position in literary history in an objective way, so as to pinpoint and correct the long-established misconception of their standing in literary history. The author also wants to point out and question the undertakings of literary history in using unfounded hearsay as the primary source for evaluating literary achievements of certain figures. As a matter of fact, the contents of the exchange of literary opinions between the two show that there is no shared concern between them. The author suggest in this article that a better way in dealing with the issues in literary history is to look closely into their literary opinions in their works and also into the overall literary development of the time, hence a more precise and unbiased picture and a fair evaluation of their respective literary achievements and be obtained. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。