頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 淺議桐城文派的韓、柳古文比較論=A Critical Analysis of Tong-cheng Literary School's Comments on the Prose Writings of Han Yu and Liu Zong-yuan |
---|---|
作者 | 許子濱; | 書刊名 | 人文中國學報 |
卷期 | 13 2007.09[民96.09] |
頁次 | 頁215-266 |
分類號 | 824.1 |
關鍵詞 | 桐城文派; 韓愈; 柳宗元; 方苞; 劉大櫆; 曾國藩; 吴汝綸; 賀濤; 文氣; 義法; Tong-cheng literary school; Han Yu; Liu Zong-yuan; Fang Bao; Liu Da-kui; Zeng Guo-fan; Wu Ru-lun; He Tao; Wen-qi; Yi-fa; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 韓、柳古文的優劣,自來是文評家討論的焦點。而在眾多的評論中,以桐城文派的看法最值得注意。方苞將道德與文章看成同一回事,並以此為基礎,建立起“義法”之說。方苞對柳宗元文多方挑剔,幾於吹毛求疵,甚而大肆詆毀,不過是實踐其理論罷了。在桐城文派的流傳過程中,對柳宗元的這種成見,儘管不能說是定調,卻也是主流意見,難怪給人留下“桐城始於排柳,終於排柳”的印象。桐城中人評論柳文,特別是談到他的文氣時,就一直受到這種成見的干擾。方苞以文氣不充譏貶柳文,並認為是自反不縮所造成。後來的劉大櫆,甚至是賀濤等,皆沿用其說。但不容忽視的是,劉大櫆以後,桐城中人評論柳文,受到成見的干擾已有減少的迹象,已開始自覺地從文學的角度來評析柳文。這種微妙的轉變,不能不說是一種進步。這跟他們逐漸把道德與文章離析為二是分不開的。從曾國藩的懷疑,到吳汝綸明確判別義理與文章為二事,他們對文學獨立性的認識漸趨清晰,創作如此,評論也如此,觀念上的這種轉變,就反映在吳汝綸等人對柳文的評價上。 |
英文摘要 | Comparing the works of Han Yu (韓愈) and Liu Zong-yuan (柳宗元) has been a focal point of critics. Among the many discussions, the point of view of the Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派) deserves special notice. Fang Bao (方苞) regarded morality and literary works as the same thing and established the concept of “Yi-fa(義法)”. He attempted to put his theory into practice by criticizing Liu’s works harshly and unfairly. During the spread of the Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派), Fang’s preconceived notion about Liu might not be the final conclusion but certainly the mainstream opinion, and hence no wonder the impression of “Tong-cheng Literary School starts and ends on attacking against Liu” was made. In fact, Tong-cheng Literary Schools” discussions on Liu’s works, especial on his style of writing, have been interfered with by such kind of prejudice. Fang commented that the Wen-qi(文氣) of Liu’s works were not strong enough due to the defect in his moral character. His descendants, such as Liu Da-kui(劉大櫆) and even He Tao (賀濤), continued to adopt this approach to ward Liu’s works. Yet, the critics after Liu Da-kui (劉大櫆) had made a fine adjustment consciously that their discussions became less biased and they started to evaluate Liu’s works from a literary perspective. The change, which could be attributed to the gradual development of the mentality of dividing morality and literary works, could be regarded as a kind of progress and should not be ignored. From Zeng Guo-fan (曾國藩) with doubt to Wu Ru-lun(吳汝綸) with certainty, Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派)regarded moral and literary works, including literary writing and literary criticism, as two different matters. The change of the point of view of Wu Ru-lun(吳汝綸) and the other critics toward Liu’s works is a result of the recognition of the independent features of literature. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。