查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 盧卡契與布萊希特在典型論上的爭議=The Controversy between Lukacs and Brecht Over Typicality |
---|---|
作 者 | 鄭玉秀; | 書刊名 | 中山學術論叢 |
卷 期 | 16 1998.06[民87.06] |
頁 次 | 頁175-190 |
分類號 | 810.138 |
關鍵詞 | 寫實主義; 現代主義; 典型人物; 典型環境; 智慧風貌; 不朽; 個人崇拜; Realism; Modernism; Typical characters; Typical environments; The intellectual physiognomy; Endurance; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 盧卡契與布萊希特分別代表一九三零年代歐洲左派文藝陣營對寫實主義傳統及現 代主義各種風潮的兩種不同態度。盧卡契非常讚賞十九世紀寫實主義的傳統,他認為普羅作 家應該從中汲取養料。然而布萊希特認為在新的時代,不應再使用舊的手法,而應有所創新 ,因此他對現代主義的各種實驗寫作方式甚為傾心。在人物的刻劃上,盧卡契認為作家應該 創造出一如恩格斯所說的:典型環境之下的典型人物。盧卡契補充說,作家還得描繪人物的 智慧風貌才能算達到典型的標準,人物也才能不朽。布萊希特則認為不朽並不重要,而且典 型論有個人崇拜的影子。本文將對他們在典型論上的爭議做較詳細的探討。 |
英文摘要 | The literary views of Lukacs and Brecht respectively represented the opposite attitudes towards realism and modernism in European left-wing literary circle in 1930s. Fredric Jameson, a contemporary culture critic, points out that many topics discussed and mentioned by them at that time are now still the focuses of contemporary literary criticisms. This short paper deals with the theory of typicality. Lukacs bases his theory of typicality on Engels's definition of realism and then complements it with the concept of a character's intellectual physiognomy. According to Engels, realism is to present typical characters in typical environments. A character can, Lukacs added, reach the standard of typicality only when his intellectual physiognomy is also portrayed. A typical character should own the characteristics of both generality and individuality. In addition, his world view and the capability of generalization have to be shown. The function of a typical environment lies in testing the real personality of a character. A typical character with intellectual physiognomy in typical environments is usually immortal. For Brecht, endurance of characters is not so important; he is against creating typical characters and environments. He thinks that Lukacs's theory of typicality has the element of the "cult of personality." Characters can be large or small. For him, to epitomize complicated social problems and life process into backgrounds to present typical characters is not correct. Brecht believes that the important task of a drama is to show characters' actions, not to present condition and devote to characterization, nor to create typicality. Brecht's critique of Lukacs need probing. First of all, Brecht feels that it is not important to create immortal typical characters because no body knows whether people of later generations would remember them. As far as this opinion is concerned, he neglects the universal in humanity. And secondly, Brecht has wrongly accused Lukacs when he relates the latter theory of typicality to the "cult of personality," which has something to do with Stalin. In saying so, Brecht insinuates that Lukacs carried out Stalin's terrorism in the culture field. As a matter of fact, Lukacs had been severely criticized in the Soviet Union as a revisionist. Though the novel is Lukacs's primary object and the drama is Brecht's focus, their opposite views of typicality show their different attitudes toward realism and modernism. Lukacs believes that writers can learn much from the good realist tradition (creating typicality is one of it), but Brecht feels that writers should use new and experimental writing techniques in a new age. At any rate, as Jameson contents, realism and modernism take turns in literary history. The point is therefore to learn merits from both of their views. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。