日常政治视阈下的文艺写作——以孙犁的抗战实践为线索

发布时间：2018-02-03 06:22

本文关键词： 孙犁晋察冀抗战文艺白洋淀文学　出处：《现代中文学刊》2017年04期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：有关孙犁的既有研究通常专注其抗战小说中的非战争性因素,强调其抒情文本内部所包蕴的"异质"成分,进而认为孙犁并未真正融入革命主流、乃是其中的"多余人"。然而若是考虑到孙犁个人"成长史"与解放区抗战实践之间的紧密联系,此类"剥离式"研究实际上未能触及抗战文艺写作与日常动员背景之间的有机关联,它所暴露的与其说是孙犁自身的匮乏,不如说是现有研究范式在定义"革命"时的狭隘——后者仅仅被想象为阶级斗争、政治批判等内容。对此,本文的研究不仅指向孙犁个人,将其写作实践放置于"文艺—动员"的互动关系中进行政治情景的勾连;更指向"革命"本身,意在阐明"革命"作为多重经验的综合体,其于日常生活中所蕴含的更为细腻、在地的一面。此时,无论作为理论工作者抑或文学创作者的孙犁,无论作为审美范畴抑或事务性工作的文艺,诸种不同的面向将同等地纳入本文的考查范围。
[Abstract]:The existing studies on Sun Li usually focus on the non-war factors in his novels of the War of Resistance, emphasizing the "heterogeneity" in his lyric text, and then thinking that Sun Li has not really integrated into the mainstream of the revolution. However, considering the close connection between Sun Li's personal "growth history" and the practice of the Anti-Japanese War in the liberated areas. In fact, this kind of "stripping" study failed to touch on the organic connection between the writing of literature and art in the War of Resistance against Japan and the background of daily mobilization. What it exposed was not so much the lack of Sun Li itself. Rather, it is the narrowness of the existing research paradigm in defining "revolution"-the latter is only imagined as class struggle, political criticism, etc. For this, the study of this paper not only points to Sun Li personally. Put its writing practice in the interactive relationship of "literature and art-mobilization" to connect the political scene; More pointed to the "revolution" itself, intended to clarify the "revolution" as a complex of multiple experiences, its daily life contains a more delicate, on the ground side. At this time. Whether as a theoretical worker or a literary creator Sun Li whether as an aesthetic category or a routine work of literature and art various different faces will be equally included in the scope of this study.
【作者单位】：北京大学中国语言文学系;
【分类号】：I207.42
【正文快照】： 何种“革命"?从目前的文学研究来看,对于“四十年代孙犁”的讨论是一个已经达成了某种定论、却又尚未被充分开掘的话题。尽管孙犁自抗日战争初期就开始了创作之路,现有的研究却通常忽略了其文学的“成长史”,而选择直接以1945年的《荷花淀》《芦花荡》等作品作为论述起点,与之

【相似文献】