悲剧欣赏中的情感问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 14:03

本文选题：悲剧欣赏 + 情感　；参考：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：早在两千多年前,悲剧欣赏中的情感问题就已经引起了古希腊先贤的注意。人们为什么喜欢观看悲剧?人们到底从悲剧中获得了怎样的情感体验(是愉悦的还是痛苦的)?这些情感体验缘何而来?它们是否真真切切地打动了观众的心灵?悲剧明明呈现痛苦和灾难的场面,为什么人们依然乐于观看?前人结合自身的时代与文化背景,对以上问题做出了解释。这些解释虽各有创见,但也有各自的局限,未能对悲剧欣赏的快感问题做出合理的解释。本文将尝试从悲剧的形象本质出发,在评述前人学说的基础上,对悲剧欣赏中情感的来源、产生机制、真实性等问题进行论述。亚里士多德强调了悲剧欣赏具有净化人们心灵的功能,但也使悲剧欣赏从无目的审美变成了有目的的"治疗"。对悲剧的欣赏应当是一种无功利的审美活动,欣赏者在欣赏过程中不应带有实际目的。卡斯特尔维屈罗认为悲剧快感来源于对道德的认知。这种快感是间接的,是欣赏者在观看悲剧之后理解的结果。然而,理解所引发的这种一般的愉快并不是审美愉快。博克认为在观看他人受难的过程中,观众感到恐惧和怜悯,继而激起同情。同情意味着别人痛苦,我们也痛苦;别人愉快,我们也愉快——可是,当别人处于痛苦中,我们怎么可能愉快呢?——基于同情的原理,我们也应该痛苦才对。事实上,"同情说"看似得到了现实生活中情感经验的支持,但是这一理论并不适用于悲剧欣赏,同情引发快感的机制也无法在悲剧欣赏中得以实现。朱光潜的"表现即缓和说"对悲剧欣赏快感的解释同样强调了内心怜悯与恐惧之类情感的宣泄,这一观点过多地关注外在的因素,而非悲剧本身。只有搞清楚悲剧的本质,才能真正弄明白悲剧欣赏过程中的情感问题。我们认为,悲剧的全部精髓都凝聚在它所塑造的"形象"之中。对形象的感知使我们获得审美愉快。借助叔本华的生命意志理论,我们论证了艺术是独立于充分根据律意外的表象,不受生命意志的控制。这正是呈现悲痛苦和灾难场面的悲剧能够引发观众的愉悦的原因。借助维柯的诗性智慧理论,我们论证了人类对形象的痴迷是与生俱来的。悲剧不仅能创造性地还原和再现现实生活中存在的事物,还能创造出许许多多人们未曾见且未曾想的事物。源源不断地创造新形象的悲剧是人们观看形象的理想途径。对于悲剧欣赏中情感的真实性的问题,我们认为:虽然悲剧本身是虚构的,但其引发的情感必定是真实的,主要原因有二:第一、悲剧欣赏所涉及的情感与人类的情感同属一个范畴;第二、悲剧欣赏中情感的产生机制与其他人类情感并无二致。悲剧欣赏中的情感与人类情感同源同质,同样具有真实性。关于情感的真实性问题,我们赞同肯达尔·沃尔顿提出的"扮假作真"观点,这一心理状态广泛存在于艺术欣赏之中,它使我们不必冒任何风险就能够体验到现实中无法体验的经验。但是,观众参与到"扮假作真"游戏中,利用道具生成虚构真实,从而产生"类情感"的说法我们很难认同。因为艺术欣赏中的情感并不是观众假装出来的,而是真实的。卡罗尔认为未确定的"思想"同样能够借助想象力使我们产生真实的情感。但他并没有对情感的产生机制和过程进行更深入阐释,因此我们无法解释为何人们产生了真实的情感却未做出相应的身体反应。彭锋借用"身心关系"理论解释了悲剧欣赏中观众情感的产生机制,但他又将虚构对象所引发的情感理解为一种半真半假的"类似的情感",回到了沃尔顿的"类情感"的路子上。另外,悲剧欣赏中痛感转化为快感的说法经不起推敲。我们认为,悲剧欣赏中的痛感和快感是同时发生、并行不悖的,并不存在所谓的"转化"过程。当我们看到恐怖的形象时,身体误以为就是真实存在的威胁,因而我们会感到害怕,但这种恐惧并不会转化为愉悦。悲剧欣赏中真实的情感体验是我们同时感到愉悦与痛感。但我们认为悲剧欣赏所带来的审美愉悦是远远大于痛感的,或者说我们从悲剧中体验到的审美愉快战胜了痛感。
[Abstract]:More than two thousand years ago, the emotional problems in the appreciation of the tragedy have aroused the attention of the ancient Greek sages. Why do people like to watch the tragedy? What is the emotional experience (joyful or painful) that people get from the tragedy? Why are these emotional experiences coming from? Are they genuinely touching the audience's mind? The drama shows the scene of pain and disaster. Why are people still willing to watch? The predecessors explained the above problems with their own times and cultural background. Although they have their own ideas, they also have their own limitations and fail to make a reasonable explanation for the pleasure of the tragedy. This article will try the essence of the tragic image. On the basis of commenting on the predecessors' theories, this paper discusses the origin, mechanism and authenticity of emotion in the appreciation of tragedy. Aristotle emphasizes that tragic appreciation has the function of purifying the people's mind, but it also makes the tragedy appreciation from the non purpose aesthetic "treatment". The appreciation of tragedy should be a kind of reactive power. In the aesthetic activity of interest, an appreciating person should not have a practical purpose in the process of appreciation. The pleasure of tragedy is based on the cognition of morality. This pleasure is indirect and the result of the appreciation of the appreciating after watching the tragedy. However, the general pleasures caused by understanding are not aesthetic pleasure. Bock thinks that the view is in view. In the process of seeing others suffering, the audience feels fear and pity, and then arouses sympathy. Sympathy means that others are painful, we are suffering; others are happy, we are happy too - but how can we be happy when others are in pain? - based on sympathy, we should also be painful. In fact, "sympathy" seemingly gains. It is the support of emotional experience in real life, but this theory does not apply to tragic appreciation, and the mechanism of sympathy triggering the pleasure can not be realized in the tragic appreciation. Zhu Guangqian's interpretation of the pleasure of appreciation of tragedy also emphasizes the emotional catharsis of inner pity and fear, this view is too much We should pay attention to external factors, not tragedies. Only by making clear the essence of tragedy can we really understand the emotional problems in the process of tragedy appreciation. We think that all the essence of the tragedy is condensed in the "image" it has created. The perception of the image makes us enjoy the aesthetic pleasure. By the theory of Schopenhauer's will of life, we discuss It is the evidence that art is independent of the appearance of the law, without the control of the will of life. This is the reason why the tragedy of grief and disaster can cause the pleasures of the audience. With the help of Vico's poetic wisdom, we demonstrate that the infatuation of the human image is inborn. The existence of things in real life can also create many things that people have never seen and never thought about. The tragedy of creating a new image is an ideal way for people to look at the image. The main reasons are two: first, the emotion involved in tragic appreciation is in the same category as human emotion. Second, the mechanism of emotion production in tragic appreciation is not identical with other human emotions. The emotion in the tragic appreciation is homologous to the human emotion, and it has the same authenticity. Kendall Walton's view of "pretend to be true" is widely used in artistic appreciation. It allows us to experience experience that can not be experienced in reality without taking any risk. However, the audience participates in the "pretend to be true" game, using the form to produce fictitious truth, thus producing "class emotion". It's hard to agree. Because the emotion in the art appreciation is not the spectator pretending, but true. Carol thinks that the undetermined "thought" can also make us produce real emotions with the help of imagination. But he does not explain the mechanism and process of emotion, so we can't explain why people come into being. The real emotion does not make the corresponding physical reaction. Peng Feng explains the mechanism of the audience's emotion in the tragedy appreciation by using the theory of "physical and mental relations", but he also understands the emotion caused by the imaginary object as a half false "similar emotion", and returns to the way of Walton's "emotion like". In addition, the pain in the appreciation of the tragic feeling turns. We believe that the sense of pain and pleasure in the enjoyment of tragedy is at the same time, and that there is no contradiction between the so-called "transformation" process. When we see the image of terror, the body mistakenly thinks that it is a real threat, and we are afraid, but this fear does not turn into pleasure. The real emotional experience of the play is that we feel pleasure and pain at the same time. But we think that the aesthetic pleasure of the tragic appreciation is far greater than the feeling of pain, or that the aesthetic pleasure we experience from the tragedy triumphs over the pain.

【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：I01

【相似文献】