文学生产论：从布莱希特到伊格尔顿

发布时间：2018-04-29 12:07

本文选题：西方马克思主义 + 美学　；参考：《四川大学》2003年博士论文

【摘要】： 本文主要研究布莱希特，本雅明、马谢雷和伊格尔顿的文学生产思想，并将之置于整个西方马克思主义的背景下，阐释和比较其演变和异同。全文共分四部分。在《导论》中，提出文学生产思想在不同的文学批评派别中，有着不同的含义。文学生产论大体上可划分为三大类：一是文学社会学；其二是文化研究；其三是西方马克思主义文学批评。文学社会学的文学生产论主要从社会学角度考察文学生产的社会机制，这种文学生产论的代表是法国社会学家罗贝尔·埃斯卡皮，文化研究对文化生产的考察，集中于消费和流通领域，西方马克思主义文学批评的文学生产论是要避开传统马克思主义文学批评的经济决定论，还原论、反映论，以及由基础和上层建筑模式所引发的种种问题，从生产角度出发，建立一种新的马克思主义文学批评。在此，本文辩析了上述三种文学生产论的异同，提出，文学社会学由于其方法和理论前提的局限，其文学生产论更多的是一种对文学的社会学研究，，文化研究在放弃了早期的马克思主义范式后，转向后结构主义，文化研究的政治激进性建基于后结构主义的主体性之上。文化研究对文学生产的关注，是为了在文化制品的消费和流通领域，寻找到在后革命时代抵抗的可能性，文化研究的这种政治激进性，使之不同于文学社会学的研究，西方马克思主义文学批评与文学社会学的区别在于，后者坚持将社会作为自然的事实，采取实证主义的价值中立方式进行研究，而前者坚持社会是人类劳动实践的产物。由此，马克思主义文学批评具有鲜明的政治功利性。马克思主义文学批评与文化研究的区别表现在，马克思主义文学批评强调阶级和革命主体性，这种主体性不同于文化研究建立于拉康思想上的分裂的后现代主体性。本文第一章研究布莱希特的文学生产思想，指出布莱希特的文学生产论建立于柯尔施对马克思主义的特定理解上，柯尔施强调从晚期马克思、即《资本论》的马克思出发来理解马克思主义，柯尔施开辟了一条从经济角度来理解马克思主义的道路。柯尔施认为，要改变社会，就必须改变一个社会的经济结构，同时，柯尔施认为观念是一种现实存在，观念的变革是现实革命的一个组成部分。布莱希特在柯尔施的思想影响下，强调文学是社会生产的一部分，强调文学对于社会的主动的建构作用，要求对资产阶级艺术进行功能转换，以实现服务于人民的目的。布莱希特的生产美学开辟了一条在传统马克思主义的基础与上层建筑模式之外来研究文学的道路，将文学作为社会生产的一部分，由此奠定了马克思主义文学批评中文学生产论的基础。本章还单独研究了布莱希特生产美学思想在其史诗剧理论和表现主义论争中的体现。第二章研究本雅明的文学生产思想，指出本雅明三十年代的文学生产思想是特定历史条件的产物。为了抵抗法西斯主义，本雅明强调美学的政治化，美学政治化的主要内容是强调文学的生产属性，要求对艺术进行功能转换，本雅明继承了布莱希特的生产美学思想，同时对其作出其出了重大的推进，其一、本雅明提出文学技术与社会生产技术的同一性，由此，布莱希特的生产美学得到了具体的表述，文学与整个社会生产具有了直接的关联性;其二、本雅明提出了文学生产力问题，文学生产力既强调了文学与社会的关系，又强调了文学的独立性，后一思想为伊格尔顿所继承。此外，本章澄清了对本雅明文学生产思想的一些误解。如本雅明的有韵艺术与无韵艺术的区分并不是一个仅仅涉及艺术发展的概念，有韵与无韵既是一个历时的概念，也是一个共时的概念。第三章研究阿尔都塞和马谢雷的文学生产思想。指出马谢雷的文学生产论是建立在阿尔都塞的结构马克思主义基础上。阿尔都塞认为每一社会结构都是由经济、政治、意识形态等不同的层次构成，每一层次都是一种实践行为，同时各个层次之间的关系是一种结构因果关系，经济层次是起最终决定作用的层次。阿尔都塞的思想改写了马克思主义基础与上层建筑的理论，意识形态和上层建筑并不是经济基础的反映或表现，它们具有自己独立的作用;其次，阿尔都塞所说的实践，是在物质生产的意义上，即通过劳动，并运用劳动工具对原材料的加工改造，因此，意识形态的实践就是意识形态的生产，文学作为一种意识形态实践，也是一种对意识形态的生产，阿尔都塞和马谢雷认为，文学以意识形态为原料，文学在其生产过程中，通过其形式机制，揭示了意识形态的边界和限制，他们同时强调，文学自身并不能意识到自己对于意识形态的暴露，只有科学的批评才能将这种暴露变现真正的知识。马谢雷的文学尘产论建立于早期阿尔都塞的思想上，由此具有阿尔都塞早期过分理性化的错误。第四章探讨伊格尔顿的文学生产论。伊格尔顿的文学生产论综合吸收了阿尔都塞、马谢雷，本雅明的思想和雷蒙德·威廉斯的文化唯物主义，伊格尔顿鉴于阿尔都塞和马谢雷思想中的抽象化和形式主义危险，在两个方向上对阿尔都塞和马谢雷的文学生产思想进行了修正。首先、伊格尔顿将作为意识形态生产的文学与作为社会物质生产的文学结
[Abstract]:This article mainly studies the literary production thought of Bly Hitt, Walter Benjamin, Ma Shele and Eagleton, and puts it in the context of the whole western Marx doctrine, explaining and comparing its evolution and similarities and differences. The full text is divided into four parts.
In introduction, the idea of literary production has different meanings in different literary criticism factions. In general, the theory of literary production can be divided into three categories: one is the sociology of literature, the other is the cultural study, and the third is the literary criticism of Western Marx. The literary production theory of literary sociology is mainly viewed from the sociological perspective. The social mechanism of literary production, the representative of the literary production theory, is Robert Escarpit, a French sociologist. The study of cultural production is focused on the field of consumption and circulation. The literary production theory of Western Marx's literary criticism is to avoid the economic determinism of the traditional Marx literary criticism, the reductionism and the contrary. As well as a variety of problems arising from the basic and superstructure models, a new Marx literary criticism is set up from the angle of production. Here, this article analyses the similarities and differences between the three theories of literary production, and puts forward that the literary sociology is more of a kind of essay due to its limitations in its methods and theoretical premises. The study of sociology, after the abandonment of the early Marx paradigm, turned to post structuralism, and the political radicalization of cultural studies was based on the subjectivity of post structuralism. Cultural research was concerned with literary production in order to find resistance in the post revolution era in the field of cultural products' consumption and circulation. It is possible that the political radicalization of cultural research makes it different from the study of literary sociology. The difference between Western Marx's literary criticism and literary sociology is that the latter insists on taking society as a natural fact and taking positivist value neutral way to study, while the former insists that society is the production of human labor practice. Thus, Marx's literary criticism has distinct political utilitarianism. The distinction between Marx's literary criticism and cultural studies shows that Marx's literary criticism emphasizes class and revolutionary subjectivity, which is different from the split postmodern owners of cultural studies on Lacan thought.
Body nature.
The first chapter studies Bly Hitt's thought of literary production and points out Bly Hitt's theory of literary production.
Based on Karl's specific understanding of Marx doctrine, Karl emphasized from late Marx, that is, capital.
Marx started to understand Marx doctrine, and Karl opened up a horse to understand horses from an economic point of view.
Kyth's way of thinking. Karl believes that to change society, we must change the economic structure of a society.
At the same time, Karl thought that the idea is a realistic existence, and the change of ideas is a component part of the realistic revolution.
Bly Hitt, under the influence of Karl's thought, emphasized that literature is a part of social production.
The active role of learning in society requires the transformation of the functions of bourgeois art in order to realize its function.
Bly Hitt's production aesthetics opened up a foundation for traditional Marx doctrine.
Outside the superstructure mode, we study the road of literature and regard literature as a part of social production.
The foundation of Marx's literary criticism on the production of Chinese students was established. This chapter also studied Bly Hitt Sen separately.
The aesthetics of production is embodied in the controversy between epic theory and expressionism.
The second chapter studies Walter Benjamin's thought of literary production and points out Walter Benjamin's thought of literary production in the 30s.
In order to resist fascism, Walter Benjamin emphasized the politicization and aesthetics of aesthetics.
The main content of politicization is to emphasize the production attribute of literature and to transform the function of art.
Ming inherited Bly Hitt's thought of production aesthetics, and made great progress to it.
Walter Benjamin put forward the identity of literary technology and social production technology, so Bly Hitt's aesthetics of production was obtained.
In a concrete way, literature is directly related to the whole social production; secondly, Walter Benjamin mentioned.
With the issue of literary productivity, literary productivity emphasizes the relationship between literature and society, and emphasizes literature.
The latter is inherited by Eagleton. In addition, this chapter clarifies the production of Walter Benjamin's literature.
Some misunderstandings of thought, such as the distinction between Walter Benjamin's rhyme art and rhyme art, are not merely involved.
The concept of artistic development has rhyme and rhyme as both a diachronic concept and a synchronic concept.
The third chapter studies Al Du Jose and Masera's thought of literary production, and points out Masera's theory of literary production.
It is based on Al Du Jose's structural Marx doctrine. Al Du Jose believes that every social structure is
By economic, political, ideological and other different levels, each level is a kind of practical behavior.
The relationship between different levels is a structural causal relationship, and the economic level is the final decision.
Althusser's thought rewrote the theory of Marx's foundation and superstructure, ideology and above.
Tier buildings are not the reflection or expression of the economic foundation. They have their own functions; secondly, al.
The practice mentioned by Tucson is in the sense of material production, that is, through labor and the use of labor tools.
Therefore, the practice of ideology is the production of ideology, and literature as a kind of
Ideological practice is also a kind of production of ideology. Al Du Jose and Masera believe that literature is based on ideology.
Ideology is the raw material. In its production process, literature reveals its ideology through its formal mechanism.
At the same time, they emphasized that literature itself is not aware of its exposure to ideology.
Only scientific criticism can turn this revelation into real knowledge.
In early Al Du Jose's thought, Al Du Jose's early rationalization was wrong.
The fourth chapter discusses Eagleton's theory of literary production. Eagleton's theory of literary production absorbs a lot.
Althusser, Ma Shai Lei, Walter Benjamin's thought and Raymond Williams's cultural materialism, Eagleton
In view of the abstract and formalistic dangers in Al Du Jose and Ma shrey's thinking, Al is in two directions.
Masera's literary production thought has been revised. First of all, Eagleton will be an ideological student.
The literature produced and the literary knot as the material production of society.

【学位授予单位】：四川大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2003
【分类号】：I02

【引证文献】