荣格原型思想及其对当代中国文艺理论建设的价值

发布时间：2018-06-09 11:39

本文选题：荣格 + 原型　；参考：《广西师范大学》2001年硕士论文

【摘要】： 八十年代末九十年代初，国内曾一度兴起研究荣格原型思想的热潮，并获得了丰厚的学术成果，，出现了大量的译著、评著和介绍性的文章，并且国内学者借鉴他的理论，观照中国文学现象，获得了大量的阐释视角新颖、言说内容厚重的实践操作文章，使其理论有效地与中国文学实践联系起来。但与此同时，国内学术界在研究荣格理论的过程中也存在着这样或那样的不足，总结起来，主要有以下两点：一、将其理论与中国文学的实践层面联系紧密但与中国当代文学的理论层面的结合不够，因而就在一定程度上抑制了荣格原型思想本身魅力的进一步张扬；二、在具体运用“原型”概念时，往往将弗莱的文学“原型”概念与荣格的心理“原型”概念相互混同和混用，这既阻碍了学术界对这两个范畴的正确理解，也阻碍了学术界对这两个概念的深入而灵活的把握并进而也阻碍了全面地理解荣格的理论关键或弗莱的理论兴奋点，从而使这两位杰出人物的理论都得不到应有的关注与思考。因此，本文想做的，就是：一、探讨荣格的“原型”概念的内涵，指出他的心理“原型”与弗莱的文学“原型”的区别与联系；二、将荣格原型思想与中国当代文艺理论实际相结合，寻求他的理论对中国当代文艺理论建设的启示意义和借鉴意义。在对“原型”概念的重释与批判中，笔者针对荣格对其理论阐释的多变性、发展性、模糊性的实际情况，在不放弃学术界原有探索成果的基础上，试图超越荣格对他的原型理论的具体分析，从他的理论的终极关怀入手，观照“原型”在其理论终极关怀中所占有的突出地位，进而得出“原型”是荣格理论的关怀终极——人类心理完整性——的集中体现和关键所在的结论，并具体分析了“原型”的动力系统、表达机制以及流传机制，在此基础之上，也略为探讨了弗莱与荣格原型定义的本质不同以及由此引出两人对文学的理解的差异。在原型对当代中国文艺理论的启示的探讨中，笔者主要立足于原型与文学本质、文学功用、文学创造这三大文艺理论核心内容来展开的。在“原型与文学本质”中，主要探讨了原型对文学发生、发展的启示意义；在“原型与文学功用”中，主要从原型角度探讨了文学治疗功能的学理基础；在“原型与文学创造”中，主要探讨了原型对文学创造主体的独特理解的当代启示意义以及在接受过程中，艺术所具有的永久魅力的心理学基础。笔者在文章的结语中指出，荣格的原型理论有着它自身的学术背景和生成基础，有着自身严重的缺陷与不足，这是我们在借鉴中所必须注意到的重要方面，否则，就有可能出现与良好愿望相反的危险。
[Abstract]:In the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was an upsurge in the study of Jung's archetypal thought in China, and a great deal of academic achievements were obtained, a large number of translated works, reviews and introductory articles appeared, and domestic scholars used his theory for reference. In view of the phenomenon of Chinese literature, a large number of practical and operational articles with novel interpretation angle and heavy content have been obtained, which make its theory effectively connected with the practice of Chinese literature. At the same time, however, in the process of studying Jung's theory, the domestic academic circles also have some shortcomings. To sum up, there are two main points: first, The theory is closely related to the practical level of Chinese literature, but not enough with the theoretical level of Chinese contemporary literature, so to a certain extent, Jung's archetypal thought can be restrained from further publicizing its charm. In the concrete application of the concept of "archetype", the concept of "archetype" of Fry's literature and the concept of Jung's psychological "prototype" are often mixed and used, which hinders the academic circles' correct understanding of the two categories. It also hinders the academic circles to grasp these two concepts deeply and flexibly, and further hinders the comprehensive understanding of Jung's theoretical key or Frye's theoretical excitability, so that the theories of these two outstanding people can not get due attention and thinking. Therefore, what this paper wants to do is: first, to probe into the connotation of Jung's concept of archetype, and to point out the difference and relation between his psychological archetype and Fry's literary archetype. Combining Jung's archetypal thought with the reality of contemporary Chinese literary theory, the author seeks the enlightenment and reference significance of his theory to the construction of Chinese contemporary literary theory. In the reinterpretation and criticism of the concept of "archetype", In view of the variety, development and fuzziness of Jung's theoretical interpretation, the author tries to transcend Jung's concrete analysis of his archetypal theory on the basis of not giving up the original exploration results of academic circles. Starting with the ultimate care of his theory, the author considers the prominent position of "archetype" in the ultimate care of his theory. Finally, the author draws the conclusion that "prototype" is the concentrated embodiment and key point of Jung's theory of ultimate solicitude-human psychological integrality, and analyzes concretely the dynamic system, expressing mechanism and spreading mechanism of "prototype", on the basis of which, It also discusses the essential differences between Frey and Jung's archetypal definitions and their understanding of literature. In the discussion of the enlightenment of archetypes to contemporary Chinese literary theories, the author is mainly based on the essence of archetype and literature. The function of literature and the creation of literature are the core contents of the three literary theories. In archetypes and Literary essence, it mainly discusses the enlightenment meaning of archetypes to the occurrence and development of literature, in prototype and Literary function, mainly discusses the theoretical basis of literary therapeutic function from the perspective of archetypes. In archetypes and Literary creation, this paper mainly discusses the contemporary enlightenment significance of archetypal understanding of literary creative subject and the process of acceptance. The author points out in the conclusion that Jung's archetypal theory has its own academic background and generating foundation, and has its own serious defects and shortcomings. This is an important aspect we must pay attention to in learning, otherwise, there may be risks contrary to good intentions.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2001
【分类号】：I0

【共引文献】