[1]梅向东.当代文学史观与“当代文学史”建构——以三种著作为例[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2018,19(06):83-90.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.06.011]
　Mei Xiangdong.The Contemporary Outlook of Literary History and the Reconstruction of “Contemporary Literary History” —Taking Three Books as Examples[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2018,19(06):83-90.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.06.011]
点击复制

当代文学史观与“当代文学史”建构——以三种著作为例()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第19卷
期数:
2018年06期
页码:
83-90
栏目:
文史哲研究:现当代文学专题研究
出版日期:
2018-11-28

文章信息/Info

Title:
The Contemporary Outlook of Literary History and the Reconstruction of “Contemporary Literary History” —Taking Three Books as Examples
作者:
梅向东
Author(s):
Mei Xiangdong
关键词:
当代文学;  当代文学史观;  当代文学史
Keywords:
contemporary literature;  contemporary outlook of literary history;  contemporary literary history
分类号:
I209
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.06.011
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
当代文学史观是建构当代文学史的价值和逻辑依据,洪子诚《中国当代文学史》的“从‘一体化'到‘多元化'”、陈思和《中国当代文学史教程》的“从‘共名状态'到‘无名状态'”、董健等《中国当代文学史新稿》的“从现代性的‘消解'到‘复归'”,是三种具有代表性的当代文学史观。它们是在同一文化语境中,对于同一对象的三种文学史意义阐释方式,也是对当代文学重新“历史化”和整体化的三种方式。三种文学史虽卓有建树,但它们的“各自为阵”便足以表明,当代文学史问题的解决并非易事。2012年莫言获得诺贝尔文学奖,不啻是对它们的莫大反讽。这证明了唐弢“当代文学不宜写史”的警告绝非多余。
Abstract:
The contemporary outlook of literary history is the value and logic basis for the reconstruction of contemporary literary history. The History of Chinese Contemporary Literature written by Hong Zicheng is “from ‘monism' to ‘pluralism'”, the Course of Chinese Contemporary Literary History written by Chen Sihe is “from ‘the common name state' to ‘the nameless state'”, The New Draft of Chinese Contemporary Literary History written by Dong Jian et al is “from the ‘dispelling' of modernity to ‘returning'”, which are three representative outlooks of the contemporary literary history. They are three different interpretations of the meanings of literary history in the same culture context, as well as three ways of re-“historization” and integration of contemporary literature. The three outlooks are contributive, but their “separation” shows that it is not easy to solve the problems of the contemporary literary history. Mo Yan won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2012, which was a great irony of them. It proves that Tang Tao's warning that “contemporary literature isn't suitable for writing history” is not superfluous.

参考文献/References:


[1]唐弢.当代文学不宜写史[N].文汇报,1985-10-29(5).
[2]洪子诚.中国当代文学史·后记[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 1999:429.
[3]曾令存.中国当代文学史写作:理论与实践[J].学术研究,2012(11):130-139.
[4]洪子诚.中国当代文学史[M].2版.北京:北京大学出版社,2007.
[5]洪子诚.中国当代文学概说[M].南宁:广西教育出版社,2000:61.
[6]陈晓明.中国当代文学主潮[M].2版.北京:北京大学出版社,2013:16.
[7]李杨,洪子诚.当代文学史写作及相关问题的通信[J].文学评论,2002(3):21-33.
[8]陈思和.中国当代文学史教程[M].2版.上海:复旦大学出版社,2006.
[9]刘忠.“重写文学史”的实践性与未完成性[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2015(8):118-124.
[10]陈思和.恢复文学史的原生态[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(4):11-13.
[11]陈思和.民间的浮沉:从抗战到“文革”文学史的一个解释[M]//陈思和.陈思和自选集.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,1997:207-208.
[12]董健,丁帆,王彬彬.中国当代文学史新稿[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2011.
[13]董健,丁帆,王彬彬.我们应该怎样重写中国当代文学史[J].江苏行政学院学报,2003(1):108-115.
[14]黄子平,陈平原,钱理群.论“二十世纪中国文学”[J].文学评论,1985(5):3-14.
[15]温儒敏.谈谈困扰现代文学研究的几个问题[J].文学评论,2007(2):110-118.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:梅向东,安庆师范大学文学院教授、硕士生导师。 基金项目:国家哲学社会科学基金一般项目 “新时期中国小说发展史论”(10BZW089)。
更新日期/Last Update: 2018-11-30