Seeking The Way To Waiting The History Of Literature

Since founding the People's Republic of China, put forward thesuggestion of writing the history of literature of our country again on someone,this kind of statement had been constant all the time last century, once therehas a fierce theory several times that had crossed swords during this time. Forexample " articles and opinions of Shanghai " were once the piss discussed in1980 times, offered the special column of " rewriting the literature history "; "Fudan Journal " open up " the literature history has been by stages " thespecial column too 1991. From that moment, he leaves different sound theseones, even to this day, the academic meeting that the circle of theory ofliterature is correlated with, nearly have every year. Though names areinconsistent in these discussions, the key question disputed is actually onlytwo, namely "how think about by literature history "with "how structureliterature history " issue. I am on theory study and foundation that think for along time, to all sorts of statements and opinions appearing while discussing,have roughly combed first, and then make the reviewing criticism, andpropose imagining further.First, describe with the phenomenon of the literature history theorycontroversy " rewriting the literature history "First, " rewrite the literature history " in the discussion of more than tenyears, to that it has a lot of views how to appraise and re-recognize thisquestion of the literature history, I sum up them as follows:The literature history begins to turn into a kind of real history, it is thatone kind lays particular emphasis on theory that investigates literature interms of relation between literature history and history, it thinks the literaturehistory is a branch of history; The view that the literature history theorizesthinks the literature history is theory history of literature or the history thattheorizes; The third kind of view is that logic and history are unitized, it thinksthe literature history is the unity of logic and history.Second, come discussion to think " rewrite the literature history " onoperation theory and his practice, literature of history, can become writingthree angles of practice question to hold from the literature history of contentstandard, form standard and literature history of history.First of all, the literature history becomes different views with standardcontent of history, there are the following several different opinions on thewhole: The first kind of view thinks the literature activity is a target takinginto consideration and writing in the literature history; The meaning in whichthe second kind of view thinks the literature history lies in establishing theclassics; The third kind of view thinks the literature history focuses onshowing the appraisal on history; The fourth kind of view emphasizes theliterature history should be close to the historical facts; The fifth kind of viewthinks that should put into the old body poesy and modern opera in the historywriting of Contemporary Literature; The sixth kind of view is that the humannature thesis study the history view.Secondly, the literature history becomes different views of the formstandard of history: The first kind of view puts emphasis on writing theaesthetic literature history; The second is the history group of the culture, itshould form the culture history group that studies of a literature history toadvocate too; The third kind of view is to emphasize the literature historyshould stress " literature "; The fourth kind of view is the personal literaturehistory.Moreover, different views of writing practice question of the literaturehistory: First, recommend building and constructing the literature history withthe philosophy view; Second, culture-the literature history that thepsychology criticizes operates the new visual angle; Third, build and construct' the history ' , integrated literature history of ' the theory '; Fourth ,recommend writing the literature history with two style worked out.Second, the literature history theory is criticizedIn this part, the imaginations of those understanding of literature historyand structure literature history appearing in the discussion of my rightabove-mentioned " rewriting the literature history ", make the reviewingcriticism.Three basic theories discussed incline to criticize to " rewrite theliterature history ": Mr.Xu Gongchi right to which the literature history beginsto turn into a kind of real history, literature history theorize with literaturehistory logic and history unitizing three appraisal of theory these very accurate,he says: "If heavy historical school moves towards the extreme, may cause 'see the trees without seeing the forest ', lacking the having under one'scommand of the macroscopic, lack the assurance of the train of thought ofdevelopment of ' the history ', the literature history becomes the loose pilingup of writer's works theory . And if heavy and logic shape theory is heldimproperly, may cause in practice the theory is divorced from historical facts,afford to trim the feet to fit the shoes. As for the unitized shape theory, thoughthe comparatively speaking most safe and most thoughtful, but the theorybelongs to the theory, it may meet more difficulty and question in practicaloperation. The perfections of the perfection and practice of the theory are twoentirely different things. "Become criticism with standard content of history to the literature history:Think the target that the literature history takes into consideration and writesshould be theories of the literature activity, it is a kind of general statement, soseem large but impractical; That kind of meaning which thinks the literaturehistory lies in establishing the classical idea, its origin lies in what theyembraced and are kept is classical literature view, after there is noconsciousness until today our society has already stepped into " in literatureera "; Think the literature history focuses on showing the opinion of theunderstanding of history and appraisal, with emphasizing the literature historyshould be close to the views of the historical facts, they each hold one end,two kinds of statements of seeing each other in shortcoming; Recommendingstudying and writing the method of the literature history in terms of humannature, it is abundant to seem to be the reason, in fact it is only the ideal statein theory , but the unable application in practice; As for thinking history ofContemporary Literature of our country should be put into the old body poesyor the idea of the modern opera, I think this kind of consideration is rather notproper.Become criticism of the form standard of history to the literature history:Since not formed the criterion of writing " aesthetic literature history " yet sofar, then can only make the " aesthetic opinion " become the empty talk buthad no way of implementing; Statement of " culture history send ", Let peoplefeel very confused, on go on operation to their; Emphasize literature historytake outstanding literature characteristic, because what is literature, what iscarrier of it, all these it is we that is it know to have no way of, then we, whilebelieving it, have got lost again. The theory of writing personal literaturehistory advocates being feasible, because if only according to the personaleyes, and leave essential objective yardstick, such history almost will fall intothe mire melting subjectively without exception.Criticism of writing practice question to the literature history: Theformulation of " building and constructing the literature history with thephilosophy view " is not feasible, but can only lay aside and neglect it ; Toculture-psychological mode, still can't find the password of decoding it so far,and become the mystery of the Pyramid of cultural circles , so really operate itand can swallow it like the tiger definitely; What is called one " history ", "in...