袁济喜 中国人民大学
Yuan, Jixi, Renmin University of China
原文Original
漫谈中国古代文论的学术智慧
中国古代文论与学术智慧有着内在的联系，无论是在谈创作论还是在谈鉴赏论方面，都强调认识与体会的统一，可知与不可知的统一，而不同于现代文艺学的认识论的逻辑性。认识这种人文智慧，有助于人们建构当今中国的文艺学。
中国古代之所谓“诗文评”乃是对于具体作品的具体品评，有着鲜明的针对性，而不是泛泛的“概论”、“通论”、“原理”一类今天常见的文艺学模式。中国古代文论到了后来《文心雕龙》这样的体大思精的作品变成大量的以欧阳修《六一诗话》为代表的诗话、赋话与曲话，还有小说评点，大概和这些观念有关。我并不是反对智慧与西学化的文艺概论，而是强调文学是一种复杂而玄奥的精神现象，既有可以认识与学习的器用层面，更有着形而上的神秘意蕴，要用一把尺子来概括千变万化的文艺现象是不现实的，也是不明智的，但是西方文艺学逻辑学是可以借鉴为我所用的。我以为，王国维的《人间词话》与钱钟书的《管锥编》是比较成功的范式。反顾中国古代文论的历史，或许可以得到一些启发，产生一些智慧。这也是拙稿的用意。
译文Translation
Some Considerations Concerning the Scholarly Wisdom of the Theory of Literature in Classical China
The literary theory of classical China and its scholarly wisdom have an intrinsic connection, both in the case of the theory of creative writing and in the field of the theory of appreciating and discussing a work. In all these areas emphasis is laid on the unity of understanding and experience, on the unity of the knowable and the unknowable, and this is different from the logic of epistemology of modern literature and arts. To know this wisdom of humanism would be beneficial for the construction of literature and arts in China today.
The so-called “evaluations of poetry” (shi wen ping) of the ancient times are a concrete appreciation and assessment of concrete works, they have a very clear focus and do not form the “introductions”, “general surveys”, “fundamental principles” of the modern type of the theory of art and literature. Later on there appeared great works of elaborate thought like the Wen Xin Diao Long, and the theory of literature of classical China shifted to the use of short poems in the style of Ouyang Xiu’s Liu Yi Shi Hua. Besides this there were reviews of novels, probably also connected to these. I do not oppose wisdom and the westernization of the theories of literature and arts, but I want to emphasize that literature is a kind of complicated and sublime spiritual phenomenon, we can know and use it as a kind of practical form or medium, but there is also a mysterious and metaphysical dimension to it, and it is not realistic to use one standard to measure and sum up all the manifold phenomena of literature and arts, nor will this be very prudent. However, we can use the logic of the western theory of literature and art as a reference for us. I think that Wang Guowei’s Ren Jian Ci Hua and Qian Zhongshu’s Guan Zhui Bian are very accomplished models in this respect. Looking back to the history of the literary theory of the Chinese antiquity we may be able to get some insights, inspirations and even wisdom. This is the intention of my paper.