本文選題：現(xiàn)實主義 + 總體��； 參考：《福建師范大學》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：關于盧卡奇的現(xiàn)實主義文論,一些學者都對他的有機總體觀持懷疑態(tài)度。正如布洛赫所說：“盧卡奇總以獨立而彼此關聯(lián)的現(xiàn)實為前提,并且在這一現(xiàn)實中唯心主義的主觀因素雖然沒有它的地位,但代替它的卻是那個在唯心主義體系中、因而也在德國古典哲學中得到最充分發(fā)展的不間斷的‘整體’學說”。的確,盧卡奇在其關于現(xiàn)實主義文學的論述中曾不止一次的強調(diào)文學要從有機總體立場出發(fā)來反映“客觀”現(xiàn)實。然而,當人們在不斷地從后現(xiàn)代主義的立場來批判盧卡奇的這種有機總體觀時候,人們似乎在無意之中遺忘了一個事實,那就是盧卡奇的總體觀恰恰是在批判各種“非理性”總體觀的基礎上形成的。在盧卡奇看來,由于資本主義社會的物化結(jié)構(gòu)總是能滲透到人類現(xiàn)實生活的各個領域,所以,任何一種局限在文學領域的批判形式都不可能對資本主義社會產(chǎn)生真正的批判效應。資產(chǎn)階級文學自自然主義文學以來,雖然都清醒地意識到資本主義的理性傳統(tǒng)對人的壓迫或壓抑,但是,由于它們只是關注現(xiàn)實生活中人的異化現(xiàn)象,而沒有正視人的異化現(xiàn)實本身,所以,它們始終沒有從“非理性”總體論的陷阱中走出來。當然,在批判自然主義文學和現(xiàn)代主義文學的同時,盧卡奇并沒有急于對這兩種文學樣式作出完全否定的論斷。盧卡奇認為,自然主義文學和現(xiàn)代主義文學最大的貢獻在于它們把人類現(xiàn)實生活中多元性的一面清晰地展現(xiàn)了出來。不過,在如何維系人類現(xiàn)實生活這種多元性局面這個問題上,它們始終沒有提供相對合理的答案。盧卡奇認為,在資本主義社會的物化結(jié)構(gòu)體系之內(nèi),文學任何一種多元主義的批判設想都是不可能實現(xiàn)的,因為資本主義社會的物化結(jié)構(gòu)本身就是建立在“尊重”人類多元存在局面基礎之上的。當然,在盧卡奇不斷強調(diào)文學應該把批判矛頭指向資本主義體制的時候,他也沒有完全認同斯大林時期的社會主義現(xiàn)實主義的觀點,在《敘述與描寫》一文中,盧卡奇曾借批判西方自然主義文學的機會變向地批判了當時的社會主義文學。本篇論文主要分為了五個部分：第一部分,主要論述盧卡奇現(xiàn)實主義理論的基礎即反映論。不可否認的是,盧卡奇的反映論是其現(xiàn)實主義理論的根基。不過,盧卡奇反映論不同于古典文學反映論的地方在于,他將古典反映論作了歷史化和具體化的處理；第二部分,主要論述盧卡奇現(xiàn)實主義文論中的總體論思想以及典型論思想。盧卡奇現(xiàn)實主義文論中的總體論思想和典型論思想是緊密聯(lián)系在一起的。盧卡奇認為,文學要反映總體的社會歷史現(xiàn)實,就需要訴諸典型人物。不過,盧卡奇這里所說的典型人物并不是像蘇聯(lián)三十年代社會主義文學所呈現(xiàn)出來的階級形象；第三部分,主要論述盧卡奇對自然主義文學的評價。盧卡奇對自然主義文學的評價主要體現(xiàn)在他的《敘述與描寫》一文中。盧卡奇認為,文學要在形式方面反映總體的社會歷史現(xiàn)實,其內(nèi)部的敘述與描寫需要達成辯證統(tǒng)一的關系。而自然主義文學之所以走向破產(chǎn)就是因為它們內(nèi)部的敘述與描寫沒有達成辯證的統(tǒng)一關系；第四部分：主要論述盧卡奇對現(xiàn)代主義文學的評價。盧卡奇對現(xiàn)代主義文學的評價是與他對自然主義文學的評價緊密聯(lián)系在一起的。盧卡奇認為,現(xiàn)代主義文學之所以走向破產(chǎn),主要也是因為它們內(nèi)部的敘述與描寫沒有達成辯證的統(tǒng)一關系；第五部分,主要論述盧卡奇的人民性思想。事實上,盧卡奇關于現(xiàn)實主義的論述歸結(jié)到一點就是關于“人民性”的問題。盧卡奇之所以批判自然主義文學和現(xiàn)代主義文學,就是因為它們對現(xiàn)實的批判沒有與廣大人民的生活有機聯(lián)系在一起,而盧卡奇之所以高度評價古典現(xiàn)實主義文學就是因為它們對現(xiàn)實的批判是與廣大人民的生活深刻聯(lián)系在一起的。
[Abstract]:On Lukacs's realistic literary theory, some scholars are skeptical about his organic general view. As Bloch said, "Lukacs is always on the premise of independent and interrelated reality, and the subjective factor of idealism in this reality has no position, but it is the idealist system instead of it." Therefore, in the German classical philosophy, the uninterrupted "holism" theory has been developed most fully. Indeed, in his discussion of realistic literature, Lukacs had more than once emphasized that literature should reflect the "objective" reality from an organic overall standpoint. However, when people are constantly from the position of Postmodernism When criticizing this organic view of Lukacs, people seem to be inadvertently oblivious to the fact that Lukacs's overall view is precisely based on criticizing all kinds of "irrational" outlook. In Lukacs's view, the materialized structure of capitalist society can always permeate the various human real life. As a result, any critical form confined to the field of literature can not have a real critical effect on the capitalist society. Since the bourgeois literature has been conscious of the oppression or oppression of the rational tradition of capitalism, although they are only concerned with the real people, the bourgeois literature has been only concerned with the people in the real life. The alienation phenomenon is not to face the alienation reality itself, so they never come out of the trap of "irrational" overall theory. Of course, while criticizing naturalism and modernist literature, Lukacs is not eager to make a complete negation of the two literary styles. Lukacs thinks naturalism is a naturalism. The greatest contribution of literature and modernist literature is that they clearly show the diversity of human life. However, they have never provided a relatively reasonable answer to the question of how to maintain the pluralism of human life. Luca, in the view of the materialized structure of the capitalist society. Within the Department, any kind of critical assumption of pluralism in literature cannot be realized, because the materialized structure of the capitalist society is based on the "respect" of human pluralism. Of course, when Lukacs constantly emphasizes that literature should point the critical spear to the capitalist system, he is not finished. In the "narration and description >", Lukacs once criticized the socialist literature of the time by criticizing the Western Naturalism Literature. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part, the main part is to discuss the basis of Lukacs's realism theory. It is undeniable that Lukacs's theory of realism is the foundation of his theory of realism. However, the place where Lukacs's theory of reflection is different from the theory of classical literature is that he treats the classical theory of reflection as a historical and concrete treatment; the second part mainly discusses the general theory and the canon of Luca's literary theory of strange realism. The idea of type theory. The general theory and the typical theory of Lukacs's realism are closely linked. Lukacs believes that literature needs to resort to typical characters to reflect the overall social and historical reality. However, the typical characters described here by Lukacs are not presented as the Soviet Socialist Literature of the Soviet Union in 30s. The class image of the third part, the third part, mainly discusses the evaluation of naturalism literature. Lukacs's evaluation of naturalism literature is mainly reflected in his "narration and description". Lukacs believes that literature should reflect the overall social and historical reality in form, and the internal narration and description need to be dialectical unity. The reason why the naturalist literature goes bankrupt is that there is no dialectical and unified relationship between their narration and description; the fourth part mainly discusses Lukacs's evaluation of modernist literature. Lukacs's evaluation of modernist literature is closely related to his assessment of the naturalistic literature. Lukacs believes that the reason why the modernist literature goes bankrupt is mainly because they have not reached a dialectical unity of narration and description; the fifth part mainly discusses Lukacs's people's thought. In fact, Lukacs's discussion of realism is attributed to the question of "people". Luca The reason why strange criticism of naturalism and modernist literature is that their criticism of reality has not been associated with the lives of the vast majority of the people, and the reason why Lukacs highly appraised classical realism literature is because their criticism of reality is closely linked with the lives of the people.

【學位授予單位】：福建師范大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：I0
，

本文編號：1805912