形式視域中的原型批評(píng)
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-12-13 06:37
【摘要】： 原型批評(píng)是流行于20世紀(jì)50-60年代的西方一個(gè)十分重要的批評(píng)流派。從形式視域中考察原型批評(píng)，既能看到它與西方形式美學(xué)傳統(tǒng)之間密切的聯(lián)系，又能了解它在哪幾方面促進(jìn)和發(fā)展了20世紀(jì)西方形式理性的思維方式。本文將分為五個(gè)部分分別加以討論： 一、引論。對(duì)原型批評(píng)的研究一直以來(lái)都是批評(píng)實(shí)踐者多，而理論闡釋者少。而從形式的角度來(lái)理解原型批評(píng)的更是少之又少。而從形式視域來(lái)考察原型批評(píng)具有非常重要的價(jià)值和意義。 二、形式與原型。榮格的原型理論與柏拉圖哲學(xué)中的形式之間存在著相互呼應(yīng)的關(guān)系。在柏拉圖哲學(xué)中的形式與榮格心理學(xué)中的原型之間，原型是以一種純粹的形式，，一種無(wú)內(nèi)容的形式的面目出現(xiàn)的。榮格學(xué)派代表人物繼承了榮格在藝術(shù)批評(píng)方面運(yùn)用的方法，對(duì)西方文學(xué)中的一些經(jīng)典之作進(jìn)行闡釋，取得了不錯(cuò)的成績(jī)。 三、藝術(shù)形式與文學(xué)原型。弗萊的文學(xué)原型是指“典型的反復(fù)出現(xiàn)的意象”，既是一種藝術(shù)形式，又是一種敘述結(jié)構(gòu)。文學(xué)原型是使文學(xué)自身成為一個(gè)系統(tǒng)的科學(xué)井然的秩序的一個(gè)核心。同時(shí)又是各民族、各地域文學(xué)進(jìn)行交流的媒介。文學(xué)原型既可以是一種微觀的屬于意象層面的藝術(shù)形式，又可以是宏觀的屬于文學(xué)敘述模式的藝術(shù)結(jié)構(gòu)。弗萊理解的藝術(shù)形式是建立在文學(xué)具體的形式基礎(chǔ)之上同時(shí)又超越了這種基礎(chǔ)，從而發(fā)展成為一種理性力量。 四、形式理性與原型批評(píng)。形式理性是以藝術(shù)形式作為邏輯起點(diǎn)來(lái)重新認(rèn)識(shí)和構(gòu)建人類(lèi)理想世界的一種理性力量。形式理性在兩方面與原型批評(píng)具有契合之處。一是形式理性突出藝術(shù)的形式作用；二是形式理性具有建構(gòu)和超越的性質(zhì)。 五、余論：原型批評(píng)在中國(guó)的發(fā)展。原型批評(píng)引進(jìn)中國(guó)之后，促進(jìn)了中國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)于文學(xué)人類(lèi)學(xué)的探討。這種以宏觀視野為背景的批評(píng)方法對(duì)于中國(guó)文學(xué)的傳統(tǒng)研究產(chǎn)生了沖擊，但同時(shí)也存在著一定的缺陷。如何在宏觀背景與文學(xué)的審美特性之間保持平衡成為我們應(yīng)該注意的問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:Archetypal criticism is a very important criticism school in the West in the 50-60's. By examining archetypal criticism from the perspective of form, we can not only see the close relationship between it and the western formal aesthetic tradition, but also understand in which aspects it promotes and develops the thinking mode of western formal rationality in the 20th century. This article will be divided into five parts to discuss: first, introduction. The research on archetypal criticism has always been a lot of criticism practitioners, but few theoretical interpretations. It is rare to understand archetypal criticism from the angle of form. It is of great value and significance to examine archetypal criticism from the perspective of form. Form and prototype. The archetypal theory of Jung and the form in Plato's philosophy are related to each other. Between the forms in Plato's philosophy and the archetypes in Jung psychology, archetypes appear as a pure form, a contentless form. The representative figures of Jung School inherited the methods used by Jung in artistic criticism and explained some classics in western literature and achieved good results. Third, artistic form and literary prototype. Frey's literary archetype refers to "typical repeated images", which is not only an artistic form but also a narrative structure. Literary archetype is the core of making literature itself a systematic scientific order. At the same time, it is also a medium for all nationalities and regional literature to communicate. Literary archetype can be not only a microscopic art form belonging to image level, but also a macroscopic art structure belonging to literary narrative mode. Frey's understanding of the artistic form is based on the concrete form of literature and transcends this basis, thus developing into a rational force. Fourth, formal rationality and archetypal criticism. Formal rationality is a kind of rational force which uses art form as logical starting point to reunderstand and construct human ideal world. Formal rationality agrees with archetypal criticism in two aspects. First, formal rationality highlights the formal role of art; second, formal rationality has the nature of construction and transcendence. Fifth, the conclusion: the development of archetypal criticism in China. After prototype criticism was introduced into China, it promoted the discussion of literary anthropology by Chinese scholars. This kind of criticism method with macroscopic view as the background impacts the traditional research of Chinese literature, but it also has some defects at the same time. How to maintain the balance between the macro background and the aesthetic characteristics of literature has become a problem that we should pay attention to.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2003
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：I06
本文編號(hào)：2376086
[Abstract]:Archetypal criticism is a very important criticism school in the West in the 50-60's. By examining archetypal criticism from the perspective of form, we can not only see the close relationship between it and the western formal aesthetic tradition, but also understand in which aspects it promotes and develops the thinking mode of western formal rationality in the 20th century. This article will be divided into five parts to discuss: first, introduction. The research on archetypal criticism has always been a lot of criticism practitioners, but few theoretical interpretations. It is rare to understand archetypal criticism from the angle of form. It is of great value and significance to examine archetypal criticism from the perspective of form. Form and prototype. The archetypal theory of Jung and the form in Plato's philosophy are related to each other. Between the forms in Plato's philosophy and the archetypes in Jung psychology, archetypes appear as a pure form, a contentless form. The representative figures of Jung School inherited the methods used by Jung in artistic criticism and explained some classics in western literature and achieved good results. Third, artistic form and literary prototype. Frey's literary archetype refers to "typical repeated images", which is not only an artistic form but also a narrative structure. Literary archetype is the core of making literature itself a systematic scientific order. At the same time, it is also a medium for all nationalities and regional literature to communicate. Literary archetype can be not only a microscopic art form belonging to image level, but also a macroscopic art structure belonging to literary narrative mode. Frey's understanding of the artistic form is based on the concrete form of literature and transcends this basis, thus developing into a rational force. Fourth, formal rationality and archetypal criticism. Formal rationality is a kind of rational force which uses art form as logical starting point to reunderstand and construct human ideal world. Formal rationality agrees with archetypal criticism in two aspects. First, formal rationality highlights the formal role of art; second, formal rationality has the nature of construction and transcendence. Fifth, the conclusion: the development of archetypal criticism in China. After prototype criticism was introduced into China, it promoted the discussion of literary anthropology by Chinese scholars. This kind of criticism method with macroscopic view as the background impacts the traditional research of Chinese literature, but it also has some defects at the same time. How to maintain the balance between the macro background and the aesthetic characteristics of literature has become a problem that we should pay attention to.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2003
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：I06
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條
1 程愛(ài)民;原型批評(píng)的整體性文化批評(píng)傾向[J];外國(guó)文學(xué);2000年05期
本文編號(hào)：2376086
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yishull/2376086.html
最近更新
教材專著
