AbstractFeminism, feminist theory, feminist literary theory were already highly contentious in what they represented to Euro-American critics and theorists in the 1980s, when scholars in Chinese literary studies began sustained research on women writers in late imperial China (ca. 1600–1911). Their research drew on developments in Western feminist theories while problematizing certain applications. In this article, I review major debates in 1980s and 1990s Western feminist literary theory, divided by the different approaches of Anglo-American and French feminist critics and gender studies, examining why specific arguments on women and language, genres studied, and theoretical underpinnings did not hold significant relevance to the study of similar issues when applied to women's writing in pre-twentieth-century China. Yet certain concepts were highly fruitful in critical analysis. Feminist theory was never monolithic, even when it was Eurocentric; theories were drawn from a plurality of different disciplines and schools. Concepts that came into currency—gender, gaze, voice, agency, subjectivity, authorship, and so on—from poststructuralist, postcolonial, cultural, and film studies proved to be useful tools in feminist literary studies. Some came to be deployed in scholarship on women's literature in historical China. In this context, I reflect on theoretical approaches in significant studies of women's writing of late imperial China and consider the impact or critique this subfield of Chinese literary studies posed to Western feminist theories and broader questions of the applicability of modern/postmodern feminist theories to literature of earlier periods and other cultures before the globalization of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
"风流"的含义随着历史的变迁而不断地丰富,我们可以以之为中心,建立一个阐释中国古代历史文化的理论.其核心内涵是"外在的影响",这至少应该包含以下几个方面的内容.第一是群体与个人的关系."风流"的群体含义体现了对人世的共同伦理价值的强调;而其个人含义则昭示了个人并不是被动地接受外来影响的,他可以有选择地接受影响,同时也可以主动对外施加影响.地域、家族是保存并流传这种个性的重要因素.第二是传承与新变的关系.既然"风流"的核心含义是"影响",这就涉及前人对后人的影响.而在传承前人的同时,古人也肯定独出机杼的创造,有时甚至主张不依傍前人.但这种创造并不是刻意的求新求异,而是在积累前人的知识文化到一定程度时自然产生的.产生以后,它又能为后人所传承,形成新的传统.第三是柔与刚的关系."风流"是潜移默化而又深远的影响,贵在蕴藉,但它又能造成一种沦肌浃髓的强烈影响,这是古人对人格、文章、艺术的一贯追求.第四是审美与伦理的关系."美"与"善"具有同一性,而"风流"是通体的美,道德之善、仪表之美都是"风流"的表现.
文人群体以诗文驱疟是文学史中一个独特的现象.这种现象的形成,既与当时社会上流行的驱疟风俗有关,也受到文学可以疗疾这种认知的影响.在诗文驱疟的过程中,文人取代了巫医成为仪式的主持人,以诗、文甚至词作为沟通疟鬼的工具,最终以驱逐疟鬼、祈求安康为目的.这股风尚肇始于中古,以杜诗、韩诗为典范,并且一直延绵到清代.驱疟诗文在创作旨趣上有多种不同的态度,在艺术手法上多以虚实结合的方式,表现现实世界与想象世界.文人诗文驱疟活动既有文学属性,也有民俗属性,体现出多重文化内涵.
宋代伴随着杜诗与《史记》的经典化过程,杜诗和《史记》因在诗、文领域的典范地位而被并举.受宗经思想影响,杜诗与史书之间的关系被不断讨论,从而确立了"诗史"的价值定位,最终产生了"杜甫似司马迁"的诗学观念.宋人在"诗史"定位下对"杜甫似司马迁"的内容进行了多角度发掘.在辨体思想下,明人对"杜甫似司马迁"的破体现象进行了大力批判.受此影响,清人在诗歌理论与诗学实践上都对此说进行了修正.宋明以来对"杜甫似司马迁"论说的讨论有重要的诗学意义.
学术史对"雕虫篆刻,壮夫不为"诠解的逻辑前提不是基于"雕虫篆刻"而是基于"雕虫篆刻"的喻指对象——词章,从而遮蔽了其作为本体自在的能指语向——"小学"与辞赋之间存在着的"语言—文学"发生机制之渊源关系.立足语言分级体系,"雕虫篆刻"、"辞赋"与"诗教"分别代表"字"、"文"与"义","雕虫篆刻"与"小学"构成能指语义层,"辞赋"与"诗教"则构成所指语义层.作为回顾式的学术批评,与其说扬雄"童子雕虫篆刻"以"献赋"与"壮夫不为"而"悔赋"呈示出赋学批评思想的矛盾纠葛,毋宁说扬雄将个体为学之渐进深入寓于齿序之少长变化中.由童子"小学"之学(学言),渐入辞章之文(尚文),后根柢在弘道之儒业(立言),应是"雕虫篆刻,壮夫不为"完整的三个阶段.倘就汉赋的语言发生机制夷考其内涵宏旨,要在扬雄对辞赋与小学关系的体认以及后期"文统"、"言统"纠葛下的思想转向.
