{"title":"王夫之「詩史」說析辨","authors":"張歡歡","doi":"10.53106/2306036020200600350005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n 「詩史」說自唐代孟棨提出,繁衍出「敘事」、「實錄」、「忠君愛國」等內涵,多在肯定層面論說。至明清之際,王夫之的觀點頗為特出,他對「詩史」諸多內涵均加以批評,更在整體上否定此說。對抗史對詩的陵越,是船山在處理詩史關係時的根本主張,其言「詩道性情」,認為「史」不能代「詩」而言「性之情」。根本而言,王夫之出於人心危淺的儒者意識,賦予詩體以獨特意義,期望藉詩之力量導情復性,於詩之審美中尋求道德之潛力,這是他的詩歌理想;而「詩史」對此僅有破壞,而無建構,故其深惡此說。本文將分析王夫之對「詩史」部分內涵的批評,論述他於明清之際推崇「詩史」之歷史語境下的嚴峻批判態度由來,並闡述他所堅持的「詩」之獨特意義。\n Since Meng Qi from the Tang Dynasty proposed the concept of \"Shishi\" (Poetry-History), multiple interpretations, most of them were on an affirmative level, had been created, such as \"narrate\", \"record as the author has witnessed \", \" loyal and patriotic \" etc. By the time of late Ming and early Qing Dynasties, Wang Fuzhi (1619-1692) ’s viewpoint stood out by criticized not only part of the interpretations but the whole concept of \"Shishi\". When dealing with the relation between \"history\" and \"poetry\", Wang Fuzhi’s fundamental proposition was to defy history’s violation of poetic form. Wang Fuzhi stressed that poetry should express \"Xing\" (human nature) and \"Qing\" (feelings). The history’s violation of poetic form would undermine the expression of Qing and therefore weaken the power of it, which could enhance the cultivation of people and help brace up the national power. Once the history was emphasized egregiously in poetic form, the essence of poetry would be vandalized. Essentially, Wang Fuzhi endowed the poetic form of a unique meaning due to his consciousness of Confucianism. He hoped that the power of poetry would guide Qing to Xing. This was his poetic ideal to seek moral potential in the aesthetics of poetry. Therefore, he rebelled at the concept of \"Shishi\" which impeded destructively. This paper analyzes Wang Fuzhi’s criticism of \"Shishi\", discusses the reason for his unique critical attitude amid the atmosphere of this concept during the late Ming and early Qing and explains his interpretations of poetry.\n \n","PeriodicalId":243831,"journal":{"name":"中正漢學研究","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中正漢學研究","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53106/2306036020200600350005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
「詩史」說自唐代孟棨提出,繁衍出「敘事」、「實錄」、「忠君愛國」等內涵,多在肯定層面論說。至明清之際,王夫之的觀點頗為特出,他對「詩史」諸多內涵均加以批評,更在整體上否定此說。對抗史對詩的陵越,是船山在處理詩史關係時的根本主張,其言「詩道性情」,認為「史」不能代「詩」而言「性之情」。根本而言,王夫之出於人心危淺的儒者意識,賦予詩體以獨特意義,期望藉詩之力量導情復性,於詩之審美中尋求道德之潛力,這是他的詩歌理想;而「詩史」對此僅有破壞,而無建構,故其深惡此說。本文將分析王夫之對「詩史」部分內涵的批評,論述他於明清之際推崇「詩史」之歷史語境下的嚴峻批判態度由來,並闡述他所堅持的「詩」之獨特意義。
Since Meng Qi from the Tang Dynasty proposed the concept of "Shishi" (Poetry-History), multiple interpretations, most of them were on an affirmative level, had been created, such as "narrate", "record as the author has witnessed ", " loyal and patriotic " etc. By the time of late Ming and early Qing Dynasties, Wang Fuzhi (1619-1692) ’s viewpoint stood out by criticized not only part of the interpretations but the whole concept of "Shishi". When dealing with the relation between "history" and "poetry", Wang Fuzhi’s fundamental proposition was to defy history’s violation of poetic form. Wang Fuzhi stressed that poetry should express "Xing" (human nature) and "Qing" (feelings). The history’s violation of poetic form would undermine the expression of Qing and therefore weaken the power of it, which could enhance the cultivation of people and help brace up the national power. Once the history was emphasized egregiously in poetic form, the essence of poetry would be vandalized. Essentially, Wang Fuzhi endowed the poetic form of a unique meaning due to his consciousness of Confucianism. He hoped that the power of poetry would guide Qing to Xing. This was his poetic ideal to seek moral potential in the aesthetics of poetry. Therefore, he rebelled at the concept of "Shishi" which impeded destructively. This paper analyzes Wang Fuzhi’s criticism of "Shishi", discusses the reason for his unique critical attitude amid the atmosphere of this concept during the late Ming and early Qing and explains his interpretations of poetry.
「诗史」说自唐代孟棨提出,繁衍出「叙事」、「实录」、「忠君爱国」等内涵,多在肯定层面论说。至明清之际,王夫之的观点颇为特出,他对「诗史」诸多内涵均加以批评,更在整体上否定此说。对抗史对诗的陵越,是船山在处理诗史关系时的根本主张,其言「诗道性情」,认为「史」不能代「诗」而言「性之情」。根本而言,王夫之出于人心危浅的儒者意识,赋予诗体以独特意义,期望藉诗之力量导情复性,于诗之审美中寻求道德之潜力,这是他的诗歌理想;而「诗史」对此仅有破坏,而无建构,故其深恶此说。本文将分析王夫之对「诗史」部分内涵的批评,论述他于明清之际推崇「诗史」之历史语境下的严峻批判态度由来,并阐述他所坚持的「诗」之独特意义。 Since Meng Qi from the Tang Dynasty proposed the concept of "Shishi" (Poetry-History), multiple interpretations, most of them were on an affirmative level, had been created, such as "narrate", "record as the author has witnessed ", " loyal and patriotic " etc. By the time of late Ming and early Qing Dynasties, Wang Fuzhi (1619-1692) ’s viewpoint stood out by criticized not only part of the interpretations but the whole concept of "Shishi". When dealing with the relation between "history" and "poetry", Wang Fuzhi’s fundamental proposition was to defy history’s violation of poetic form. Wang Fuzhi stressed that poetry should express "Xing" (human nature) and "Qing" (feelings). The history’s violation of poetic form would undermine the expression of Qing and therefore weaken the power of it, which could enhance the cultivation of people and help brace up the national power. Once the history was emphasized egregiously in poetic form, the essence of poetry would be vandalized. Essentially, Wang Fuzhi endowed the poetic form of a unique meaning due to his consciousness of Confucianism. He hoped that the power of poetry would guide Qing to Xing. This was his poetic ideal to seek moral potential in the aesthetics of poetry. Therefore, he rebelled at the concept of "Shishi" which impeded destructively. This paper analyzes Wang Fuzhi’s criticism of "Shishi", discusses the reason for his unique critical attitude amid the atmosphere of this concept during the late Ming and early Qing and explains his interpretations of poetry.