On a Far-Off Journey – a Commentary on the “History of Literary Culture” Approach in The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Yan Xu
{"title":"On a Far-Off Journey – a Commentary on the “History of Literary Culture” Approach in The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature","authors":"Yan Xu","doi":"10.1163/23521341-12340170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe Cambridge History of Chinese Literature is based on a “history of literary culture” approach that differs clearly from the standard literary-historical narrative favored by most Chinese scholars. The conventional approach to literary history tends to focus on the most engaging elements of a literary canon, while the history of literary culture model attempts to study literary texts in conjunction with their historical contexts. Based on historical documentation, this approach seeks to rehabilitate literary works that have been misinterpreted over time. With this approach, both texts and contexts are at the heart of literary history. If literary texts are restored to the context of their literary production, we are asked to reconsider the following three important research questions. Where did the texts originate? Why were they selected as part of the literary canon? What are their special characteristics and how are they related to other texts? Answers to these questions make literary research more varied and three-dimensional. In terms of theory, the contributors to The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature clearly aspire towards historicism. In their own writing, however, they seem willing to compromise and follow “a middle way” between conventional and alternative narratives of Chinese literary history.","PeriodicalId":37097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Humanities","volume":"32 41","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/23521341-12340170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature is based on a “history of literary culture” approach that differs clearly from the standard literary-historical narrative favored by most Chinese scholars. The conventional approach to literary history tends to focus on the most engaging elements of a literary canon, while the history of literary culture model attempts to study literary texts in conjunction with their historical contexts. Based on historical documentation, this approach seeks to rehabilitate literary works that have been misinterpreted over time. With this approach, both texts and contexts are at the heart of literary history. If literary texts are restored to the context of their literary production, we are asked to reconsider the following three important research questions. Where did the texts originate? Why were they selected as part of the literary canon? What are their special characteristics and how are they related to other texts? Answers to these questions make literary research more varied and three-dimensional. In terms of theory, the contributors to The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature clearly aspire towards historicism. In their own writing, however, they seem willing to compromise and follow “a middle way” between conventional and alternative narratives of Chinese literary history.
远行--评《剑桥中国文学史》中的 "文学文化史 "方法
剑桥中国文学史》基于 "文学文化史 "的研究方法,与大多数中国学者青睐的标准文学史叙事方法明显不同。传统的文学史方法倾向于关注文学典籍中最吸引人的元素,而文学文化史模式则试图将文学文本与其历史背景结合起来研究。这种方法以历史文献为基础,试图为那些长期以来被误读的文学作品恢复名誉。在这种方法中,文本和语境都是文学史的核心。如果将文学文本还原到其文学创作的语境中,我们就需要重新考虑以下三个重要的研究问题。文本源自何处?它们为何被选入文学典籍?它们有什么特点,与其他文本有什么关系?对这些问题的回答将使文学研究更加多样化和立体化。在理论方面,《剑桥中国文学史》的撰稿人显然向往历史主义。不过,在他们自己的写作中,他们似乎愿意在中国文学史的传统叙事和另类叙事之间做出妥协,走 "中间道路"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Chinese Humanities
Journal of Chinese Humanities Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信