论文部分内容阅读
在以《日夜书》为“知青”一代作传后,韩少功推出长篇散文《革命后记》(《钟山》2014年第2期),来追寻当代激进政治并未远去的背影。他试图突破当下“文革”叙述的诸种弊端,以平静的、超越左右的眼光,在官方与民间、境内与境外的各种声音中,去触摸历史复杂的真实。他意识到记忆与书写的困境,即由记忆者的身份、视角、经历与时间的幕布所带来“真实”偏离,试图如阿伦特在反思大屠杀时提出的“平庸的恶”一样,发现导致这场全面性灾难的根本原因。然而,他的写作意图是否完成,或者这份“艰难的证词”能否被相信,还须追索在错杂的现象叙述、繁多的理论与数据征引、以及那两百零九个注释之后的话语逻辑。
After making a biography of “Youth” through the “Day and Night Book,” Han Shaogong launched the long essay “The Revolutionary Postscript” (“Zhongshan No. 2, 2014”) to trace the shadow of contemporary radical politics. He tried to break through the various shortcomings described by the current “Cultural Revolution” and touted the complicated reality of history in a calm and transcendental perspective and in various voices of officials, civilians, both inside and outside the country. He realized that the dilemma of memory and writing, that is, the “true” deviation brought about by the identity, perspective, experience and time of the memory, attempted such as Arendt put forward in rethinking the massacre. “Mediocre evil ”, Find the root cause of this comprehensive disaster. However, whether his writing intent is fulfilled or whether the “difficult testimony” can be believed must be traced back to the misrepresentation of phenomena, the numerous theories and data to be drawn, and the two hundred and nine notes The logic of discourse.