论文部分内容阅读
在一些美学家看来,解释不可能重建作者原意。要想去恢复作者的意图,就必须重建一个已经一去不复返的作者当时所处的语境关系,而这是绝对做不到的。即使勉强去做了,也只能使艺术研究变成对作家生活片断的索隐,而极大地局限了艺术作品的意义和批评的可能性。W.K.温默萨特(W.K.Wimsatt)和 M.C.比尔兹利(M.C.Beardsley)早就直截了当地提出过:作家意图无法追寻,甚至连作者本人都不知道自己的真正意图是什么。因此,想重建作者原来的意图,从一开始就只是一种“意图的谬误”。作者意图既不能有效地追寻,也不值得追寻,更不能作为判断文学批评是否成功的标准。在许多人看来,解释的本质只能是从本文出发去重建我们所能理解的那种意义。对我们来说,一个本文的性质只能在解释者的解释中才
For some estheticians, interpretation does not make it possible to reconstruct the author’s meaning. To restore the author’s intentions, it is necessary to rebuild the contextual relationship of an already gone-back author, which is absolutely impossible. Even barely done, it can only make the study of art into a hidden part of the life of writers, and greatly limits the significance of the work of art and the possibility of criticism. W.K. Wimsatt and M. C. Beardsley have long been straightforward to argue that writers’ intent can not be traced, and that even the author himself did not know what his true intentions were. Therefore, trying to reconstruct the original intention of the author from the outset is merely a “fallacy of intention.” The author’s intention is neither to search effectively nor to pursue, nor to judge the success of literary criticism. To many, the essence of interpretation can only be the departure from this article to rebuild what we can understand. For us, the nature of a paper can only be explained by the interpreter