论文部分内容阅读
郭沫若和沈从文都是著名的新文学作家,而且都是具有社会担当精神、热爱中华民族的知识分子,但抗战爆发后,他们却选择了迥异的人生道路。沈从文强调文学的价值,要求创造文学经典,反对“空头作家”。而郭沫若认为创造经典不重要,动员民众立即行动起来参加抗战才是作家/文人的当务之急。沈从文长期生活在学院体制之中,他自觉维护现代社会对人的专业分工,要求个体接受这一制度性安排。而郭沫若则把自己当成一个可以游走于多个领域的角色,尤其是民众动员,这其实跨越了现代社会对专业作家的职权限定,而迈进了政治家的活动范围。是否适应现代社会对个体分工的制度性安排,是两位作家分歧的所在。而将这一分歧置于抗战特殊语境之中,则提示我们思考危机时刻作家/知识分子的社会作用问题。
Both Guo Moruo and Shen Congwen are well-known new literary writers. They are all intellectuals who have the spirit of social responsibility and love the Chinese nation. However, after the outbreak of the war of resistance against Japan, they chose a very different path of life. Shen Congwen emphasized the value of literature, called for the creation of literary classics, against “short writers.” However, Guo Moruo considered it a priority for writers / writers to think that it was not important to create a classic and to mobilize the people to act immediately to participate in the war of resistance. Shen Congwen lived in the college system for a long time. He conscientiously maintained the professional division of labor in modern society and demanded that individuals accept this institutional arrangement. Guo Mo-ruo regarded himself as a person who could walk in many fields, especially the mobilization of the people. This actually crossed the limits of the authority of professional writers in modern society and advanced the range of activities of politicians. It is the disagreement between two writers whether to adapt to the institutional arrangement of individual division of labor in modern society. Putting this disagreement into the special context of the war of resistance means that we should think about the social role of writers / intellectuals in times of crisis.