论文部分内容阅读
艺术介入与艺术自律的矛盾由来已久,且在德国和法国有不同的传统。萨特的《什么是文学?》一文虽然暂时缓和了这种争论,但问题本身仍然紧迫。无论萨特的介入文学观抑或其情境剧,还是布莱希特带有明确介入倾向的史诗剧或教育剧,都与党派宣传相去不远。这类作品要么具有政治缺陷,要么具有形式缺陷。政治缺陷成为艺术缺陷,反之亦然。艺术无法脱离现实,即便自律艺术本身也具有社会性,但是艺术不能直接介入现实,唯有借助形式中介的自律艺术才能够真正发挥介入社会的作用。艺术应是表现苦难的语言。“奥斯维辛之后继续写诗是野蛮的”这一断语,并非意在反对所有文学作品甚至介入作品,而是反对将苦难娱乐化、抽象化的艺术作品。
The conflict between art intervention and artistic self-discipline has existed for a long time and has different traditions in Germany and France. Although Sartre’s article “What Is Literature?” Temporarily eased this debate, the issue itself is still pressing. Whether Sartre’s involvement in literature or his situation drama, or Brecht’s epic or educational play with a clear-cut interventionalism are not far from the party propaganda. Such works have either political or formal flaws. Political flaws become artistic flaws, and vice versa. Art can not be divorced from reality. Even though art of self-discipline itself is social, art can not directly intervene in reality. Only through self-discipline art of formal intermediary can it really play its role of intervening in society. Art should be the language of suffering. It is not intended to oppose all literary works or even intervening works, but to oppose the artistic work of entertaining and abstracting misery, “the phrase” continuing to write poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric. "