论文部分内容阅读
在2007年第3期本专栏中,发表了陈思和先生的《先锋与常态:现代文学史的两种基本形态》一文,引起了较为广泛的反响。本期发表的咸立强先生的《“自我”文学书写中的常态与先锋性》一文,以初期创造社同人“自我”文学书写的三种范式为例,将各自呈现出来的文学常态与先锋的扭结及其演进历程进行了梳理,并以此为中国现代文学史上先锋与常态这一观点提供了佐证,并也有可能引发人们对现代文学史上许多文学社团运行轨迹的思考。蓝爱国先生的文章,再一次阐释了他一直关注的文学史界碑的确立以及价值属性,很具启发性。杨剑龙先生认为现今的中国现代文学史研究应该进入到一个去繁就简、由多至少的经典化过程,并认为个人治史对于学科的发展有着重要意义,也为人们梳理百年来中国文学史的脉络提供了有益的研究视角。
In the third issue of 2007, the article entitled “Pioneer and Normal: Two Basic Patterns of Modern Literary History” published by Mr. Chen Sihe has aroused a relatively wide range of responses. In this issue of the “” self “the normal and avant-garde in literary writing” published by Mr. Li Liqiang, taking the three paradigms of initial creation of social associates and “self” literary writing as examples, The literary norm and the vanguard of vanguard and its evolutionary history are combed, and this provides evidence of the vanguard and norm in the history of modern Chinese literature and may also lead to the thinking of the running track of many literary societies in the history of modern literature. His essay once again illustrates the establishment of the historical landmarks of literature and the value attributes that he has always been interested in. It is instructive. Yang Jianlong thinks that the study of the history of modern Chinese literature should go into a process of simplification and at least a minimum of classics. He believes that personal history is of great significance for the development of disciplines and also serves to sort out the history of Chinese literature for centuries Vein provides a useful research perspective.