河南師範學院編印的「教學業務通訊」担負着指導河南全省高級中等學校各科教學的任務。創刊近兩年,出版數十期,所發表的文章也都具有一定的示範指導意義,各校教師幾乎人手一編,把它作為教學上的主要依據。因此,它的成續是應該肯定的。但其中有關語文教學的某些文章,我認為作者的资產階級思想影響,却是十分值得提出批判的。這些文章在分析文學作品時,常常把作品中豐富的思想内容輕輕放過,只在一些詞句、寫作技巧上兜圈子;或者把一篇文章割裂得支離破碎;或者以形式主義的分析代替對生活真理的探求,把鮮明生動的藝術形象公式化、抽象化,完全忽略掉文學作品是認識生活反映生活的藝術手段。特別是在分析古典文學作品時,不注意研究作品的人民性與現實主義的優秀傳統,只注意對片言隻字作繁琐的考訂,結果不僅不能正確地闡述作品的積極意義,反而抹煞了作品的真實精神,割裂了完整的藝術形象。最嚴重的是在評價人物時,往往主觀片面,亂扣帽子;在分析作品時,竟不顧社會背景,妄下斷語,作了反歷史主義的歪曲。這一切都是資產階級唯心思想的具體表现,也是助長我們的語文教學脱離生活、脫離實際的重要根源之一。上述现象最突出地表現在牛庸懋同志所寫的幾篇文章中。如牛同志在該刊第八號發表的「略論」「孔雀東南飛」的思想內容與寫作方法上的特點」一文,是一篇完全脫離實際的文章。按「孔雀東南飛」是一篇具有豐富的人民性的古典現實主義作品,它所以至今還為人民所喜愛,正是由於它真實而深刻地反映了當時人民的生活,反映了封建社會婦女的遭遇,替人民道出了心中的憤恨。所以余冠英同志說它是一篇「中國現實主義傳統的反映人民生活的作品」,王瑤同志也說它「反映着廣大人民的生活」。而牛同志在「略諭」這篇作品時,對於這些地方一點也未提及,却旁徵博引地在「三從四德」、「七出」等封建道德上兜圈子,好像分析古典文學作品就可以不注意考察它是否真 Henan Normal University’s “Teaching Business Communication” is responsible for guiding the teaching of various subjects in the senior secondary schools in Henan Province. The first two years of publication, publishing dozens of published articles also have some exemplary guidance, almost all teachers in each school a series of editors, as the main basis for teaching. Therefore, its successor should be affirmed. However, some of the articles on Chinese teaching, I think the author’s bourgeois ideas, but it is worth criticizing. When analyzing literary works, these essays often leave the rich thought content in the works lightly, circling only some words and writing skills, or fragmentation of an article, or replacing the truth of life with the analysis of formalism The quest to vivid and vivid artistic image of the formula, abstraction, completely ignoring literary works is to understand the life reflects the art of life means. Especially in the analysis of classical literary works, paying no attention to the fine traditions of people’s character and realism in the study of works, paying attention only to the cursory examination of words and phrases only results in not only failing to correctly explain the positive significance of the work, Real spirit, cut off the complete artistic image. The most serious thing is that when evaluating people, they often subjectively and unilaterally detach their hats. In analyzing the work, they did not consider the social background and made vain judgments and made anti-historicist distortion. All this is a concrete manifestation of the idealist ideal of the bourgeoisie and one of the important causes that help to extricate our language teaching from life and from reality. The above-mentioned phenomenon is most prominently displayed in several articles written by Comrade Niu Yong-mao. The article entitled “On the Argument” and “The Characteristics of the Ideological Content and Writing Methods of Peacock Flying Southeast” published by No. 8 in No. 8 of this issue is a totally out-of-article. According to “Peacock southeast flight” is a richly populous classical realism works, so it is still loved by the people, precisely because it is a real and profound reflection of the people’s lives at that time, reflecting the feudal society of women Encounter, for the people out of heart resentment. Therefore, Comrade Yu Guan-ying said that it is a “work reflecting the people’s livelihood in the traditional Chinese realism.” Comrade Wang Yao also said that it “reflects the life of the vast majority of the people.” In his work, however, Oliver cowhide did not mention these places at all. Instead, he tried to find a way around the feudal morals of “three from four, four virtues,” “seven outs,” as if he could analyze classical works of literature without paying attention to them Is it true?