伊格尔顿批判——兼谈否定主义的文学观

Critique to Terry Eaglton——From the View of Literature in Negativism

从否定主义文艺学出发,伊格尔顿的"政治批评"存在如下局限:在"文学"上,优秀的文学是意味模糊的"体验形态",而伊格尔顿则是以"可观念化"的"意识形态"对之进行切割,这就把文学对现实的"疏离"误解为意识形态需要而不是缓解意识形态的需要;在"文学性"上,伊格尔顿忽略了以"形象世界"来整合"虚拟"、"想象"、"创造",从而不能发现这些概念区别于"非文学世界"的界线,而"文学性"既不能还原为"形象世界"中的"文学性语句",也不能作静态的对象化解释;在"文学理论"上,伊格尔顿始终没有对"历史的"和"地方的"进行清晰界定,这就既难以解释特定时期的文学现为什么会产生"超历史影响"的现象,也难以解释由于历史的循环性而导致一种特定的文学观会不断被后人提起的现象,更难以解释不是任何"历史"和"地方"都会产生自已的文学理论欲求之现象。

From the view of literature in negation, Terry Eagleton＇s ＂Political Criticism＂ had the following limitations： In ＂literature＂, excellent literary works should be ＂experience forms＂ with vague senses, but Eagleton divided them with ＂ideationable ideology＂, which was a misunderstanding of the ＂alienation＂ of literature from the reality as the need of ideology rather than the relief of the need of ideology; in ＂the na- ture of literature＂, Eagleton neglected the integration of ＂virtualness＂, ＂imagination＂ and ＂creation＂ with ＂the image world＂, so that he failed to find the line to differentiate these concepts from ＂the non-literature world＂, while ＂the nature of literature＂ could neither be reverted to ＂literary discourses＂ in ＂the image world＂, nor be explained as a static object; in ＂the theory of literature＂, Eagleton, from beginning to end, didn＇t gave clear definitions to ＂historical＂ and ＂local＂, making it difficult to explain the reason why ＂trans-historical influences＂ were cast on views of literature in a specific period of time, and the fact that a specific view of literature would be frequently brought up by later generations due to historical circulation, and more difficult the fact that not any ＂history＂ or ＂location＂ would produce a phenomenon of its own literary-theory desire.