再谈现代文学史写作的“边界”与“价值尺度”——由严家炎《二十世纪中国文学史》所引发的研讨

A Further Talk on "Margin" and "Value Standard" in Writing Modern History of Literature:——A Discussion Aroused by Yan Jiayan's A History of Chinese Literature in 20th Century

严家炎主编的《二十世纪中国文学史》,可谓十多年来现当代文学研究最重要的标志性成果。该书引发的现代文学研究"边界"以及评价标准等问题,亦是近年来最受关注的问题。事实上,研究边界往晚清的"前移"似乎已成态势,构成对既有文学史观的挑战。但晚清的文学"新变"只是"量变",离"五四"前后的"质变"还有一个过程,"五四"作为重大历史标志的地位,是晚清"新变"所不能取代的。现代文学史可以从晚清写起,但这只是序幕,大的变革还是"五四"新文学运动。现在流行"没有晚清,何来五四"的说法,从历史的承续角度看是有道理的,问题是,在具体的文学史写作中,如何将"晚清"与"五四"连贯起来,并有效地"统合"纯文学与通俗文学,仍然缺乏一个完整的价值评判框架。而目前有些将起点"前移"的论作,其实包含有对"五四"历史价值"降解"的潜在意图。这种评价标准的模糊会造成文学史写作逻辑的混乱。这些年倡导文学史写作的"多元共生",体现比较宽容的态度,但把不同价值观、世界观或意识形态支配下的创作汇集到一起时,需要考虑到在哪一个价值层面上去统合,在何种意义上以何种形态去处理这种"汇集"。这其实也牵涉到现代文学学科安身立命的问题。

A History of Chinese Literature in 20th Century edited by Yan Jiayan is the most important achievement in the past ten years and more in the field of modern and contemporary literature studies. The issues, ＂margin＂ and value standard, etc. , put up in it are also mostly concerned in recent years. The question is how, in real writing of a literary history, to connect ＂late Qing Dynasty＂ with ＂May 4th Movement＂, and effectively ＂unify＂ pure literature and popular literature, because there lacked a wholesome frame of evaluation. But the present writings which ＂fore-moved＂ the starting point contain an impetus of ＂degrading＂ the historical value of May 4th Movement. This fuzzy standard of evaluation would cause logical confusion in writing a literary history. The recent advocate of a ＂multiple co-existence＂ of the writing of literary histories embodies a tolerant attitude. But when collecting the writings of different values, world views, and ideologies, one needs to consider to which value stratum they can be unified, and to which significance and by what morphology the ＂collecting＂ could be dealt with. This, in fact, concerns with the issue of how the science of modern literature can be settled.