英雄与超人,以崇高的名义——对一种与亚氏悲剧观相抗衡的悲剧理论的分析

Hero,Superman,and Loftiness ——An Analysis of a Non-Aristotle Theory of Tragedy

亚里士多德的悲剧观在17世纪受到挑战,一种有别于亚氏的新"悲剧性"开始得到建构。人们关于悲剧价值的看法出现了历史性变化,承受苦难命运的悲剧人物要比悲剧人物深陷苦难的命运更为重要,"悲剧性"的建构因此产生了一次历史性转型,与"怜悯/恐惧"正相关的"命运感"退居幕后,而与"感动/鼓舞"正相关的悲剧人物的"英雄性"走向台前。本文聚焦崇高与这一悲剧性之间的关系,梳理"悲剧崇高性"建构的思想脉络,并在对席勒和尼采悲剧思想分析的基础上得出最后的结论:建构在"崇高"基础上的悲剧性已走完其全部历程,失去了继续阐发的理论空间。

Aristotle＇ s view on tragedy met with serious challenges in the 17th century. A new quality was constructed for tragedy that was rather different from those designated by Aristotle. People＇ s view on the values of tragedy experienced a historical change. More priority was put on the tragic hero who suffered from his miserable fate than the fate that dragged the tragic hero into misery. Instead of Pity-Fear that reminds the audience of the force of the Fate, the tragedy was meant to move and aspire, and to reveal the heroism in the tragic character. This study focuses on the relationship be- tween loftiness and tragedy in an effort to sort through the intellectual foundations of the ＂loftiness of tragedy. ＂ After an exploration into Schiller and Nietzsche, the author concludes that tragedy based on loftiness has reached its limits of theoretical development and hence has seen its end.