当代文学史观与“当代文学史”建构——以三种著作为例

The Contemporary Outlook of Literary History and the Reconstruction of“Contemporary Literary History”——Taking Three Books as Examples

当代文学史观是建构当代文学史的价值和逻辑依据,洪子诚《中国当代文学史》的"从‘一体化’到‘多元化’"、陈思和《中国当代文学史教程》的"从‘共名状态’到‘无名状态’"、董健等《中国当代文学史新稿》的"从现代性的‘消解’到‘复归’",是三种具有代表性的当代文学史观。它们是在同一文化语境中,对于同一对象的三种文学史意义阐释方式,也是对当代文学重新"历史化"和整体化的三种方式。三种文学史虽卓有建树,但它们的"各自为阵"便足以表明,当代文学史问题的解决并非易事。2012年莫言获得诺贝尔文学奖,不啻是对它们的莫大反讽。这证明了唐弢"当代文学不宜写史"的警告绝非多余。

The contempora struction of contemporary ry outlook of literary literary history. The written by Hong Zicheng is ＂from ＇monism＇ to rary Literary History written by Chen Sihe is history is the value e History of Chin ＇pluralism＇ ＂, the and logic basis for the recon ese Contemporary Literature Course of Chinese Contern po name state＇ to ＇the nameless state＇ ＂, The New Draft of Chinese Contemporary is ＂from the ＇dispelling~ of modernity to ＇returning of the contemporary literary history. They are three literary history in the same culture context, as Literary History wri ＂, which are three tten by Dong Jian et al different interpretations of the me outlooks anings of well as three ways of re ＂historization＂ and inte gration of contemporary literature. The three outlooks are contributive, but their shows that it is not easy to solve the problems of the contemporary literary histo the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2012, which was a great irony of them. It proves ry. Mo Yan won that Tang Tao＇s warning that ＂contemporary literature isn＇t suitable for writing history＂ is not superfluous.