论常州词派对《花间集》的词学接受

On the Acceptance to HuaJian Ji of Changzhou Ci School

《花间集》是"倚声填词之祖",然而在词学接受史上其命运多舛,至清代的常州词派有一个深刻变化,后者正是在对《花间》的词学接受中拓开理论堂庑的。张惠言对《花间》之首的温庭筠词作微言大义的重新阐释,以期实现词的形式之本与意义之源的合一,从而开启常派词学;但他将温庭筠攀比屈子抽离《花间》的解读策略,有着重大破缺。周济以"浑厚"之说观照《花间》,立其为词之渊源,修补了张氏的破缺。陈廷焯则既推温、韦为词宗,又斥《花间》为祸首,将张氏的破缺演绎成了对《花间》的悖论式接受。

Although initiated the creation form of Ci by filling in words based on tones, the acceptance of HuaJian Ji was not smooth viewing Ci history. There is a profound transformation in the Qing dynasty, when the Changzhou Ci School established its own theoretical framework in acceptance of this book. With subtle expressions, Zhang Huiyan reinterpretated the works of Wen Tingyun at the beginning of HuaJian Ji with the purpose to achieve the integration of the form and meaning of Ci, starting the Changzhou Ci School. However, there were substantial problems in his interpretation of comparing Wen Tingyun to Qu Yuan, Later those problems were modified by Zhou Ji, who commented HuaJian Ji with his idea of "Integrated significance" and considered it as the origin of Ci. Chen Tingzhou highly praised Wen Tingyun and Wen Zhuang as founders of Ci, but denounced HuaJian Ji as the culprit, and develped those problems of Zhang Huiyan’s interpretation to a paradoxical acceptance of HuaJian Ji.