“迂回”何以提供“进入”?

Why Does“Meandering”Provide“Entry”?

跨文化研究受制于研究者对异族语言文字的工具性掌握程度、思维方式的熟悉程度等因素,而给其跨文化研究带来语义解释的偏颇、文献掌握的误差和深度理解的困惑。于连试图以在上下文中寻求“意义的迂回”的视角来寻求对中国文化的解释、“进入”的路径,是有其限度的。对那些并不同于“意义的迂回”的非对象性意象的审美感知,于连尚缺乏认知。要把“意义的迂回”的“迂回策略”延伸至非关联性的意象聚合的审美视域,审美意义上的“迂回”就一定要经过非对象化意象的中介才能提供诗意的“进入”——“文见于此,意生于彼”。这个“意生于彼”的“意”并不是“意义”,而是“意象”。而“意象”作为“精神形象概念”并不是像于连所言是中国文化所缺乏的,“意象”思维恰恰是贯串于中国传统美学艺术始终的具有超越性的“精神的世界”。

Cross cultural research is restricted by the researcher’s instrumental mastery of foreign languages,the familiarity with the way of thinking and other factors.There are limits to Francois Jullien’s attempt to seek the interpretation of Chinese culture and the way to enter it from the perspective of“meandering”in context.The aesthetic perception of those non-objective images,which are different from“meandering”,is still lacking in Jullien’s cognition.The“meandering”in aesthetic sense must be through the intermediary of non-objectified images to provide poetic“entry”,namely,the text is seen here,and the image is born in the other.“Image”,as a concept of spiritual image,is not what Jullien said is lacking in Chinese culture.The thinking of“image”is just a transcendent“spiritual world”that runs through Chinese traditional aesthetic art.