旧题新作:寻觅文学史意义上的时间与存在

Old Title and New Research:Looking for Time and Existence in the Sense of Literary History

受到正统文学史叙事的影响,学界对当年的“文白之争”往往满足于粗疏笼统的“文言反动”“白话先进”的对立判断。其实,“五四”的思想故事绝不是仅靠一家之言就能撑起的历史叙事,而需要以“群言”的方式对细节进行不断填充。《重撰“五四”:在语义与场域之间》摒弃了单一历史主体的正统叙事,通过呈现“五四”场域中多元主体的思想表达与文化体验,强调文白对抗叙事在中国文人特定生命场域中丰富的语义内涵,并以此打开重撰“五四”的历史空间。作者在语义与场域之间打捞历史记忆,以此重撰“五四”,这既是对学术话语的重塑,也是学科体系再造过程中学术研究的必经之路。

Influenced by the narrative of orthodox literary history,the academic circles are often satisfied with the rough and general opposite judgment of“classical Chinese reactionary”and“advanced vernacular”.In fact,the ideological story of the May 4th movement is not a historical narrative that can be supported only by the words of one school,but needs to be constantly filled with the details in the way of“group words”.Rewriting the May 4th Movement:Between Semantics and Field abandons the orthodox narrative of a single historical subject.By presenting the ideological expression and cultural experience of multiple subjects in the May 4th movement field,it emphasizes the rich semantic connotation of classical Chinese/vernacular confrontation narrative in the specific life field of Chinese scholars,so as to open the historical space of rewriting the May 4th movement.The author retrieves the historical memory between semantics and field to rewrite the May 4th Movement,which is not only the reconstruction of academic discourse,but also the only way for academic research in the systematic reconstruction of discipline.