读者为何被迫“偷听”?——从史蒂文斯到格吕克

From Stevens to Glück:Why Should Readers Be Forced to “Overhear”?

诺贝尔奖得主格吕克对前辈诗人史蒂文斯作出了负面评价,认为史蒂文斯的作品迫使读者产生“偷听”之感,且这种阅读经验压制了她的创作欲望。本文聚焦于格吕克这种基于“读者”视角的批评观点,试图论证格吕克笔下的读者为何实际上有必要被迫“偷听”。一方面,史蒂文斯迫使读者产生的“偷听”经验与格吕克推崇的诗人“沉默”策略构成辩证统一关系,本质上是对艾略特式的现代主义“对话”模式的挑战和重构。另一方面,在战后背景下,以史蒂文斯为代表的诗人“拒斥读者”的策略被格吕克赋予了历史意义,隐喻了“二战”与“战后”两个时代之间的历史边界。史蒂文斯和格吕克的文学关系中具有尚未被学界充分发掘的复杂性和时代性。

Louise Glück,the Nobel Prize winner,negatively criticized Wallace Stevens,in that Stevens’ s works have forced his readers to “overhear,” which somehow suppressed Glück’s desire for poetry creation.Focusing on Glück’s criticism from the perspective of the “reader,” this paper would attempt to demonstrate why the reader in Glück’s assumption essentially should be forced to “overhear.” On the one hand,a dialectical unity exists between the feeling of “overhearing” that Stevens forced on his readers and the strategy of “silence” that Glück advocated,which challenges and rewrites the modernist “dialogue” represented by T.S.Eliot.On the other hand,in the postwar discourse,the tendency of the “exclusion of readers” is endowed with historical significance by Glück,metaphorically implying a historical barrier between the Second World War and the postwar era.The literary relationship between Stevens and Glück contains complexity and historical implications that are yet to be elaborated.