论卞之琳对艾略特莎评的过滤式接受

On Bian Zhilin’s Filtered Acceptance of T.S.Eliot’s Shakespearean Criticism

卞之琳秉承马克思主义的文艺观和方法论,对T.S.艾略特的莎评进行过滤式接受,在其著作《莎士比亚悲剧论痕》中频繁地提及艾略特的莎评。他接受艾略特对莎士比亚的崇高的文学地位的评价,但在对《哈姆雷特》的分析中,卞之琳批评艾略特重艺术,而不重思想,用艺术的“一致性”标准和“客观对应物”的美学理念来评判《哈姆雷特》的失败.艾略特认为《哈姆雷特》的基本情绪是哈姆雷特对有罪过的母亲的情绪,但剧中的很多事物与这一情绪没有对应关系。而卞之琳用马克思主义的文艺反映社会本质的理念来肯定《哈姆雷特》的成功,认为这个剧的核心是反映时代性和社会性,剧中的一切都围绕着这一核心展开。在对莎剧总的评价中,卞之琳批评艾略特重“流”,不重“源”,认为文艺复兴的人文主义是源,基督教精神是流,卞之琳从文学和社会关系的维度阐释莎剧。卞之琳与艾略特莎评的差异源于各自不同国家的社会气候和文学气候,卞之琳所处的是马克思主义广泛传播,并成为主流意识形态的中国,他接受了马克思主义的文艺思想。而T.S.艾略特所处的是资本主义的英国,秉持的是基督教人文主义的观念。卞之琳的过滤式接受反映了社会意识形态的主导作用,反映了中国学者在接受西方学术思想时的独立性和能动性。

Adhering to the Marxist view of literature and methodology,Bian Zhilin filtered and accepted T.S.Eliot’s Shakespearean criticism.He frequently referred to Eliot’s Shakespearean criticism in Towards a New Appraisal of Shakespearean Tragedy.Bian agreed with Eliot’s appraisal of Shakespeare’s great status in literature,but in the analysis of Hamlet,Bian Zhilin criticized Eliot for paying more attention to art than thought,and insisting on“consistency”standards and the concept of“objective correlative”to judge the failure of Hamlet.Eliot held that Hamlet was dominated by an emotion which was inexpressible.Hamlet’s bafflement at the absence of an objective equivalent to his feelings was a prolongation of the bafflement of his creator in the face of his artistic problem.Hamlet was up against the difficulty that his disgust was occasioned by his mother,but that his mother was not an adequate equivalent for it.Bian Zhilin appraised the success of Hamlet with Marxist literature and art that reflected the nature of social philosophy.He held that the core of Hamlet was a reflection of the character and society of the age.In the general evaluation of Shakespeare’s plays,Bian Zhilin criticized Eliot’s emphasis on“flow”rather than“source.”He denied Eliot’s Christian thinking and interpreted Shakespeare’s plays with humanism from the perspective of social nature and the relationship between literature and society.Bian and Eliot were different because they lived in different countries having different social and literary climates.Bian Zhilin lived in China in a society where Marxism spread and became the mainstream ideology.He accepted the literary and artistic ideas of Marxism,while Eliot lived in capitalist Britain and upheld the concept of Christian humanism.Bian Zhilin’s filtered acceptance reflects the dominant role of social ideology and the independence and activity of Chinese scholars in accepting Western academic thought.