中晚明诗学奉行“第一义”的不同路向及其得失

The different ways of pursuing"the First Meaning"and their gains and losses in the poetics of the middle and late Ming Dynasty

“第一义”学说与中晚明诗学具有紧密而复杂的关联,过往学人多将此视作七子派因袭模拟以致无穷流弊的重要思想渊源而屡有批评。但就文学创作的实际言,奉行第一义,特别是取法古人,既是无奈之举,也属必然选择。就彼时文坛的格局说,这是明代文人基于现实处境的应对之方,且伴随潮流变化而同步更张。就讨论诗文创作的模式论,或如七子派那般,对学习何种对象以及如何学习有具体明确的种种规定,或如公安派那般,仅有一些根本性的理念,且强调自我和自主。前者于方便后学的同时也极易滋生流弊,后者虽因通脱灵活广受好评,但也容易遭致“轻薄”“矜诞”等缺失。彼此各有利弊,如何解决这对矛盾成为历代文人的难题,个中关键或在于厘清歧异的表述方式及其带来的必然效果。

The theory of"the First Meaning"has a close and complex connection with the poetics of the middle and late Ming Dynasty,and in the past,scholars have often regarded this as an important ideological source of the imitation and endless malpractice of Seven-Scholar School,which has been criticized repeatedly.But in terms of literary creation,adhering to"the First Meaning",especially following the teachings of the ancients,is not only a helpless act,but also an inevitable choice.In terms of the pattern of the literary world at that time,this was the response of literati in the Ming Dynasty based on the actual situation,and it was synchronized with changes in trends.On the discussion of the mode theory of poetry and prose creation,there are either specific and clear regulations on what objects to learn and how to learn like the Seven-Scholar School,or only some fundamental concepts with focus on self and autonomy like the Public Security School.The former is not only convenient for later learning,but also prone to abuses,while the latter is widely praised for its fluency and flexibility,but also prone to shortcomings such as"frivolity"and"extravagance".Each has its own advantages and disadvantages,and how to solve this contradiction has become a difficult problem for literati throughout history.The key may lie in clarifying the different expressions and their inevitable effects.