明传奇历史剧的叙事艺术
|
摘要
明传奇历史剧是指明代创作的文学体制规范化和音乐体制格律化的长篇历史戏曲剧本。历史剧是指起码剧情中的主要人物和其部分事迹曾载诸史籍的剧作。明传奇历史剧叙事艺术之流变,主要表现在其处理史料的方式和人物境遇的设置上。
在明传奇历史剧发展的三个阶段中,以史书为本事来源创作的历史剧其比例在不断地下降,而以历史人物为剧中的主要人物,但其事迹多为作者所杜撰的这类剧作的比例却在不断地上升。这就显示了这样一个事实：明传奇历史剧的整个发展历程,是一个由主要依据史书来创作剧本到逐渐减少对史料依傍,多以虚构情节的方式进行创作的发展过程。这一变化从总体上说明,剧作家的“史学意识”在逐渐减弱,戏剧意识在逐渐增强。这给明传奇历史剧的创作带来了显著的影响——剧作的叙事艺术在不断地完善。具体表现在：1.愈益注重情节波澜的设置；2.情节线的针脚更加细密；3.情节的发展更加合乎情理。
明传奇历史剧在阐释历史时形成了几种能够完美处理剧与史、“虚”与“实”关系的情节建构模式。“情节建构模式”是指史剧处理史料、敷衍情节的基本建构样式。它是在传统认知观念、思维方式的基础上形成的,主要有三种样式：大率据史建构模式、可能性还原建构模式、虚实相应建构模式。在明传奇历史剧创作的发展历程中,可能性还原建构模式与大率据史建构模式的使用率总的来说是在逐渐减少,而虚实相应建构模式的使用率却在逐渐地增大,并有渐次为主的发展趋势。这种变化也正说明了明传奇历史剧作家的“史学意识”在逐渐减弱,而戏剧意识在不断地增强这样一个事实。
明传奇历史剧作家在艺术观念上的变化,主要是由“还事物以本来面目”的观念渐次向“史料为我所用”这一基本观念转变的。这种艺术观念的转变与整个明代社会思想价值观念的转换不无关系。明朝中期以后社会历史文化条件发生了很大的变化,程朱理学的地位发生了动摇,王阳明的心学理论在晚明迅速流播成为显学,并深入到普通民众之中,心学理论逐渐取代了程朱理学思想的统治地位。心学的主要特征是由内向外的实践,并在外部世界中来实现自我,而理学的“格物致知”是由外向内探究物理。两种学说在思维理路上的不同也正是明传奇历史剧“虚实相应建构模式”与“大率据史建构模式”在思维方式和观念上的差异。因此明代后期的史剧作家在创作时,更多的是以自身的认知和感受来处理史料及笔下的历史人物,而不是过多地囿于史实。
与元杂剧相比,明传奇历史剧最显著的基本特征是其叙事性的加强,元杂剧历史剧是尽量将历史事件转化为抒情因素,而明传奇历史剧是尽量将历史事件转化为叙事因素,其中不断完善的人物境遇设置就是其加强叙事性的一个重要标志。“人物现实境遇”简称“境遇”或“人物境遇”,主要是指那些能显示主人公的精神特质或性格特征的,在现实中可能发生的具体事件。明传奇历史剧的境遇设置是一个由少至多,由简单到复杂的流变过程。这种流变所揭示的是：1.明传奇历史剧的叙事艺术在逐步完善,即情节发展愈益曲折多变,事件性的戏剧冲突在逐步增多和加强,连续剧的艺术结构设计愈益完美。2.人物刻画愈益精细,主人公的单项度性格内涵渐趋“丰富”。3.明传奇历史剧的境遇设置是一种渐次复杂化(同类型境遇描述竞相呈现,或不同类型的境遇描述交错出现)的变化发展过程。这也表明,后期的明传奇历史剧创作在叙事艺术上已发展到了“极致”,并不太注重舞台形式的特征,注重的只是剧本本身复杂的情节结构,案头剧因此而形成。
古之察人论人有所谓“八观六验”、“六戚四隐”之法,这是采用多角度、多层面的方法和思路来识人、论人,是将人物放在一定的环境及人与人的关系中来彰显其品行的。明传奇历史剧增设人物现实境遇的基本方法和思路也是这样,以此来给人物的品格进行定性,因此“人之情伪贪鄙美恶,无所失矣”。这种观察人的方法是一种动态的观照法,其间就有着在不断转换的人物境遇中依据其行为表现来对人物进行审视和评判的思路。万历十五年以前的明传奇历史剧在彰显人物性格时,多采用“外”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇,极少以“内”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇；而在万历十五年以后采用“内”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇的现象却逐渐地增多了起来。也就是说,此时的明传奇历史剧的境遇内容有向贫民化、大众化方面贴近的趋势。
增设人物现实境遇的艺术功用有：1.令单向度人物的性格内涵渐趋丰富。“单向度人物性格”是指剧作在塑造历史人物时仅仅描写和突出了人物性格中某一层面的性格特征,而不是立体多层面地展现了其性格中的多种特征。明传奇历史剧在增设人物境遇时,其价值取向大体是依照儒家传统的“仁”之精神,在“仁义礼智信”的意义范围内来展开的,继而也在此基础上进一步丰富了其单向度人物的性格内涵。明传奇历史剧仅展现出人物性格中某一层面的性格内涵是有其合理性的,这是那个时代剧作获得成功的保证。2.便于确定人物性格的“本质意义”。随着人物境遇的增设出现了两种情形：一是主人公的活动环境在相对地扩大；二是主人公的不同境遇之间产生了相互映衬的作用。这两种情形的结果都是使主人公的性格中的“本质意义”被突显了出来。3.制造出剧作情节的艺术张力。明传奇历史剧在塑造历史人物时,要不断地描述人物新的境遇,要尽量将人物置于更大的环境中来显示其精神内涵,直至最终确定其“本质的性格特征”,这就使剧情具有了艺术的张力。
在明传奇历史剧的创作中,也有一种常见的现象,这就是剧情所描述的虽是历史人物在现实世界中的境遇,但同时又往往将一个非现实境遇搀杂到现实的境遇中来进行描述,并多让其成为剧情发展的肯綮。所谓“非现实境遇”,是指在剧情中人物所遭遇的非现实事件。这些事件往往是在某种观念中产生的,是现实中不可能实有的。对非现实境遇的描述,在明传奇历史剧艺术发展的整个过程中其比例是呈上升趋势的,这种上升不仅表现在其使用频率上,而且还表现在其使用范围的扩大上。对人物的非现实境遇进行描述,最初的作用仅为要表达一种观念或仅是剧情所要展现的一部分离奇的内容,可到中后期却被普遍地用于明传奇历史剧情节发展的肯綮之处,成为了一种消释冲突和促使剧情发生逆转的叙事手段。在明传奇历史剧的情节中捏合了两种不同性质的境遇描述,而打通这两种境遇描述所凭借的就是“体”、“用”一源的“心灵之眼”。
非现实境遇描述的艺术功用有：释冲突,“致中和”；强化鬼神观念,以期行为自律；慰藉人心,寄托情怀；为剧作的情节逆转提供叙事的捷径等等。前两个作用与儒家的传统诗学精神和本民族的传统鬼神观念有关,后两个作用与戏剧艺术的规律性有关。
传奇剧在体例上也有着理性的“规定形式”,也形成了一套适合于表意的“书法体例”,即一套严密的表意体例。这套表意体例实质上就是一套具有内外强化作用的评判方式。传奇剧体例中的这套评判方式极有利于剧作者对历史人物的忠奸程度进行鲜明的评判,也有利于剧作者为单向度人物的性格进行定性,使传奇历史剧形成二元对立的人物格局。这套评判方式主要有三类：标注式评判、节要式评判和叙事性评判。这三类评判方式于整合中完成了对某一历史人物和历史事件的评判和定性。但在明传奇历史剧的艺术创作中,这三类评判方式的艺术作用及它们对史剧文学品位的影响却有高下优劣之分。
标注式评判主要被运用于传奇剧的“出目”标注上,故每一出“目录”的含义实质上已给所描述的人物和事件定了性,即起到了或褒或贬的“评判”作用。可见“标注式评判”是在“出目”的用词中直接明示出对描述对象的褒贬之意。这种对人物或事件的概括性“评判”标注,是读者了解剧中情节和历史人物正邪程度的一个重要“环节”,读者在牵连起这一个个“出目”时,就能大致明白史剧剧情和题旨倾向了。
这种“标注式评判”方式,在正史中也被采用,两者的区别在于：史书中的“传目”标注,往往是根据政治上的需要将人物硬性归类,并按照归类的标准来叙述其事迹,以此达到对人物进行评判的目的。而传奇剧的“出目”标注(用约定俗成的两字式精确点评),是从剧情中提炼出思想内涵,从事物中找出有概括性的东西,并在一般共识的基础上来进行评判。它具有揭示历史人物性格,概括事件内涵的作用。
“节要式评判”,其方法和形式是对全剧或一个情节段,或某一出的主要人物情节进行集中的评判。它可细分为多种小类,其作用也略有差异。譬如可分为：小结式评判、承启式评判、综论式评判(如自报家门式的自我评判)等等。这类评判方式具有“集中”和“显性”的特征,它是在故事情节发展之外所进行的理性思考,并无推动剧情发展的作用,没有它的出现剧情依然完满,但它却是强化戏剧教化功能和对历史人物进行直接评判的重要表意形式,并有“间离”和引人深思的作用。它与戏剧情节相结合时的特点各不相同,对这种差异性的考查能给传奇历史剧创作以一定的启迪。
小结式评判是在某一情节段之后的评判。这种评判有时会出现失当之议和蛇足之论。承启式评判是一种承上启下的预报式评判,在承上概论剧情的同时又预报了下文将要出现的情节。这种“评判”形式的灵活性极强,具有可穿插使用的特点。但这类文字显然不宜过多,否则在历史面前有先入为主之嫌。“承启式评判”形式在明传奇历史剧中处理得较好。综论式评判,即对人或事的多个方面进行综合性的评价。这类评判对大致了解整个剧情,让观众理清剧情发展的基本脉络有一定的帮助。并也便于观众将其与历史相参照,但其于明传奇历史剧中有使用过滥的现象。
节要式评判除了能直接揭示剧作的主旨之外,还有一个重要的作用,即传奇历史剧作为叙事体的舞台艺术,容易使观众进入情境,为使观众对所表演的事件有一个分析和批判的立场,需要用这类评判方式在戏剧演出中产生“间离效果”,使观众能够暂离情感的旋涡进入到理性的思考之中。
从总体上说,正史与明传奇历史剧都墨守着“义”“例”相与为用的基本原则,以期能明确地阐发其义理。但此类评判方式在两种文本中的作用并不相同,在正史中“节要式评判”主要是起“揭示性”的作用,而于明传奇历史剧中它主要是起强化评判的作用。
节要式评判的作用不可小视,但如果不掌握分寸,处理得过了头会适得其反。
另外,“标注式评判”虽与“节要式评判”都是一种显性的评判,都是由叙述者直接出面所进行的评判,但两者对传奇历史剧叙事艺术的影响却不大相同,“标注式评判”所起到的作用主要是正面的,而“节要式评判”如果处理得不当,会对史剧的历史认知和文学品位产生负面的影响。所以传奇历史剧的作者多用上场诗和下场诗的形式来进行评点,以免议论过火过滥。
叙事性评判,即寓论断于叙事之中使读者自见其善恶的评判方式。这是一种隐性评判,是叙事性文本的本色性评判方式。对于传奇历史剧的创作来说,叙事性评判方式也正当其用,它能把作者的褒贬倾向与爱憎情感不露痕迹地渗透到对历史的叙述之中,让读者自己去鉴别和认知,从而得出自己的评判。这种评判是由作者和读者共同来完成的。
这种评判方式亦是史书中的主要表意方式,史书也是在自然的叙事中流露出了作者的评判倾向。有了这种能于不动声色的叙述中表达出作者的评判态度的方式,其它的评判方式就显得多余了。比较而言,一个是具有创造性的戏剧文本,一个是“纪实”性的历史文本,前者的评判意识比后者更为显露和强烈。由此可见在富有“创造性”的文学艺术领域内,更有利于封建统治阶级实施其精神控制的策略。
采用这种评判方式时,史书的作者是自己在叙述历史,而史剧的作者是尽量通过剧中人物之口——对立面双方、朋友、亲属等等剧中人物之口来叙事,即用所谓的“代言体”来叙事,这对表现历史内涵来说似乎更显得客观和有现场感,也更便于史剧采纳史事来对历史人物进行不动声色的评判。因此“叙事性评判”方式在传奇历史剧中具有将历史进行生态还原的性质。
可见,上述几种评判方式被运用于传奇历史剧中时,因形式不同它们与史剧的艺术可融性也不尽相同。所谓“艺术可融性”是指不同的评判形式在与史剧情节结合时,在融合的程度上、在艺术整体的紧密度上会不尽相同,不同的评判形式处于不同的艺术层面上。
“标注式评判”主要被运用于“出目”的表达中,“出目”对于剧情内容和整部剧作来说是艺术审美过程的中介环节。“标注式评判”处于史剧“艺术可融性”的表层,没有这类“标注式评判”,史剧文本也能够成立；采用了这类“标注式评判”,史剧的情节线索和内涵可一目了然,它有助于快速理清剧情发展的基本思路。
“节要式评判”被用于传奇历史剧中,其状态也处于戏剧“艺术可融性”的表层,它起着“间离性”的作用,它能打破剧情的感性幻觉为理性的目的性服务。它以显性的形式出现,与传奇历史剧连续性的情节发展线索相分离,使剧作情节处于一种相对静止的理性思考阶段。对于评判历史人物和历史事件而言,它为理性的目的性提供了一种显性的、直接的“强化服务”。
通常而言,叙事性文艺作品所追求的应当是一种“潜移默化的服务”形式,若将过于理性化的表达形式生硬地与叙事性的表达形式一起使用,必然会有枝蔓和蛇足之感。在这方面,郑樵于评论史书时也有同感,他说：“且纪传之中,既载善恶,足为鉴戒,何必于纪传之后,更加褒贬,此乃诸生决科之文,安可施于著述。”这一观点也同样适用于传奇历史剧的创作之中,明传奇历史剧有不少剧目在使用“节要式评判”时就给人有过火和蛇足之感(如《投梭记》的第四出)。
“叙事性评判”形式在传奇历史剧中,其状态则处于戏剧“艺术可融性”的深层。因“叙事性评判”形式能在不动声色的叙事中渗入作者的褒贬倾向,故它是叙事性传奇历史剧的主要表意形式和艺术的有机组成部分,也是史剧艺术之魅力所在。观众的情感与理性倾向往往因它而产生,且一旦产生,就将成为观众自发的行为动力。也就是说,“叙事性评判”是叙事性传奇历史剧的本真形态,它是理性思想与艺术的一种内在结合形式,并处于戏剧艺术的深层结构之中,它是用“艺术”来阐发思想,而不是用思想来阐释“艺术”。
以上分析说明：三类评判方式对于叙事性的传奇历史剧来说,标注式评判和叙事性评判一“显”一“隐”,不但有利于对历史人物进行定性,而且更有利于增强史剧的艺术表现力,对其进行运用将有助于提高传奇历史剧的艺术品位。将其处理得自然生动是使用这两类评判方式的基本原则,因此能否处理得引人入胜是史剧艺术优劣成败的关键所在,在此方面明传奇历史剧大多处理得较好。而“节要式评判”在传奇历史剧的创作中当慎用之,应注意把握分寸,否则在强化表意的同时、在过度强调发挥剧作的教化功能的同时,会因理性化过重而损伤了史剧艺术的整体表现力,在这方面明传奇历史剧的有些剧作没有把握好分寸,因用得过滥而破坏了艺术的韵味。
总之,传奇戏剧在体例上的理性的“规定形式”,能有效地对历史人物和历史事件进行评判,从而达到传播历史信息和灌输历史观念的目的。这种“义例相与为用”的表达方式,即通过一套能够于内外表里进行强化的评判方式来达到对历史人物进行褒扬和贬抑的目的,从而也起到了“诛奸谀于既死,发潜德之幽光”的作用。但在使用中,明传奇历史剧有时也出现了蛇足的现象和概念化等问题,可谓是优劣互见了。好在有优美的唱腔和虚拟的艺术表演形式弥补了某种“反艺术”的缺陷。
The legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty refers to the long historical plays whose literary system is standardized and whose musical system is formalized. The historical drama refers to the fact that the main characters in the plot and their partial deeds have been recorded in historical books. The vicissitudes of drama of the Ming Dynasty are mainly expressed in the way of treating historical materials and the setting up of the circumstances of characters.
The development of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty had three stages, in which the ratio of the historical drama originating in historical events was constantly dropping, while the ratio of the drama whose main characters were historical ones, yet their deeds being mostly fabricated by the author, was constantly rising. This indicates such a fact:the whole process of development of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty was a process of development in which plays created according to historical books gradually less depended on historical materials; creating was done by imaginary plots. Such a change, on the whole, indicated that the consciousness of historical learning was gradually weakening, while the consciousness of drama was gradually strengthening. This exerted an obvious influence on the creation of legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty-Its narrative art was constantly being perfected. It was concretely expressed in, firstly the more and more paying attention to the rise and fall of the plot, secondly its closeness and its development being much more and more reasonable.
The legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty forms several kinds of plot-structure models which can perfectly deal with the relations between drama and history-"fiction and fact". The plot-structure models refer to how historical drama deals with historical materials and enriches the plot. It is formed on the basis of traditional ideas of knowledge and their thinking style. There are three kinds of forms:structural model based on history, structural model in which possibility is restored, and structural model in which fiction and fact correspond. In the course of development of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, the use of the structural model in which possibility is restored and of the structural model mainly based on history, generally speaking, is gradually lessened, while the use of the structural model in which fiction and fact correspond is gradually increasing and its developing tendency is gradually to gain mastership. Such a change illustrates the fact that the consciousness of historical learning of the authors of the Ming Dynasty is gradually weakening, whereas the consciousness of drama is constantly strengthening.
The art notion of the legendary historical drama writers changed mainly from that of "restoring the original truth" to the basic one of "historical materials chosen available to oneself" step by step. Such a change in art notion was somewhat associated with the shift of the values of the social philosophy in the Ming Dynasty. After the mid Ming Dynasty, the social historical cultural conditions changed fundamentally, the dominating position of Cheng and Zhu's Neo-Confucianism was shaken, while Wang Yangming's theory of mind was spread rapidly and popular among grass roots to become the dominant school of thought, gradually taking place of Cheng and Zhu's Confucian school of idealistic philosophy.The main feature of Wang Yangming's theory of mind is a kind of practice moving from the internal to the external and realizes itself in the external world, while Cheng and Zhu's idealistic school, is characterized by studying the phenomena of nature in order to acquire knowledge, which is sort of exploring process from the external to the internal. The differences in the thinking way of the above-mentioned two schools are equal to those of structural model in which fiction and fact correspond and structural model based on history. Therefore, during the later Ming Dynasty,the drama writers have dealt with the historical materials and then created the historical figures according to their own social cognition and understanding rather than confined themselves within the bound of historical facts.
Compared with the poetic drama of the Yuan Dynasty, the salient basic characteristic of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is the strengthening of historical narrative quality, while the historical play in the Yuan poetic drama is, as much as possible, to turn historical events into lyrical factors. The legendary historical play of the Ming Dynasty is, as much as possible, to turn historical events into narrative factors-the constant perfection of the setting up of the circumstances of characters is an important mark of strengthening its narrative quality. The realistic circumstances of characters mainly refer to the concrete affairs which may possibly happen to the leading character, revealing his special spiritual quality or his characteristics. The setting up of the circumstances of characters in the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is a process of developing from few to many and from simplicity to complexity, which reveals 1) the narrative art in the legendary historical drama is getting better, namely, the development of plot is getting complicated, the incidental dramatic conflicts are gradually inereasing and strengthening, and the art structure design of play series is becoming more perfect; 2) the carving description of characters is getting much finer, the single-dimensional connotation of the leading characters is getting much richer; 3) the setting up of the circumstances of characters in the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is a developing process of becoming complicated gradually (the circumstances description of the same type appear competitively, or the circumstances description of different types occur alternatively). This also indicates the development of the creation of legendary historical play in late Ming Dynasty has reached the ultimate climax, focusing on the complexity of the plot structure of the play itself instead of the features of dramatic forms and finally bringing closet drama into existence, which is more suitable for reading than performing.The ancients used the methods of "eight observations and six examinations".
This means evaluating people from multiple perspectives, such as the thought of desire, knowing people, understanding their habits and behavior and applying different methods and ways to different people by observing them closely, which is adopted wisely to manifest the characters'traits by putting them in certain circumstances and the relationships among people. The same is true of the basic methods and way of thinking of increasing realistic circumstances of characters in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical play for the purpose of assessing their traits. Such methods of observing and judging people are dynamic, in which there exists the way of thinking of surveying and criticizing the characters according to their behaviours in the constantly shifting circumstances of characters.As far as the methods of setting up the circumstances of characters to display their traits are concerned, before 1587, the methods of externally observing and thinking were chiefly adopted; however, after 1587, the internal approaches of observing and thinking were likely to be considered more and more in this respect. That is to say, the content of circumstances in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical play tended to be plebeianized and popularized.
The artistic functions of increasing realistic circumstances of characters are shown as follows:1) the functions are enabling the connotation of characters to get richer. "One-dimensional character" refers to merely depicting and giving prominence to a single dimension or aspect of the intended character instead of presenting the multiple traits from different angles. As to the aspect of increasing circumstances of characters in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical plays, the value concepts roughly followed the traditional idea of Confucian Benevolence and were realized within the meaning scope of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, trust, and then further, on this basis, made the single dimensional character connotation richer. It was reasonable to focus on displaying a single trait connotation from a certain aspect in the legendary historical drama, which also proved the success of such historical dramas of that time.2) The functions help to identify the "essence meaning" of characters easily. Along_with the increasing of character circumstances, there exist two conditions:that is, on the one hand the activity of the leading character is extending comparatively, on the other hand the roles of the leading characters in different circumstances interact in between, the results of which will make the essential meaning in the traits of the leading characters salient.3) The functions help to produce the art tension of drama plot. For the legendary historical play of the Ming Dynasty, in the process of creating historical characters, the new circumstances of the characters must be repeatedly described, which aim to put the described ones in larger circumstances to reveal their spiritual connotation, and identify the "essential traits" as a result. In this way, the whole plot is characterized by the wanted art tension as well.
There exists such a kind of phenomenon, i.e. a plot description involves the realistic circumstances of the historical figures, and meanwhile it also intermingles a non-realistic circumstance with the realistic circumstances and then the former is likely to be treated as the crucial point of the plot development. The unrealistic circumstance refers to the unrealistic events the characters in the plots experience, which more often occur in certain notions and impossibly exist in the real world. In the whole developing process of Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, the ratio of the description of unrealistic circumstances is on the rise, which is reflected not only in its frequency but also in the extension of its usage. The functions of depicting the unrealistic circumstances of the characters varied accordingly at different stages, that is, initially it was employed for expressing a kind of notion or demonstrating a part of weird content for the plot development, later it was widely applied in the crucial turning points of the plot development, serving as a narrative device for resolving conflicts and promoting the reversal of plot developments. In the plots of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical plays, putting the circumstance descriptions of two different types together relied on the spiritual eye from which the substance (noumenon/ontology) and function (phenomena) originate.
The aesthetic functions of description of unrealistic circumstances have employed such conceptions as resolving conflicts, being devoted to moderation and harmony and strengthening the traditional concepts of ghosts and gods for self discipline, comforting others, entrusting emotions, and providing narrative devices/short-cuts/methods for the reversal of plots and so on. The former two have impact on the traditional Chinese poetic thoughts and are related to the native traditional ideas of ghosts and gods, meanwhile, the latter two are associated with the regularities of the art of drama.
As to compilation style, there exist rational "stipulated form" and a tight calligraphy style applicable to express meaning, in legendary historical drama. Essentially such meaning-expressing compilation style in legendary historical drama, a set of evaluation methods with interior and exterior strengthening function, is beneficial to evaluate the positive and negative sides of the characteristics of the historical figures and also to define the characteristics of the single-dimension figure, thus forming the dual-contradictory structure pattern. Such evaluation methods involve mainly three types, namely, marking, gist-of-the-section and narrative evaluation, which are used to realize the evaluation and judgment on a certain historical figure and event in an integrated way. However, the artistic functions of the three methods and their significance in the literary works of historical drama differ widely.
The marking of appraisal is mainly applied to that of the content in the legendary drama, so the implication of each content is virtually to define the described personages and events, namely, serving as the appreciation or depreciation of the evaluation. That is to say, the diction in the marking appraisal indicates directly the positive or negative meaning. With the features of summary of figures or events, the marking of evaluation is an important link for the potential readers to understand the plot of the drama or the intensity of the figures'positive or negative side. According to the Chumu (the content of the section in a drama) involved, the readers can grasp roughly the plot and the likely theme tendency of the drama.
This marking appraisal mode and method is also adopted in the official history. The difference between them (referring to the legendary drama and the official history) lies in the marking of "Zhuan mu(the content in the history presented in a series of biographies)". In the historical records the figures was classified unnaturally for a certain political purpose and then their events also were narrated accordingly for the purpose of evaluating them. However, the marking in legendary historical drama (usually commented accurately with two key words), is to refine the connotation and to seek something summative and then to make a reasonable evaluation based on the concluded agreement, which functions as revealing the characteristics of the historical figures and summarizing the connotation of the events.
As to the gist-of-the-section appraisal, its methods and forms are to focus on evaluating the major figures of the whole drama or one plot section, which also can be subdivided into smaller categories and differentiate slightly, for instance, summative evaluation, cohesive-coherent evaluation (i.e. a connecting link between what comes before and what goes after) and synthetic evaluation (for instance, self-evaluation, self-introduction type) and so on. The characteristics of these appraisal methods are centralized and explicit, which are a kind of rational thinking outside the development of plots, namely, it can not promote or improve the plot development. However, it can strengthen the instructive enlightening function of dramas and is an important form of expressing the meaning of judging the historical figures directly, with the function of alienation effect and making people think deeply. When it is combined with the related drama plots respectively, the characteristics concerned differ, the investigation of which can offer a certain inspiration for the creation of the legendary historical drama.
The summative appraisal is one used after the plot, in which improper arguments or redundancy may occur frequently. Cohesive-coherent appraisal is one of prediction which is a connecting link between the preceding and the following, namely, summarizing the above drama plot and guiding the coming plot, the form of which is extremely flexible and able to insert limited words alternatively and flexibly through the whole context, the form of which is dealt with in the writing of legendary historical plays. Synthetic appraisal is one which is comprehensive to judge the historical figures and events from multiple angles, which is helpful and convenient for the audience to understand the plot roughly, to grasp the basic train of thought of the plot, and then to make right comparisons with the related history. But, the use of it is a bit excessive in the legendary historical plays of the Ming Dynasty.
Apart from the function of directly revealing the drama theme, the gist-of-the-section appraisal of the legendary historical dramas, has the role of producing alienation effect, which will help the audience foster the analysis and critical standpoint and make them have rational thinking away from the swirl of emotion temporarily. It is known that the legendary historical drama is a narrative-style stage art, easily leading the audience into the plot circumstances.
On the whole, the books with official history records and the legendary historical dramas of the Ming Dynasty both strictly stick to the basic rules of interaction between doctrines and forms to elucidate definitely its doctrines of Confucian moral philosophy(义理)But the role of the gist-of-each-section differs in the above two types of texts (referring to the official history and the legendary historical drama), of which the former is for revelation, while the latter is chiefly for enforcing appraisal.
The usage of the gist-of-each-section appraisal is vital and so its proper application should be taken into careful consideration. Otherwise, it will run counter to desire due to the excessively improper dealing.
In addition, although both the marking appraisal and the gist-of-each-section appraisal are all apparent and conducted by the narrators directly, their impact on the narrative arts of legendary historical plays differ greatly, of which the former plays a positive role mainly, while the latter may exert a negative influence on the historical recognition and literary taste of historical dramas if it is dealt with improperly. So the authors of dramas are likely to make comments by adopting the form of on-stage or off-stage poems, and then avoid overreaching as a result.
The narrative appraisal, an implicit evaluation method with nature on narrative texts, is one of embedding the concluding judgment in the narrating process which can make readers aware of the good and evil of the text itself. To the creation of the legendary historical plays, the narrative appraisal is right for use, for it can help let the authors' various feelings, covering both positive and negative inclinations penetrate, into the process of narrating history, and then let the readers themselves distinguish and perceive so that they can obtain their own evaluation eventually. It is obvious that such an evaluation can be realized by both of the authors and the readers.
Such an evaluation method is also the main way of expressing the meaning in the books with official history records where the author's inclination of evaluation has been expressed in a natural way. In other words, this appraisal method dominates over others. Between the drama text with creativity and the documentary text reflecting historical records, it is apparent that the former is stronger than the latter comparatively regarding the consciousness of appraisal that the former is more helpful for the ruling class in China's feudal era to exert their tactics to control the spirit of people in the literary art field rich in creativity.
While adopting this kind of appraisal method, the authors of the books with history records are narrating the history by themselves, but the authors of the historical dramas are vividly narrating the story and demonstrate the authors'standpoint, attitude and feelings by the speaking of characters in the drama-both the opposite sides, friends and relatives etc, that is, so-called "Speaking-for-others" style or mouthpiece style. The "speaking-for-others" style seems more objective with the sense of presence for displaying historical connotation and more convenient for appraising the historical figures naturally with the adoption of historical events in historical dramas. So narrative appraisal approach is characterized with the feature of restoring the history to a natural circumstance in the legendary historical drama.
It is obvious that the artistic blendability with the historical dramas differentiates among their different forms when several kinds of appraisal modes and methods described above are applied in the legendary historical dramas. The so-called "art blendability" means that when different forms of appraisals are mixed with the plots of dramas, the degree of art blending into the plot circumstances will differ, which is true of the tightness of the art integrity. Therefore, different forms of appraisals are on different artistic levels too.
The marking appraisal is chiefly applied to the expression of the content of the section of the legendary drama, which is the interface of the aesthetic course of art for the story content and the whole play. The marking appraisal is also at the surface level, which is necessary for the establishment of historical drama texts. The adoption of the marking evaluation can make the clue and connotation of the dramas clear and facilitate the basic thinking of the development of story in a smooth way.
The gist-of-each-section appraisal is applied to the legendary historical dramas, the state of which is at the surface level of art blending, functioning as "alienation effect", which can break the perceptual illusion of plots and then serve for rational purposes. It appears in the explicit form, and is separated from the clues of the plot development with continuity of legendary historical plays, which will make the plot of the play reach relatively static rational thinking. As to the evaluation of historical figures and historical events, it has offered a kind of explicit and direct services with forces for rational purposes.
Usually, what narrative literary and art works pursue should be a form of "imperceptibly-influenced" service. The stiff mixture of over-rational expression with the narrating expression form tends to lead to such unwanted phenomenon, namely, the sense of redundancy, which is true of Zheng qiao's idea on commenting historical documentary books in this respect. Zheng qiao, a great historian in ancient China, held that both positive and negative (the good and evil) sides are worth to be mentioned in the process of commenting on historical records too. Such views are also suitable for the creation of legendary historical dramas too. However, the employment of the gist-of-each-section appraisal in many legendary historical dramas of the Ming Dynasty is unsuitable and farfetched, for instance, its use in the 4th section of "Throwing the Shuttle", a zaju drama, is a typical case.
As to the form of the narrative appraisal among the legendary historical plays, its state is rooted in the deeper layer of the art blendability in dramas. With such a form, the author's inclination for appreciation or depreciation can permeate through the narration naturally, so it is a main form of expressing the meaning and the integrated component of the art in narrating legendary historical plays etc., namely, the glamour of art of historical dramas too. This form tends to arouse the audience's emotion and rationality frequently, and then become audience's spontaneous behavioral motive force once it occurs. That is to say, the narrative evaluation is the original status quo of the narrative legendary historical play, an inherent combination of rational thoughts and art, which is lying in the deep structure of dramatic art and elucidates the thought instead of the other way round with the use of art.
The above-mentioned analysis indicates that among the three kinds of appraisal modes and methods, for the narrative legendary historical dramas, the evaluation of the marking and narrative type are judged in the light of the features of being "explicit" and "implicit" respectively, which helps not only to determine the nature of the historical figures, but also to strengthen the artistic expression force of historical dramas furthermore, the use of which is to raise the artistic taste of legendary historical dramas. Dealing with them in a natural and vivid way is the basic rule for the application of the above two appraisal modes and methods, so whether the author can cope with it properly is the key to the success of dramatic art, in which the dealing skills in the Ming Dynasty go smooth relatively. It is ideal to handle the degree to the point of avoiding the over-rationalization of the plots of dramas in the process of employing the gist-of-each-section appraisal so that the holistic expression force of dramatic art can be kept intact while the expression of meaning and the enlightening function of dramas are being enforced. In this respect, the over-use of the gist-of-each-section appraisal improperly in some plays of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical dramas once spoiled the aroma of dramatic art.
In a word, the rational stipulated form of legendary dramas in compilation style, can judge the historical figures and events effectively, thus achieving the goal of disseminating the historical information and inculcating the historical idea. Such expressive modes and methods of interaction between doctrines and forms can achieve the purpose of evaluating the appreciation and deprecation of historical figures internally and externally by the use of the set of evaluation modes and methods available, thus functioning as "putting forward the good with morality naturally while criticizing the evil". However, such problems as redundancy or predicting-prior-stereotype also occur in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, namely, it contains something positive and negative at the same time. Fortunately, the existing beautiful vocal music in a Chinese opera and fictitious artistic performance form remedy certain defects which are counter-arts.
在明传奇历史剧发展的三个阶段中,以史书为本事来源创作的历史剧其比例在不断地下降,而以历史人物为剧中的主要人物,但其事迹多为作者所杜撰的这类剧作的比例却在不断地上升。这就显示了这样一个事实：明传奇历史剧的整个发展历程,是一个由主要依据史书来创作剧本到逐渐减少对史料依傍,多以虚构情节的方式进行创作的发展过程。这一变化从总体上说明,剧作家的“史学意识”在逐渐减弱,戏剧意识在逐渐增强。这给明传奇历史剧的创作带来了显著的影响——剧作的叙事艺术在不断地完善。具体表现在：1.愈益注重情节波澜的设置；2.情节线的针脚更加细密；3.情节的发展更加合乎情理。
明传奇历史剧在阐释历史时形成了几种能够完美处理剧与史、“虚”与“实”关系的情节建构模式。“情节建构模式”是指史剧处理史料、敷衍情节的基本建构样式。它是在传统认知观念、思维方式的基础上形成的,主要有三种样式：大率据史建构模式、可能性还原建构模式、虚实相应建构模式。在明传奇历史剧创作的发展历程中,可能性还原建构模式与大率据史建构模式的使用率总的来说是在逐渐减少,而虚实相应建构模式的使用率却在逐渐地增大,并有渐次为主的发展趋势。这种变化也正说明了明传奇历史剧作家的“史学意识”在逐渐减弱,而戏剧意识在不断地增强这样一个事实。
明传奇历史剧作家在艺术观念上的变化,主要是由“还事物以本来面目”的观念渐次向“史料为我所用”这一基本观念转变的。这种艺术观念的转变与整个明代社会思想价值观念的转换不无关系。明朝中期以后社会历史文化条件发生了很大的变化,程朱理学的地位发生了动摇,王阳明的心学理论在晚明迅速流播成为显学,并深入到普通民众之中,心学理论逐渐取代了程朱理学思想的统治地位。心学的主要特征是由内向外的实践,并在外部世界中来实现自我,而理学的“格物致知”是由外向内探究物理。两种学说在思维理路上的不同也正是明传奇历史剧“虚实相应建构模式”与“大率据史建构模式”在思维方式和观念上的差异。因此明代后期的史剧作家在创作时,更多的是以自身的认知和感受来处理史料及笔下的历史人物,而不是过多地囿于史实。
与元杂剧相比,明传奇历史剧最显著的基本特征是其叙事性的加强,元杂剧历史剧是尽量将历史事件转化为抒情因素,而明传奇历史剧是尽量将历史事件转化为叙事因素,其中不断完善的人物境遇设置就是其加强叙事性的一个重要标志。“人物现实境遇”简称“境遇”或“人物境遇”,主要是指那些能显示主人公的精神特质或性格特征的,在现实中可能发生的具体事件。明传奇历史剧的境遇设置是一个由少至多,由简单到复杂的流变过程。这种流变所揭示的是：1.明传奇历史剧的叙事艺术在逐步完善,即情节发展愈益曲折多变,事件性的戏剧冲突在逐步增多和加强,连续剧的艺术结构设计愈益完美。2.人物刻画愈益精细,主人公的单项度性格内涵渐趋“丰富”。3.明传奇历史剧的境遇设置是一种渐次复杂化(同类型境遇描述竞相呈现,或不同类型的境遇描述交错出现)的变化发展过程。这也表明,后期的明传奇历史剧创作在叙事艺术上已发展到了“极致”,并不太注重舞台形式的特征,注重的只是剧本本身复杂的情节结构,案头剧因此而形成。
古之察人论人有所谓“八观六验”、“六戚四隐”之法,这是采用多角度、多层面的方法和思路来识人、论人,是将人物放在一定的环境及人与人的关系中来彰显其品行的。明传奇历史剧增设人物现实境遇的基本方法和思路也是这样,以此来给人物的品格进行定性,因此“人之情伪贪鄙美恶,无所失矣”。这种观察人的方法是一种动态的观照法,其间就有着在不断转换的人物境遇中依据其行为表现来对人物进行审视和评判的思路。万历十五年以前的明传奇历史剧在彰显人物性格时,多采用“外”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇,极少以“内”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇；而在万历十五年以后采用“内”观之法和思路来设置人物境遇的现象却逐渐地增多了起来。也就是说,此时的明传奇历史剧的境遇内容有向贫民化、大众化方面贴近的趋势。
增设人物现实境遇的艺术功用有：1.令单向度人物的性格内涵渐趋丰富。“单向度人物性格”是指剧作在塑造历史人物时仅仅描写和突出了人物性格中某一层面的性格特征,而不是立体多层面地展现了其性格中的多种特征。明传奇历史剧在增设人物境遇时,其价值取向大体是依照儒家传统的“仁”之精神,在“仁义礼智信”的意义范围内来展开的,继而也在此基础上进一步丰富了其单向度人物的性格内涵。明传奇历史剧仅展现出人物性格中某一层面的性格内涵是有其合理性的,这是那个时代剧作获得成功的保证。2.便于确定人物性格的“本质意义”。随着人物境遇的增设出现了两种情形：一是主人公的活动环境在相对地扩大；二是主人公的不同境遇之间产生了相互映衬的作用。这两种情形的结果都是使主人公的性格中的“本质意义”被突显了出来。3.制造出剧作情节的艺术张力。明传奇历史剧在塑造历史人物时,要不断地描述人物新的境遇,要尽量将人物置于更大的环境中来显示其精神内涵,直至最终确定其“本质的性格特征”,这就使剧情具有了艺术的张力。
在明传奇历史剧的创作中,也有一种常见的现象,这就是剧情所描述的虽是历史人物在现实世界中的境遇,但同时又往往将一个非现实境遇搀杂到现实的境遇中来进行描述,并多让其成为剧情发展的肯綮。所谓“非现实境遇”,是指在剧情中人物所遭遇的非现实事件。这些事件往往是在某种观念中产生的,是现实中不可能实有的。对非现实境遇的描述,在明传奇历史剧艺术发展的整个过程中其比例是呈上升趋势的,这种上升不仅表现在其使用频率上,而且还表现在其使用范围的扩大上。对人物的非现实境遇进行描述,最初的作用仅为要表达一种观念或仅是剧情所要展现的一部分离奇的内容,可到中后期却被普遍地用于明传奇历史剧情节发展的肯綮之处,成为了一种消释冲突和促使剧情发生逆转的叙事手段。在明传奇历史剧的情节中捏合了两种不同性质的境遇描述,而打通这两种境遇描述所凭借的就是“体”、“用”一源的“心灵之眼”。
非现实境遇描述的艺术功用有：释冲突,“致中和”；强化鬼神观念,以期行为自律；慰藉人心,寄托情怀；为剧作的情节逆转提供叙事的捷径等等。前两个作用与儒家的传统诗学精神和本民族的传统鬼神观念有关,后两个作用与戏剧艺术的规律性有关。
传奇剧在体例上也有着理性的“规定形式”,也形成了一套适合于表意的“书法体例”,即一套严密的表意体例。这套表意体例实质上就是一套具有内外强化作用的评判方式。传奇剧体例中的这套评判方式极有利于剧作者对历史人物的忠奸程度进行鲜明的评判,也有利于剧作者为单向度人物的性格进行定性,使传奇历史剧形成二元对立的人物格局。这套评判方式主要有三类：标注式评判、节要式评判和叙事性评判。这三类评判方式于整合中完成了对某一历史人物和历史事件的评判和定性。但在明传奇历史剧的艺术创作中,这三类评判方式的艺术作用及它们对史剧文学品位的影响却有高下优劣之分。
标注式评判主要被运用于传奇剧的“出目”标注上,故每一出“目录”的含义实质上已给所描述的人物和事件定了性,即起到了或褒或贬的“评判”作用。可见“标注式评判”是在“出目”的用词中直接明示出对描述对象的褒贬之意。这种对人物或事件的概括性“评判”标注,是读者了解剧中情节和历史人物正邪程度的一个重要“环节”,读者在牵连起这一个个“出目”时,就能大致明白史剧剧情和题旨倾向了。
这种“标注式评判”方式,在正史中也被采用,两者的区别在于：史书中的“传目”标注,往往是根据政治上的需要将人物硬性归类,并按照归类的标准来叙述其事迹,以此达到对人物进行评判的目的。而传奇剧的“出目”标注(用约定俗成的两字式精确点评),是从剧情中提炼出思想内涵,从事物中找出有概括性的东西,并在一般共识的基础上来进行评判。它具有揭示历史人物性格,概括事件内涵的作用。
“节要式评判”,其方法和形式是对全剧或一个情节段,或某一出的主要人物情节进行集中的评判。它可细分为多种小类,其作用也略有差异。譬如可分为：小结式评判、承启式评判、综论式评判(如自报家门式的自我评判)等等。这类评判方式具有“集中”和“显性”的特征,它是在故事情节发展之外所进行的理性思考,并无推动剧情发展的作用,没有它的出现剧情依然完满,但它却是强化戏剧教化功能和对历史人物进行直接评判的重要表意形式,并有“间离”和引人深思的作用。它与戏剧情节相结合时的特点各不相同,对这种差异性的考查能给传奇历史剧创作以一定的启迪。
小结式评判是在某一情节段之后的评判。这种评判有时会出现失当之议和蛇足之论。承启式评判是一种承上启下的预报式评判,在承上概论剧情的同时又预报了下文将要出现的情节。这种“评判”形式的灵活性极强,具有可穿插使用的特点。但这类文字显然不宜过多,否则在历史面前有先入为主之嫌。“承启式评判”形式在明传奇历史剧中处理得较好。综论式评判,即对人或事的多个方面进行综合性的评价。这类评判对大致了解整个剧情,让观众理清剧情发展的基本脉络有一定的帮助。并也便于观众将其与历史相参照,但其于明传奇历史剧中有使用过滥的现象。
节要式评判除了能直接揭示剧作的主旨之外,还有一个重要的作用,即传奇历史剧作为叙事体的舞台艺术,容易使观众进入情境,为使观众对所表演的事件有一个分析和批判的立场,需要用这类评判方式在戏剧演出中产生“间离效果”,使观众能够暂离情感的旋涡进入到理性的思考之中。
从总体上说,正史与明传奇历史剧都墨守着“义”“例”相与为用的基本原则,以期能明确地阐发其义理。但此类评判方式在两种文本中的作用并不相同,在正史中“节要式评判”主要是起“揭示性”的作用,而于明传奇历史剧中它主要是起强化评判的作用。
节要式评判的作用不可小视,但如果不掌握分寸,处理得过了头会适得其反。
另外,“标注式评判”虽与“节要式评判”都是一种显性的评判,都是由叙述者直接出面所进行的评判,但两者对传奇历史剧叙事艺术的影响却不大相同,“标注式评判”所起到的作用主要是正面的,而“节要式评判”如果处理得不当,会对史剧的历史认知和文学品位产生负面的影响。所以传奇历史剧的作者多用上场诗和下场诗的形式来进行评点,以免议论过火过滥。
叙事性评判,即寓论断于叙事之中使读者自见其善恶的评判方式。这是一种隐性评判,是叙事性文本的本色性评判方式。对于传奇历史剧的创作来说,叙事性评判方式也正当其用,它能把作者的褒贬倾向与爱憎情感不露痕迹地渗透到对历史的叙述之中,让读者自己去鉴别和认知,从而得出自己的评判。这种评判是由作者和读者共同来完成的。
这种评判方式亦是史书中的主要表意方式,史书也是在自然的叙事中流露出了作者的评判倾向。有了这种能于不动声色的叙述中表达出作者的评判态度的方式,其它的评判方式就显得多余了。比较而言,一个是具有创造性的戏剧文本,一个是“纪实”性的历史文本,前者的评判意识比后者更为显露和强烈。由此可见在富有“创造性”的文学艺术领域内,更有利于封建统治阶级实施其精神控制的策略。
采用这种评判方式时,史书的作者是自己在叙述历史,而史剧的作者是尽量通过剧中人物之口——对立面双方、朋友、亲属等等剧中人物之口来叙事,即用所谓的“代言体”来叙事,这对表现历史内涵来说似乎更显得客观和有现场感,也更便于史剧采纳史事来对历史人物进行不动声色的评判。因此“叙事性评判”方式在传奇历史剧中具有将历史进行生态还原的性质。
可见,上述几种评判方式被运用于传奇历史剧中时,因形式不同它们与史剧的艺术可融性也不尽相同。所谓“艺术可融性”是指不同的评判形式在与史剧情节结合时,在融合的程度上、在艺术整体的紧密度上会不尽相同,不同的评判形式处于不同的艺术层面上。
“标注式评判”主要被运用于“出目”的表达中,“出目”对于剧情内容和整部剧作来说是艺术审美过程的中介环节。“标注式评判”处于史剧“艺术可融性”的表层,没有这类“标注式评判”,史剧文本也能够成立；采用了这类“标注式评判”,史剧的情节线索和内涵可一目了然,它有助于快速理清剧情发展的基本思路。
“节要式评判”被用于传奇历史剧中,其状态也处于戏剧“艺术可融性”的表层,它起着“间离性”的作用,它能打破剧情的感性幻觉为理性的目的性服务。它以显性的形式出现,与传奇历史剧连续性的情节发展线索相分离,使剧作情节处于一种相对静止的理性思考阶段。对于评判历史人物和历史事件而言,它为理性的目的性提供了一种显性的、直接的“强化服务”。
通常而言,叙事性文艺作品所追求的应当是一种“潜移默化的服务”形式,若将过于理性化的表达形式生硬地与叙事性的表达形式一起使用,必然会有枝蔓和蛇足之感。在这方面,郑樵于评论史书时也有同感,他说：“且纪传之中,既载善恶,足为鉴戒,何必于纪传之后,更加褒贬,此乃诸生决科之文,安可施于著述。”这一观点也同样适用于传奇历史剧的创作之中,明传奇历史剧有不少剧目在使用“节要式评判”时就给人有过火和蛇足之感(如《投梭记》的第四出)。
“叙事性评判”形式在传奇历史剧中,其状态则处于戏剧“艺术可融性”的深层。因“叙事性评判”形式能在不动声色的叙事中渗入作者的褒贬倾向,故它是叙事性传奇历史剧的主要表意形式和艺术的有机组成部分,也是史剧艺术之魅力所在。观众的情感与理性倾向往往因它而产生,且一旦产生,就将成为观众自发的行为动力。也就是说,“叙事性评判”是叙事性传奇历史剧的本真形态,它是理性思想与艺术的一种内在结合形式,并处于戏剧艺术的深层结构之中,它是用“艺术”来阐发思想,而不是用思想来阐释“艺术”。
以上分析说明：三类评判方式对于叙事性的传奇历史剧来说,标注式评判和叙事性评判一“显”一“隐”,不但有利于对历史人物进行定性,而且更有利于增强史剧的艺术表现力,对其进行运用将有助于提高传奇历史剧的艺术品位。将其处理得自然生动是使用这两类评判方式的基本原则,因此能否处理得引人入胜是史剧艺术优劣成败的关键所在,在此方面明传奇历史剧大多处理得较好。而“节要式评判”在传奇历史剧的创作中当慎用之,应注意把握分寸,否则在强化表意的同时、在过度强调发挥剧作的教化功能的同时,会因理性化过重而损伤了史剧艺术的整体表现力,在这方面明传奇历史剧的有些剧作没有把握好分寸,因用得过滥而破坏了艺术的韵味。
总之,传奇戏剧在体例上的理性的“规定形式”,能有效地对历史人物和历史事件进行评判,从而达到传播历史信息和灌输历史观念的目的。这种“义例相与为用”的表达方式,即通过一套能够于内外表里进行强化的评判方式来达到对历史人物进行褒扬和贬抑的目的,从而也起到了“诛奸谀于既死,发潜德之幽光”的作用。但在使用中,明传奇历史剧有时也出现了蛇足的现象和概念化等问题,可谓是优劣互见了。好在有优美的唱腔和虚拟的艺术表演形式弥补了某种“反艺术”的缺陷。
The legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty refers to the long historical plays whose literary system is standardized and whose musical system is formalized. The historical drama refers to the fact that the main characters in the plot and their partial deeds have been recorded in historical books. The vicissitudes of drama of the Ming Dynasty are mainly expressed in the way of treating historical materials and the setting up of the circumstances of characters.
The development of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty had three stages, in which the ratio of the historical drama originating in historical events was constantly dropping, while the ratio of the drama whose main characters were historical ones, yet their deeds being mostly fabricated by the author, was constantly rising. This indicates such a fact:the whole process of development of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty was a process of development in which plays created according to historical books gradually less depended on historical materials; creating was done by imaginary plots. Such a change, on the whole, indicated that the consciousness of historical learning was gradually weakening, while the consciousness of drama was gradually strengthening. This exerted an obvious influence on the creation of legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty-Its narrative art was constantly being perfected. It was concretely expressed in, firstly the more and more paying attention to the rise and fall of the plot, secondly its closeness and its development being much more and more reasonable.
The legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty forms several kinds of plot-structure models which can perfectly deal with the relations between drama and history-"fiction and fact". The plot-structure models refer to how historical drama deals with historical materials and enriches the plot. It is formed on the basis of traditional ideas of knowledge and their thinking style. There are three kinds of forms:structural model based on history, structural model in which possibility is restored, and structural model in which fiction and fact correspond. In the course of development of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, the use of the structural model in which possibility is restored and of the structural model mainly based on history, generally speaking, is gradually lessened, while the use of the structural model in which fiction and fact correspond is gradually increasing and its developing tendency is gradually to gain mastership. Such a change illustrates the fact that the consciousness of historical learning of the authors of the Ming Dynasty is gradually weakening, whereas the consciousness of drama is constantly strengthening.
The art notion of the legendary historical drama writers changed mainly from that of "restoring the original truth" to the basic one of "historical materials chosen available to oneself" step by step. Such a change in art notion was somewhat associated with the shift of the values of the social philosophy in the Ming Dynasty. After the mid Ming Dynasty, the social historical cultural conditions changed fundamentally, the dominating position of Cheng and Zhu's Neo-Confucianism was shaken, while Wang Yangming's theory of mind was spread rapidly and popular among grass roots to become the dominant school of thought, gradually taking place of Cheng and Zhu's Confucian school of idealistic philosophy.The main feature of Wang Yangming's theory of mind is a kind of practice moving from the internal to the external and realizes itself in the external world, while Cheng and Zhu's idealistic school, is characterized by studying the phenomena of nature in order to acquire knowledge, which is sort of exploring process from the external to the internal. The differences in the thinking way of the above-mentioned two schools are equal to those of structural model in which fiction and fact correspond and structural model based on history. Therefore, during the later Ming Dynasty,the drama writers have dealt with the historical materials and then created the historical figures according to their own social cognition and understanding rather than confined themselves within the bound of historical facts.
Compared with the poetic drama of the Yuan Dynasty, the salient basic characteristic of the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is the strengthening of historical narrative quality, while the historical play in the Yuan poetic drama is, as much as possible, to turn historical events into lyrical factors. The legendary historical play of the Ming Dynasty is, as much as possible, to turn historical events into narrative factors-the constant perfection of the setting up of the circumstances of characters is an important mark of strengthening its narrative quality. The realistic circumstances of characters mainly refer to the concrete affairs which may possibly happen to the leading character, revealing his special spiritual quality or his characteristics. The setting up of the circumstances of characters in the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is a process of developing from few to many and from simplicity to complexity, which reveals 1) the narrative art in the legendary historical drama is getting better, namely, the development of plot is getting complicated, the incidental dramatic conflicts are gradually inereasing and strengthening, and the art structure design of play series is becoming more perfect; 2) the carving description of characters is getting much finer, the single-dimensional connotation of the leading characters is getting much richer; 3) the setting up of the circumstances of characters in the legendary historical drama of the Ming Dynasty is a developing process of becoming complicated gradually (the circumstances description of the same type appear competitively, or the circumstances description of different types occur alternatively). This also indicates the development of the creation of legendary historical play in late Ming Dynasty has reached the ultimate climax, focusing on the complexity of the plot structure of the play itself instead of the features of dramatic forms and finally bringing closet drama into existence, which is more suitable for reading than performing.The ancients used the methods of "eight observations and six examinations".
This means evaluating people from multiple perspectives, such as the thought of desire, knowing people, understanding their habits and behavior and applying different methods and ways to different people by observing them closely, which is adopted wisely to manifest the characters'traits by putting them in certain circumstances and the relationships among people. The same is true of the basic methods and way of thinking of increasing realistic circumstances of characters in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical play for the purpose of assessing their traits. Such methods of observing and judging people are dynamic, in which there exists the way of thinking of surveying and criticizing the characters according to their behaviours in the constantly shifting circumstances of characters.As far as the methods of setting up the circumstances of characters to display their traits are concerned, before 1587, the methods of externally observing and thinking were chiefly adopted; however, after 1587, the internal approaches of observing and thinking were likely to be considered more and more in this respect. That is to say, the content of circumstances in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical play tended to be plebeianized and popularized.
The artistic functions of increasing realistic circumstances of characters are shown as follows:1) the functions are enabling the connotation of characters to get richer. "One-dimensional character" refers to merely depicting and giving prominence to a single dimension or aspect of the intended character instead of presenting the multiple traits from different angles. As to the aspect of increasing circumstances of characters in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical plays, the value concepts roughly followed the traditional idea of Confucian Benevolence and were realized within the meaning scope of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, trust, and then further, on this basis, made the single dimensional character connotation richer. It was reasonable to focus on displaying a single trait connotation from a certain aspect in the legendary historical drama, which also proved the success of such historical dramas of that time.2) The functions help to identify the "essence meaning" of characters easily. Along_with the increasing of character circumstances, there exist two conditions:that is, on the one hand the activity of the leading character is extending comparatively, on the other hand the roles of the leading characters in different circumstances interact in between, the results of which will make the essential meaning in the traits of the leading characters salient.3) The functions help to produce the art tension of drama plot. For the legendary historical play of the Ming Dynasty, in the process of creating historical characters, the new circumstances of the characters must be repeatedly described, which aim to put the described ones in larger circumstances to reveal their spiritual connotation, and identify the "essential traits" as a result. In this way, the whole plot is characterized by the wanted art tension as well.
There exists such a kind of phenomenon, i.e. a plot description involves the realistic circumstances of the historical figures, and meanwhile it also intermingles a non-realistic circumstance with the realistic circumstances and then the former is likely to be treated as the crucial point of the plot development. The unrealistic circumstance refers to the unrealistic events the characters in the plots experience, which more often occur in certain notions and impossibly exist in the real world. In the whole developing process of Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, the ratio of the description of unrealistic circumstances is on the rise, which is reflected not only in its frequency but also in the extension of its usage. The functions of depicting the unrealistic circumstances of the characters varied accordingly at different stages, that is, initially it was employed for expressing a kind of notion or demonstrating a part of weird content for the plot development, later it was widely applied in the crucial turning points of the plot development, serving as a narrative device for resolving conflicts and promoting the reversal of plot developments. In the plots of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical plays, putting the circumstance descriptions of two different types together relied on the spiritual eye from which the substance (noumenon/ontology) and function (phenomena) originate.
The aesthetic functions of description of unrealistic circumstances have employed such conceptions as resolving conflicts, being devoted to moderation and harmony and strengthening the traditional concepts of ghosts and gods for self discipline, comforting others, entrusting emotions, and providing narrative devices/short-cuts/methods for the reversal of plots and so on. The former two have impact on the traditional Chinese poetic thoughts and are related to the native traditional ideas of ghosts and gods, meanwhile, the latter two are associated with the regularities of the art of drama.
As to compilation style, there exist rational "stipulated form" and a tight calligraphy style applicable to express meaning, in legendary historical drama. Essentially such meaning-expressing compilation style in legendary historical drama, a set of evaluation methods with interior and exterior strengthening function, is beneficial to evaluate the positive and negative sides of the characteristics of the historical figures and also to define the characteristics of the single-dimension figure, thus forming the dual-contradictory structure pattern. Such evaluation methods involve mainly three types, namely, marking, gist-of-the-section and narrative evaluation, which are used to realize the evaluation and judgment on a certain historical figure and event in an integrated way. However, the artistic functions of the three methods and their significance in the literary works of historical drama differ widely.
The marking of appraisal is mainly applied to that of the content in the legendary drama, so the implication of each content is virtually to define the described personages and events, namely, serving as the appreciation or depreciation of the evaluation. That is to say, the diction in the marking appraisal indicates directly the positive or negative meaning. With the features of summary of figures or events, the marking of evaluation is an important link for the potential readers to understand the plot of the drama or the intensity of the figures'positive or negative side. According to the Chumu (the content of the section in a drama) involved, the readers can grasp roughly the plot and the likely theme tendency of the drama.
This marking appraisal mode and method is also adopted in the official history. The difference between them (referring to the legendary drama and the official history) lies in the marking of "Zhuan mu(the content in the history presented in a series of biographies)". In the historical records the figures was classified unnaturally for a certain political purpose and then their events also were narrated accordingly for the purpose of evaluating them. However, the marking in legendary historical drama (usually commented accurately with two key words), is to refine the connotation and to seek something summative and then to make a reasonable evaluation based on the concluded agreement, which functions as revealing the characteristics of the historical figures and summarizing the connotation of the events.
As to the gist-of-the-section appraisal, its methods and forms are to focus on evaluating the major figures of the whole drama or one plot section, which also can be subdivided into smaller categories and differentiate slightly, for instance, summative evaluation, cohesive-coherent evaluation (i.e. a connecting link between what comes before and what goes after) and synthetic evaluation (for instance, self-evaluation, self-introduction type) and so on. The characteristics of these appraisal methods are centralized and explicit, which are a kind of rational thinking outside the development of plots, namely, it can not promote or improve the plot development. However, it can strengthen the instructive enlightening function of dramas and is an important form of expressing the meaning of judging the historical figures directly, with the function of alienation effect and making people think deeply. When it is combined with the related drama plots respectively, the characteristics concerned differ, the investigation of which can offer a certain inspiration for the creation of the legendary historical drama.
The summative appraisal is one used after the plot, in which improper arguments or redundancy may occur frequently. Cohesive-coherent appraisal is one of prediction which is a connecting link between the preceding and the following, namely, summarizing the above drama plot and guiding the coming plot, the form of which is extremely flexible and able to insert limited words alternatively and flexibly through the whole context, the form of which is dealt with in the writing of legendary historical plays. Synthetic appraisal is one which is comprehensive to judge the historical figures and events from multiple angles, which is helpful and convenient for the audience to understand the plot roughly, to grasp the basic train of thought of the plot, and then to make right comparisons with the related history. But, the use of it is a bit excessive in the legendary historical plays of the Ming Dynasty.
Apart from the function of directly revealing the drama theme, the gist-of-the-section appraisal of the legendary historical dramas, has the role of producing alienation effect, which will help the audience foster the analysis and critical standpoint and make them have rational thinking away from the swirl of emotion temporarily. It is known that the legendary historical drama is a narrative-style stage art, easily leading the audience into the plot circumstances.
On the whole, the books with official history records and the legendary historical dramas of the Ming Dynasty both strictly stick to the basic rules of interaction between doctrines and forms to elucidate definitely its doctrines of Confucian moral philosophy(义理)But the role of the gist-of-each-section differs in the above two types of texts (referring to the official history and the legendary historical drama), of which the former is for revelation, while the latter is chiefly for enforcing appraisal.
The usage of the gist-of-each-section appraisal is vital and so its proper application should be taken into careful consideration. Otherwise, it will run counter to desire due to the excessively improper dealing.
In addition, although both the marking appraisal and the gist-of-each-section appraisal are all apparent and conducted by the narrators directly, their impact on the narrative arts of legendary historical plays differ greatly, of which the former plays a positive role mainly, while the latter may exert a negative influence on the historical recognition and literary taste of historical dramas if it is dealt with improperly. So the authors of dramas are likely to make comments by adopting the form of on-stage or off-stage poems, and then avoid overreaching as a result.
The narrative appraisal, an implicit evaluation method with nature on narrative texts, is one of embedding the concluding judgment in the narrating process which can make readers aware of the good and evil of the text itself. To the creation of the legendary historical plays, the narrative appraisal is right for use, for it can help let the authors' various feelings, covering both positive and negative inclinations penetrate, into the process of narrating history, and then let the readers themselves distinguish and perceive so that they can obtain their own evaluation eventually. It is obvious that such an evaluation can be realized by both of the authors and the readers.
Such an evaluation method is also the main way of expressing the meaning in the books with official history records where the author's inclination of evaluation has been expressed in a natural way. In other words, this appraisal method dominates over others. Between the drama text with creativity and the documentary text reflecting historical records, it is apparent that the former is stronger than the latter comparatively regarding the consciousness of appraisal that the former is more helpful for the ruling class in China's feudal era to exert their tactics to control the spirit of people in the literary art field rich in creativity.
While adopting this kind of appraisal method, the authors of the books with history records are narrating the history by themselves, but the authors of the historical dramas are vividly narrating the story and demonstrate the authors'standpoint, attitude and feelings by the speaking of characters in the drama-both the opposite sides, friends and relatives etc, that is, so-called "Speaking-for-others" style or mouthpiece style. The "speaking-for-others" style seems more objective with the sense of presence for displaying historical connotation and more convenient for appraising the historical figures naturally with the adoption of historical events in historical dramas. So narrative appraisal approach is characterized with the feature of restoring the history to a natural circumstance in the legendary historical drama.
It is obvious that the artistic blendability with the historical dramas differentiates among their different forms when several kinds of appraisal modes and methods described above are applied in the legendary historical dramas. The so-called "art blendability" means that when different forms of appraisals are mixed with the plots of dramas, the degree of art blending into the plot circumstances will differ, which is true of the tightness of the art integrity. Therefore, different forms of appraisals are on different artistic levels too.
The marking appraisal is chiefly applied to the expression of the content of the section of the legendary drama, which is the interface of the aesthetic course of art for the story content and the whole play. The marking appraisal is also at the surface level, which is necessary for the establishment of historical drama texts. The adoption of the marking evaluation can make the clue and connotation of the dramas clear and facilitate the basic thinking of the development of story in a smooth way.
The gist-of-each-section appraisal is applied to the legendary historical dramas, the state of which is at the surface level of art blending, functioning as "alienation effect", which can break the perceptual illusion of plots and then serve for rational purposes. It appears in the explicit form, and is separated from the clues of the plot development with continuity of legendary historical plays, which will make the plot of the play reach relatively static rational thinking. As to the evaluation of historical figures and historical events, it has offered a kind of explicit and direct services with forces for rational purposes.
Usually, what narrative literary and art works pursue should be a form of "imperceptibly-influenced" service. The stiff mixture of over-rational expression with the narrating expression form tends to lead to such unwanted phenomenon, namely, the sense of redundancy, which is true of Zheng qiao's idea on commenting historical documentary books in this respect. Zheng qiao, a great historian in ancient China, held that both positive and negative (the good and evil) sides are worth to be mentioned in the process of commenting on historical records too. Such views are also suitable for the creation of legendary historical dramas too. However, the employment of the gist-of-each-section appraisal in many legendary historical dramas of the Ming Dynasty is unsuitable and farfetched, for instance, its use in the 4th section of "Throwing the Shuttle", a zaju drama, is a typical case.
As to the form of the narrative appraisal among the legendary historical plays, its state is rooted in the deeper layer of the art blendability in dramas. With such a form, the author's inclination for appreciation or depreciation can permeate through the narration naturally, so it is a main form of expressing the meaning and the integrated component of the art in narrating legendary historical plays etc., namely, the glamour of art of historical dramas too. This form tends to arouse the audience's emotion and rationality frequently, and then become audience's spontaneous behavioral motive force once it occurs. That is to say, the narrative evaluation is the original status quo of the narrative legendary historical play, an inherent combination of rational thoughts and art, which is lying in the deep structure of dramatic art and elucidates the thought instead of the other way round with the use of art.
The above-mentioned analysis indicates that among the three kinds of appraisal modes and methods, for the narrative legendary historical dramas, the evaluation of the marking and narrative type are judged in the light of the features of being "explicit" and "implicit" respectively, which helps not only to determine the nature of the historical figures, but also to strengthen the artistic expression force of historical dramas furthermore, the use of which is to raise the artistic taste of legendary historical dramas. Dealing with them in a natural and vivid way is the basic rule for the application of the above two appraisal modes and methods, so whether the author can cope with it properly is the key to the success of dramatic art, in which the dealing skills in the Ming Dynasty go smooth relatively. It is ideal to handle the degree to the point of avoiding the over-rationalization of the plots of dramas in the process of employing the gist-of-each-section appraisal so that the holistic expression force of dramatic art can be kept intact while the expression of meaning and the enlightening function of dramas are being enforced. In this respect, the over-use of the gist-of-each-section appraisal improperly in some plays of the Ming Dynasty legendary historical dramas once spoiled the aroma of dramatic art.
In a word, the rational stipulated form of legendary dramas in compilation style, can judge the historical figures and events effectively, thus achieving the goal of disseminating the historical information and inculcating the historical idea. Such expressive modes and methods of interaction between doctrines and forms can achieve the purpose of evaluating the appreciation and deprecation of historical figures internally and externally by the use of the set of evaluation modes and methods available, thus functioning as "putting forward the good with morality naturally while criticizing the evil". However, such problems as redundancy or predicting-prior-stereotype also occur in the Ming Dynasty legendary historical drama, namely, it contains something positive and negative at the same time. Fortunately, the existing beautiful vocal music in a Chinese opera and fictitious artistic performance form remedy certain defects which are counter-arts.
引文
1.[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏》[M],中华书局,1980年版。
2.[明]毛晋编：《六十种曲》[G],中华书局出版,1996年第4次印刷。
3.[清]王士祯撰、张世林点校：《分甘余话》[M],上海古籍出版社,1989年第1版。
4.中国戏典研究院：《中国古典戏曲论著集成》(1-10册)[G],中国戏剧出版社,1959年版。
5.孙书磊：《中国古代历史剧研究》[M],南京师范大学出版社,2004年7月第1版。
6.奚海:《元杂剧论》[M],河北教育出版社,2001年5月第1版。
7.[梁]刘勰著、周振甫注：《文心雕龙》[M],人民文学出版社,1981年版。
8.周裕锴:《中国古代阐释学研究》[M],上海人民出版社,2003年11月第1版。
9.齐森华、陈多、叶长海主编：《中国曲学大辞典》[G],浙江教育出版社,1997年12月第1版。
10.李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版。
11.[宋]普济著、苏渊雷点校：《五灯会元》[M],中华书局,1984年第1版。
12.葛剑雄、周筱赞：《历史学是什么》[M],北京大学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
13.余秋雨:《中国戏剧文化史述》[M],湖南人民出版社,1985年版。
14.李修生、赵义山主编：《中国分体文学史戏曲卷》(修订本)[M],上海古籍出版社,2001年版。
15.么书仪著：《元人杂剧与古代社会》[M],北京大学出版社,1998年版。
16.邓绍基等主编：《元代文学史》[M],人民文学出版社,1991年版。
17.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊初集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1954年版。
18.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊二集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1954年版。
19.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊三集》[G],北京,文学古籍刊行社,1957年版。
20.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊四集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1958年版。
21.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊五集》[G],上海古籍出版社,1986年版。
22.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊九集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1964年版。
23.司马迁撰：《史记》[M],中华书局,2005年第1版。
24.[唐]刘知几撰、[清]浦起龙释：《史通》[M],上海古籍出版社,1978年第1版。
25.[宋]朱熹撰、金良年今译：《四书章句集注》[M],上海古籍出版社,2006年第1版。
26.[唐]李延寿著：《北史》[M],中华书局,1974年第1版。
27.[后晋]刘昫等撰：《旧唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第l版。
28.陈澔注：《礼记》[M],上海古籍出版社,1987年第1版。
29.[汉]班固撰、[唐]颜师古注：《汉书》[M],中华书局,1962年第1版。
30.茅盾著：《关于历史和历史剧》[M],作家出版社,1962年版。
31.[清]董诰等编：《全唐文》[G],中华书局,1983年第1版。
32.[宋]范晔著：《后汉书》[M],中华书局,2007年第1版。
33.张双棣等译注：《吕氏春秋》[M],中华书局,2007年版。
34.杨伯峻译注：《论语译注》[M],中华书局,1980年第1版。
35.杨伯峻译注：《孟子译注》[M],中华书局,2005年第2版。
36.张三丰著、方春阳点校：《张三丰全集》[G],浙江古籍出版社,1990年第1版。
37.王卫民编校：《吴梅全集》[G],河北教育出版社,2001年第1版。
38.[唐]孔颖达等正义：《尚书》[M],中华书局,1998年第1版。
29.柳诒徵著：《国史要义》[M],中国人民大学出版社,2007年第1版。
30.王国良：《明清时期儒学核心价值的转换》[M],安徽大学出版社,2002年2月第1版。
31.郭英德编著：《明清传奇综录》[G],河北教育出版社,1997年7月第1版。
32.郭英德：《明清传奇史》[M],江苏古籍出版社,2001年5月第1版。
33.郭英德：《明清传奇戏曲文体研究》[M],商务印书馆,2004年7月第1版。
34.[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版。
35.[清]王士祯撰：《香祖笔记》[M],上海古籍出版社,1982年第1版。
36.[宋]司马光编著、[元]]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M],中华书局,1956年第1版。
37.[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆民国24年(1935)。
38.[清]沈德潜选注：《唐诗别裁》[G],中华书局,1964年第1版。
39.何宁：《淮南子集释》[M],中华书局,1978年第1版。
40.李养正：《道教概说》[M],中华书局,1989年第1版。
41.张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版。
42.吴玉杰：《新历史主义与历史剧的艺术建构》[M],中国社会科学出版社,2005年4月第1版。
43.[宋]欧阳修、宋祁撰：《新唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第1版。
44.李凯：《儒家元典与中国诗学》[M],中国社会科学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
1.王海燕：《20世纪明清历史剧研究综述》,《南阳师范学院学报》(社科版)[J],2006年第2期。
2.孙书磊：《20世纪历史剧争论之检讨》,《南京师范大学学报》(社科版)[J],2005年第3期。
3.陈剩勇：《中国传统史学的伦理教化功能试析》,《学习与探索》[J],1995年第5期。
4.顾宇倩：《元杂剧中三国戏题材探源》,《扬州大学学报》(人文社会科学版)[J],1999年01期。
5.顾宇倩：《元杂剧中三国戏艺术管窥》,《扬州大学学报》(人文社会科学版)[J],1997年06期。
6.谭帆：《元代历史剧的虚构艺术》,《华东师范大学学报》[J],1986年5期。
7.李雁：《对历史剧的界定及其在元杂剧中的鉴别和统计》,《山东社会科学》[J],2003年第4期。
8.关四平、陈默：《市井文学框架与诗骚抒情传统·论元杂剧三国戏的美学风格》,《绥化师专学报》[J],2003年第3期。
9.杨翼、乔治忠：《论中国古代史学理论的思想体系》,《南开学报》(哲社版)[J],1995年第5期。
10.伏涤修：《论<长生殿>、<桃花扇>在古代历史剧创作中的典范意义》,《同济大学学报》(社会科学版)[J],2005年第3期。
11.张东光：《传统史学的衡评模式与衡评标准》,《河南教育学院学报》(哲社版)[J],1995年第1期。
12.孟昭燕：《略谈历史剧》,《历史教学问题》[J],1999年01期。
13.田同旭：《演人·借鬼演人·再演人：论古代戏曲艺术题材的嬗变》,《山西大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)[J],1995年01期。
①郭英德：《明清传奇综录》[M],河北教育出版社,1997年7月第1版,第3页。
②同上
①[宋]司马光编著、[元]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M]卷二百九十四,中华书局,1956年第1版,第9608页。
②[宋]司马光编著、[元]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M]之《新注资治通鉴序》,中华书局,1956年第1版,第28页。
①[明]冯梦龙编：《智囊》[M]
②《曲海总目提要》[M]卷9引《总评》,人民文学出版社,1959年版。
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论——当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第82页。
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第l版,第71页。
②阐释方式与思维方式是一种表里关系,本质上是一致的。
①周振甫：《周易译注》[M],中华中局,1991年4月第1版,第271页。
①杨伯峻编著:《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第1099页。
②杜预注、孔颖达正义：《春秋左传正义》[M],上海古籍出版,1990年版,第366页。
③王卫民编校：《吴梅全集》[M](理论卷上),河北教育出版社,2001年第1版,第89页。
①[汉]班固撰：《汉书》[M]卷三十,中华书局,1962年第1版,第1755-1756页。
②杨伯峻编著：《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第1145页。
③参见李清良的《中国阐释学》[M]第三章。
④[宋]司马光编纂：《资治通鉴》[M],岳麓书社,1990年5月第1版,第650页。
①[汉]王充撰：《论衡》[M],上海古籍出版社,1992年7月第1版,第139页。
②李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版,第118页。
①中国戏曲研究院：《中国古典戏曲论著集成》[G](第九册),中国戏剧出版社,1959年8月版,第247页。
②[东汉]徐干著、[宋]曾巩校勘：《中论·治学》[M],上海,商务印书馆,1922年版。
①杨伯峻编：《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第10页。
①张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版,第16页。
②[明]祝世禄：《分金记·序》[M]
①王岳川：《二十世纪西方哲性诗学》[M],北京大学出版社,1999年版,第446页。
②朱熹撰：《四书章句集注》[M],中华书局,1983年版,第350页。
③焦循撰、沈文倬点校：《孟子正义》[M](下),中华书局,1987年版,第638页。
④《老子·十一章》[M]
⑤陈鼓应：《老子今注今译》[M],北京,商务印书馆,2004年1月1日版。
①[宋]普济著、苏渊雷点校：《五灯会元》[M],中华书局,1984年第1版,第127页。
②[清]沈德潜选注：《唐诗别裁》[G],中华书局,1964年第l版,《凡例》第1页。
①同下,第65页。
②[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译:《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第66页。
③[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第81页。
①维度：有“属性、范围、系数、承受能力”等意思,对象不同所指代的意思也不尽相同,此为“范围”、“内容”之义。
②[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社2006年3月第1版,第81页。
③张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版,第31页。
④同上
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论——当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第87页。
①[美]亚伯拉罕·马斯洛著、许金声译：《动机与人格》[M],中国人民大学出版社,2007版。
②参见金道行的《文学创作的潜动机》,《写作》[J]杂志,2005年第5期。
③王玉林：《红楼梦是隐秘曹家历史的小说考证》,《中华读书报》[N],2004年3月3日。
④同上
①王国维：《观堂集林》[M],河北教育出版社,2001年版,第717页。
②赵诒琛辑：《丙子丛编》[M],台湾艺文印书馆,1973年版。
③徐復祚撰：《三家村老委谈》[M],台北新兴,1986年版。
①[明]佘翘撰：《新镌量江記》[M],商务印书馆,1955年版,第1页。
①[宋]陆九渊著、钟哲点校：《陆九渊集》[G]卷二,中华书局,1980年1月第1版,第16-17页。
①[清]戴震：《戴震集》,《答郑丈用牧书》[M],上海古籍出版社,1980年版,第186页。
②伽达默尔是海德格尔的学生,他们在上个世纪将作为一般方法论的阐释学发展成为哲学本体论,从而使阐释学跻身于哲学之列。其后,许多学者又将作为方法论和本体论的阐释学运用到文学文本的理解之中,由此产生出文学阐释学这一分支。
③伽达默尔著,夏镇平、宋建平译：《哲学解释学》[M],上海译文出版社,1994年版。
④全句为：“所闻诗无达诂,易无达占,春秋无达辞”。(出自董仲舒的《春秋繁露·精华》。“诗无达诂”是说：诗词没有通达的解释。“达诂”的意思是确切的训诂或解释。董氏从先秦人赋诗言志多断章取义的实际情况出发,认为：要自由表达意旨,可不顾及原诗题旨对《诗》进行任意引用和发挥。)
⑤参见李凯的《儒家元典与中国诗学》[M]第四章,中国社会科学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
①王弼著、韩康伯注、孔颖达疏：《周易正义》[M],九州出版社,2004版,第776页。
①《管子·宙合》[M]
②[宋]朱熹撰、[宋]黎靖德编：《朱子语类》[M],中华书局,1986年版,第161页。
①纪昀等纂：《钦定四库全书总目》[M],中华书局,1997年版,第532页。
②纪昀等纂：《钦定四库全书总目》[M],中华书局,1997年版,第1025页。
③同上,第1357页。
④[宋]陆九渊著：《陆九渊集》[G],北京,中华书局,2008年9月第2版,第399页。
⑤[宋]陆九渊著：《陆九渊集》[G],北京,中华书局,2008年9月第2版,第395页。
①焦循撰、沈文倬点校：《孟子正义》[M](下),中华书局,1987年版,第638页。
②同上
③[宋]朱熹：《四书章句集注》[M],上海书店,1987年版,第127页。
④朱熹：《四书章句集注》[M],中华书局,1983年版,第59页。
①黑格尔：《法哲学原理》[M],北京,商务印书馆,1961年版,第12页。
②[清]黄宗羲著：《明儒学案》[M]卷十,北京,中华书局,1985年10月第1版,第179页。
③邹元标：《愿学集》[M]卷五下,《重修阳明先生祠记》。
④[明]王畿：《重刻阳明先生(文录)后序》[A],录自《龙溪王先生全集》[G]卷十三。
①[明]王阳明：《传习录》[M](下),北京,蓝天出版社,2007年12月第1版,第242页。
②[明]王阳明：《传习录》[M](上),北京,蓝天出版社,2007年12月第1版,第132页。
①[汉]董仲舒撰：《春秋繁露》[M],中华书局,1975年版,第99页。
①[战国]吕不韦：《吕氏春秋》[M]第三卷,上海古籍出版社,1989年3月第1版,第30页。
①朱熹：《玉山讲义》[M],《朱子大全》[G]43册,卷74,上海,中华书局,1936年版,第18页。
①吕天成撰、吴书荫校注：《曲品校注》[M],中华书局,1990年版,第1页。
①参见潇元的《尖型人物和圆型人物的新解》,《写作》[J]杂志,2006年第12期。
①王安石著：《王临川集》[G]卷七十三,《答曾子固书》,北京,商务印书馆,1940年版。
②[清]顾炎武著、[清]黄汝成集释：《日知录集释》[M],上海古籍出版社,2006年版,第947页。
①《陆九渊集》[G]卷三十四,《语录上》。
②李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版,第110页。
③沈括：《梦溪笔谈》[M]卷十七。
①[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·礼记正义》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第1625页。
①恩格斯著,中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《自然辩证法》[M],人民出版社,1971年版,第15页。
②同上,第24页。
①[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·论语注疏》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第2468页。
②《左传·昭公二十年》[M]。
③司马迁著：《史记》[M],中华书局,1959年版,第1956页。
④[宋]沈约撰：《宋书》[M],中华书局,1974年版,第736页。
①[汉]孔安国撰：《尚书正义》[M],上海古籍出版社,2004年版。
②[清]皮锡瑞撰：《今文尚书考证》[M],中华书局,1989年版,第84页。
③李养正：《道教概说》[M],中华书局,1989年第1版,第4页。
④[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·论语注疏》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第2490页。
⑤同上,第2498页。
⑥同上,第2513页。
①《老子》[M]第33章。
②《老子》[M]第50章。
③《老子》[M]第59章。
④《庄子·逍遥游》[M]。
⑤《庄子·大宗师》[M]。
⑥《庄子·田子方》[M]。
①[唐]刘知几撰、[清]浦起龙释：《史通》[M],上海古籍出版社,1978年第一版,第37页。
①[唐]李延寿著：《北史》[M]卷五六,中华书局,1974年第一版,第203页。
①[宋]欧阳修、宋祁撰：《新唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第一版,第5540页。
①注：“间离效果”,又译为“陌生化效果”,最早出现在俄国形式主义艺术家维克多·斯克洛夫斯基的著名文章《艺术作为艺术手段》中,后来为德国著名戏剧家贝托尔特·布莱希特发展成为更成熟的戏剧艺术理论。
②如,《左传·隐公》[M]：“君子曰,颖考叔,纯孝也”。“君子谓,郑庄公失政刑矣”。《左传·襄公》[M]：“君子以为知礼”等。《春秋左传正义》[M],上海古籍出版社,1990年第一版。
①[后晋]刘昫等撰：《旧唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第一版,第4509页。
①“箴”：文体名,是规戒性的韵文。
②刘昫等撰：《旧唐书·李德裕传》[M],中华书局出版,1975年版,第4528页。
③脱脱等撰：《宋史》[M],中华书局,1977年版,第9570页。
④[梁]刘勰著,周振甫注：《文心雕龙》[M],人民文学出版社,1981年版,第169页。
①[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆,民国24年(1935),第2页。
①[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆,民国24年(1935),第1页。
①[唐]韩愈著、余冠英等主编：《唐宋八大家全集·韩愈集》[G],国际文化出版公司,1997年版,第332页。
2.[明]毛晋编：《六十种曲》[G],中华书局出版,1996年第4次印刷。
3.[清]王士祯撰、张世林点校：《分甘余话》[M],上海古籍出版社,1989年第1版。
4.中国戏典研究院：《中国古典戏曲论著集成》(1-10册)[G],中国戏剧出版社,1959年版。
5.孙书磊：《中国古代历史剧研究》[M],南京师范大学出版社,2004年7月第1版。
6.奚海:《元杂剧论》[M],河北教育出版社,2001年5月第1版。
7.[梁]刘勰著、周振甫注：《文心雕龙》[M],人民文学出版社,1981年版。
8.周裕锴:《中国古代阐释学研究》[M],上海人民出版社,2003年11月第1版。
9.齐森华、陈多、叶长海主编：《中国曲学大辞典》[G],浙江教育出版社,1997年12月第1版。
10.李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版。
11.[宋]普济著、苏渊雷点校：《五灯会元》[M],中华书局,1984年第1版。
12.葛剑雄、周筱赞：《历史学是什么》[M],北京大学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
13.余秋雨:《中国戏剧文化史述》[M],湖南人民出版社,1985年版。
14.李修生、赵义山主编：《中国分体文学史戏曲卷》(修订本)[M],上海古籍出版社,2001年版。
15.么书仪著：《元人杂剧与古代社会》[M],北京大学出版社,1998年版。
16.邓绍基等主编：《元代文学史》[M],人民文学出版社,1991年版。
17.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊初集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1954年版。
18.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊二集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1954年版。
19.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊三集》[G],北京,文学古籍刊行社,1957年版。
20.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊四集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1958年版。
21.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊五集》[G],上海古籍出版社,1986年版。
22.古本戏曲丛刊编委会：《古本戏曲丛刊九集》[G],上海,商务印书馆,1964年版。
23.司马迁撰：《史记》[M],中华书局,2005年第1版。
24.[唐]刘知几撰、[清]浦起龙释：《史通》[M],上海古籍出版社,1978年第1版。
25.[宋]朱熹撰、金良年今译：《四书章句集注》[M],上海古籍出版社,2006年第1版。
26.[唐]李延寿著：《北史》[M],中华书局,1974年第1版。
27.[后晋]刘昫等撰：《旧唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第l版。
28.陈澔注：《礼记》[M],上海古籍出版社,1987年第1版。
29.[汉]班固撰、[唐]颜师古注：《汉书》[M],中华书局,1962年第1版。
30.茅盾著：《关于历史和历史剧》[M],作家出版社,1962年版。
31.[清]董诰等编：《全唐文》[G],中华书局,1983年第1版。
32.[宋]范晔著：《后汉书》[M],中华书局,2007年第1版。
33.张双棣等译注：《吕氏春秋》[M],中华书局,2007年版。
34.杨伯峻译注：《论语译注》[M],中华书局,1980年第1版。
35.杨伯峻译注：《孟子译注》[M],中华书局,2005年第2版。
36.张三丰著、方春阳点校：《张三丰全集》[G],浙江古籍出版社,1990年第1版。
37.王卫民编校：《吴梅全集》[G],河北教育出版社,2001年第1版。
38.[唐]孔颖达等正义：《尚书》[M],中华书局,1998年第1版。
29.柳诒徵著：《国史要义》[M],中国人民大学出版社,2007年第1版。
30.王国良：《明清时期儒学核心价值的转换》[M],安徽大学出版社,2002年2月第1版。
31.郭英德编著：《明清传奇综录》[G],河北教育出版社,1997年7月第1版。
32.郭英德：《明清传奇史》[M],江苏古籍出版社,2001年5月第1版。
33.郭英德：《明清传奇戏曲文体研究》[M],商务印书馆,2004年7月第1版。
34.[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版。
35.[清]王士祯撰：《香祖笔记》[M],上海古籍出版社,1982年第1版。
36.[宋]司马光编著、[元]]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M],中华书局,1956年第1版。
37.[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆民国24年(1935)。
38.[清]沈德潜选注：《唐诗别裁》[G],中华书局,1964年第1版。
39.何宁：《淮南子集释》[M],中华书局,1978年第1版。
40.李养正：《道教概说》[M],中华书局,1989年第1版。
41.张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版。
42.吴玉杰：《新历史主义与历史剧的艺术建构》[M],中国社会科学出版社,2005年4月第1版。
43.[宋]欧阳修、宋祁撰：《新唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第1版。
44.李凯：《儒家元典与中国诗学》[M],中国社会科学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
1.王海燕：《20世纪明清历史剧研究综述》,《南阳师范学院学报》(社科版)[J],2006年第2期。
2.孙书磊：《20世纪历史剧争论之检讨》,《南京师范大学学报》(社科版)[J],2005年第3期。
3.陈剩勇：《中国传统史学的伦理教化功能试析》,《学习与探索》[J],1995年第5期。
4.顾宇倩：《元杂剧中三国戏题材探源》,《扬州大学学报》(人文社会科学版)[J],1999年01期。
5.顾宇倩：《元杂剧中三国戏艺术管窥》,《扬州大学学报》(人文社会科学版)[J],1997年06期。
6.谭帆：《元代历史剧的虚构艺术》,《华东师范大学学报》[J],1986年5期。
7.李雁：《对历史剧的界定及其在元杂剧中的鉴别和统计》,《山东社会科学》[J],2003年第4期。
8.关四平、陈默：《市井文学框架与诗骚抒情传统·论元杂剧三国戏的美学风格》,《绥化师专学报》[J],2003年第3期。
9.杨翼、乔治忠：《论中国古代史学理论的思想体系》,《南开学报》(哲社版)[J],1995年第5期。
10.伏涤修：《论<长生殿>、<桃花扇>在古代历史剧创作中的典范意义》,《同济大学学报》(社会科学版)[J],2005年第3期。
11.张东光：《传统史学的衡评模式与衡评标准》,《河南教育学院学报》(哲社版)[J],1995年第1期。
12.孟昭燕：《略谈历史剧》,《历史教学问题》[J],1999年01期。
13.田同旭：《演人·借鬼演人·再演人：论古代戏曲艺术题材的嬗变》,《山西大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)[J],1995年01期。
①郭英德：《明清传奇综录》[M],河北教育出版社,1997年7月第1版,第3页。
②同上
①[宋]司马光编著、[元]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M]卷二百九十四,中华书局,1956年第1版,第9608页。
②[宋]司马光编著、[元]胡三省音注：《资治通鉴》[M]之《新注资治通鉴序》,中华书局,1956年第1版,第28页。
①[明]冯梦龙编：《智囊》[M]
②《曲海总目提要》[M]卷9引《总评》,人民文学出版社,1959年版。
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论——当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第82页。
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第l版,第71页。
②阐释方式与思维方式是一种表里关系,本质上是一致的。
①周振甫：《周易译注》[M],中华中局,1991年4月第1版,第271页。
①杨伯峻编著:《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第1099页。
②杜预注、孔颖达正义：《春秋左传正义》[M],上海古籍出版,1990年版,第366页。
③王卫民编校：《吴梅全集》[M](理论卷上),河北教育出版社,2001年第1版,第89页。
①[汉]班固撰：《汉书》[M]卷三十,中华书局,1962年第1版,第1755-1756页。
②杨伯峻编著：《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第1145页。
③参见李清良的《中国阐释学》[M]第三章。
④[宋]司马光编纂：《资治通鉴》[M],岳麓书社,1990年5月第1版,第650页。
①[汉]王充撰：《论衡》[M],上海古籍出版社,1992年7月第1版,第139页。
②李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版,第118页。
①中国戏曲研究院：《中国古典戏曲论著集成》[G](第九册),中国戏剧出版社,1959年8月版,第247页。
②[东汉]徐干著、[宋]曾巩校勘：《中论·治学》[M],上海,商务印书馆,1922年版。
①杨伯峻编：《春秋左氏传》[M](修订本),中华书局,1990年5月第1版,第10页。
①张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版,第16页。
②[明]祝世禄：《分金记·序》[M]
①王岳川：《二十世纪西方哲性诗学》[M],北京大学出版社,1999年版,第446页。
②朱熹撰：《四书章句集注》[M],中华书局,1983年版,第350页。
③焦循撰、沈文倬点校：《孟子正义》[M](下),中华书局,1987年版,第638页。
④《老子·十一章》[M]
⑤陈鼓应：《老子今注今译》[M],北京,商务印书馆,2004年1月1日版。
①[宋]普济著、苏渊雷点校：《五灯会元》[M],中华书局,1984年第1版,第127页。
②[清]沈德潜选注：《唐诗别裁》[G],中华书局,1964年第l版,《凡例》第1页。
①同下,第65页。
②[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译:《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第66页。
③[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第81页。
①维度：有“属性、范围、系数、承受能力”等意思,对象不同所指代的意思也不尽相同,此为“范围”、“内容”之义。
②[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论-当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社2006年3月第1版,第81页。
③张隆溪：《道与逻各斯》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年5月第1版,第31页。
④同上
①[英]特里·伊格尔顿著、王逢振译：《现象学、阐释学,接受理论——当代西方文艺理论》[M],江苏教育出版社,2006年3月第1版,第87页。
①[美]亚伯拉罕·马斯洛著、许金声译：《动机与人格》[M],中国人民大学出版社,2007版。
②参见金道行的《文学创作的潜动机》,《写作》[J]杂志,2005年第5期。
③王玉林：《红楼梦是隐秘曹家历史的小说考证》,《中华读书报》[N],2004年3月3日。
④同上
①王国维：《观堂集林》[M],河北教育出版社,2001年版,第717页。
②赵诒琛辑：《丙子丛编》[M],台湾艺文印书馆,1973年版。
③徐復祚撰：《三家村老委谈》[M],台北新兴,1986年版。
①[明]佘翘撰：《新镌量江記》[M],商务印书馆,1955年版,第1页。
①[宋]陆九渊著、钟哲点校：《陆九渊集》[G]卷二,中华书局,1980年1月第1版,第16-17页。
①[清]戴震：《戴震集》,《答郑丈用牧书》[M],上海古籍出版社,1980年版,第186页。
②伽达默尔是海德格尔的学生,他们在上个世纪将作为一般方法论的阐释学发展成为哲学本体论,从而使阐释学跻身于哲学之列。其后,许多学者又将作为方法论和本体论的阐释学运用到文学文本的理解之中,由此产生出文学阐释学这一分支。
③伽达默尔著,夏镇平、宋建平译：《哲学解释学》[M],上海译文出版社,1994年版。
④全句为：“所闻诗无达诂,易无达占,春秋无达辞”。(出自董仲舒的《春秋繁露·精华》。“诗无达诂”是说：诗词没有通达的解释。“达诂”的意思是确切的训诂或解释。董氏从先秦人赋诗言志多断章取义的实际情况出发,认为：要自由表达意旨,可不顾及原诗题旨对《诗》进行任意引用和发挥。)
⑤参见李凯的《儒家元典与中国诗学》[M]第四章,中国社会科学出版社,2002年8月第1版。
①王弼著、韩康伯注、孔颖达疏：《周易正义》[M],九州出版社,2004版,第776页。
①《管子·宙合》[M]
②[宋]朱熹撰、[宋]黎靖德编：《朱子语类》[M],中华书局,1986年版,第161页。
①纪昀等纂：《钦定四库全书总目》[M],中华书局,1997年版,第532页。
②纪昀等纂：《钦定四库全书总目》[M],中华书局,1997年版,第1025页。
③同上,第1357页。
④[宋]陆九渊著：《陆九渊集》[G],北京,中华书局,2008年9月第2版,第399页。
⑤[宋]陆九渊著：《陆九渊集》[G],北京,中华书局,2008年9月第2版,第395页。
①焦循撰、沈文倬点校：《孟子正义》[M](下),中华书局,1987年版,第638页。
②同上
③[宋]朱熹：《四书章句集注》[M],上海书店,1987年版,第127页。
④朱熹：《四书章句集注》[M],中华书局,1983年版,第59页。
①黑格尔：《法哲学原理》[M],北京,商务印书馆,1961年版,第12页。
②[清]黄宗羲著：《明儒学案》[M]卷十,北京,中华书局,1985年10月第1版,第179页。
③邹元标：《愿学集》[M]卷五下,《重修阳明先生祠记》。
④[明]王畿：《重刻阳明先生(文录)后序》[A],录自《龙溪王先生全集》[G]卷十三。
①[明]王阳明：《传习录》[M](下),北京,蓝天出版社,2007年12月第1版,第242页。
②[明]王阳明：《传习录》[M](上),北京,蓝天出版社,2007年12月第1版,第132页。
①[汉]董仲舒撰：《春秋繁露》[M],中华书局,1975年版,第99页。
①[战国]吕不韦：《吕氏春秋》[M]第三卷,上海古籍出版社,1989年3月第1版,第30页。
①朱熹：《玉山讲义》[M],《朱子大全》[G]43册,卷74,上海,中华书局,1936年版,第18页。
①吕天成撰、吴书荫校注：《曲品校注》[M],中华书局,1990年版,第1页。
①参见潇元的《尖型人物和圆型人物的新解》,《写作》[J]杂志,2006年第12期。
①王安石著：《王临川集》[G]卷七十三,《答曾子固书》,北京,商务印书馆,1940年版。
②[清]顾炎武著、[清]黄汝成集释：《日知录集释》[M],上海古籍出版社,2006年版,第947页。
①《陆九渊集》[G]卷三十四,《语录上》。
②李清良：《中国阐释学》[M],湖南师范大学出版社,2005年3月第2版,第110页。
③沈括：《梦溪笔谈》[M]卷十七。
①[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·礼记正义》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第1625页。
①恩格斯著,中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《自然辩证法》[M],人民出版社,1971年版,第15页。
②同上,第24页。
①[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·论语注疏》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第2468页。
②《左传·昭公二十年》[M]。
③司马迁著：《史记》[M],中华书局,1959年版,第1956页。
④[宋]沈约撰：《宋书》[M],中华书局,1974年版,第736页。
①[汉]孔安国撰：《尚书正义》[M],上海古籍出版社,2004年版。
②[清]皮锡瑞撰：《今文尚书考证》[M],中华书局,1989年版,第84页。
③李养正：《道教概说》[M],中华书局,1989年第1版,第4页。
④[清]阮元校刻：《十三经注疏·论语注疏》[M],中华书局,1980年版,第2490页。
⑤同上,第2498页。
⑥同上,第2513页。
①《老子》[M]第33章。
②《老子》[M]第50章。
③《老子》[M]第59章。
④《庄子·逍遥游》[M]。
⑤《庄子·大宗师》[M]。
⑥《庄子·田子方》[M]。
①[唐]刘知几撰、[清]浦起龙释：《史通》[M],上海古籍出版社,1978年第一版,第37页。
①[唐]李延寿著：《北史》[M]卷五六,中华书局,1974年第一版,第203页。
①[宋]欧阳修、宋祁撰：《新唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第一版,第5540页。
①注：“间离效果”,又译为“陌生化效果”,最早出现在俄国形式主义艺术家维克多·斯克洛夫斯基的著名文章《艺术作为艺术手段》中,后来为德国著名戏剧家贝托尔特·布莱希特发展成为更成熟的戏剧艺术理论。
②如,《左传·隐公》[M]：“君子曰,颖考叔,纯孝也”。“君子谓,郑庄公失政刑矣”。《左传·襄公》[M]：“君子以为知礼”等。《春秋左传正义》[M],上海古籍出版社,1990年第一版。
①[后晋]刘昫等撰：《旧唐书》[M],中华书局,1975年第一版,第4509页。
①“箴”：文体名,是规戒性的韵文。
②刘昫等撰：《旧唐书·李德裕传》[M],中华书局出版,1975年版,第4528页。
③脱脱等撰：《宋史》[M],中华书局,1977年版,第9570页。
④[梁]刘勰著,周振甫注：《文心雕龙》[M],人民文学出版社,1981年版,第169页。
①[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆,民国24年(1935),第2页。
①[宋]郑樵撰：《通志》[M],商务印书馆,民国24年(1935),第1页。
①[唐]韩愈著、余冠英等主编：《唐宋八大家全集·韩愈集》[G],国际文化出版公司,1997年版,第332页。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |