К вопросу о жанровой концепции Лю Се и ее месте в раннесредневековой китайской литературной мысли

Трактат Лю Се (465/466–520/522) «Резной дракон литературной мысли» («Вэнь синь дяо лун») часто рассматривают как квинтэссенцию раннесредневековой китайской литературоведческой мысли, поскольку он превосходит другие сочинения своего времени как по размеру (примерно 40 тысяч иероглифов), так и по сложности структуры, и по глубине проработки вопросов теории и практики литературы. В данной статье же делается попытка оспорить эту идею и показать, что по многим своим взглядам Лю Се намного опередил свое время. Анализируя жанровую концепцию «Резного дракона...», автор останавливается на двух важных вопросах. Первый – это вопрос о связи жанра с понятиями традиционных китайских «литературных родов» «вэнь» и «би» и с формой художественной речи. Второй – вопрос иерархии жанров, заданной порядком их описания в трактате. Автор оспаривает распространенные представления о Лю Се как о стороннике деления литературы на вэнь и би только по признаку рифмы. По ее мнению, Лю Се считал, что для характеристики литературных жанров содержание произведений важнее чисто формальных черт.

Ключевые слова

Лю Се, Резной дракон литературной мысли, «Вэнь синь дяо лун»,китайская поэтика, китайская литература, средневековая китайская литература

Получено

20.03.2019

Дата публикации

21.03.2019

Кол-во символов

97915

Цитировать

ГОСТ	Стеженская Л. В. К вопросу о жанровой концепции Лю Се и ее месте в раннесредневековой китайской литературной мысли // Восток. Афро-Азиатские общества: история и современность – 2019. – Выпуск 1 C. 93-121 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://vostokoriens.jes.su/S086919080003962-5-1 (дата обращения: 29.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S086919080003962-5
MLA	Stezhenskaya, Lidiya "Revisiting Liu Xie’s concept of the genre and its place in the early medieval Chinese literary theory." Vostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost 1 (2019):93-121. DOI: 10.31857/S086919080003962-5
APA	Stezhenskaya L. (2019). Revisiting Liu Xie’s concept of the genre and its place in the early medieval Chinese literary theory. Vostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost (1), pp.93-121 DOI: 10.31857/S086919080003962-5

100 руб.

При оформлении подписки на статью или выпуск пользователь получает возможность скачать PDF, оценить публикацию и связаться с автором. Для оформления подписки требуется авторизация.

Оператором распространения коммерческих препринтов является ООО «Интеграция: ОН»

Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной.


1	The concept of genre accompanied Chinese literary thought since the very appearance of the written tradition in China. The oldest written monuments The Most Venerable Book (Shang Shu) and The Book of Songs (Shi jing) specify the genre of the texts that composed them [Riftin, 1994, p. 267–270]. Up to the early twentieth century the traditional Chinese poetics was based on the concept of the canonized genre. The idea of a proper set or system of traditional genres was formed in the early Middle Ages. Outlining the composition of literary genres, medieval Chinese literary critics and theorists thus gave the definition of the notion of literature of their time [Smirnov, 2000, p. 265–289]. This literature may be called classical or elitist. Traditional literary criticism ignored a significant layer of national Chinese literature represented by the so-called “low genres”.
2	In a series of historical and literary sources of the early Middle Ages, the treatise of Liu Xie (465/466 – 520/522) The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons (Wen Xin Diao Long, hereafter – The Dragon…) occupies an exceptional place. None of the other works of this period can compare with The Dragon... neither by size (about 40 thousand characters), nor by the complexity of the structure, nor by the depth of working out the issues of literature theory and practice. Moreover, the organization and vastness of the text of The Dragon... makes it the most important source of our knowledge of the early medieval Chinese literature.
3	Hence the researcher may have a temptation to present the literary concept of Liu Xie as a kind of quintessence of early medieval Chinese thought (see, for example, the monographs of Vladimir Iosifovich Braginsky who represented the “averaged” poetology of the Arabic, Indian and Chinese zone-shaping literatures [Braginsky, 1991; Braginsky, 2004]). Chinese medieval poetology was examined on the basis of the treatise by Liu Xie Wen Xin Diao Long, in which “most of the concepts of Chinese poetology are integrated into an orderly whole” [Braginsky, 1991, p. 54].
4	In this article, I will try to challenge this thesis about the representativeness of The on ... for the literary thought of the early Middle Ages. Liu Xie was significantly different from his contemporaries. I will focus on the two points in my study of the genre concept of The Dragon... The first is the connection of the genre with categories of a higher or general order, with the notions of traditional Chinese literary types or modes of wen and bi and with the form of artistic speech. The second is the hierarchy of genres specified by the order of their description in the treatise.
5	The study of The Dragon ... in Russia will soon overstep a hundred-year boundary and, of course, it is not limited to the specified issues. The main attention of soviet and Russian literary theorists-sinologists was directed to the general aesthetic evaluation of the treatise. One of the steps on the way to understanding the content of Liu Xie’s aesthetic concept was the explanation of his principle of hierarchy of genres and that category itself. From this groundwork I will proceed in my article, in some cases expanding the context of the problem, and in others, on the contrary, referring to details that have not yet been considered in Russian literary studies of China.
6	The description of specific genres occupying almost half of the treatise leaves no doubt that Liu Xie in his work relied on a certain concept of the literary genre. The interpretation of the content of this concept or its equivalents by Liu Xie remains a debated issue of modern Chinese literary studies and the history of Chinese literature. It is considered that the enumeration of genres in the treatise sets the hierarchy of medieval Chinese genres, that is, represents their classification.
7	Important advantages of this classification are its diversity and unity of principles. As a rule, they are specified in the following provisions. All the genres of Liu Xie are grouped according to the large categories of contemporary literature – elegant literature (wen) and simply literature (bi). The order of enumeration of genres is determined by their literary qualities. More literary or elegant genres are explained earlier than less literary ones. When enumerating genres, their thematic proximity is taken into account, so many genres are described in pairs. When genres are less close in content, the chapter gives their generalized representation. In the description of the literary genre, the lexical explanation of the genre name and its definition is given first. Then the stylistic features of the genre are explained. Further, the historical origins of the genre and its evolution are indicated. Finally, information on the best works in the specified genre is provided.
8	In the title of the treatise Wen Xin Diao Long (lit. The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons), two themes are distinguished: literariness (i.e., the feature of being literature) and literary work. Liu Xie clarifies the literary concept mainly in the first five chapters of the treatise, as well as in the final chapter 50, Statement of intent (Xu zhi). Liu Xie’s literariness reflects an understanding of this attribute in China during the second half of the fifth century – the early sixth century. In modern studies, this literariness is treated as elegance and literature itself – as elegant literature represented by a limited set of the literary genres contemporary with Liu Xie. The Liu Xie’s genre theory is to be studied within a more general problematics: the relationship between the historical concept of elegance and his concept of artistry. The core of the latter forms the concept of aesthetic [Khalizev, 2000, p. 31–33, 82, 104–105].

Всего подписок: 2, всего просмотров: 1743

Оценка читателей: голосов 0

1. Алексеев В. М. Китайская литература. Алексеев В. М. Труды по китайской литературе. В 2 кн. Кн. 2. М.: Восточная литература, 2002. C. 65–89 [Alekseev V. M. Chinese literature. Alekseev V. M. Works on Chinese literature. In 2 books. Book 1. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, 2002. Pp. 65– 89 (in Russian)].

2. Брагинский В. И. Проблемы типологии средневековых литератур Востока. М.: Наука, 1991 [Braginsky V. I. The problems of typology of medieval literatures of the East. Moscow: Nauka, 1991 [in Russian)].

3. Вяткин Р. В. Историографические взгляды Лю Се. История и культура Китая: (Сб. памяти акад. В. П. Васильева). М.: Наука, 1974. С. 217–235 [Vyatkin R. V. Historiographical views of Liu Xie. History and culture of China: (Collection in memory of Academician V. P. Vasiliev). Moscow: Nauka, 1974. Pp. 217–235 (in Russian)].

4. Голыгина К. И. Определение изящной словесности-вэнь в средневековой китайской теории литературы. Историко-филологические исследования: Сб. ст. памяти академика Н. И. Конрада. М.: Наука, 1974. C. 190–199 [Golygina K. I. Definition of elegant literature-wen in the medieval Chinese theory of literature. Historical and Philological Studies: Collection of articles in memory of Academician N. I. Konrad. Moscow: Nauka, 1974. Pp. C. 190–199 (in Russian)].

5. Голыгина К. И. Классическая проза и драма. «Изящная словесность» (вэнь). Духовная культура Китая: Энциклопедия. М.: Восточная литература, Т. 3. Литература. Язык и письменность. 2008(1). C. 76–78 [Golygina K. I. Classical prose and drama. “Elegant literature” (wen). The spiritual culture of China: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura. Vol. 3. Literature. Language and writing. 2008(1). Pp. 76–78 (in Russian)].

6. Голыгина К. И. Теория и жанры литературы. Традиционная литературная теория. Духовная культура Китая. Энциклопедия. М.: Восточная литература Т. 3. Литература. Язык и письменность. 2008(2). C. 138–139 [Golygina K. I. Theory and genres of literature. The spiritual culture of China: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura. Vol. 3. Literature. Language and writing. 2008(2). Pp. 138–139].

7. Кобзев А. И. Ли [1]. Духовная культура Китая: Энциклопедия. Гл. ред. М. Л. Титаренко; Ин-т Дальнего Востока. М.: Восточная литература Т. 1. Философия. 2006(1). C. 295–297 [Kobzev A.I. Li [1]. The spiritual culture of China: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura. Vol. 1. Philosophy. 2006(1). Pp. 295–297 (in Russian)].

8. Кобзев А. И. Ци [1]. Духовная культура Китая: Энциклопедия. М.: Восточная литература Т. 1. Философия. 2006(2). C. 549–551 [Kobzev A. I. Qi [1]. The spiritual culture of China: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura. Vol. 1. Philosophy. 2006(2). Pp. 549–551 (in Russian)].

9. Конрад Н. И. Избранные труды. Синология. М.: Наука, 1977 [Conrad N.I. Selected Works. Sinology. Moscow: Nauka, 1977 (in Russian)].

10. Конфуций. Беседы и суждения Конфуция. Ред. Р.В. Грищенков. СПб.: Кристалл, 1999 [Confucius. Conversations and judgments of Confucius. Grischenkov R.V. (ed.). Saint Petersburg: Crystal, 1999 (in Russian)].

11. Кравцова М. Е. «Вэнь синь дяо лун». Духовная культура Китая. Энциклопедия. М.: Восточная литература, Т. 3. Литература. Язык и письменность. 2008. C. 250–254 [Kravtsova M. E. “Wen Xin Diao Long”. The spiritual culture of China: Encyclopedia. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura. Vol. 3. Literature. Language and writing. 2008. Pp. 250–254 (in Russian)].

12. Кривцов В. А. К вопросу об эстетических взглядах Лю Се. Проблемы Дальнего Востока. М., 1978. № 1. C. 158–164 [Krivtsov V. A. Revisiting the aesthetic views of Liu Xie. Problems of the Far East. Moscow, 1978. No. 1. Pp. 158–164 (in Russian)].

13. Лисевич И. С. Литературная мысль Китая: На рубеже древности и средних веков. М.: Наука, 1979 [Lisevich I. S. Literary thought of China: At the turn of antiquity and the Middle Ages. Moscow: Nauka, 1979 (in Russian)].

14. Переломов Л. С. Конфуций: «Луньюй». М.: Восточная литература, 1998 [Perelomov L. S. Confucius: “Lun yu”. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, 1998 (in Russian)].

15. Прядохин М. Г. Китайские недоговорки-иносказания. М.: Наука, 1977 [Pryadokhin M. G. Chinese half-words-allegories. Moscow: Nauka, 1977 (in Russian)].

16. Рифтин Б. Л. Жанр в литературе китайского средневековья. Историческая поэтика. Литературные эпохи и типы художественного сознания. Отв. ред. П. А. Гринцер. М.: Наследие, 1994. 267–296. [Riftin B. L. Genre in the literature of the Chinese Middle Ages. Historical poetics. Literary epochs and types of artistic consciousness. Grintser P. A. (ed.). Moscow: Nasledie, 1994. Pp. 267–296. (in Russian)].

17. Смирнов И. С. О китайских средневековых антологиях и предисловиях к ним. Вестник РГГУ. М., 2000. Вып. IV. C. 265–289 [Smirnov I. S. On the Chinese medieval anthologies and their forewords. RSUH / RGGU Bulletin. Moscow, 2000. Issue. IV. Pp. 265–289 (in Russian)].

18. Стеженская Л. В. Трактовка заглавия трактата Лю Се «Вэнь синь дяо лун» (V–VI вв.). Вестник РУДН. Серия: Литературоведение. Журналистика. М., 2013. № 1. C. 19–26 [Stezhenskaya L. V. The Interpretation of the title of Liu Xie’s treatise Wen Xin Diao Long. RUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism. Moscow, 2013, No. 1. Pp. 19–26 (in Russian)].

19. Томашевский Б. В. Теория литературы: Учебное пособие. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2002 [Tomashevskiy B. V. Theory of Literature: Training Manual. Moscow: Aspect Press, 2002 (in Russian)].

20. Хализев В. Е. Теория литературы. М.: «Высшая школа», 2000 [Khalizev V. E. Theory of Literature. Moscow: “Vysshaya Shkola”, 2000 (in Russian)].

21. Braginskiy V. I. The Comparative Study of Traditional Asian Literatures: From Reflective Traditionalism to Neo-Traditionalism. Leningrad; New York, 2004.

22. Ban Gu. Xin Jiao Ben Han Shu Ji Zhu Bin Fu Bian Er Chung. [“Han Shu” with a consolidated commentary with a new text markup and two annexes]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1986 (in Chinese).

23. Duanju Shisan jing jingwen: Chunqiu Zuo zhuan. [“Chun Qiu” with Zuo's commentary]. Taipei: Taiwan Kaiming, 1991 (in Chinese).

24. Guo Shaoyu. Zhongguo wen xue pi ping shi. [History of Chinese Literary Criticism]. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chuban Xinhua faxing, 1992 (in Chinese).

25. Liu Xie. Wen Xin diao long zhu. [Wen Xin Diao Long with [Fan Wenlan's] comments]. Beijing: Renmin wenxue chuban she, 1962 (in Chinese).

26. Liu Xie. Wen xin diao long yizhen. [Wen xin diao long with the commentary of Zhan Ying. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chuban she, 1989 (in Chinese)].

27. Liao Zhiqiang. Nanchao wen bi sho. [Concerning wen and bi of the Southern dynasties period]. Hong Kong, 1999 (in Chinese).

28. (Qing) Dong Wei and other (eds.). Quan Tang wen. [All Tang prose]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987 (in Chinese).

29. Quan shang gu San dai Qin Han San guo Liu chao wen. [Collection of texts of Antiquity, Three Dynasties, Qin, Han, Three Kingdoms and Six Dynasties]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju,1958 (in Chinese).

30. Ren Fang. Wenzhang yuanqi. [The Origins of Literature]. Hefei: Huangshan shushe, 2009 (in Chinese).

31. Tong dian. [Comprehensive Institutions]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1988 (in Chinese).

32. Wang Chong. Lun heng jiao shi. [“Balanced Inquiries” with corrections and notes]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1990 (in Chinese).

33. Wang Yuanhua. “Bian sao pian” ing gui “Wensin diaolong” zonglun. [The chapter “Bian sao” should be attributed to the general part of “Wenxin diaolong”. Wen Xin Diao Long's creation theory]. Shanghai guji chuban she, 1984. Pp. 227–233 (in Chinese).

34. Wang Yuanhua. Wenxin diaolong jiangshu. [Lectures on Wenxin diaolong]. Guilin: Guangxi shifan daxue chuban she, 2004 (in Chinese).

35. Wen xuan. [Selections of Refined Literature]. Shanghai guji chuban she, 1986 (in Chinese).

36. Xiao Yi. Jin lou zi. [Master of the Golden Tower]. Taipei: Jia xin shuini gongsi wenhua jijin hui, 1967 (in Chinese).

37. Xin jiao ben Han shu ji zhu bing fu bian er zhong. [“Han Shu” with a consolidated commentary with new text markup and two annexes]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1986 (in Chinese).

38. Xin jiao ben Jin shu bing fu bian liu zhong. [“Jin Shu”with new text markup and six annexes]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1980 (in Chinese).

39. Xin jiao ben Jiu Tang shu fu suoyin. [The Old History of Tang with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1981 (in Chinese).

40. Xin jiao ben Liang shu fu suoyin. [“Liang Shu” with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1980 (in Chinese).

41. Xin jiao ben Nan shi fu suoyin. [“Nan Shi” with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1981 (in Chinese).

42. Xin jiao ben Song shu fu suoyin. [“Song shu” with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1980 (in Chinese).

43. Xin jiao ben Sui shu fu suoyin. [Sui shu with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1980 (in Chinese).

44. Xin jiao ben Xin Tang Shu fu suoyin. [The New Book of Tang with new text markup and pointers]. Taipei: Ding wen shuju, 1981 (in Chinese).

45. Yang Sai. Lun Ren Fang bi. [On the literature-bi of Ren Fang. Zhengzhou shifan xueyuan xuebao (Journal of Zhengzhou Teachers College)]. 2012. No. 1. Pp. 1–13 (in Chinese).

46. Yao Mingda. Zhongguo muluxue shi. [History of Chinese Bibliography]. Shanghai shudian, 1984 (in Chinese).

47. Zhi Yu. Wenzhang liubie ji: Fu Wenzhang zhi lun. [“Literary Trends”, Descriptions and Interpretations, with the annex of “Literature Description”]. Sine loci, 1935 (in Chinese).