Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/79334
|
| Title: | 從“唐無賦”到“賦莫盛於唐”－唐賦評價變遷之考察 |
| Other Titles: | From ";There Was No Fu in Tang Dynasty";to ";The Silver Age of Fu Was Tang Dynasty";-A Survey of Vicissitude of Tang-Fu Appraisals |
| Authors: | 陳成文
Chen, Cheng-Wen |
| Contributors: | 中文系 |
| Keywords: | 唐無賦;賦莫盛於唐;唐賦;古賦;律賦;評價
There was no Fu in Tang dynasty;the silvery age of fu was Tang dynasty;Tang-Fu;Gu-Fu;Lu-Fu;Appraisal |
| Date: | 2008-07 |
| Issue Date: | 2015-11-04 17:24:27 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本論文考察明清以來「唐無賦」與「賦莫盛於唐」兩極評價的歷史變遷。明代前七子之一的李夢陽首倡「唐無賦」之說，主張恢復漢賦的傳統。明初徐師曾《文體明辨》也以揚雄揭示的麗則之旨爲判準，肯定《楚辭》與漢賦的價值，否定六朝以來的駢賦、律賦與文賦。明中葉以後王文祿《文脈》首先質疑「唐無賦」的說法，公安派袁宏道也肯定唐賦的新變發展。至清代王芑孫《讀賦卮言》進一步提出「賦莫盛於唐」的正面評價，而清初出現大量的律賦選本，也使唐代律賦漸受矚目；此外，清代賦論家如李調元《賦話》著意探討律賦的形式及內涵，形成「律賦宗唐」的風潮，而清代出現專收古賦的選本，也拓展唐賦的面向。民國以來，「唐無賦」之說仍餘波盪漾，並將唐賦的衰微歸咎於律賦的盛行，貶抑其文學價值。晚近學者則逐漸擺脫以漢賦爲判準的思考，馬積高《賦史》說明唐賦超越前代的特點；葉幼明《辭賦通論》則標榜唐宋辭賦爲「辭賦的高峰期」。當代學者也重新肯定律賦的價值，律賦研究成爲顯學；晚近的賦史專著也對唐代古賦多所著墨。凡此均提供重新審視唐賦價值與內涵的契機。
In this essay, I am aim to explore the historical vicissitude of two-pole appraisals of ”there was no Fu in Tang dynasty” and ”the silver age of Fu was Tang dynasty”, those arguments started in Ming dynasty. First, in Ming dynasty, one of the ancient literary drives, Li Meng-Yang advocated ”there was no Fu in Tang dynasty” firstly and claimed to restore the tradition of Han-Fm In the beginning of Ming, Shiu Shi-Zeng`s ”Differentiations of literary forms” also took ”views of Fu” to be a sentence according to Yang Xion, affirmed the value of ”Chu Ci” and denied the contribution of Pian-Fu, Lu-Fuand Wen-Fu that started to be created in Six Dynasties. After middle Ming, Wang Wen-Lu questioned the argument of ”there was no Fu in Tang dynasty” firstly in his work, ”Arrangement of a piece of writing”. One member of Gong-An school, Yuag Hung-Dao also commended the development of Tang-Fu. Next, in Ching dynasty, Wang Chi-Sun`s ”Comments on Fu” brought the further positive view of ”the silver age of Fu was Tang dynasty”, moreover, the appearance of a great number of picked Lu-Fu books made Lu-Fu that were written in Tang start to be important. In addition, the Fu critic, Li Tiao-Yuan`s ”Fu Hua” focused on discussing the form and connection of Lu-Fu, this discussion caused a trend that people respected the Lu-Fu that were written in Tang. Some people who collected the picked Gu-Fu books also caused Tang-Fu to spread widely. Since 1911, the statement of ”there was no fu in Tang dynasty” still had effect on literary and imputed the fall in Tang-Fu to the popularity of Lu-Fu. Recent scholars got out of the thinking of taking Han-Fu as a sentence. Ma Ji-Gao illustrated that Tang-Fu was greater than others before. However, Ye You-Ming stated that the greatest period of Tsz-Fu was in Tang and Song dynasty in ”Comments on Tsh-Fu``. Modern scholars also reaffirmed the value of Lu-Fu and the Lu-Fu study became important. The Fu scholars also focused on Gu-Fu recently. All of the above bring a turning point to resurvey the value and connotation of Tang-Fu. |
| Relation: | 臺北教育大學語文集刊,14,115 - 148 |
| Data Type: | article |
| Appears in Collections: | [中國文學系] 期刊論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | | 0Kb | HTML2 | 487 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
