本文關(guān)鍵詞：解構(gòu)批評：形態(tài)與價值　出處：《江西師范大學(xué)》2010年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 解構(gòu) 修辭分析 閱讀 文本 范式 形態(tài)

【摘要】：可以說,任何一種比較成熟的批評形態(tài),都自成系統(tǒng),都包含著自身獨特的話語、方法、范式以及觀念等幾個層面,而其中思想觀念是最為核心的一環(huán),也可以說,正是某種批評形態(tài)的基本觀念決定了它是“這一個”。為此,要把握解構(gòu)批評的基本特征、基本精神,要使其系統(tǒng)化,就必須對其基本的思想觀念進行總結(jié)。在此基礎(chǔ)上,再來反觀學(xué)界對其作出的評價,就能夠較為準確地判別出哪些是合理的,哪些是強加之辭;最后,應(yīng)該著眼于我們的現(xiàn)實問題,立足當(dāng)下,對其作出合理的評價。 從大的范圍來講,本文分為兩個部分:一是解構(gòu)批評的基本形態(tài)(1-7);二是對其進行評價(8-11)。具體來說,又包括以下幾個部分。 一(1-2)、就解構(gòu)、解構(gòu)批評的基本特點、基本內(nèi)涵給予說明,指出解構(gòu)作為一種本源性的、生生不息的、蘊含著極大顛覆性與創(chuàng)造性的內(nèi)驅(qū)力,產(chǎn)生于結(jié)構(gòu)成其為結(jié)構(gòu)的那一刻,它是對他者性召喚的肯定性應(yīng)答,是對結(jié)構(gòu)等級制秩序的顛覆。解構(gòu)在解放他者的同時也解放了他者的對立面,它不知疲倦地從一種結(jié)構(gòu)奔向另一種全新的結(jié)構(gòu),以至無窮。而解構(gòu)性事件就是二元等級秩序顛覆之后所產(chǎn)生的后果。狹義上的解構(gòu)指的是作為文學(xué)批評的解構(gòu),或稱為解構(gòu)批評,解構(gòu)批評追隨1966年、1979年、1983年、2004年等這么幾個標志性的年份,漸次呈現(xiàn)為興起、高潮、擴散以及漸次衰落的走向。 二(3-6)、就解構(gòu)批評的基本觀念如文學(xué)觀、文本觀、批評觀、語境觀進行說明。在解構(gòu)批評看來,不存在什么超驗的文學(xué)本質(zhì),文學(xué)的特殊性就在于它比其它語言更直接地呈現(xiàn)為修辭性語言;文學(xué)的基本精神是自由,它激發(fā)我們想象和構(gòu)造世界的創(chuàng)造力;而所謂的文本只能是存在于閱讀之中,是閱讀建構(gòu)了文本;文學(xué)批評應(yīng)該探尋文本的“真相”,分析文本的修辭特性、別異性以及互文性等;語境在解構(gòu)批評看來是非常重要的,沒有語境我們甚至無法理解,但是解構(gòu)批評同時指出語境實際上是不可靠的,因為語境本身也同樣是書寫物,是一種建構(gòu),換句話說,它本身也不過是個文本。 三(7)、“解構(gòu)批評的范式”。首先,對范式的定義及其基本特點進行了概括,指出本文將范式理解為一種闡釋模式,它具有不可通約性、繼承與創(chuàng)新、競爭等幾個方面的特征;其次,依據(jù)艾布拉姆斯的“文學(xué)藝術(shù)四要素說”,將文學(xué)批評形態(tài)歸納為四個大的范式,然后從這四大范式中再劃分出各具特色的較小單位的范式;最后,對解構(gòu)批評的范式進行概括,指出解構(gòu)批評已經(jīng)從主題批評模式轉(zhuǎn)向多義性的修辭性閱讀模式。 四(8-9)、針對學(xué)界從現(xiàn)實態(tài)度和思想性質(zhì)兩個方面對解構(gòu)批評的指責(zé),作出一些分析和回應(yīng);首先就有關(guān)解構(gòu)批評回避現(xiàn)實、政治,解構(gòu)毀滅一切的指責(zé),分別從解構(gòu)批評產(chǎn)生的歷史語境、解構(gòu)的性質(zhì)、解構(gòu)批評的旨趣等角度對此進行分析,認為某種程度上解構(gòu)論者的確不再直接采取“五月風(fēng)暴”式的激進手段來介入現(xiàn)實,但另一方面他們與現(xiàn)實的對抗也似乎從未妥協(xié),只是改變了形式;同時還就德曼事件引起的爭論,也給予分析。其次,針對將解構(gòu)批評等同于虛無主義、相對主義、懷疑主義的看法,結(jié)合解構(gòu)批評的基本觀念進行分析,指出不能籠統(tǒng)地將解構(gòu)批評同虛無主義、相對主義、懷疑主義等同起來,實際上,解構(gòu)批評本身有個很好的傳統(tǒng),即譜系學(xué)的研究思路,解構(gòu)批評不是懷疑一切,而是質(zhì)疑在場;而且解構(gòu)批評不是單純只看到差異,而是說所有同一性中都蘊含著差異;尤為重要的是,解構(gòu)批評可以說是有史以來對教條主義展開的最為徹底、最為猛烈的攻擊。 五(10-11)、“解構(gòu)批評的洞見與盲視”。就解構(gòu)批評自身存在著的優(yōu)勢和不足給予了分析和評價。解構(gòu)批評在打破“教條式閱讀”方面有著極為重要的意義,它鼓勵讀者發(fā)揮自己的創(chuàng)造潛能來開拓文本,發(fā)現(xiàn)那些被壓抑、被遮蔽但卻非常有價值的東西。但解構(gòu)批評無疑太精英化、太嚴肅化了,它對閱讀提出的要求也實在是太過苛刻了,這并不是所有人都能夠做到的。某種程度上說,任何一種具體的批評形態(tài)都一定有其精華之處,也有其不足之處,不應(yīng)該非常武斷地根據(jù)自身的理論范式來厚此薄彼,在文學(xué)批評實踐中,就各種批評形態(tài)之間的關(guān)系等問題,我們主張:閱讀時應(yīng)該注重“多維共釋”。并且,就這一看法,結(jié)合具體作品給予說明。
[Abstract]:It can be said that any one kind of mature forms of criticism, both as a system, with its unique discourse, methods, several aspects of paradigm and concepts, and the concept is a part of the core, it can be said that it is the basic concept of a critical form determines that it is this a ". Therefore, to grasp the basic characteristics of deconstruction, criticism of the basic spirit, to make the system, must be the basic ideas are summarized. On this basis, again in evaluation of the academic circle to make, could accurately distinguish which is reasonable, which is imposed by the speech; finally, should focus on the practical problems, we based on the moment, make a reasonable evaluation on it.
Speaking from a large scale, this article is divided into two parts: first, deconstructing the basic form of criticism; (1-7) two, appraise it (8-11). Specifically, it includes the following parts.
A (1-2), on the basic characteristics of deconstruction, deconstruction criticism, the basic connotation given that deconstruction as a source of life and growth in nature, contains great subversive and creative drive, from the moment of its structure into the structure, it is a positive response to the call of the other the hierarchical structure is a subversion of the order. At the same time the other deconstruction in the liberation of the liberation of the other on the opposite side, it tirelessly from one structure to another a new structure, endless generated. After the deconstruction of events is two yuan order to subvert the consequences. The narrow sense of deconstruction refers to as literary criticism, deconstruction, criticism or deconstruction, deconstruction criticism following the 1966, 1979, 1983, 2004, so a few landmark year, gradually showing rise, and gradually decline to a climax, diffusion.
Two (3-6), is the basic concept of deconstruction criticism as literature view, view of text, criticism, context is described. In the deconstructive view, what does not exist the transcendental nature of literature, special literature is that it is more direct than other language appears as a figurative language is the basic spirit of literature; freedom, it excites our imagination and creativity of the structure of the world; and the so-called text can only be found in reading, reading is the construction of the text; the text should explore the "truth" of literary criticism, analyzes the rhetorical characteristics of text, intertextuality and difference; it is very important in the context of deconstructive criticism, no context we can't even understand, but also pointed out that the context of deconstructive criticism is actually not reliable, because the context itself is also writing, is a kind of construction, in other words, it itself is not a text.
Three (7), "deconstructive paradigm". Firstly, the definition of paradigm and its basic characteristics are summarized, pointed out that this will be interpreted as a paradigm of interpretation, it has the incommensurability, inheritance and innovation, characteristics and other aspects of the competition; secondly, on the basis of Abu Rams "the literature art four factor, literary criticism were divided into four major paradigms, then from the four paradigm to further divided into smaller units of different characteristics of the model; finally, the deconstructive paradigm is summarized, pointed out that the deconstruction criticism has the theme from the criticism mode to the rhetorical reading mode of polysemy.
Four (8-9), in the academic circles from the realistic attitude and ideological nature of two aspects of deconstruction criticism, makes some analysis and response; first on deconstruction criticism to avoid the reality, politics, the deconstruction of the destruction of all the accused, respectively from the deconstructive criticism of historical context, the nature of the purport of deconstructive criticism to analyze this, think on some level of deconstruction does not directly take radical measures to intervene in the May storm "type of reality, but on the other hand, they fight with reality seems to never compromise, just changed form; also Digmann incident caused controversy, also analyzed. Secondly, according to the deconstruction is equivalent to nihilism, relativism and skepticism view, combined with the analysis of the basic concepts of deconstruction criticism, points out that relativism can not generally be deconstruction criticism of nihilism, skepticism. In fact, Marxism equated, deconstruction criticism itself has a very good tradition, namely research genealogy, deconstruction criticism is not to doubt everything, but questioned the present; and deconstructive criticism not only see the difference, but all the same in all contain differences; especially, deconstruction criticism can be said to be on the history of dogmatism most thoroughly, the most violent attacks.
Five (10-11), "deconstruction insights and blind criticism." deconstruction criticism itself has the advantages and disadvantages to the analysis and evaluation. Deconstruction criticism has a very important significance in breaking the "dogmatic reading", it encourages readers to use their creative potential to open up the text, found that repressed, but very valuable things are obscured. But the deconstructive criticism is too elitist, too serious, it demands on reading really is too harsh, this is not everyone can do. To some extent, any specific forms of criticism are certain the essence of the place, also has its shortcomings, should not be very arbitrary according to the theory in the practice of literary criticism in favour one more than another, and various forms of criticism of the relationship between the problem, we advocate: reading should focus on the "multidimensional Co In addition, this view is explained in combination with the specific works.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：I06

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張沛;德里達解構(gòu)主義的開拓[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報;1991年06期

2 陳鳴樹;解構(gòu)主義述評[J];東疆學(xué)刊;1991年02期

3 生安鋒;;批評的愉悅、解構(gòu)者的責(zé)任與學(xué)術(shù)自由——米勒訪談[J];國外理論動態(tài);2007年01期

4 鄭亞捷;;“五月風(fēng)暴”的遺產(chǎn)[J];國外理論動態(tài);2009年03期

5 連小麗;王小會;;齊澤克論1968年“五月風(fēng)暴”[J];國外理論動態(tài);2009年04期

6 汪民安;;解構(gòu)主義與中國當(dāng)代文學(xué)批評[J];華中師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1993年04期

7 張小元;走出象牙之塔,重返歷史之流——略論解構(gòu)主義文學(xué)批評[J];人文雜志;1992年05期

8 羅杰鸚;;J·希利斯·米勒在中國——20世紀90年代以來國內(nèi)米勒研究述評[J];國外文學(xué);2006年04期

9 ;解構(gòu)主義者談解構(gòu)主義──希利斯·米勒訪談錄[J];國外文學(xué);1995年03期

10 鄭敏;解構(gòu)主義與文學(xué)批評[J];外國文學(xué)評論;1990年02期

，

本文編號：1433470