浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)
 
   2025年5月1日 星期四   首页 |  期刊介绍 |  编委会 |  投稿指南 |  信息服务 |  期刊订阅 |  联系我们 |  预印本过刊 |  浙江省高校学报研究会栏目 |  留言板 |  English Version
浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)  2013, Vol. 43 Issue (5): 181-190    DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2012.11.091
栏目 最新目录| 下期目录| 过刊浏览| 高级检索 |
解释学视野下的《兰亭序》真伪之辨
刘毅青
A Debate on the Authenticity of Orchid Pavilion Preface from the Perspective of Hermeneutics
Liu Yiqing

全文: PDF (1358 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

从解释学的理论来看,郭沫若在《由王谢墓志的出土论到〈兰亭序〉的真伪》一文中的考证明显观念先行,说明艺术史研究对史料的考证与风格的判断不可能脱离主观的前理解,以及由此而展开的循环论证。前理解在艺术史研究中的影响使艺术史研究必须意识到自身方法的限度,从而更客观地探索艺术史研究的方法,更谨慎地下判断。事实也证明,古史辨派的诸多辨伪其实均非古书为伪,而只是现代人不懂得古代的书体。就中国艺术史而言,善意的前见远比彻底颠覆传统的前见更为可靠与有意义。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入我的书架
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
刘毅青
Abstract

Textual research and interpretation relevant to the history of art is an activity of hermeneutics. The discussion stirred up by Guo Moruo's article The Discovery of Wang, Xie Epitaph and the Authenticity of the Orchid Pavilion Preface has not ceased so far. The academic significance of this discussion goes far beyond the authenticity of the Orchid Pavilion Preface ,and constitutes an excellent example of hermeneutics. First of all, Guo Moruo's historical research method towards ancient historical data, his premise and assumptions on the counterfeit works in particular, has already contained a procedure of hermeneutics, in which an assumption is made in advance and then a collection of relating data follows up. This method depends mainly on hypothesis. The indirect historical data correlate with each other through logic and reasoning that rely on subjective imagination. Secondly, the historical dating method centering on stylistic and ideological histories depends on the circular argument and procedure of hermeneutics, too. That's why a textual research which applies basically the same materials tends to reach widely divergent, even opposed results. The collision of textual research proves a crisis it is faced with, because the so-called significance of historical materials and facts shows in organizing the messy historical facts to an overall layout and organic integrity, not in any new historical materials. History itself doesn't automatically present significance. The purely objective historical research builds on researchers' recognition to their limitations and their constant self-reflection. Then, a real sense of history is a comprehensible and meaningful diagram view constituted by a series of related historical documents. It is unnecessary to study the history, if the historical materials themselves can speak. Because historical materials need to be interpreted, human beings constantly rewrite history. Generally, we claim that historical texts communicate historical truth. But every real statement of facts is not the guarantee of a historical diagram view without distortion. Therefore, simple literature criticism can't restore the original truth of history. What we get from literary documents is fragments in the historical perpetual flow. How to collage historical fragments to the complete conception and thought and even a concrete thought is not only the task of textual criticism but it depends on ideologists' explanations. Actually, any textual criticism is impossible without explanation, and it shows certain tension in their relation.  In the research of art history, textual criticism of historical materials and judgment of styles can't shake off the pre-understanding and circular argument from subjective value standpoint. Only when admitting the effect of pre-understanding in the research of art history, the researchers can be more conscious in the limitations of their research methods, more objective to explore methods of the research of art history and more prudent to make a judgment. As the fact proves, to distinguish between truth and fake in the ″Ku-shih-pien″ school fails to distinguish true ancient books from those fake ones, but to misunderstand ancient book formats in modern perceptions. In other words, when we doubt ancient books, we would rather allow those ancient books change our concept than judge their authenticity. It is in this sense that the pre-knowledge with goodwill is more reliable and meaningful than the pre-knowledge with complete subversion of the tradition in the research of traditional culture.

    
引用本文:   
刘毅青. 解释学视野下的《兰亭序》真伪之辨[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2013, 43(5): 181-190. Liu Yiqing. A Debate on the Authenticity of Orchid Pavilion Preface from the Perspective of Hermeneutics. , 2013, 43(5): 181-190.
链接本文:  
https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2012.11.091     或     https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2013/V43/I5/181
发表一流的成果,传播一流的发现,提供一流的新知

浙ICP备14002560号-5
版权所有 © 2009 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)    浙ICP备05074421号
地址:杭州市天目山路148号 邮编:310028 电话:0571-88273210 88925616 E-mail:zdxb_w@zju.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn