|
|
Regret for Flowery Expressions: The Self-repentance Mentality and Literary Activities of Literati in the Ming Dynasty |
Song Ziqiao |
School of Literature, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
Abstract The self-repentance phenomenon of literati in the Ming Dynasty was very common. In the literary history of the Ming Dynasty, a large number of important literati, such as Sung Lian, Fang Xiaoru, Wang Shouren, Xu Zhenqing, Wang Shenzhong, Wang Shizhen, and Yuan Hongdao experienced repentance at different stages of literary creation. Studying the causes and consequences of their self-repentance, we can analyze their psychology of creation, go deep into the creation scene of the Ming Dynasty literature, and explore the literati’s literary fashion and identity consciousness in the Ming Dynasty society, which can enrich our understanding of the details of the evolution of the Ming Dynasty literature history. The self-repentance of literati in the Ming Dynasty had multiple factors. The most common situation was that literati, as they grew older and accumulated long-term education and aesthetic shaping, examined their old works with a more rigorous perspective, leading to a regretful attitude. Some literati, under the expectation of passing down their works, inevitably placed their hopes on improving the literary quality of their works. Aesthetic self-expectations could cause internal anxiety when reviewing works, leading to a sense of regret and shame. In addition, influenced by Neo Confucianism, the study of mind and Buddhist thought had led to fundamental doubts about the value of the Wen, resulting in a belief in valuing the Tao over the Wen.The performance of the literati in the Ming Dynasty after self-repentance was completely different. They would reveal their regretful mentality in their creations through ceremonial and symbolic actions. Firstly, the most common transformation was the elimination of old works, reflecting an inherent pursuit of literary value. Secondly, literati would change their style, indicating the change of personal literary orientation. Some literati expressed their repentant attitude by abandoning writing, burning old manuscripts, and transforming cultural identities. The self-repentance of literati in the Ming Dynasty often occurred in the interaction between individuals and groups. This behavior not only foreshadowed a turning point in individual creation, but also marked a change in the style of the literary community. The self-repentance of the literati in the Ming Dynasty not only marked a change in personal style, but it was also related to the literary trends of the scholarly community. Some literati expressed their identification with the literary community through self-regret, thus entering the literary community. For example, Xu Zhenqing regretted his old works during the imperial examination and joined the He and Li camps, thereby strengthening the momentum of the first retro movement in the Ming Dynasty. Some Ming Dynasty literati also expressed their regret and abandonment of their past creations through self-regret during the creative process, which led to the decline of the influence of the literary community. The transformation of literati after self-repentance may also give rise to new schools of thought and build a new literary community centered on themselves.Analyzing the self-repentance behavior of literati of the Ming Dynasty can be used to observe issues such as the relationship between Wen and Tao and identity consciousness in the social trends of the Ming Dynasty. The regretful behavior of the literati in the Ming Dynasty reflects an inherent ideological tendency of valuing morality over literature. The Wen they regretted refers to the narrow sense of diction, because most Ming Dynasty literati who regretted themselves did not question the fundamental value of the Wen.
|
Received: 30 May 2023
|
|
|
|
1 廖可斌: 《回归生活史和心灵史的古代文学研究》,《文学遗产》2014年第2期,第122-125页。 2 蔡道宪: 《蔡忠烈公遗集》,见《四库未收书辑刊》编纂委员会编: 《四库未收书辑刊》第5辑第26册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 3 方孝孺: 《方孝孺集》,徐光大点校,杭州:浙江古籍出版社,2013年。 4 黎靖德编: 《朱子语类》,王星贤点校,北京:中华书局,1986年。 5 江盈科: 《江盈科集》,黄仁生点校,长沙:岳麓书社,2008年。 6 徐祯卿: 《徐祯卿全集编年校注》,范志新校注,北京:人民文学出版社,2009年。 7 钱谦益: 《列朝诗集小传》,上海:上海古籍出版社,2008年。 8 黄卓越: 《明永乐至嘉靖初诗文观研究》,北京:北京师范大学出版社,2001年。 9 王廷相: 《王廷相集》,王孝鱼点校,北京:中华书局,2009年。 10 王守仁: 《王阳明全集》,吴光等编校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2014年。 11 归有光: 《震川先生集》,周本淳点校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2007年。 12 守遂注、古灵了童补注: 《佛说四十二章经注》,李传军、常峥嵘整理,北京:中华书局,2021年。 13 释道世: 《法苑珠林校注》,周叔迦、苏晋仁校注,北京:中华书局,2003年。 14 萧士玮: 《春浮园文集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》集部第108册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 15 费元禄: 《甲秀园集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》集部第62册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 16 高出: 《镜山庵集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》集部第31册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 17 侯方域: 《壮悔堂文集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》集部第51册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 18 杨廉: 《杨文恪公文集》,见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编: 《续修四库全书》集部第1333册,上海:上海古籍出版社,2002年。 19 李开先: 《李开先全集》,卜键笺校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2014年。 20 袁黄: 《游艺塾续文规》,见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编: 《续修四库全书》集部第1718册,上海:上海古籍出版社,2002年。 21 陈孝逸: 《痴山集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》集部第49册,北京:北京出版社,1997年。 22 阮元校刻: 《十三经注疏》,北京:中华书局,2009年。 23 钟惺: 《隐秀轩集》,李先耕、崔重庆标校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2017年。 24 谭元春: 《谭元春集》,陈杏珍点校,上海:上海古籍出版社,1998年。 25 屠隆: 《白榆集》,见《屠隆集》第四册,汪超宏主编,杭州:浙江古籍出版社,2012年。 26 黄汝亨: 《寓林集》,见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编: 《续修四库全书》集部第1369册,上海:上海古籍出版社,2002年。 27 艾南英: 《天慵子集》,见四库禁毁书丛刊编纂委员会编: 《四库禁毁书丛刊》补编第72册,北京:北京出版社,2005年。 28 董斯张: 《静啸斋存草》,见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编: 《续修四库全书》集部第1381册,上海:上海古籍出版社,2002年。 29 罗时进: 《焚稿烟燎中的明代文学影像》,《苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2016年第1期,第145-153页。 30 钱谦益: 《牧斋杂著》,钱曾笺注、钱仲联标校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2007年。 31 王樵: 《方麓集》,见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1285册,台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986年。 32 王世贞: 《弇州山人四部稿》,见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1280册,台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986年。 33 宋濂: 《宋濂全集》,黄灵庚点校,北京:人民文学出版社,2014年。 34 德]斐迪南·滕尼斯: 《共同体与社会》,林荣远译,北京:商务印书馆,1999年。 35 李春青: 《论中国古代文学共同体的形成机制及其阐释学意义》,《西北大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2018年第1期,第128-138页。 36 王世贞: 《艺苑厄言》,见丁福保辑: 《历代诗话续编》(下册),北京:中华书局,2006年。 37 顾起纶: 《国雅品》,见丁福保辑: 《历代诗话续编》(下册),北京:中华书局,2006年。 38 朱彝尊: 《静志居诗话》,姚祖恩编,北京:人民文学出版社,1990年。 39 王世贞: 《弇州山人续稿》,见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1284册,台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986年。 40 袁宏道: 《袁宏道集笺校》,钱伯城笺校,上海:上海古籍出版社,1979年。 41 王慎中: 《遵岩集》,见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1274册,台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986年。 42 唐顺之: 《唐顺之集》,马美信、黄毅点校,杭州:浙江古籍出版社,2014年。 43 文徵明: 《文徵明集》,周道振辑校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2014年。 44 杨慎: 《升庵集》,见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1270册,台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986年。 |
|
|
|