Based on the triple essence of literature: prototype significance, practical significance and aesthetic significance, this paper analyzes the writing phenomenon of post-80 s

First, the historical and cultural background of literary "aesthetic" characteristics

We can't help but trace back to the social and cultural context produced by the theory of "aesthetic" characteristics. If we don't know this social and cultural context, it seems that we can describe literature as anything. Because literature and literary activities involve a wide range, how to understand literature can be. Literature is imitation, literature is reproduction, literature is reflection, literature is expression, literature is emotional expression, literature is meaningful form, literature is righteousness, literature is Tao, literature is lyrical expression, literature is language, literature is social ideology, literature is a higher ideology suspended at the upper level, literature is a special ideology, literature is a prototype, literature is a gestalt, literature is education and literature. Therefore, scholars have long believed that it is better to ask what literature is than what literature is. Any literary theory has its social and historical background and object of criticism.

Second, the formation of the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics

Without mentioning that literature and art are subordinate to politics and that literature and art serve politics, how can we explain literature and art? At that time, the academic thinking on literature and art was linked with beauty. In modern times, Kant first linked art with aesthetics. Kant divides people's psychological structure into three types: knowledge, emotion and meaning. Knowledge is knowledge, the object is nature, and the product is regular science; Emotion is happiness and unhappiness, it is a kind of judgment, and its product is purposeful art; It means desire, it is a kind of rationality, and its product is morality that conforms to both regularity and purpose. But in the ten years after the founding of the People's Republic of China, how dare you admit Kant? Kant is a master of idealism. How dare you talk about Kant if you avoid talking about it? Therefore, it is still fresh and valuable to think about the combination of literature, art and aesthetics in the new period. It has both realistic pertinence and theoretical depth.

(A) beauty is the basic attribute of art.

The initial idea of the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics in the new period is to link literature and art with beauty, and to determine beauty as the basic attribute of literature and art. The famous aesthetician Jiang Kongyang published the article "Beauty and the Creation of Beauty" in 1980, and put forward:

The essence of art and beauty is basically the same. Beauty has the characteristics of visualization, appeal, sociality and the ability to realize human essential strength, and art also has these characteristics. Because of this, we say that beauty is the basic attribute of art. An unattractive "art" can't be real art. A person who works in art, whether he can do it or not, should be a person who creates beauty in essence. Creating beauty and creating art are consistent in basic laws. (8)

He added:

The beauty of art lies not in what it reflects, but in how it reflects and whether the artist has created a beautiful artistic image. Of course, beautiful things in life can be shaped into beautiful artistic images, and even unpleasant or even ugly things in life can be shaped into beautiful artistic images. (9)

(2) Literature is characterized by emotion.

Li Zehou, an aesthetician, also talked about his understanding of literature and art. As early as 1979, Li Zehou emphasized that literature and art are not just "cognition", but "simply treating art as cognition is the fundamental reason for many formulated conceptual works" (12). At the same time, he believes that the characteristics of literature and art are not images, and what only has images is not art. He stressed:

Art contains the elements and functions of cognition. But I don't agree to attribute it to or equate it with knowledge. I think this just ignores the characteristics of art and its special role. Art infects its appreciators through emotion, making you slowly, imperceptibly and unconsciously influenced by it, unlike reading a theory book, which clearly recognizes something. ( 13)

I think it is more emotional to talk about the characteristics of literature. The reason why Han Yu's The Original Road is well written and can be read as a literary work is that it has momentum, sentences are arranged in parallel, and the tone is verve, which makes it feel powerful and powerful to read. Therefore, it has been said that Han Yu's articles have a kind of "masculine beauty" or grandeur. (14) Li Zehou criticized the view that literature and art, which have been popular for many years, are cognition and the characteristics of literature and art are images, which should be said to be profound. "Understanding" is the function of all sciences and philosophy and social sciences, which is not enough to explain the characteristics of literature and art. The theory of literary image characteristics has been popular for many years. In fact, it is not necessarily literature that has images. Animal and plant wall charts all have images, but they are not documents. Articles like Han Yu have no image, only literature. It really opens the door to formulation and conceptualization to regard literature as merely expressing knowledge through images. From this, he believes that the characteristic of literature is emotion, that is, aesthetics. Later, in "Thinking in Images" (1979), he directly said that literature is a "powerful aesthetic appeal". Aesthetics includes cognitive-understanding elements or factors, but it can never be attributed to cognition. (15) Li Zehou's above understanding, coupled with Jiang Kongyang's exposition, can not but be said to be the forerunner of the literary concept turning to the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics in the new period.

(C) Literature reflects the aesthetic value of life

198 1 The author published Reflections on Literary Characteristics, clearly put forward the emotional characteristics of literature, and 1983 published Literature and Aesthetics, expounding the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics. The author thinks:

The life reflected by literature is a beautiful life for human beings. Whether a person's life can become the object and content of literature depends on whether this life is related to beauty. If this life can't have anything to do with beauty, then it can't be the object of literature. Literature is a field of beauty. The object and content of literature must have aesthetic value, or have aesthetic value after description. Beauty is not only the attribute of objective things, but also closely related to the subjective function of aesthetic subject. What is a good life, what is not a good life, what life can enter the work and what life can't enter the work, this is an extremely complicated problem. But literature creates artistic beauty, which comes from the beauty of life, so it is easy to understand that only a beautiful life can become the object of literature. Poets praise the sun, the moon and the stars because they can connect people's poetic feelings and have beautiful value; I haven't heard of any poem praising the internal structure of the atom, because the internal structure of the atom can't be connected with people's poetry for the time being, and it doesn't have beautiful value yet. Poets chant birds, flowers, grass, fish and fat, because poets find beauty in these objects; I have never heard of any poet chanting excrement, caterpillars and turtles, because these objects are not beautiful or the poet has not found their connection with beauty. ( 16)

(D) the theory of literary aesthetic reflection

At that time, most people in the academic circles agreed with the aesthetic characteristics of literature, and the further work to be done was to put forward a rigorous theory about the aesthetic characteristics of literature. At this time, it has reached the mid-1980s, and the emergence of the so-called "method" year and "concept" year has given theorists of literary aesthetic characteristics a better research environment and a broader vision.

(5) the theory of literary aesthetic ideology

So far, "aesthetic reflection theory" and "aesthetic ideology theory" have coexisted and even used each other. It should be said that the theory of literary "aesthetic reflection" and the theory of literary "aesthetic ideology" are the collective theoretical innovations put forward by scholars of an era according to the requirements of the times, and they are the backwash and criticism of the theory of literary political tools in the Cultural Revolution. It transcends the slogan of "literature and art serve politics", which has ruled the literary and art circles for a long time and brought formula to literary creation and criticism, but its position is still firmly on Marxism. The new theory finally replaced the old one. It is a powerful illustration that "aesthetic reflection" and "aesthetic ideology" have entered more than 20 most important "Introduction to Literature" textbooks in China. "Aesthetic reflection theory" and "aesthetic ideology" have far-reaching significance.

Thirdly, the theoretical characteristics of "literary aesthetic reflection theory" and "literary aesthetic ideology"

Literature is an aesthetic reflection and literature is an aesthetic ideology. What is the basic connotation of this theory? What are their theoretical characteristics? According to the author's understanding, there are several points:

(A)' literary aesthetic reflection theory' and' aesthetic ideology' integrity

The theory of literary aesthetic reflection and the theory of literary aesthetic ideology are a complete concept, which is not aesthetics plus reflection theory, nor aesthetics plus ideology. They are a phrase with the nature of an independent word, not a simple addition of aesthetics and reflection, aesthetics and ideology. They are an organic theoretical form and a whole proposition, and should not be divided into aesthetics and reflection, aesthetics and ideology. Aesthetics is not a pure form, but a poetic content; "Reflection" and "ideology" are not simple ideas, they are concrete and formal. As Brauff said, there is no abstract entity of "ideology". He said:

"Pure" ideology does not exist in principle. Ideology only exists in various concrete forms of expression-such as philosophical ideology, political ideology, legal ideology, moral ideology and aesthetic ideology. (26)

This understanding of "ideology" is not only correct, but also extremely meaningful. Unfortunately, Brauff failed to discuss this issue. However, if we understand it carefully, two points deserve our attention: first, ideology is concrete, not abstract. Usually, what we call "ideology" is only an abstraction and generalization of specific ideology, and the ubiquitous general "ideology" does not exist. Ideology only exists in its specific forms, such as the above-mentioned philosophical ideology, political ideology, legal ideology, moral ideology and aesthetic ideology. Beyond these concrete forms, there is no so-called universal ideology. Second, more importantly, all these specific ideologies-philosophical ideology, political ideology, legal ideology, moral ideology and aesthetic ideology-are a complete and independent system. Philosophical ideology is not a simple addition of "philosophy" and "ideology", nor is political ideology a mechanical patchwork of "politics" and "ideology"? Of course, all these ideologies have their own characteristics, that is, they all reflect social life, but different ideologies reflect different objects. Philosophical ideology is the fundamental reflection of the whole social life, which focuses on answering the question of what is the basis of the relationship between thinking and existence, spirit and matter. Generally speaking, political ideology is a conflict and compromise that reflects the interests of different groups in social life. The ideology of law is an ideological field that is reflected by the rules of conduct formulated by the ruling group according to its own will in social life and guaranteed by the state's coercive force? Generally speaking, aesthetic ideology is people's aesthetic reflection on social emotional life. Different objects in different ideologies also lead to their different forms. This different form of ideology has its own unique content and form, forming its own independent and complete ideological field. Naturally, various forms of ideology are interrelated, interacting, influencing and infiltrating, but they are independent of each other. These different ideological fields, for the economic foundation of society, do have the difference between near and far, but they are not "high and low". There is no question of who serves whom between them. The interaction between them is inevitable, but there is no relationship between who controls whom. For example, the relationship between aesthetic ideology and political ideology is not always obedient. On the contrary, it is quite normal and reasonable for aesthetic ideology to "persuade", "supervise" and "reprimand" political ideology. For example, western romanticism and critical realism are generally dissatisfied with the capitalist political order, which is a "poetic judgment" on the loss of human nature, human alienation, human miserable living state and inhuman living environment under the leadership of capitalist political ideology. In this case, the aesthetic ideology itself has formed a unique ideological system, and its integrity is fully displayed. Therefore, literature and art, as an aesthetic ideology, is a specific ideological category, which is related to philosophical ideology, political ideology, legal ideology and moral ideology, but their status is equal, and there is no simple question of who serves whom. It is not in line with the theoretical spirit of Marxism to equate literature with politics and literary issues with political issues as in the past. In 1980s, the academic circles put forward "aesthetic ideology" and "aesthetic reflection theory" of literature, which is not a simple grafting of "aesthetics" and "ideology", let alone an expedient measure, but a theoretical achievement rooted in Marxism. Of course, we emphasize that the independence and equality among various ideologies are not absolute. At such a special moment during the period of China people's War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression, Mao Zedong put forward the theory that "weapons", "army" and literature and art serve politics in his speech at the Yan 'an forum on literature and art, which is a special theoretical requirement in an extraordinary period and has its rationality. But in peacetime, various ideologies should be relatively independent. The theory of literary aesthetic reflection should also be understood as above.

The compound structure of "literary aesthetic reflection theory" and "literary aesthetic ideology"

When we explain the integrity of the concepts of "literary aesthetic reflection" and "aesthetic ideology", we do not deny the composite structure of the core contents of these two theories.

In essence, these two theories are the unity of collectivity and universality of all mankind. As an aesthetic reflection and an aesthetic ideology, literature does show the tendency of group and group, which goes without saying. However, no matter which group or group a writer belongs to, his thoughts and feelings will not always be bound by the tendency of that group or group. Writers are also human beings, and there must be a common humanity between people, and everyone must have a sense of life, and they must pay attention to human survival.

Functionally, both theories emphasize cognition and emotion. Literature is a reflection of social life, which undoubtedly includes the understanding of society. This determines that literature has cognitive factors, and it is impossible not to include an understanding of reality. However, we say that literary reflection includes cognition, but it cannot be equated with philosophical epistemology or scientific cognition. Understanding of literature is always expressed in the form of emotional evaluation. The understanding of literature is completely integrated into the writer's emotional evaluation attitude.

In a word, the theory of literary aesthetic reflection and the theory of literary aesthetic ideology are different from general abstract cognition or ideology. They try to explain that literature, as an aesthetic activity of human beings, contains that unique cognition or ideology in aesthetics. Here, aesthetics and cognition, aesthetics and ideology, like salt dissolved in water, are invisible and tasteless. I can't see what "aesthetics" and "ideology" are at all. As a composite structure, they have reached the realm of integration.

The complexity of literature is not imposed on literature by us. Literature itself is a complex thing. Sometimes literature is so complicated that it is difficult for us to understand it, accept it and explain it. Our argument is only to show its true colors. Is a dream of red mansions simple? Everything, social, non-social, utilitarian, non-utilitarian, real, fictional, emotional, ideological, class, non-class, national, human, emotional, rational, game, non-game, poetic and non-poetic? It is the combination, combination and unification of these that constitute A Dream of Red Mansions. A work is so complicated, let alone a literary activity. As for methodology, Engels put forward the argument of "this and that" in his book Dialectics of Nature. Engels believes that things are not single, and our judgment should not be single. "Unity of opposites" is one of the basic methodologies of dialectical materialism.

Fourthly, the values of the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics.

After the "linguistic turn" in 1990s and the baptism of current "cultural studies", have the theories of "literary aesthetic reflection theory" and "literary aesthetic ideology" become invalid or outdated?

In fact, the "aesthetic reflection theory" and "aesthetic ideology theory" did not ignore the language problem of literature from the beginning. For example, in the paper published by 1986, "The most concrete and subjective is the most abundant-the creative essence of aesthetic reflection", Qian Zhongwen clearly pointed out: "Aesthetic reflection is realized through the embodiment of language, symbols and forms. Generally speaking, aesthetics rarely involves this aspect. But without these factors, it is difficult to interweave the above levels and penetrate back and forth to form a dynamic aesthetic structure. " (27) The Course of Literary Theory, edited by the author, also points out that literature is a kind of language art, and further explains the "language implication" of literature. Literary aesthetic reflection or literary aesthetic ideology does not refer to the ideological system like philosophy. Although it contains people's understanding, it is more important to experience and evaluate emotions. It is inseparable from the "home" of literary language. "Literary aesthetic reflection" and "literary aesthetic ideology" are closely related to language. The so-called "linguistic turn" did not destroy the theory of literary aesthetic reflection and the theory of literary aesthetic ideology, but combined them to define literature more accurately.

Qian Zhongwen advocated the theory of "aesthetic ideology" of literature, and he repeatedly emphasized the harmonious relationship between aesthetic characteristics and ideological characteristics of literature. He said: "Aesthetic culture also has some spiritual and cultural characteristics of non-aesthetic culture. More importantly, feelings and thoughts in aesthetic culture are mutual. Of course, their relationship in literature is not a mechanical, half-and-half, equally divided structure. Thought can't realize itself in literature, but must be reflected through the transmission of feelings. ? In aesthetic consciousness, feeling is associated with various psychological factors, such as perception, imagination and unconscious activities, but it is also manifested as rational understanding. " (3 1) The "non-aesthetic culture" and "rational knowledge" he mentioned here certainly contain the values of politics, morality, history, religion, law and other cultures, and he never excluded culture from literature and art, which is very clear.

Xiang, and the author almost invariably answered the question of the relationship between aesthetics and non-aesthetics in literature, and profoundly explained the internal relationship between aesthetics and non-aesthetics. It is totally unfounded to accuse "literary aesthetic reflection" and "literary aesthetic ideology" as "aestheticism". Some people just don't like literature, they don't like aesthetic literature, but they intentionally or unintentionally distort the theory of literary aesthetic characteristics into a purely aesthetic thing.

In addition, the theory of "literary aesthetic reflection" and the theory of "literary aesthetic ideology" also have an important feature, that is, truth, goodness and beauty are intrinsically linked, and literary aesthetics inherently contains truth, goodness and beauty, which goes beyond the previous formulation that literature is subordinate to politics and the "socialist realism" theory of the former Soviet Union. Socialist realism in the former Soviet Union has been popular for decades. After Mao Zedong's "speech" in 1942 and before the "anti-revision" in 1962, it almost became a "literary constitution". It stipulates: "Socialist realism, as the basic method of Soviet literature and Soviet criticism, requires artists to describe reality truly, historically and concretely from the revolutionary development of reality. At the same time, the authenticity and historical concreteness of artistic description must be combined with the task of transforming and educating working people with the socialist spirit. " This definition was questioned by simonov and others in the "thawing period" of the former Soviet Union. They thought the latter sentence was redundant, so they added another sentence. It seems that authenticity and historical concreteness can be combined with the task of ideological education or not. Qin Zhaoyang's article "Realism-A Broad Road" published in 1956 also questioned this. It can be seen that the definition of socialist realism really separates authenticity, historical concreteness and ideological education tasks, which is very inaccurate. The theory of literary aesthetic reflection and the theory of literary aesthetic ideology clearly see the disadvantages of "literature is subordinate to politics" and "socialist realism", while emphasizing authenticity and education is inherent in aesthetics.

For example, Wang Yuan emphasized: "The content of cognition does not directly enter the work in the form of cognitive achievements (concepts, judgments, reasoning), but is indirectly revealed through the author's aesthetic feelings and experiences; Literary artists' ideological understanding, even the deepest and most valuable ideological understanding, will inevitably lose its aesthetic value if it cannot be transformed into their own aesthetic attitude and evaluation, and naturally it will not be shown in their works "(32). If Wang Yuan emphasized aesthetic feeling and experience, then Qian Zhongwen emphasized aesthetic communication: "Cultural feelings and ideological understanding are mutual. Of course, their relationship in literature is not a mechanical, half-and-half, equally divided structure. Thought cannot be self-realized in literature, but must be reflected through emotional communication "(33). Without emotional communication, there is no culture contained in literature, and the truth and goodness of literature cannot be posted from the outside. The author solves this problem from the mutual penetration of aesthetic value and non-aesthetic value: "Aesthetic value and other values are the unity of contradictions. On the one hand, aesthetic value is different from other values, on the other hand, aesthetic value and its value permeate each other. The aesthetic value of reality is not isolated from other values of reality, and there is no gap between them. It should be noted that the aesthetic value of reality has the characteristics of digestion and integration. Like water with dissolving power, it can dissolve and integrate cognitive value, moral value, political value and religious value. " (34) The relationship between realistic aesthetic value and other values permeates each other, and so does the aesthetic value and truth, goodness and beauty in literature. Literary truth is aesthetic truth, artistic truth, poetic truth and emotional truth, not scientific truth; The goodness of literature is also an aesthetic goodness, an ideal candle, a spiritual revelation and a humanistic concern, rather than an actual ethical sermon in reality. In this way, truth, goodness and beauty are integrated, thus scientifically expounding the value of literature.

It should be noted that the previous literary theory has never solved the problem of values. As far as the authenticity of literature is concerned, it has been discussed many times since the founding of the People's Republic of China, but few people think about authenticity in the field of aesthetics. Since the new period, the issue of literary authenticity has been discussed again. However, these discussions often stay at the level of philosophy and sociology, without entering the unique aesthetic level. As early as 1985, the author published an essay on literary authenticity, criticized the artistic truth view of the "essence" theory, and raised the issue of literary authenticity to the aesthetic level for demonstration. The author puts forward the word "reasonable" to illustrate the authenticity of literature and art. The so-called "reasonable" means that the artistic image of a work should reflect people's true feelings, sincerity and sincerity; The so-called "rationality" refers to the conformity with the life logic in the artistic hypothesis and its understandability (35). This understanding of literary authenticity is an understanding in the field of aesthetics, which has great explanatory power, and the authenticity of any work can be reasonably explained from this statement. Because this theory of artistic authenticity is not moved from the ready-made philosophical category, it is actually discussed from the aesthetic characteristics of literature and art.

The above shows that "literary aesthetic reflection theory" and "literary aesthetic ideology theory" are by no means pure aesthetics as some people say, but "aestheticism" because they fully consider the cultural dimension of truth, goodness and beauty. By the way, at present, some middle-aged scholars disdain "aesthetics", and some people suggest that "satisfaction of desire" is the realistic theme. This is something we can't agree with. Desire belongs to both man and beast. Man becomes a man because he can control his desires and reach the "aesthetic" realm of spiritual transcendence. Is it necessary to advocate "satisfaction of desire" today to make people return to "animal nature"? This is where the author is very confused.

conclusion

Since the new period, in terms of literary theory, we have introduced many foreign literary theories, but there are not many theoretical innovations of our own. Then, were the "literary aesthetic reflection theory" and "literary aesthetic ideology" put forward by China people themselves? Is this a theoretical innovation of China academic circles?

Cai Yi put forward the viewpoint of "aesthetic education" in literature in the book On Realistic Art written by 1942. He said: "From a realistic point of view, art should truly describe reality, create artistic models and create artistic beauty. Its social education significance is not general, but the subtle influence of aesthetic education, and its ideological propaganda significance is nothing else. Cai Yi's point of view is good. In particular, his emphasis on the unity of artistic utility and artistic characteristics is particularly valuable. However, his "aesthetic education" and "subtle influence" only illustrate the effectiveness of art, but do not clarify the characteristics of art itself.