Examples of comparative literary misreading

Literary misreading is a common phenomenon of acceptance in literary reading, Harold Bloom in The Anxiety of Influence first put forward the concept of "misreading" and used it as a theoretical term, at the same time declared that "all reading is misreading". This has given rise to the academic debate on "whether there is misreading and whether all reading is misreading".

To put it plainly, what the author intended to express may have been another meaning, but it was misunderstood by the later generations, and a wrong expression was given.

For example, when "The Son and the Night" came out, the critics were largely lopsided in their praise. Revolutionary critic Qu Qiubai said of Ziyou: "This is the first successful long novel of realism in China ...... 1933 In the future history of literature, there is no doubt that the publication of Ziyou should be recorded." [1] Wu Mi of the Xueheng school also enthusiastically praised Ziyou: "This book is the best structured of the author's writings ...... The typicality and individuality of the characters are extremely open, and the environment is also very well configured! ...... The writing style is as beautiful as a fire, sound and unrestrained, uncontrollable. The subtleties of the work are so colorful that they are rare and precious." In the 1950s and 1960s, Ziyou was regarded as an important model of proletarian literature. The international sinology community also gave Ziyou a high evaluation. According to Czech Sinologist Pushik, Mao Dun's creations pushed Chinese literature to a new height in the 20th century, and Ziyou is the peak of creations in that period. Dr. Sorokin, a Russian philologist, praised the achievements of Ziyou in the depiction of social life and characterization. The Japanese scholar Shinoda Ishi said: "The Son's Night" is one of the ten great works in the world literature of the 20th century. But, after the 1960s, another kind of voice began to appear in the acceptance of Ziyou. The American scholar Xia Zhiqing, in his History of the Modern Chinese Novel, gave a negative evaluation to Ziyou, which he regarded as a failure. Hong Kong's Sima Changfeng discussed Ziyou in A History of New Chinese Literature and was quite dismissive. He said: Mao Dun's talent is not enough, coupled with the work too much emphasis on social significance, resulting in its literary nature is very weak. 1980s, under the influence of "rewriting literary history" trend, some young and middle-aged scholars have questioned the "Zi Nian" artistic tendency and the status of literary history, but also "theme first" and "Zi Nian", "the theme first" and "Zi Nian", and so on. Under the influence of the trend of "rewriting literary history," some young and middle-aged scholars have questioned the artistic tendency and literary history status of Ziyou, and have also pondered and explored the "theme first" and "paradigm of Ziyou," which has led to rebuttals and rethinking, and the acceptance of Ziyou has shown a pluralistic pattern in which questioning and agreeing exist side by side, interpreting and debunking occur, and challenging and suspending exist together. --In 1989, Lan Dizhi published "A Higher Form of Social Documentation: A Reappraisal of Ziyou," in which he argued that Ziyou was a product of "theme first," and that the praise he received for Ziyou was too much, calling for a re-evaluation of Ziyou's literary status. There is no doubt about the place of the book in literary history. It is a masterpiece, recognized by the world literary community. It is a masterpiece, recognized by the world literary circles. It profoundly expresses the problem of the way out of China's national industry in the semi-colonial and semi-feudal society, and its structure and artistic achievement are extremely high, and the image of the capitalist is portrayed with great success, which is of important sociological and literary value. Although it has its shortcomings, it can be said that it is a flawed classic masterpiece. Xia Zhiqing, Sima Changfeng, and Lan Dizhi's assessment of Ziyou is clearly a misreading.