淺議桐城文派的韓、柳古文比較論

A Critical Analysis of Tong-cheng Literary School’s Comments on the Prose Writings of Han Yu and Liu Zong-yuan

Authors

  • 許子濱 (HSU Tzu Pin) 嶺南大學中文系

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24112/sinohumanitas.132481

Keywords:

桐城文派, 韓愈, 柳宗元, 方苞, 劉大櫆, 曾國藩, 吴汝綸, 賀濤, 文氣, 義法, Tong-cheng Literary School, Han Yu, Liu Zong-yuan, Fang Bao, Liu Da-Kui, Zeng Guo-fan, Wu Ru-lun, He Tao, Wen-qi, Yi-fa

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.

韓、柳古文的優劣,自來是文評家討論的焦點。而在衆多的評論中,以桐城文派的看法最值得注意。方苞將道德與文章看成同一回事,并以此爲基礎,建立起“義法”之説。方苞對柳宗元文多方挑剔,幾於吹毛求疵,甚而大肆詆毁,不過是實踐其理論罷了。在桐城文派的流傳過程中,對柳宗元的這種成見,儘管不能説是定調,却也是主流意見,難怪给人留下“桐城始於排柳,终於排柳”的印象。桐城中人評論柳文,特别是談到他的文氣時,就一直受到這種成見的干擾。方苞以文氣不充譏貶柳文,并認爲是自反不縮所造成。後來的劉大櫆,甚至是賀濤等,皆沿用其説。但不容忽視的是,劉大櫆以後,桐城中人評論柳文,受到成見的干擾已有減少的迹象,已開始自覺地從文學的角度來評析柳文。這種微妙的轉變,不能不説是一種進步。這跟他們逐漸把道德與文章離析爲二是分不開的。從曾國藩的懷疑,到吳汝綸明確判别義理與文章爲二事,他們對文學獨立性的認識漸趨清晰,創作如此,評論也如此,觀念上的這種轉變,就反映在吳汝綸等人對柳文的評價上。

Comparing the works of Han Yu (韓愈) and Liu Zong-yuan (柳宗元) has been a focal point of critics. Among the many discussions, the point of view of the Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派) deserves special notice. Fang Bao (方苞) regarded morality and literary works as the same thing and established the concept of "Yi-fa (義法)”. He attempted to put this theory into practice by criticizing Liu’s works harshly and unfairly. During the spread of the Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派), Fang’s preconceived notion about Liu might not be the final conclusion but certainly the mainstream opinion, and hence no wonder the impression of “Tong-cheng Literary School starts and ends on attacking against Liu” was made. In fact, Tong-cheng Literary Schools” discussions on Liu's works, especial on his style of writing, have been interfered with by such kind of prejudice. Fang commented that the Wen-qi (文氣) of Liu’s works were not strong enough due to the defect in his moral character. His descendants, such as Liu Da-kui (劉大櫆) and even He Tao (賀濤), continued to adopt this approach toward Liu’s works. Yet, the critics after Liu Da-kui (劉大櫆)had made a fine adjustment consciously that their discussions became less biased and they started to evaluate Liu’s works from a literal perspective. The change, which could be attributed to the gradual development of the mentality of dividing morality and literary works could be regarded as a kind of progress and should not be ignored. From Zeng Guo-fan (曾國藩) with doubt to Wu Ru-lun (吳汝綸) with certainty, Tong-cheng Literary School (桐城文派) regarded moral and literary works, including literary writing and literary criticism, as two different matters. The change of the point of view of Wu Ru-lun (吳汝綸) and the other critics toward Liu’s works is a result of the recognition of the independent features of literature.

Published

2007-09-01

How to Cite

許 子. (2007). 淺議桐城文派的韓、柳古文比較論: A Critical Analysis of Tong-cheng Literary School’s Comments on the Prose Writings of Han Yu and Liu Zong-yuan. 人文中國學報, 13, 215–266. https://doi.org/10.24112/sinohumanitas.132481

Issue

Section

論文