English

上海大学学报(社会科学版)

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

“文史分合”轨迹述论 ——兼评萧统、刘知几文史观

  

  1. 上海大学文学院
  • 收稿日期:2010-02-18 出版日期:2011-05-15 发布日期:2011-05-15

A Brief Survey of the Track of Literature and
History in Division and Reunion
——Also Comment on the LiteratureHistory Views of Xiao Tong and Liu Zhiji

  • Received:2010-02-18 Online:2011-05-15 Published:2011-05-15

摘要：

　摘要： 萧统和刘知几，生活时代略有前后，但皆欲分清文史。萧统对问题的处理比较简单，他在自己主持编撰的《文选》中将史著一律逐出并仅于《序》中作出解释而已。刘知几面对林林总总的有关著作，坚持“文史之分”，但又看到许多著作的性质存在着“文史难分”的客观现象。于是他把所谓“偏记小说”分门别类，根据不同内容，给予不同评价，使得这些作品取得了某种存在的合法性。刘知几面对文史难分的局面，既坚持“分清”，又不过于偏激绝对，这无疑是明智的。

关键词:  萧统, 刘知几, 文史观

Abstract:

 Both Xiao Tong and Liu Zhiji try to distinguish between literature and History, although they live a slightly different age. Xiao tong' s disposal of the devision is simple. In Selected Works edited chiefly by him, he expels all historical works, just mentioning them in Preface. But Liu Zhiji is different. While he insists on the division of literature and history in dealing with numerous relevant works, he accepts the fact that many works are truly hard to distinguish between. Therefore he classifies the socalled "storybooks emphasizing record", and gives a different evaluation according to the content, thus making these works obtain the legitimacy of a certain existence. Evidently it is sensible for Liu Zhiji, facing the situation of hardness to distinguish between literature and history, to insist on a clear distinction and, at the same time, not to go to extremes.

Key words: A Brief Survey of the Track of Literature , History in Division and Reunion,  Comment on the LiteratureHistory Views of Xiao Tong and Liu Zhiji