「詩質」在臺灣現代詩史之定義流變與批判

本文從詩的批評論著手，梳理臺灣現代詩史中「詩質」與其相關術語在實際批評中的運作模式，概覽並比較各詩家的定義異同。以「詩質」作為觀察中心，肇因於過去的詩學論述中時常使用「詩質」一詞作為文學批評的術語，但卻從來沒有詩家清楚說明定義；近年鄭慧如《台灣現代詩史》甚至強調以「詩質」為評斷詩人重要性之判準，也同樣未對「詩質」確切說明，在文本分析上沒有依歸，造成文學史定位的疑慮。作為術語，「詩質」與其相關詞彙之操作型定義為何？各詩家的定義有何差異？其和新批評的「字質」是否具備關聯性？本文假定「詩質」為一客觀、可被檢驗的文學批評術語，試圖透過以上的問題意識，詳加爬梳覃子豪、紀弦、余光中等人在臺灣現代詩史對於「詩質」的論述；另外，本文更進一步聚焦系統性使用「詩質」作為術語的簡政珍《台灣現代詩美學》，討論其「詩質」論述中產生的問題，旁及討論其他相關詞彙在理論與實務上的可能。

關鍵字

詩質；字質；詩素；簡政珍；新批評

並列摘要

This article starts with the viewpoint of "Poetry Criticism," sorting out the operation mode of "poetic quality" (詩質) in Taiwan. "Poetic quality" and its related terms are quite important in the history of modern Taiwan poetry. This paper clarifies the relationship of those terms, overviewing and comparing the definitions of "poetic quality" in the works of various poets. Focusing on "poetic quality" dues not only to the frequent use of it in criticism, but also to the vague definition of it, which makes a lot of space to explain. Hui-Ju Cheng's (鄭慧如) History of Modern Taiwan Poetry《臺灣現代詩史》(2019), is the significant field of reinforcing the importance of "poetic quality." The book emphasizes the use of "poetic quality" as the criterion for judging the importance of poets, but as well fails to specify the definition of "poetic quality" in a precise way. The phenomenon showed the problems that "poetic quality" in History of Modern Taiwan Poetry is subjective. Those unreliable textual analyses cause lots of problems about the positioning of literary history. As a term, what is the definition of "poetic quality"? What are the differences among the definitions of "poetic quality" used by different poets? Is "poetic quality" related to the "texture" which comes from the New Criticism? This article assumes that "poetic quality" is an objective and verifiable term in literary criticism, and attempts to use the above problematics to elaborate on the discussion of "poetic quality" in the history of modern Taiwan poetry.