彌補與脫節：臺、港《純文學》比較－以「近代中國作家與作品」專欄為主

1967年1月，林海音主編的《純文學》在臺創刊，第2期即推出「近代中國作家與作品」專欄，評介五四以降二、三○年代作家及作品，編案揭示：「重刊這些作品的目的，是為了彌補現代讀者對近代中國文學作品的脫節現象。」關鍵詞正是「彌補」與「脫節」。在檢查制度的六○年代，此舉無異「艱難而冒險」，然《純文學》從「彌補脫節」心念出發，自許地山至陳西瀅共評介了二十一位作家，構築了一條臺灣1949年後與五四文學關聯的新時間走廊，進而催生了香港版《純文學》的發行。港版《純文學》1967年4月創刊，由香港文化人王敬羲掌旗，初期內容大同小異，一時帶動香港文學風潮，形同再生產，在王敬羲主導下，港版《純文學》逐步有了「在地性」，可惜的是，港版《純文學》在臺灣少為人知，或者誤以為是同本刊物，甚而臺灣各圖書館皆未收藏，加重了研究困難度，至今無專文論述。臺版《純文學》於1972年2月停刊，共發行62期；港版《純文學》在臺版停刊後繼續出刊，終不敵現實，於1972年12月第66期宣布結束。異體同命的兩地《純文學》可說為臺港文化交流模式僅見。鑑於「近代中國作家與作品」專欄的貫穿性，本文因此聚焦於此，梳理異同之餘，進一步比較臺版怎樣應對檢查制度、港版如何開展港土意識，期重返「純文學」的年代，彌補既有研究之不足。

關鍵字

《純文學》；林海音；王敬羲；「近代中國作家與作品」專欄

並列摘要

In January of 1967, the inaugural issue of the journal Pure Literature (Chun Wen Xue), edited by Lin Hai Yin, was published in Taiwan. In the second issue, Lin, by launching the special column ＂Modern Chinese Writers and Works,＂ reviewed May Fourth writers and works in the 20s and 30s and, proclaimed that ＂these works are re-published to compensate for readers' disjointed understanding of modern Chinese literary works.＂ It was ＂difficult and risky＂ to do so because of the censorship in the 60s; however, Pure Literature succeeded in recalling our reading memories by having reviewed twenty-first writers in total-from Xu Di Shan to Chen Xi Ying-and building a temporal corridor which connects Taiwan in 1949 and the May Fourth Literature. The Hong Kong version of Pure Literature, echoing with the Taiwanese version, was inaugurated in April of 1967 by a cultural man Wang Jing Xi. Beginning with similar contents, it inspired the literary zeal of Hong Kong literature and triggered a process of literary reproduction. The Hong Kong version found its ＂local＂ expression in Wong's leading. It is a pity that the Hong Kong version is lesser-known in Taiwan: it might be mistaken as the same version or that it is not collected in the National Library. It is a potential-but difficult-research subject for lack of special articles up to now. This study reviews that the Taiwanese version of Pure Literature had ceased publication in February of 1972, with a total of 62 issues. After that, the Hong Kong version strived to keep publishing, changed in the reduction to two-monthly, but ended up stopping publication in December of the same year, with a total of 66 issues. Sharing the same fate, both versions of Pure Literature are worth researching for their roles in the cultural interactions between Hong Kong and Taiwan. This study, by comparing the special column of ＂Modern Special Writers and Works,＂ explores the different strategies Taiwan and Hong Kong adopted at that time. Whilst the Taiwan version was required to deal with censorship then, the Hong Kong version developed local consciousness to be issue-oriented. By doing so, this study returns to the times of Pure Literature in hope of filling in the gaps in existing research.