摘要
晚明的戲曲評點因為城市人民的娛樂需求、戲曲文化的活躍繁榮與刻書事業的蓬勃發展而興盛。以「湯顯祖」為號召的戲曲評點本，因數量不少，已成一系列的「湯評本」，然而其中有不少評點本並非湯顯祖所評。由於釐清這些湯評本的真偽，運用這些評點資料，有助於建構或補充湯顯祖的戲曲理論，而且即使這些湯評本為偽託之作，其評點內容仍能表現當時普遍流行的戲曲理論觀點，因此有其研究的必要與價值。 本論文所採取的研究方法是先掌握學者諸說的爭議所在，以作為展開真偽考述的基礎；再以四種角度觀照湯評本的諸多問題，一是考察「劇本作者」、「劇本創作年代」與湯顯祖生平的關係，以探討湯顯祖加以評點的可能性；二是藉由板式與插圖進行「評本刊刻地」的考察，觀察明代刊刻湯評本的現象，藉以判斷書坊作偽的可能性與型態；三是針對「同劇作的各種評本」進行比較，以釐清評語是否借襲他本及各評本間的關係；四是分析「評語內涵」是否符合湯顯祖的思想精神與文藝觀點。 最後以可信為湯顯祖所評的《董解元西廂》與《紅拂記》來探討湯評本的戲劇學觀點，一是雖然重視「曲意」的發揮，但已越來越講究「關目情節」的經營與安排，二是對於人物形象塑造，也因「情真」思想，促使人物由「類型化」轉變為「個性化」的發展。 至於偽託湯評本的戲劇學觀點，則由視為「擬作」的《玉茗堂批評紅梅記》、《玉茗堂批評異夢記》、《玉茗堂批評種玉記》與《玉茗堂批評節俠記》四種來探討，一是追隨湯顯祖「情」與「夢」的主題，二是注意曲白文詞的抒情性以及人物塑造的「情真」，三是注重關目情節的呈現，四是注意場上表演的需要，已逐漸建立戲曲劇本「場上表演」的觀念。
並列摘要
The commentary of drama was in vogue during the late Ming dynasty, because the amusement demand of civilian, prosperous culture of opera and flourishing development of book publication. In the series of text about “Tang Hsien-Tsu’s commentary of drama”, which was thought to be written by Tang Hsien-Tsu himself, were not all Tang Hsien-Tsu’s commentary. Because of distinguishing “the Tang Hsien-Tsu’s commentary of drama” true and false, using these commentary materials is helpful to construct or supply the drama theory of Tang Hsien-Tsu. However, even if the commentary was forged to be Tang Hsien-Tsu's, it can still exhibit the popular viewpoint of opera at that time. Therefore, a research about this is necessary and valuable. The research methodology of thesis is to grasp all scholar's dispute. After that, the problems of the commentaries are surveyed in four respects. First, to show the relations between“drama author”, “play writing times” and Tang Hsien-Tsu's life; Second, to investigate the book workshops and types forged; Third, to compare various of drama commentaries in order to distinguish the relations of drama commentaries; Fourth, to analyze comment intension whether it accords with thoughts, literature and art viewpoints of Tang Hsien-Tsu. The commentaries of “Tung chieh yuen his hsiang” and “Hung fu ji” made by Tang Hsien-Tsu are reliable. We use these commentaries to show Tang Hsien-Tsu's drama theory. First, though “meaning of song” was valued, the arrangement of plot was emphasized more and more; Second, for personage image-building, impelling personages to be changed into “individualized development” from the “the type” was due to the thought of “true feelings”. The commentaries of “Hung mei ji ”, “I meng ji”, “Chien yu ji” and “Chieh hsia ji” were not made by Tang Hsien-Tsu, but commentators made these like Tang Hsien-Tsu. These commentators, first, followed the theme about “the feeling” and “the dream” of Tang Hsien-Tsu; Second, they paid attention to the lyric words of a song and characterization about “real feelings”; Third, they laid stress on the appearing of plot; Fourth, they thought highly of the need of performing on the field so they had already set up the idea of the libretto, “performs on the field”, gradually.