通俗讀物編刊社與戰時歷史書寫(1933-1940)

成立於1934年7月的通俗讀物編刊社，是九一八事變之後以抗日宣傳為目的所成立的學術性社團，其前身為燕京大學中國教職員抗日會。初期嘗試以唱本、戲劇和大鼓書等形式，創作適合大眾閱讀的通俗讀物，宣揚抗日意識，並成立三戶書社銷售其出版品；後因抗日色彩鮮明，受到日本和國民政府干預，脫離燕大，改名為通俗讀物編刊社，並透過實地調查與分析，深入了解民間通俗讀物的流通管道，發展出「舊瓶裝新酒」的創作理論，從而編印各種定期刊物、叢書、畫刊及戰時國民讀本。發行量龐大，影響深遠，是為1930-1940年代致力推廣通俗大眾化讀物的重要社團。過去學界對於通俗讀物編刊社的研究，大多著重在主要領導人物顧頡剛一人身上，或是側重於文化史角度的分析。本文則嘗試以最新出版的《顧頡剛日記》及過去較少為人利用的通俗讀物編刊社原始出版品，配合部份成員的回憶，分析1930-1940 年代通俗讀物編刊社如何在通俗化和大眾化的訴求下，發展出一套「舊瓶裝新酒」的書寫策略，並討論此一因應戰時需要而重新改造的歷史書寫方式，對於重塑現代歷史意識和國民現代性的影響，以及通俗讀物編刊社在這方面的努力及其所遭遇的困境。

關鍵字

通俗化；大眾化；舊瓶裝新酒；顧頡剛；通俗讀物；歷史書寫

並列摘要

The Popular Reading Publishing Company was established in July 1934 after the Mukden Incident as an anti-Japanese academic society. Its predecessor was the Association of Anti-Japanese Chinese faculty of Yenching University. The original goal of the publishing company was to promote anti-Japanese sentiment with popular publications such as transcripts of folksongs, operas, and drum singing. The Popular Reading Publishing Company even established its own distributor, the Three Clans Bookstore. The publishing company later disassociated from Yenching University under the pressure of the Japanese and Nationalist Chinese governments, due to its anti-Japanese nature. The company then developed its own appreciation of how to market for the popular audience and a strategy for its publications, namely ＜||＞new wine in old bottles.＜||＞ The company published many periodicals, book series, pictorials, and readers for citizens during the war. With its extensive publications and far-reaching influence, the Popular Reading Publishing Company distinguished itself as an important association popularizing reading materials during the 1930s. Previous studies of the Popular Reading Publishing Company mostly focused on its famous director, Gu Jiegang, or approached it from a cultural history perspective. This article, on the other hand, attempts to analyze the marketing strategy of ＜||＞new wine in old bottles＜||＞ by examining the recently published Diary of Gu Jiegang, memoirs of its other members, and less examined popular publications put out by the company itself. The article then discusses how its revamped style of history writing shaped modern consciousness of history and national modernity. It also addresses the frustrations the company faced in this effort.