李維楨文學思想研究

A Study to Li Wei-zhen’s Literary Philosophy

謝旻琪(Min-Chi Hsieh)

指導教授 ： 周志文

淡江大學/文學院/中國文學系博士班/博士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2010.00204

摘要

李維楨（1547-1626）是晚明王世貞所選定的「末五子」之一。李維楨並不是個一流的理論家，他對於晚明文學研究的學者來說，也是相對比較陌生的人物。但是他的生存年代，以及他的文壇地位，都有其特殊性。

關於晚明文壇的研究，有兩個可再思考的問題；第一，論述常常陷入一種過度簡單二分的框架當中──亦即「復古」與「反復古」的對局──，其立場多半是將復古派認定為落後、保守的一端，而反復古則是創新、進步，代表人物除了公安三袁之外，再推至李贄、徐渭、湯顯祖等；第二，文學史的論述，久而久之，累積出所謂「重要的」作家。如此雖無可厚非，但是學術上的「重點」一旦確立、強化，細部很容易就被掩蓋了。若對此重新思考，那麼，李維楨這種具有鮮明的折衷色彩、處於流派過度之間，在當時具有文名，卻在後世較少為人所注意的論者，似乎有再重新衡定的必要。他的論點儘管未必多強悍偉大，但是他參與了晚明文壇的轉變，他既指出晚明文人的時代議題，也代表復古派後期文學觀念的轉向。

關於李維楨的文學思想，本論文分為三個部分來探討：第一部分是李維楨的文學歷史意識。復古派文人非常重視對傳統的省察，李維楨認為文學創作具有歷史責任，他延續復古派「格以代降」的說法而有所修正，提出「一代之才即有一代之詩」，並從文學發展的規律，說明明代在文學史上的極盛地位。第二個部分是李維楨的創作論，他提出的情感與性靈論述，以及才、學、識三個創作條件，調和了「師古」與「師心」兩個路向。第三個部分是李維楨的批評論，他論析復古派所要求的「兼長」理想，同時他也承認人有才性的侷限，「兼長」未必能達成，故他提出「適」的觀念，轉而欣賞「偏至」。他並分析各文體的藝術樣貌、時代風格，以便掌握創作之法。

本論文所拈出的議題，都不是單純的拆解李維楨的寫作文本，而是期望以此作為考察晚明文壇的切入點之一，並提供晚明文學研究的參照與輔助。

關鍵字

李維楨 ； 王世貞 ； 末五子 ； 復古派 ； 明代文學 ； 晚明 ； 師心 ； 師古

並列摘要

Li Wei-zhen (1547-1626) was chosen by Wang Shi-zhen as a member of the Last Pentaschool. Li was not an outstanding ideologue, and he was not known very well to those who study in the Late Ming Dynasty’s literature. Still, the eras he lived and the position he held was so special to ignore.

In the studying of the Environment of Late Ming Literature, there are two agendas for us to rethink: First, It is almost an accepted opinion that the Anti-Classicist School was in the opposing positions to the Classicist School. The prejudgment is taking the Classicists represented superannuation and conservation, while the Anti-Classicist School, including Yuan’s brothers of Gongan School, Li Chi, Hsu Wei, and Tang Shen-Zu, represented innovation and advancement. Second, so-called “important” literary authors were defined in the discourse of literature history. These won’t be major mistakes, but if the “academic focus” were established, the details will be ignored easily. To avoid the catches, we have to re-estimate those who were standing in the compromise position, famous at that time, but not notice in the later period, such as Li Wei-zhen. Maybe Li’s viewpoint was not so important and powerful, but, as he involved in the variation of Late Ming Literary arena, he pointed out the major agenda for the Late Ming’s literary authors, he also represented the turning phase of late Classicists’ literary concept.

This thesis will focus on three major points to analyze Li Wei-zhen’s literary philosophy. First, his historical consciousness of literature: the Classicists always attached importance to tradition. Li followed the Classicist’s concept of “the later, the lower character”, but revised it to “every generation got its own poem,” and tried to prove the Ming’s literature was standing on the summit of literature history via the rules of literary development. Second, his theories about creating: he emphasized both affections and spirits, and brought up three terms of creating – talent, knowledge, and experience. Through these, Li harmonized the two different directions “follow the ancient” and “follow the soul”. Third: his theories about criticism: he analyzed the idea “full-scale ability” the Classicists had addressed, and recognized that author was limited with his talent and interest. He tried to revise the idea with the concept “suit”, and appreciated “special forte”. Also, he analyzed different genres of literature and their style to grasp the methods of creating.

The topics discussed in this thesis are not focus on Li Wei-zhen’s texts; instead, they are expected to be the entrance points in studying Late Ming’s literary circle, and to provide the reference or assistance to the Late Ming’s literature.

並列關鍵字

Li Wei-zhen ； Wang Shi-zhen ； the Last Pentaschool ； the Classicist School ； Ming’s literature ； Late Ming Dynasty ； “follow the ancient” ； “follow the soul”

參考文獻

易聞曉：《公安派的文化闡釋》，濟南：齊魯書社，2003年。

李東陽《麓堂詩話》

嚴志雄：〈錢謙益攻排竟陵鍾、譚側議〉，《中國文哲所通訊》第14卷，第2期，收錄於《錢謙益文學研究專輯》，2004 年6 月，頁93-119。

胡雲翼：《增訂本中國文學史》，臺北：三民書局，1979年。

湯顯祖著，徐朔方箋校：《湯顯祖全集》，北京：北京古籍出版社，1999年。