The Interpretations of Kant’s Notion of "Mere Form" in Anglo-American Literary Formal Theories

【作者】 薛华；

【导师】 谈峥；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 “形式”是西方美学(包括英美文学理论)当中影响深远的一个重要的概念。在过去的两个世纪中,文学形式的研究受到英美文学理论界和学术界空前的重视,甚至在诸如唯美主义、新批评和结构主义等理论和批评中占据核心地位。学术界普遍认为这个转变受到康德美学中的“纯形式”概念的极大影响。虽然学术界关于康德美学以及英美文学形式理论的研究蔚为可观,但是,关于英美文学形式理论界和学术界对康德美学中“纯形式”概念所作的主要解读,以及这些解读的成因、合理性以及它们对英美文学形式理论的发展所具有的意义,相关的研究却很不充分,而且已有的一些研究观点也有待检验,因此有必要对这些理论问题进行进一步的考察和分析。首先,本文对康德《判断力批判》中的“纯形式”的概念作了简要的理论分析。在这本著作中,康德并没有给所谓的“纯形式”下明确的定义,而只是对这一术语进行外延上的限定,因此,本文首先探讨了“纯形式”一词的历史起源、它在康德分析哲学体系当中的地位、以及它与康德其它重要美学概念的关系,从而明确康德对“纯形式”一词所做的界定。其次,本文从两个方面就英美文学理论、批评和学术界对康德“纯形”概念的具体解读及其影响进行了历史的分析研究。一方面,本文详细考察了英美文艺形式理论界和学术界对康德“纯形式”概念的外延的解读,以及这些解读伴随英美主要文学形式理论演进的过程；另一方面,本文还考察了英美文学理论、批评和学术界对“纯形式”这一概念的内涵所作的四种具有代表性的解读,即将之理解为先验的纯形式、特定经验特征、某种认识模式以及“感觉的游戏”(康德语)。这四类解读彼此差异很大,甚至有时相互对立,但是它们都得到康德文本的若干支持。第三,根据康德对“纯形式”概念所做的限定,本文将上述解读放到康德文本框架中进行验证,并加以分析批判。本文指出：英美文学形式理论界和学术界在对“纯形式”一词的外延解读方面基本一致,并且基本符合康德关于“纯形式”审美的非功利性和自足性的观点。但是,英美文学理论界和学术界对“纯形式”一词内涵所作的各种解读大多并不符合康德这一概念的本义。因此,本文认为,从对这个概念的外延的理解来看,说康德的“纯形式”影响了英美文学诸多形式理论是贴切的,但是从对这个概念的内涵的理解来看,很难说英美诸多文学形式理论主要是来自康德的这个概念的,或者说受到这一概念内涵的决定性影响的。许多关于“纯形式”概念对英美文学形式理论的影响的观点没有对这个概念的外延影响和内涵影响进行具体的、辩证的区分,因而值得商榷。最后,关于英美文学理论界和学术界对“纯形式”概念解读的多样性和矛盾性,本文从英美文学理论自身发展需要、康德对“纯形式”一词缺少明确界定、康德语言运用的多变性以及康德试图调和理性主义和经验主义的哲学方法等四个方面分析探讨了它们形成的影响因素。通过分析,本文认为：英美文学形式理论界和学术界对“纯形式”一词重要性和自足性的解读为多数流派的形式理论奠定了理论基础。关于它的内涵解读的多样性、差异性和矛盾性虽然暴露了英美世界对“纯形式”一词内涵的多重误读,但是它们一方面有助于我们理解英美文学形式理论在康德“纯形式”概念影响下的发展脉络,另一方面也有助于我们对康德的这一概念加以确切的理解。更多还原

【Abstract】 "Form" is an important term that has long and extensively been employed in the Western aesthetics, including in the Anglo-American literary theories of form. In the past two centuries, literary form is unprecedentedly emphasized in many schools of Anglo-American literary theories and criticism. Sometimes it is even regarded as one of the core concepts in the Anglo-American literary formal theories, such as Aestheticism, New Criticism and Structuralism. It is widely recognized that the Anglo-American stress on artistic form is influenced by Kant’s notion of "mere form". While researches into Kant’s aesthetics and the Anglo-American literary formal theories are voluminous, the study of the Anglo-American interpretations of his concept of "mere form", their causes, their agreeableness to Kant and their influences on the Anglo-American literary formal theories is comparatively insufficient. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct further study of these important theoretical issues.First, the author makes a brief theoretical examination of the term as in.Kant. In Critique of Judgment, Kant leaves "mere form" undefined, and only provides extensional stipulations for the term, so the author observes it by exploring its historical origins, its textual backdrop in his critical philosophy and its extensional relations to other core aesthetic concepts and notions in Kant. Second, the author explores in two perspectives the interpretations of "mere form" rendered by Anglo-American literary formal theorists, critics and scholars. On the one hand, the author examines interpretations regarding the extensions of the Kantian term, elucidating their relation to the development of main Anglo-American literary formal theories. On the other hand, the author scrutinizes four representative interpretations concerning the connotations of "mere form" respectively as a priori pure form, empirical features, a mental mode related to conceptual cognition and as "free play of sensations."(Kant’s words) All these interpretations are very different, if not always contradictory, but all of them can find support in Kant’s texts. Thus they are inevitably subject to further analysis and evaluation.Third, according to Kant’s contextual and extensional stipulations of "mere form", the author tests and evaluates these interpretations in his texts. It is thus illustrated that most Anglo-American extensional interpretations of "mere form" as a significant stress on the disinterested and autonomous value of art are in agreement with Kant, but many of the multifarious connotational interpretations of the term are not congenial to him. While it is safe to contend that the Kant exerts significant influence through his "mere form" on Anglo-American literary theories of form in accordance with the extensional interpretations, it is problematic to presuppose such influence in terms of the connotational readings. Therefore, many academic arguments with respect to such influence lack dialectic distinction between extensional and connotational influences, and are thus subject to further evaluation. Last, the author analyzes the causes for such diverse and even opposed connotational interpretations in four-fold perspective:the intrinsic requirements of the development of literary theory and criticism, lack of clear definition of the term in the third critique, Kant’s delicate philosophizing methods to mediate between Rationalism and Empiricism, and his problematic use of language. In the final analysis, as a stress on the autonomous value of art, the extensional interpretations ground most Anglo-American literary formal theories. In the meantime, though the diversity and complexity of connotational interpretations suggests considerable misreadings of the term, they are helpful not only in understanding the evolution of modern Anglo-American literary formal theories under the influence of Kant, but also in construing properly the term itself.更多还原