抒情與敘事的辯證──楊牧「詩史」之探究

Abstract

本研究擬以「詩史」為框架，探究楊牧詩作中的「敘事以抒情」技藝，以及詩人如何以歷史敘事之縫隙開展詩作，又如何以詩呈現其介入社會之思考。「詩史」乃中國文學批評中的詩學文論，最早作為杜甫的稱號，闡釋其詩作對安史之亂及其後的現實之描繪。宋以來的論者針對「詩史」開展論述，辯證詩歌的抒情性與敘事性問題。從楊慎、王夫之的討論裡，可見其人探問「詩史」如何鎔鑄抒情與敘事於詩中。清初錢謙益則因世變論證、實踐「詩史」。「詩史」的意涵反映的是詩人如何以史／事／情回應所處的現實，以文學對抗社會的厄難；文學性方面「詩史」則體現「抒情」與「敘事」如何同時作為詩歌的特質而存在。楊牧的文論中，可見重視詩創作與歷史敘事的連結，詩更必須回應現實，進而以詩作實踐「敘事以抒情」成為其一生志業。本研究第一章爬梳「抒情傳統」、「詩史」、「楊牧詩作研究」三面向之前行研究，以奠定研究基礎。第二章試圖重點式梳理歷來論者對「詩史」 的討論，釐清詩人如何看待詩歌抒情性與敘事性的問題，進一步探悉論者對「詩史」創作手法的建構。並以楊牧的散文、論述為基礎，討論楊牧與「詩史」相似之創作思路，並辨析楊牧詩的「歷史意識」、「社會介入」內涵。本研究認為「詩史」在楊牧詩作中反映為「歷史意識」、「社會介入」兩面向，此二重性非二元對立，而是互相影響的。為更細緻地詮釋楊牧詩作，因此將其詩作中具備「詩史」意涵之詩作分為「歷史意識」、「社會介入」兩類。第三章以其具備「歷史意識」詩作為例，論證楊牧如何以歷史敘事為題材譜寫詩作，並融入詩人的想像於其中以言志。第四章以具備「社會介入」之詩作為例，探賾楊牧如何以詩批判臺灣海內外的戰爭、威權等。本研究既以「抒情與敘事的辯證」為題，三、四章詮釋詩作時亦關注詩人如何敘事以抒情，藉此闡發楊牧的詩美學技藝。第五章則總結並討論楊牧「詩史」之研究成果，以及未來仍能開展之研究可能性。擬藉本研究之初探，以窺楊牧「詩史」之樣貌。

This study aims to explore the technique of"Using narrative to promote lyricism" in Yang Mu's poetry within the framework of "Poetry As History." It will examine how the poet uses the gaps in historical narratives to write his poetry and how his poems reflect his engagement with social issues. "Poetry As History" is a concept in Chinese literary criticism, originally used as a title for Du Fu to explain how his poetry depicted the An-Shi Rebellion and its aftermath. Since the Song Dynasty, scholars have discussed "Poetry As History," debating the issues of lyricism and narrative in poetry. From the discussions of Yang Shen and Wang Fuzhi, we see their inquiry into how"Poetry As History" integrates lyricism and narrative in poetry. In the early Qing Dynasty, Qian Qianyi further demonstrated and practiced "Poetry As History" in response to societal changes. The concept of "Poetry As History" reflects how poets respond to the realities of their time through history/events/emotions, using literature to counter societal hardships. In terms of literary features, "Poetry As History" embodies how "lyricism" and "narrative" can coexist as characteristics of poetry. Yang Mu's literary theory shows his consideration of the importance of historical narrative in poetry creation and how poetry responds to reality. Additionally, he practices the poetic technique of "Using narrative to promote lyricism" in his works. This study argues that Yang Mu's thoughts and practices can be discussed within the perspective of "Poetry As History." Chapter One of this study reviews prior research on three aspects: "Chinese Lyrical Tradition," "Poetry As History," and "researchon Yang Mu's poetry" to establish the foundation for the study. Chapter Two attempts to systematically outline the discussions by previous scholars on "Poetry As History," clarifying how poets perceive the issues of lyricism and narrative in poetry, and further exploring the construction of creative techniques related to "Poetry As History." Based on Yang Mu's essays and discourses, this chapter also discusses the similarities in his creative approach compared to "Poetry As History." The study posits that "Poetry As History" in Yang Mu's works is reflected in two dimensions: "historical sense" and "criticize social reality," which are not binary opposites but mutually influencing. To provide a more detailed interpretation of Yang Mu's poetry, this study categorizes his works with "Poetry As History" connotations into "historical sense" and "criticize social reality" types. Chapter Three uses examples of poems with "historical sense" to demonstrate how Yang Mu employs historical narrative as a subject to write his poetry and integrates the poet’s imagination to express his intentions. Chapter Four, using examples of poems that criticize social reality, explores how Yang Mu uses poetry to critique wars and authoritarianism both in Taiwan and abroad. Chapter Five summarizes and discusses the research findings on Yang Mu's "Poetry As History" and the potential for future research. This study, focusing on the "dialectic of lyricism and narrative," also examines how the poet uses narrative to promote lyricism, thereby elucidating Yang Mu's poetic aesthetic techniques.