Thesis--Australian National University. / Bibliography: p. 459-481.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis--Australian National University. / Bibliography: p. 459-481.

abstract: Li He (790-816), an outstanding poet full of literary talent in classical Chinese poem history, his poignant words, incredible literary construction, nether artistic conception and nuanced peculiar poem style owned him the reputation of “ghostly, demonic genius” 鬼才. Scholars demonstrated that his ghostly and demonic style has much to do with the special imagery and allusion in his poetry. However, this kind of ghostly appeal of literature exactly have much to do with the large quantity of sensory vocabulary that the poet is expert in using in his poems, which evokes resonance from the readers/audiences. Li He fuses visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory and tactile sensation in his poems, building up his special writing style, evoking and creating a sensorial space for readers. The thesis concentrates on analyzing the sensory vocabulary in Li He’s poetry, sonic depiction in particular, which are rarely discussed before, based on which making further conclusion about the artistic conception and the special style of Li He’s poetry. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis East Asian Languages and Civilizations 2015

摘 要 根據鍾理和寫給文友廖清秀的信函中，指出他約在一九三○年左右，接觸了大量的中國新文學作家的作品，引起他強烈的閱讀興趣，甚至到了廢寢忘食的地步，而其中影響最大且最深的要算是魯迅，因為不論在他的日記或與文友的通信中，最常提及的中國作家就是魯迅。 魯迅是中國新文學運動中最重要的作家，他在文學上的成就，不僅在中國，甚至對鄰近的日本、韓國、新加坡等都產生了深遠的影響，他不僅是中國文學上的巨人，也是躋身世界文學之林的大文豪，日據時期的台灣文壇就是站在世界文學的角度上，開始閱讀並接受魯迅，鍾理和也就是在這樣的文學背景下接觸魯迅。因此，我們在看待魯迅對鍾理和的影響之時，並不把他當作是個獨特現象，而是把他放置在「台灣魯迅學」的範疇中，視為魯迅在台灣傳播的眾多面向之一。所以，本論文首先簡單探討魯迅文學在台灣的傳播情形，再透過對兩人文本的細讀與比較，尋繹魯迅對鍾理和文學的影響。 要進行不同作家文學的傳承或影響的研究，並不能只強調兩者的接觸關係，還必須在諸如主題、表現方式、文字技巧、創作風格等等的層面上進行考察，才能得到較為完整、正確的結果。因此，我們嘗試在鍾理和的作品中，尋找若干對魯迅文學的繼承或轉化的情形，尤其在顯而易見的國民性批判議題與寫實精神的發揚上，除了探討文字上所具體呈現的影響外，也注意在精神或思想上的可能關連。透過這些全面而深入的討論，我們看到鍾理和之所以接受魯迅文學，無疑地主要是著眼在「現代性」這部分上。同樣源自對傳統封建思想的不滿，企求對所處社會進行改革，在國民性的議題上，在對鄉土的寫實與批判上，無一不是站在「現代性」的立場，吸收、學習魯迅相關的文學與思想，但鍾理和的文學並不完全等於魯迅，他一直有著自我獨特的風格，始終立足於台灣的觀點，恰如其份地展現他的主體性。 此外，我們也明確的看到鍾理和是在文學上認識、接受並詮釋魯迅的，有別於被中共神化或國民黨貶抑的扭曲形象，在這裡我們重新看到魯迅作為文學家的真實形象。而鍾理和借鑑魯迅文學的事實，也說明魯迅或中國文學確曾對台灣文學的發展產生作用，並客觀證成台灣文學開放性的特色。 / Abstract Zhong Li-he pointed out in his correspondence with his literary friend Liao Qing-xiu that sometime around 1930 he began to be in touch with a lot of literary works written by Chinese new-vernacular literary writers, which aroused his intense reading interest to the extent that he couldn’t eat and sleep without finishing reading them. Lu Xun was the Chinese writer who had the greatest influence on Zhong Li-he because his name was most often mentioned in either his diaries or his correspondence with his literary friends. Lu Xun, whose achievement in literature exerted profound influence not only in China but also on neighboring countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Singapore, was the most important writer in the Chinese new-vernacular literature movement. Not only was he a literary giant in Chinese literature, but he was also an eminent writer in world literature. In fact, the literary arena of Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule started to read and accept the works of Lu Xun from the perspective of World literature, and it was against this literary background that Zhong Li-he began his contact with the literary works of Lu Xun. Therefore, we do not treat Lu Xun’s influence on Zhong Li-he as a unique phenomenon; in contrast, we place it in the field of “Lu Xun Studies in Taiwan,” and regard it as one of the many facets of how the literary works of Lu Xun were disseminated in Taiwan. Therefore, this dissertation first discusses how Lu Xun literature was disseminated in Taiwan. It then inquires into the influence Lu Xun exerted on Zhong Li-he literature by comparing their literary texts. When carrying out a research into the inheritance or influence of the literary works of different writers, we cannot emphasize simply on the way they contact with one another; on the contrary, we must also examine other facets such as the literary subjects, the ways they are expressed, the writing skills, the creative writing styles etc. so as to arrive at a more complete and correct conclusion. Therefore, we attempt to find out how Lu Xun literature was inherited or transformed through the reading of Zhong Li-he’s literary works. For instance, when dealing with the issues of national characteristic criticism and the promotion of realistic writing, we not only discuss the influence they embodied in written language, but also take notice of the possible correlation between them in terms of spirits or thoughts. By means of comprehensive and thorough discussion, we find out that Zhong Li-he’s acceptance of Lu Xun literature was undoubtedly because of his focus on the aspect of “modernity”. Similarly, on the issue of national characteristic and on the realism and criticism of “hometown”, Zhong Li-he’s position was anchored in “modernity”, expressing his discontentment with traditional feudalistic thinking and his great eagerness for social reforms. Even though Zhong Li-he learned and soaked up Lu Xun-related literature and thoughts, Zhong Li-he literature is not equivalent to Lu Xun literature because Zhong always had his own unique style. He grounded his position from the perspective of Taiwan, which reflected his subjectivity. Finally, we clearly find out that Zhong Li-he came to know, accept and interpret Lu Xun literarily, which is different from the distorted image conjured up by the Chinese Communist Party’s deification or Kuomintang’s disparagement of him. It is in this context that we see the real image of Lu Xun as a literary man. On the other hand, the fact that Zhong Li-he drew lessons from Lu Xun literature explained that Lu Xun or the Chinese literature did exercise influence on the development of the literature of Taiwan, which objectively testified to the fact that openness was a characteristic of the literature of Taiwan.