论文部分内容阅读
在当前形势下,陆老师提出文艺本质问题让大家讨论,很有意义,也显示出探索真理的勇气。过去说“文艺是社会生活的反映”。但仅只于此还不是马克思主义。马克思主义以前的机械唯物主义美学也肯定这一点。陆老师明确指出:“文艺的直接反映的观点,不是马克思主义观点”。这一震聋发聩之语对廓清人们对马克思主义文艺本质观的误解有积极意义。文艺反映生活不是直接的、映象式的,它经过文艺家的选择、加工、改造,是创造性的客观的“再现”与主观“表现”的统一。那么,在“反映”前加“能动”二字是否就可以了?陆老师认为仍然是含混的,未能把文艺与其
Under the current circumstances, it is of great significance that Professor Lu proposed the issue of the essence of literature and art for discussion. It also shows the courage to explore the truth. In the past, “art is a reflection of social life.” But this is not yet Marxism alone. This is also affirmed by the previous mechanical materialist aesthetics of Marxism. Teacher Lu explicitly pointed out: “The view directly reflected in literature and art is not a Marxist viewpoint.” This deafening rhetoric is of positive significance for clarifying people’s misunderstanding of the essence of Marxist literary and art viewpoints. Literary and artistic reflection of life is not direct, image-based, it through the choice of artists, processing, transformation, is a creative objective “reproduction” and the subjective “performance” of unity. Is it possible to add the word “active” before “reflecting”? Teacher Lu thinks it is still vague and fails to combine literature and art with