Second Thoughts on the Proposition “Literature Is the Study of Man”

摘要

20“”“”21“”“”“”20“”“”“” : “”   In an essay written in the 1950s, Qian Gurong noted that Gorky once suggested calling literature “the study of man.” He went on to argue that Gorky was the first to have put forward this proposition. In the twenty‐first century, Qian added the comment that “Rights to the statement ‘Literature is the study of man’ should go to H. Taine.” In this paper, I argue that in fact, Gorky never suggested calling literature “the study of man,” nor did Taine ever say in so many words “Literature is the study of man.” Nevertheless, it certainly took extraordinary courage and talent for Qian Gurong to have put forward this proposition and expounded on the “humane” character of literature given the political and literary situation of China in the 1950s. His act was of more than usual significance, for it had an enormously positive influence on literary creation and research in the succeeding half century. At the same time, it is worth noting that the proposition “Literature is the study of man” is not justifiable in terms of the principles of logic. In the new century, as we examine this proposition more rigorously, we can see its deficiencies more clearly: that is, man is the center, rather than the sole object, of literary description; man is a measure, rather than the sole measure, of literary criticism. Besides, literature should follow its own particular laws.View full textDownload full textKeywords“Literature is the study of man,”, source, historical background, matrix of relationshipsRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02529203.2011.573303