| 730 | 0 | 210 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
作为宋代最早谈论诗料者,苏轼从自然物象、书本知识两端搜取诗料。苏轼定州诗用“代北”“太行”刻画地方,而不赋咏深具诗歌传统的幽蓟,这与元祐末年政局有关。面对诗涉边事的危机和诗料匮乏的困境,苏轼移用南方乃至海外物象。苏轼到海南后,由耳闻目睹而习得的地方知识主要集中于民俗方面,因此在写作上陷入了取资困境。典籍中海南人文故实的匮乏迫使苏轼开掘其海洋知识中“海”的一面,而淡化具体位置之于用事切地的重要性。两处地方书写的灵感来源于北宋诗画关系的新变,借助图经、景观图的流播而呈现于诗歌中的“地方”未必皆合实际,但在此过程中得到存留和提炼的地方性,促进了宋人地域认同和创作习性的形成。
Abstract:As the earliest poet who mentioned the poetic materials in the Song Dynasty, Su Shi gathered poetic materials from both natural phenomena and book knowledge. Su Shi used "Daibei" and "Taihang" to depict the area in his poem about Dingzhou, instead of praising Youzhou and Jizhou with poetic traditions. This had something to do with the political situation in the late Yuanyou Era. Faced with the crisis of poetry involving the border issues and the dilemma of a lack of poetic materials, Su Shi turned to images from the south and even overseas. After Su Shi arrived in Hainan, the local knowledge acquired through his personal experiences and observations mainly focused on folk customs, and he was lost in the dilemma of scarce reference materials in his literary writing. The scarcity of humanistic and historical facts about Hainan in the classics forced Su Shi to explore the side of "sea" with his maritime knowledge, and downplay the importance of specific locations in relating to a certain place with allusions. The inspirations for the writing of two places come from the new changes in the relationship between poetry and painting in the Northern Song Dynasty. Although the "area" in the poetry presented through the dissemination of illustrated books and landscape maps may not necessarily be realistic, a localized essence preserved and refined through this process had promoted the formation of regional identity and creation habits among the people in the Song Dynasty.
[1]浅见洋二.距离与想象:中国诗学的唐宋转型[M].金程宇,冈田千穗,译.上海:上海古籍出版社,2013.
[2]杜芝明.宋朝边疆地理思想研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2011.
[3]陈善.扪虱新话[M]//程毅中.宋人诗话外编.北京:中华书局,2017:517.
[4]苏轼.苏轼诗集[M].孔凡礼,点校.北京:中华书局,1982.
[5]孙瑜.唐代代北军人群体研究[D].北京:首都师范大学,2011.
[6]王存.元丰九域志[M].王文楚,魏嵩山,点校.北京:中华书局,1984.
[7]程千帆.古诗考索[M]//程千帆.程千帆全集·第八卷.石家庄:河北教育出版社,2001.
[8]韩泉欣.孟郊集校注[M].杭州:浙江古籍出版社,2012:287.
[9]李碧妍.危机与重构:唐帝国及其地方诸侯[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2015:372.
[10]李焘.续资治通鉴长编[M].北京:中华书局,2004:11497.
[11]苏轼.苏轼文集[M].孔凡礼,点校.北京:中华书局,1986.
[12]詹锳.文心雕龙义证[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1994:1759.
[13]葛兆光.历史中国的内与外——有关“中国”与“周边”概念的再澄清[M].香港:香港中文大学出版社,2017:41.
[14]周俊.苏轼儋州文学创作中的民族民俗事象[J].民族文学研究,2015(4):52-58.
[15]钱希白.洞微志[M]//陶宗仪.说郛·卷七十五.北京:中国书店,1986:2a.
[16]马强才.中国古代诗歌用事观念研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2014.
[17]范晔.后汉书[M].北京:中华书局,1973:2817.
[18]司马迁.史记[M].北京:中华书局,1963:1369.
[19]陈寿.三国志[M].冯乃乾,校点.北京:中华书局,1964.
[20]刘宝楠.论语正义[M].高流水,点校.北京:中华书局,1990:170.
[21]班固.汉书[M].北京:中华书局,1964.
[22]郭庆藩.庄子集释[M].王孝鱼,点校.北京:中华书局,1985:925.
[23]李树辉.苏武牧羊之北海及丁令居地考[J].敦煌学辑刊,2022(4):1-15.
[24]何薳.春渚纪闻[M].张明华,点校.北京:中华书局,1983:88.
[25]彼得·伯克.知识社会史:从《百科全书》到维基百科[M].汪一帆,赵博囡,译.杭州:浙江大学出版社,2016:228.
[26]王溥.五代会要[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1978:254.
[27]王应麟.玉海[M].扬州:广陵书社,2003:274.
[28]戴思哲.中华帝国方志的书写、出版与阅读:1100—1700年[M].向静,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2022:23.
[29]潘晟.宋代地理学的观念、体系与知识兴趣[M].北京:商务印书馆,2014:141.
[30]王旭.论宋代图经向方志的转变——以图的变化为中心[J].史学史研究,2016(2):110-119.
[31]朱弁.风月堂诗话[M].陈新,点校.北京:中华书局,1988:104.
[32]北京大学古文献研究所.全宋诗[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1995:29002.
[33]钱仲联.韩昌黎诗系年集释[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1984:1179.
[34]姜双双.论唐宋图经与诗歌[J].中国诗歌研究,2018(2):92-107.
[35]内山精也.传媒与真相:苏轼及其周围士大夫的文学[M].朱刚,等译.上海:上海古籍出版社,2013:461.
[36]吉川幸次郎.中国诗史[M].章培恒,骆玉明,等译.上海:复旦大学出版社,2012:239.
[37]朱新亮.唐宋时期风土组诗的兴起与演变[J].中国文学研究,2022(4):50-56.
[38]周裕锴.宋代诗学通论[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2019:226-243.
[39]王延梯,林瑞娥,王成.王禹偁诗集编年笺注[M].香港:香港天马出版有限公司,2005:455.
基本信息:
DOI:10.15886/j.cnki.hnus.202408.0219
中图分类号:I207.22
引用信息:
[1]王居衡.盈缩的诗世界:苏轼诗中的地方书写与“迁移”现象[J].海南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2025,43(04):43-49.DOI:10.15886/j.cnki.hnus.202408.0219.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金重点项目(19AZW009)
2024-08-17
2024
2024-11-06
2024-11-12
2024
1
2024-11-12
2024-11-12
2024-11-12