|
|
|
| The Literary Significance of Taoist Immortal Narrative in the Poems of San CAO's Yue-fu |
| YANG Qing |
| School of History and Administration, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming, Yunnan, 650500 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract As a component of Jian'an poetry, CAO Cao's Qiu Hu, CAO Pi's Breaking Willows, and CAO Zhi's Flying Dragon had different creative backgrounds and writing times, but they all participated in literary interpretation based on the story structure of “meeting between humans and immortals”, which were unique in Yue-fu Poetry about immortals. Taking the above works as the center, it could be seen that San CAO's Yue-fu about immortals had evolved from “depicting the image of immortals” and “depicting the scenes of the immortal world” in the Han Dynasty to “narrating the stories of encountering immortals”, allowed the imperial and noble consciousness of “seeking immortals”, especially the experience of “expressing aspirations”, to be personalized. This provided more inspiration and possibilities, and promoted the development process of poetry about immortals in middle ages. The reason why Taoist immortal narrative in San CAO's Yue-fu Poetry, was not only due to the influence of the trend of immortality since the Warring States and Han dynasties, but also because the Taoist biographical knowledge system, especially the comprehensive biographies of Taoist immortals Immortal Biography, repeatedly portrayed immortal stories, provided a religious foundation and narrative model for related creations. Its literary significance was to make special contributions to verifying the evolution of Taoist novels. The fusion and symbiosis of Yue-fu poetry about immortals and Taoist immortal narrative occurred very timely in the Jian'an era, which may be an inevitable result of the development of literary and religious history.
|
|
Received: 23 March 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] (清)王士祯.师友诗传续录[A].王夫之等.清诗话[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,1978.158.
[2] (明)徐祯卿.谈艺录[A].历代诗话[M].(清)何文焕辑.北京:中华书局,2004.769.
[3] (明)王士贞.艺苑卮言校注[M].罗仲鼎校注.济南:齐鲁书社,1992.204.
[4] 采菽堂古诗选[M]采菽堂古诗选[M].(清)陈祚明评选,李金松点校.上海:上海古籍出版社,2008.
[5] (汉)曹操.曹操集注[M].夏传才注.郑州:中州古籍出版社,1986.
[6] (清)顾祖禹.读史方舆纪要(卷五十二)[M].贺次君,施和金点校.北京:中华书局,2005.2497.
[7] (晋)陈寿.三国志[M].裴松之注.北京:中华书局,1959.
[8] 魏武帝诗注[A]魏武帝诗注[A].黄节注汉魏六朝诗六种[M].黄节注.北京:人民文学出版社,2008.259.
[9] 张可礼. 三曹年谱[M].济南:齐鲁书社,1983.138-139.
[10] (明)冯惟讷.诗纪(卷二十二)[A].四库全书(第1379册)[M].台北:台湾商务印书馆,1986.168.
[11] 魏文帝诗注[A]魏文帝诗注[A].黄节注汉魏六朝诗六种[M].黄节注.北京:人民文学出版社,2008.
[12] 张作耀. 曹操评传[M].南京:南京大学出版社,2001.152-153.
[13] 宋战利. 魏文帝曹丕传论[M].开封:河南大学出版社,2009.275-276.
[14] (魏)曹植.曹植集校注(卷三)[M].赵幼文校注.北京:人民文学出版社,1984.
[15] (魏)曹植.曹植选集[M].俞绍初,王晓东选注.北京:人民文学出版社,1997.
[16] 徐公持. 曹植年谱考证[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016.248.
[17] (唐)吴兢.乐府古题要解[A].历代诗话续编[M].丁福保辑.北京:中华书局,2006.
[18] 曹子建诗注[A]曹子建诗注[A].黄节注汉魏六朝诗六种[M].黄节注.北京:人民文学出版社,2008.
[19] 陈飞之.应该正确评价曹植的游仙诗[J].文学评论,1983,(1):119-123+139.
[20] 萧涤非. 汉魏六朝乐府文学史[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1984.33.
[21] 阳清. 先唐文学人神遇合主题研究[M].北京:人民出版社,2009.89.
[22] (明)王夫之.古诗评选[A].船山全书(第14册)[M].长沙:岳麓书社,2011.499.
[23] 傅正义. “三曹”游仙诗比较论[J].求索,2004,(5):196-198.
[24] 乐府诗集[M].(宋)郭茂倩编.北京:中华书局,1979.926.
[25] (魏)曹植.曹集铨评[M].(清)丁晏纂.北京:文学古籍刊行社,1957.72.
[26] (梁)钟嵘.诗品集注[M].曹旭集注.上海:上海古籍出版社,1994.247.
[27] 张庆民. 魏晋南北朝志怪小说通论[M].北京:首都师范大学出版社,2002.157.
[28] 古诗源[M].(清)沈德潜选.北京:中华书局,1963.1.
[29] (明)许学夷.诗源辨体[M].北京:人民文学出版社,1987.67.
[30] 陈洪. 《列仙传》的道教意蕴与文学史意义[J].文学评论,2010,(3):106-111.
[31] 阳清,李贺.从《山海经》到《神异经》《海内十洲记》——博物志怪走向道教仙话的叙事丕变[J].广西社会科学,2015,(1):169.
[32] 阳清. 两汉神秘文化与武帝传说系列文本的人神遇合[J].昆明理工大学学报(社科版),2009,(10):82-86.
[33] 杨义. 中国古典小说史论[M].北京:人民出版社,1998.107-108.
[34] (清)乔松年.萝藦亭札记[A].山右丛书初编(十)[M].太原:山西人民出版社,1986.608.
[35] (汉)司马迁.史记[M].北京:中华书局,1959.179-180.
[36] 列仙传注译·神仙传注译[M]列仙传注译·神仙传注译[M].邱鹤亭注译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004.3-5.
[37] 张玉莲. 《列仙传》及其叙事学阐释[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2014,(1):151-155.
[38] (清)永瑢等.四库全书总目[M].北京:中华书局,1965.1248.
[39] 陈洪. 《列仙传》成书时代考[J].文献,2007,(1):45-52.
[40] (明)杨慎.升庵全集[M].北京:商务印书馆,1937.705-706.
[41] 汉魏六朝百三家集题辞注[M]汉魏六朝百三家集题辞注[M].(明)张溥辑,殷孟伦注.北京:人民文学出版社,1960.71. |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 41 
