追随可能性-罗伯特.克里利诗歌尺度研究

出版时间：2011-8  出版社：中山大学  作者：刘朝晖  页数：233  
Tag标签：无  

内容概要

　　《追随可能性：罗伯特·克里利诗歌尺度研究（英文版）》探讨了美国投射派诗人罗伯特·克里利关于诗歌及其形式、语言和情感的四个尺度：①诗歌是诗人自身现象性的衡量；②形式是内容的延伸；③词语是事物：④情感是诗歌的首要尺度。　　“诗歌是诗人自身现象性的衡量”这一尺度强调时间的偶然流动，强调瞬间先于形式，强调同一性主体的消解以及世界的碎片性。“形式是内容的延伸”尺度则是投射诗三原理之一，它推翻形式与内容的二元对立，丰富了诗歌内容和形式的可能性。“词语是事物”的尺度涉及诗歌语言；在克里利的诗歌中，该尺度从四个方面得到体现：①阻碍语言和现实的联系；②直接以言行事；③削弱语言的主观性；④凸显语言自身特质。“情感是诗歌的首要尺度”，正因为克里利同时遵循其他三个尺度，他的情感表达方式与浪漫派和自白派诗人大相径庭。　　克里利的四个尺度相互紧密联系着。一方面，遵循一个尺度意味着同时遵循其他尺度；另一方面，违背一个尺度也将背离其他尺度。这四个尺度继承并发展了惠特曼-庞德-威廉斯以降的美国诗歌传统，为语言诗的发展做出了重要的贡献。

作者简介

　　刘朝晖 1970年生，湖南科技大学英语语言文学学士，湖南师范大学英语语言文学硕士，中山大学英语语言文学博士。深圳职业技术学院副教授。主要从事英语诗歌与诗论研究。近年来，在《当代外国文学》等核心刊物和《广州大学学报》等一般刊物上发表学术论文近二十篇。

书籍目录

IntroductionChapter One Poetry: The Measure of the Poet's Own Phenomenality1.1 The Measure of the Poet's Own Phenomenality: Contexts and Meaning1.1.1 Contexts1.1.2 Meaning1.2 The Measure of the Poet's Own Phenomenaiity as Reflected in Creeley's Poetry1.3 A Contemporary Version of Negative Capability1.3.1 Definition1.3.2 Similarities1.3.3 DifferencesChapter Two Form: An Extension of Content2.1 A Brief Survey of the Relation Between Form and Content2.2 Creeley's Poetics of Form and the Poetics of Projective Verse2.2.1 Creeley's Poetics of Form2.2.2 Creeley's Poetics of Form as Related to the Poetics of Projective Verse2.3 A Demonstration of Creeley's Poetics of Form-- “Le Fou”2.4 Postmodemity of Creeley's Poetics of Form2.5 Inconsistency between Creeley's Theory and PracticeChapter Three Words:Self-Contained Things3.1 Indications of Words' Thingness in Creeley's Poetry3.1.1 Problematized Language-reality Nexus3.1.2 Words Doing Things3.1.3 Weakened Subjectivity3.1.4 Highlighted Physical Features of Language3.2 Approach to Words' Thingness: Literality Instead of Objectivity3.3 Suspicious Elements in Cree|ey's Poetics of Language3.4 A Genealogy of Creeley's Poetics of Language3.4.1 Sources3.4.2 InfluenceChapter Four Emotion: A Primary Measure for Poetry4.1 Emotion and Poetry4.2 Emotion and Creeley's Poetry4.3 Emotion as Related to the Other Three Measures4.4 Creeley's Mode of Turning Out Emotion as Distinguished from Wordsworth's and Lowell's4.4.1 Creeley and Wordsworth: Betraying vs Expressing4.4.2 Creeley and Lowell: Exact vs GeneralConclusionWorks CitedAppendix: Biographical Chronology of Robert Creeley

章节摘录

　　To sum up，the measure of the poet's own phenomenalitv comesin to being in the process of the poet's writing .It has little to d0 with any fixed rule. In Creeley's poems it is reflected by an emphasis on the chance flux of time，priority of the moment over form，disappearance of the identical subject as well as fragmentation of the world. Comparing Keats'negative capability and Creeley's measure of the poet's own phenomenality，we find out that the two bear both close similarities and distinct differences.　In fact，the measure of the poet，s own phenomenality can be seen as a contemporary version of negative capability.　　Although the measure of the poet's own phenomenalitv is no specific rule，it does imply an overall standard as to what and how the poet should write. It is an attempt to liberate poetic composition from the bondage of traditional metrics so that endless possibilities may emerge in the process of writing .As the poet breaks away from any prescribed pattern and concerns himself only with what appears to his consciousness at each moment，the measure he follows is nothing other than the measure of his own phenomenality. The form the poem is assuming then cannot be anticipated，as Creeley says of Williams：“What device，means，rhythm，or form the poem can gain for its coherence are a precise issue of its occasion.”（Essays 45）Creeley's other remarks concerning form are：　“Form is never more than an extension of content；”（qtd. .in Olson，“Projective”40）and“Form is what happens.”（qtd. in Allen，78）This can be seen as a sense of measure Creeley has developed concerning the form of poetry. The next chapter will deal with it in detail.　　……