Why didn't the Han people leave an epic in ancient times (1)

Subtitle About []: Students, my name is Wang Xianpei, and I am a teacher in the College of Literature of Huazhong Normal University. The general topic I want to tell you is "The development track and characteristics of China's literary narrative". The first topic we are going to talk about today is "Why didn't the Han people leave an epic in ancient times". Let's start with the specific content. Narrative in modern narratology includes historical narrative, news narrative and literary narrative, as well as "image narrative", "network narrative" and even "philosophical narrative" and "psychological narrative", which are all so detailed in modern times. In ancient times, they were mixed. Historical narrative, news narrative and literary narrative are integrated, but they are not separated. When did the literary narrative, historical narrative and news narrative of all countries in the world fall apart? After separation, their position and weight in the whole literature and culture are different, which reflects the cultural characteristics of various countries and literature. The development of China's literary narration has its own special way, which is different from many countries in the world. Therefore, these different characteristics are a subject we are studying today. What influence does this difference in history have on today's literature and culture? What role will it play? This is a question that we need to think about. In the past century, many scholars and scholars have given their own answers to this question, and their personal opinions are not the same. These opinions deserve to be discussed again today. There are two academic problems in the narrative history of China ancient literature and the narrative history of western literature, which are called "Homer problem" in the west. What is the Homer Problem? As we know, the two great epics of ancient Greece were written by Homer, both of which are long and great works. It is said that Homer is a blind poet. How could a blind poet write these two epics alone more than 3000 years ago? How did he write it and how did he record it? This is a problem that many western scholars are studying. What is the big problem in China's academic history? That is, the Han nationality, a major ethnic group in China, why is there no epic? Many scholars have studied this problem. Up to now, there is no consistent conclusion, which needs to be discussed today. China is an ancient civilization and one of the largest in the world. There is no epic, and there is no epic literary style. This is a very strange thing, a strange thing. Then we need to consider this matter. There were no epics in ancient China, that is to say, there were no epics in a strict sense, typical, narrow and strict. Epic is very important for a nation. Hegel once said that the epic is the national emblem of a nation, and its emblem, the symbol of this nation, the national spirit, cultural tradition, people's ideals and concepts of a nation are often contained in the epic. Many countries in the world have epics. As we said just now, there are two epic poems in Greece, Ilion and Odyssey, which are very famous. India's two great epics are also famous, namely Mahabharata and Ramayana. Germany has Song of Nibelungen; Russia has an Igor expedition; Britain has Beowulf; Spain has a poem "My World"; France has the song of Roland. There are also some small countries with few ethnic groups, such as Armenia, which have their own epics. China is an ancient civilization, a country with a large population and profound cultural traditions. Why don't you have your own epic? This is a very strange question. Of course, some people say that China has epics. Some scholars say that, like The Book of Songs and Elegance in ancient China, some people quote five articles, while others quote six articles, saying that they are epics, including Gong Liu, Mian, Yi Di and Daming. But I'm afraid it's a little reluctant. If nothing else, an epic is generally called a long folk story poem, which means it must be very long. Aristotle said in Poetics that the time of tragedy is day by day, and there is no limit to the time of epic performance. Epics are often written for more than ten years or even decades, and the length will be very long. For example, some Greek epic Iliad is translated into Ilian, with 24 volumes, 15693 lines, Odysseus is also 24 volumes, 12 165438 lines, and the Indian epic Ramayana has 48,000 lines. As we mentioned just now, some scholars think that China also has epics, so the poems of Gong Liu and Gong Liu are only over 300 words, and the poem of Sheng Min is only over 400 words. If it is an epic, it is a bit reluctant. It's hard to call it an epic just from the perspective of space. Of course, it is very valuable and has very important documentary value. However, we can't say it is an epic. It is a problem that the Han people in China did not leave an epic in ancient times. The ancients didn't think this was a problem. This problem was raised as a problem in the 20th century. Not only in the Qin Dynasty, but also in the Han Dynasty, Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties, no one raised such a question. Only at the beginning of the 20th century did scholars put it forward as a question. Why? Because China was a relatively closed country in the past, there were few foreign exchanges, and we lacked understanding of world literature, so there were no epics. Everyone thought it was a common thing. I don't know, there are many ethnic groups with a genre like epic, and there are all kinds of literary works, so I don't think it's a problem. In the 20th century, Chinese and foreign exchanges were very close, and we learned a lot about world literature. But at first, this question was not raised by China scholars or China people. Hegel said in the middle of his Aesthetics that there were no epics in ancient China, but Hegel's explanation is a little vague today, which can't satisfy us. He said that there was no epic in China, because ancient China people viewed it in prose. We feel that this statement seems to be difficult to establish. In ancient China, the ancient people observed prose. China is a big country with a glorious history of poetry. In addition, he said that the second reason is that China's religious concept is not suitable for epic. He didn't explain this in detail, and it's hard for us to understand, because there is no such narrow religion in China, and there is a Taoism, which is not necessarily in conflict with the creation of epic. Then I saw that Japanese scholars really raised this question and answered it. Japanese scholars put forward this question and tried to give their answers. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were some great scholars and writers in China. They saw these situations and got in touch with the views of Japanese and Japanese scholars. Put forward this question and make your own explanation. For example, Lu Xun mentioned this problem in the second chapter of A Brief History of China's Novels. Hu Shi, for example, mentioned this problem in the History of Vernacular Literature and explained it. Lu Xun's A Brief History of Chinese Novels 1922 was officially published, and Hu Shi's History of Vernacular Literature 1928 was officially published. But they all give lectures first and then write books. The lecture time is about the same, about 192 1 and 1922, so this question was first raised in the 1920s. Then in 1929, Mao Dun published a book called "A Study of China Myth ABC", which studied the ancient myths of China, so he also mentioned this issue and made some explanations different from those of Lu Xun, Hu Shi and Japanese scholars. Let's take a look at these explanations, which we agree with today, which we think may need to be revised and supplemented, or which we think cannot be established. The opinions of Lu Xun and Hu Shi are actually introducing the opinions of the Japanese. There is a Japanese scholar named Yan Guwen. He has a very important book, An Introduction to China Literature, which tells the history of China literature. It is mentioned that there were no epics in ancient China, and the myths handed down in ancient China were scattered, while the ancient Greek myths were very rich and systematic. Myth system, ancient Greek mythology, mainly includes the legend of heroes and historical stories. Its god, its hero, can build a huge pedigree. There are also myths in ancient China, which are very fragmentary and preserved in Shan Hai Jing and some ancient books. They are all fragmentary and unsystematic. Lu Xun, Hu Shi, Japanese scholars and western scholars should also explain this question, why there is no epic for the Han people in China, and the myths of the ancient Han people in China are fragmentary. They introduced Yan Guwen's point of view. Influenced by Dana's theory, a French literary theorist at that time, Yan Guwen believed that the particularity of geographical environment determined the existence and development of literature. At that time, it was believed that China, the Chinese nation and the Han nationality were mainly developed in the Yellow River Basin. In the Yellow River basin, its climate is cold and the land is not very fertile. When the productivity was low, the ancients had to make great efforts and hard work, and the harvest was not fruitful. The Greeks, like Hu Shi in the middle period of vernacular literature history, are described in literary style. He described the Aegean Sea as a maritime climate, which is very conducive to the growth of plants and crops. He said that the ancient Greeks could lie under trees and rest. If they are hungry, they will be almost full. If they lift their bodies and reach for a fruit on the tree to eat, then they will have a lot of time to think and come. The Han people in the Yellow River valley, our ancestors, face the loess, and they are very hard, have no food and clothing, and have no leisure to write such a long epic. This statement was put forward by Yan Guwen and introduced by Hu Shi and Lu Xun. Obviously, they agreed at least in part because they did not introduce other viewpoints. Today, in our view, this statement is difficult to hold, and it is difficult to explain that the Han nationality did not leave an epic with a geographical environment. We just need to give a counterexample. Iceland has its own epic, more than one epic. Iceland has two epics, one called Sakya and the other called Eda, which are masterpieces of world literature and attract worldwide attention. Is the geographical conditions and climate of the Yellow River basin worse than Iceland? This is untenable. That part of Iceland is very cold. Why does it have its own epic? So why don't Han people have epics? Therefore, using the geographical environment determinism, I always feel that this explanation is completely unconvincing and unreasonable. This is the first point we introduced, Yan Guwen's point of view, and Lu Xun and Hu Shi also repeated such a point of view. The second one is Mao Dun, whom I mentioned just now. When he published "China Mythology Research ABC" on 1929, he used the pseudonyms of mysterious "Xuan" and jewel "Zhu", and the pseudonyms used were. He also mentioned this issue, but did not repeat Yan Guwen's point of view. He explained it himself, and Mao Dun had two explanations. His first explanation is that epics are all about wars, wars and large-scale wars. As we know, Homer's epic is about the Trojan War, which lasted for ten years. Igor's expedition is also about war, and most of the epics are about war. Mao Dun said that there was no such large-scale war in ancient China, so there was no epic. I think this statement is far-fetched Why was there no war in ancient China? The legendary battle of the Yellow Emperor Chiyou is also a big battle, and the battle of Troy is not necessarily particularly big. In ancient China, many tribes and some small countries often fought wars, so it is difficult to convince people to explain this. There are many other countries, smaller countries, and the scale of that war is even smaller. It also has its own epic. But Mao Dun also put forward a second explanation, this second explanation. Personally, I think it is quite profound and worthy of our consideration. Mao Dun said that China had a cultural feature and a tradition in ancient times, and it had always been like this, at least until the Qing Dynasty. In other words, the rulers turned myths and legends into history and mythical history. What does this mean? As we all know, China people have such a habit and tradition of continuing their genealogy. Now our genealogy will find out what some celebrities, big names and earliest ancestors look like, whether they are champions, prime ministers or at least scholars. Then the emperor, the king, was not satisfied with this. He wants to say that his ancestors, ancestors, are gods, and he wants to create a myth to mythize history. When a person becomes an emperor, his ancestors become gods, and the emperor is called "the son of heaven". What does the son of heaven mean? It's the son of heaven. He's not a mortal, so he has the right to rule all people. You should obey him. This is called mythizing one's own history and family history, and then turning the myth into history, and the characters in the middle of the myth become real people in history. Originally a god, a myth and a legend, he regarded it as an ancestor and turned it into history. I think Mao Dun's explanation is more convincing, and it is worth our thinking and discussion today, to enrich it, revise it and supplement it. Once a myth is historicized, it lacks literariness and becomes something without aesthetics, artistry and literariness. At the same time, it cannot be said that this is a history, a history of trust, a history that can be trusted, and a history that has been distorted. In particular, the historization of this myth has been repeated for thousands of years, and some ancient and legendary figures have been constantly reshaped by later rulers, and have been reshaped for thousands of years. I think this process of remolding, rewriting and rewriting may be an important reason for the disappearance of epic and myth.