英文摘要
|
Shen Deqian's Tang Shi BieCaiJi and Sun Zhu's Tang Shi San Bai Shou are both famous Tang poetry selections of Qing Dynasty. Although there are two editions of Tang Shi Bie Cai Ji, the original (1717) and the revised (1763) ones, both of they consistently promote the "poetic ethics of elegant legitimism" (yazheng). While up to seventy percent of poems selected by Tang Shi San Bai Shou, which was compiled in 1763, overlap with those in the original edition of Tang Shi Bie Cai Ji, the main difference of the two selections comes down to "regulated verse", particularly to the selection and critique of poems of Li Shangyin and Du Mu. Directed by the "poetic ethics of elegant legitimism", Shen Deqian consciously removed the "shallow" (qingbo) and "gaudy" (nongli) works of the two poets addressed above, especially their masterpieces such as Du Mu's "Qian Huai", "Zeng Bie" and Li Shangyin's "Jin Se", "Wu Ti". At the same time he made "having lasting appeal" (yuanyun yuanshen) and "inheriting the characteristic of Du Fu" (Jiewu Shaoling) as the real images of the poets. However, Sun Zhu not only conversely selected many of those romantic and lyric work removed by Shen Deqian, but also added notations to give reading directions. This observation shows that although Tang Shi San Bai Shou selected poems based on Tang Shi Bie Cai Ji and it also emphasized the poetic ethics of "gentleness and kind heartedness" (wenrou dunhou), it has a significantly different attitude towards Du Mu and Li Shangyin in comparison with Shen Deqian, which serves as the critical distinction between the two selections. This paper compares the different images of Du Mu and Li Shangyin in the two selections, from which the fundamental ideas of poem selections of Shen Deqian and Sun Zhu could be generalized. Meanwhile, the question of how they shaped the images of poets through selecting poems could be asked. Moreover, both Shen Deqian and Sun Zhu's works have their advantages and weaknesses. While the former corresponds with "elegant legitimism" but seems to be "inhumane", the latter is an opposite case. Which selection would be more acceptable to modern readers is an extended issue that the paper intends to explore.
|