The Western Learning of literary criticism standards and local enlightenment

In China, the concept of "literature" in the modern sense has only appeared for more than a hundred years, but the criticism and theoretical works that have emerged around literature have been voluminous, and their Chinese criticism standards have been repeatedly mentioned and discussed as hot topics. Is there an objective criterion for literary criticism? Who is qualified to propose and construct these standards? What exactly are these standards included? Does it stand the test of history? These constitute the core issues of literary criticism standards in contemporary literary theory, and are also some of the major problems that need to be solved urgently in the Field of Chinese Literary Criticism today. To answer these questions, we must first examine how the standards of literary criticism have been progressively constructed in different historical periods and cultural contexts from the perspective of the history of the development of Chinese and Western literary theories.

A debate on the standards of literary criticism in Western literature

Since the beginning of the 20th century, with the scientificization of literary criticism in the Western disciplinary system, there has also been a major shift in the standards of mainstream literary criticism, that is, from the impressional criticism standards based on the personal experience and concepts of critics that dominated in the 19th century to the scientific criticism standards based on more universal and normative.

But in many ways, there are significant differences in the views of different critics on the criteria for literary criticism. Formalist criticism and the New Critical School advocate the construction of an ontological critical paradigm, limiting the criteria of literary criticism to the text, excluding not only social and historical factors outside of literature, but even internal factors of literature, including writers and readers. They believe that through a close reading of the textual form, we can grasp the most correct way of evaluating the text, and then construct an objective formalist criticism standard that transcends the era and region. Structuralist criticism and archetypal criticism focus on examining the way literary meaning is generated in texts, thus avoiding the positive construction of literary criticism standards. But they often interpret classic works, so in the process of selecting the object of analysis, they have secretly handed over the qualifications for constructing the standards of literary criticism to the process of classicization of literature. Phenomenological criticism and hermeneutics examine the dynamic relationship between literary value between author consciousness, textual meaning, and reader interpretation, deny the existence of purely objective standards of literary criticism, and instead advocate a relativistic standard of criticism, believing that this standard can be effective in evaluating factors within literature for a long time, but this view also brings the risk of the proliferation of relativist criticism standards.

Western Marxism, psychoanalytic criticism and ethical criticism construct literary criticism standards more from the perspective of literary external factors, and they construct literary criticism standards that they consider to be reasonable from the degree of reflection of the historical reality of a specific period, the degree of expression of the unconscious structure of culture or society, and the degree of disclosure of the essence of moral ideology. Although these schools of criticism have a certain degree of corrective effect on the critical standards of text-centrism, it is inevitable that literature as a way of operating with its independent values and meanings will be regarded as a background or footnote in other fields, which is also overcorrected. Especially since the 1970s, a large number of critical theories have emerged under the influence of deconstructivism and postmodernism, and it is generally believed that the "cage" of discourse itself isolates truth from what we can know. These critical theories attempt to overthrow existing literary values by destroying fixed textual meanings not only abolish the objectivity and authority of all previous critical standards, but also hinder the construction of new critical standards, and even the rationality of the existence of literary criticism standards themselves has been questioned. Many scholars worry that these "post" theories, through the deconstruction and subversion of literary classics, put the theory of value before literature itself, will make literary research lose its foundation of evaluation and eventually lead to the decline of literature. Whether and how the standard of literary criticism exists in the current pluralistic theoretical context is still the focus of debate in Western literary circles.

Chinese Literature Reference and Reflection on Western Literary Criticism Standards

Starting from the New Culture Movement, western learning from the East gradually had a profound impact on the modernization process of Chinese literature. In the face of the controversial issue of literary criticism standards, the Chinese literary theory circles have explored in different historical stages in combination with their own national conditions and ideological contexts, which has promoted the development of Chinese literary theory.

The discussion of the standards of literary criticism in Chinese academic circles during the May Fourth period mainly focused on the question of which is dominant in literature, "beauty" (artistic standards) and "truth" (realistic standards). On the basis of inheriting traditional literary resources such as "Poetry and Speech" and "Literature with The Tao", the Truth-Seeking School absorbs Marxist literary theory after the transformation of Russian and Soviet realism, and attaches more importance to the reflection and critical role of literature on society, so it emphasizes the degree of literary intervention in reality ("for life") when constructing literary criticism standards. On the basis of inheriting traditional literary resources such as "poetic affection" and "poetry has different interests", the beauty-seeking school draws on new criticism and other formalistic literary theories, and pays more attention to the aesthetic meaning of literature beyond reality and the tension of emotional expression ("no utilitarianism"). The controversy over the standards of these two literary criticisms lasted for more than twenty years, until Mao Zedong's "Speech at the Yan'an Forum on Literature and Art" proposed that "political standards should be put first, and artistic standards should be put second".

Since the reform and opening up, marked by the "translation fever" and "aesthetic fever" that accompanied the emancipation of the mind, how to construct a new standard of literary criticism has once again become a hot issue in the academic circles. After the 1990s, the domestic academic circles began to consciously construct original Chinese literary criticism discourse, and the issue of how to construct literary criticism standards was also discussed more comprehensively and deeply. A series of new concepts, including "literary subjectivity", "Chinese literary aphasia", "rewriting literary history", "aestheticization of daily life", etc., have caused wave after wave of controversy. On the basis of reflecting on Western literary theory, the academic circles have put forward many propositions and viewpoints on the standards of literary criticism that have begun to take shape with Chinese characteristics, and the issue of literary criticism standards has also changed from pure theoretical deduction to critical practice of the emerging Chinese literary experience.

In recent years, the discussions of Chinese scholars around "compulsory hermeneutic theory", "ontological hermeneutic theory" and "public hermeneutic theory" have not only questioned and reflected on the applicability and limitations of contemporary Western literary criticism standards, but also promoted the continuous development of contemporary Chinese literary research theory and practice.

Construct standards of literary criticism with Chinese characteristics

Today, the works and phenomena faced by literary criticism have undergone unprecedented changes, and globalization, popularization and new media have become a new trend in the development of literature, which is both a challenge and an opportunity for literary criticism. How to construct literary criticism standards with Chinese characteristics today has become an important issue facing literature and art in the new era.

In the face of this problem, we must first adhere to the Marxist standard of criticism as the guide. The "aesthetic and historical" standard proposed by Engels in that year has left ample room for interpretation for future researchers due to its inclusiveness, and it is still widely regarded as the highest standard of Chinese literary criticism today. General Secretary Xi Jinping's "Speech at the Symposium on Literary and Art Work" pointed out that literary creation should "adhere to the people-centered creative orientation", and excellent literary and artistic works "should be both ideologically and artistically successful, and welcomed in the market", and can "disseminate contemporary Chinese values, embody the spirit of Chinese culture, reflect the aesthetic pursuit of Chinese, and organically unify ideology, artistry and ornamentation". This is not only a new interpretation of the "aesthetic and historical" standard based on the actual situation of Chinese literary and artistic creation, but also provides a guiding ideology for the construction of literary criticism standards with Chinese characteristics.

Second, the dialogue between China and the West is still an important way to construct the standard of literary criticism in the new era. In the context of media convergence and globalization, which has become a major trend, the Dialogue between China and the West should not be just a translation of foreign academic views or a simple explanation, as in the past, but should be transformed into a broader and deeper two-way exchange. Specific paths include, but are not limited to, inviting foreign scholars to visit and lecture in China for a long time, Chinese scholars to study abroad and communicate directly with Western academic circles, publishing foreign language papers and conducting direct theoretical dialogues with Western scholars, etc., in this process, actively displaying the latest thinking and achievements from Chinese academic circles, and truly "please come in" and "go out".

Finally, we should also explore the construction of a standard system of literary criticism with Chinese characteristics based on local literary practice. History has repeatedly proved that it is not feasible to directly "tailor" Chinese literary practice with Western theoretical discourse. In the current Chinese cultural context, literature needs new criticism standards for systematic evaluation, and criticism standards for different types of literature should have different emphases. A typical example is online literature, which has not only developed rapidly in the local area, but has also had an initial international impact through translation. Therefore, it is imperative to construct critical standards for Chinese online literature. Thinking about this issue clearly needs to take into account many factors such as culture, readers, markets and media, rather than "market standards" or "cultural standards" that can be simply summarized.

The formulation and construction of any standard of literary criticism should not be divorced from the specific socio-historical context. Under the guidance of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, I believe that the "clichéd" issue of the construction of literary criticism standards can be revitalized today, becoming an organic part of "Chinese wisdom" and "Chinese solution", and taking this as an opportunity to contribute to the development of humanities in the world.

(This paper is a phased result of the Ministry of Education's major project on philosophy and social sciences, "Research on the Theoretical Construction and Practice of the Value System of Literary and Art Criticism" (15JZD039))

(Author Affilications:College of Literature, Fujian Normal University)

Edit: Hu Zixuan