原创《论清人清词衰亡》：该文是关于清人清词衰亡论文范文，为你的论文写作提供相关论文资料参考。
摘 要： 清人在清词复盛时提出“清词衰亡”说,其实质是清人在对元明词学何以衰亡的反思过程中所表现出的对当代词学兴衰的忧患意识,也是清人针对清词发展过程中不断出现的种种问题而提出的词学策略,它促使清人不断地调整词学理念、学词门径、作词技巧和选词旨向,令清词的发展始终处于理性地自觉变革的状态,从而臻于极盛.
中图分类号： I207.23
文献标志码： A
文章编号： 10012435（2015）04051608
On Scholars" Views about “Decaying of Qing Ci Poetry” in Qing Dynasty
HU Xiaolin （School Of Literature, Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang Hubei 441053, China）
Key words： the scholars in the Qing Dynasty; Qing ci poetry; the views about the decaying of Qing ci Poetry
Abstract： The scholars in the Qing Dynasty appealed the views about the “decaying of Qing ci poetry”, whose substance was the awareness of unexpected development during the rise and decline of Qing ci in the process of rethinking why ci poetry decayed in the Yuan Dynasty and the Ming Dynasty, and a strategy of ci poetry which was aimed at the problems in the rehabilitation process of Qing ci poetry. The views impelled the scholars of the Qing Dynasty constantly to adjust the ideas about ci poetry, the methods about learning to write ci poetry, and the purport about choosing ci poetry, which could make the development of Qing ci poetry to keep transforming constantly and resonantly. The views about the decline of Qing ci poetry in the Qing Dynasty made Qing ci poetry to achieve its prosperity.
词至清代复盛,清人已视之为定论,陈廷焯说：“词兴于唐,盛于宋,衰于元,亡于明,而再振于我国初,大畅厥旨于乾嘉以还也.”[1]沈曾植云：“词莫盛于宋,而宋人以词为小道,名之曰诗馀.及我朝而其道大昌.”[2]但是
清人论清词时,也时常提出“清词衰亡”这一说法.为什么会出现这种现象?其实质是什么?清人“清词衰亡”说对于清词复兴的意义如何?
一、清人“清词衰亡”说的提出
在清代以前的词史中,词人最早针对当代词坛提出“衰亡”说的是明代晚期的俞彦.他在谈论词的音调时说：“词全以调为主,调全以字之音为主.音有平仄,多必不可移者,间有可移者.仄有上去入,多可移者,间有必不可移者.傥必不可移者,任意出入,则歌时有棘喉涩舌之病.故宋时一调作者,多至数十人如出一吻.今人既不解歌,而词家染指,不过小令中调,尚多以律诗手为之,不知孰为音,孰为调,何怪乎词之亡已.”[3]批评明人作词不解词音和词调,任意为之,遂致词在明代衰亡.至清代,清人对当代词坛的得失利弊尤为关注,不断提出“清词衰亡”说.
清代初年,词坛大家如徐士俊、史惟园、徐、陈维崧、万树等,均提出“清词衰亡”的观点.徐士俊《荫录轩词序》认为当代词作缺失真性情,数量虽多而质量堪忧：“词和诗虽体格不同,其为摅写性情,标举景物一也.若夫性情不露,景物不真,而徒然缀枯树以新花,被偶人以袨服,饰淫靡为周、柳,假豪放为苏、辛,号曰诗馀,生趣尽矣,亦何异诗家之活剥工部、生吞义山也哉?余故谓词至今日而已臻极盛,正恐自今日而渐底于衰.”[4]116史惟圆指出当代词坛貌似词家众多,创作繁盛,其实隐藏着衰落之兆：“今天下词亦极盛矣,然其所为盛,正吾所谓衰也.家温、韦而户周、秦,抑亦《金荃》《兰畹》之大忧也.”（陈维崧《蝶庵词序》）[4]136徐《词觏序》也指出当世词人忽略了词体特质,必将会导致清词衰亡：“词至今日而极盛,亦至今日而极衰.盖古者里巷讴谣,皆被弦管.南唐北宋以来,凡所见于《 》《草堂》者,莫不别其源流,严其声格,若圭景龠黍之纤毫无以易也等传至今日,放失益滋.染指者愈多,则舛缪者愈甚.余故以为极衰也.”[4]151毛际可《绝妙近词跋语》则注意当代词人学词之弊：“近世词学之盛,颉颃古人.然其卑者掇拾《 》《草堂》数卷之书,便以骚坛自命,每叹江河日下.”[4]180
清代中叶,“清词衰亡”的观点依然存在,并且批评对象愈加明确,措辞也更为激烈.保培基在《蓉湖渔笛词序》中斥责近世词坛堆砌数典、不审音律之陋习：“窃见今之学者,于诗工拙固不可知,而往往剽青镵白,袭彼俪此,割裂而堆砌之,曰填词,曰诗馀,无怪乎所谓文艺之下乘也等余独慨夫近世词学之几息.”[4]405瞿世寿《徐睿贞词稿序》指出当世词人的狂妄自大：“近代诸家偭背先型,师心自是,彭亨拥肿,曤目丧心.苍耳蒺藜,罥之皆能刺足;鹿床乌喙,食之便可腐肠.复旦无期,横流难挽.古人真面目,灰丛垢集非一日矣.”[4]458蒋敦复在《寒松阁词跋》中的批评则更为严厉：“握手论词,相叹近日词风盛行,词学转衰等时彦诧于人,辄云姜张、朱厉,其实于玉田、樊榭仅得皮毛.竹垞已不可及,若白石之一往庯峭,非貌为清空者可袭而取.”[4]1198
清人清词衰亡论文参考资料：
结论：论清人清词衰亡为关于清人清词衰亡方面的的相关大学硕士和相关本科毕业论文以及相关清诗清词论文开题报告范文和职称论文写作参考文献资料下载。
