Abstract
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. “脂評”自其被發現以來，就一直被當作《石頭記》的副文本來閱讀，研究者或藉其作歷史考證，以倡《石頭記》自傳説；或爲“脂評”本身的歷史真實性大費周章，力辨其真僞。這類研究往往忽略了“脂評”本身的創作性和虚構性。本文旨在釐清上述討論之誤區，通過對“脂評”之語言風格、批評策略的舉例論證，探討“脂評”批書人特殊主體性的建構。要之，“脂評”批書人以《石頭記》之小説作爲參照物（鏡子）所作的自我認同，其中充滿想像、誤識、自戀和分裂的成份，故此，“脂評”是否能作爲閱讀《石頭記》的可靠依據，是紅學或脂學研究者亟需要深思的一個根本問題。 “Zhi-ping” has been regarded as the sub-text of Shi-tou ji or The Story of the Stone since it was discovered. Critics either employ the commentaries as historical proofs of Shi-tou ji being autobiography, or study the historicity or authenticity of the commentaries. What has been neglected is the subjectivity of the commentator(s). This essay tries to discuss the construction of the Subject of the commentator(s) of “Zhi-ping”. I am intended to argue that in the process of annotating, the commentator(s) regards the novel Shi-tou ji as his “mirror” of identification, which pervades with imaginary, misrecognition, narcissism, and split. As a result, reading of Shi-tou ji relying on the historicity of “Zhi-ping” is always misreading and questionable since “Zhi-ping” is itself a creative and fictive work.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
