现在的小说有许多名目，有一种叫做“职场小说”，大约就是写职场的生活。但似乎又不尽然。我读了其中的一些，比如有一部叫《浮沉》，还有一部叫《杜拉拉升职记》，就在这似与不似之间。固然，作者笔下的生活是属于职场的，但在小说叙事中，用传统文学的眼光去看，又夹杂了太多的非文学因素。于是，人们会有这样的疑问：小说可以这样写吗？
如果换成读者的角度来看，又会怎么样呢？我想一定会有很大的不同。据说，这两部小说的销量都在十几万册或几十万册。这和纯文学或纯小说往往只销几千册或万把册的情况形成了强烈反差。这么大的销量至少说明读者是欢迎这种读物的。这就给我们的判断带来了困难。我们是相信鲜活的、生动的、摆在我们面前的销量呢？还是相信那些冰冷的、僵硬的、小说写作的观念和原则呢？
实际上，在我们的文学传统中，从来都是只有作者的位置，而没有读者的位置。上世纪80年代以来强调作家的主体性，作家敢说我是为自己写作，而不是为读者写作。这在当时的中国是巨大的进步。作家真实地而不是扭曲地表达自己的所见所闻所思所想所触所感所爱所恨，这样的作家不是太多，而是太少。
但这又带来了另外一种令人忧虑的局面：一旦作家个性表达和精神自白的合法性与合理性被不适当地放大，作家与读者之间的紧张关系就呈现出来。我不反对作家维护自身的独立性，我也承认文学试验对于小说叙事做出了巨大贡献，但文学的存在不仅需要有作家，也需要有读者。古来确有将作品藏之名山的，但总有其难言之隐，至少是对当代读者不信任，以为知音难觅，只好以待来世。这并不构成文学的主流。
在笔者看来，绝大多数作家还是希望自己的写作能够得到读者认可，读者越多，作家就越高兴。很少有作家宣称不需要通过读者肯定自己，我就是孤芳自赏，自说自话，自怜自爱，真是这样，也很令人钦佩！
我一直坚信文学因阅读而存在。专家、学者有权将一个作家或一部作品从文学史中“忽略”掉，广大读者多年之后还可以通过阅读将这个作家或这部作品起死回生。这样的例子很多。现实生活当中也是这样，作家或文学批评家们可以因种种理由排斥一些作品，以为它们是缺少文学性或庸俗的，但读者的阅读却向我们传递出另外的信息。就像《杜拉拉升职记》或《浮沉》这样的通俗小说，既然有那么多的读者接受它、喜欢它，我们怎能无视读者的这种选择呢？
相反，我们应该研究和思考这种选择中所包含的读者的阅读愿望和需求。文学是什么并不重要，重要的是读者希望它是什么！从阅读心理中所透视出来的微妙之处，不仅出版商要了解，作家更应该有所了解，特别是那些愿意和读者建立平等关系的作家，尤其应该了解。
单就文学性而言，我想，事情也不像文学家们想的那么简单，以为读者越多的，文学性就越少；而读者越少的，文学性就越多。是读者喜欢和文学性作对呢，还是文学性偏和读者作对呢？我一时也还没有结论。不过，就我读过的这些小说而言，怕也不能说就没有文学性。文学性的多少是一个问题，怎么来认识文学性，文学性在文学中居怎样的地位，更是个问题。
其实，现在很多很有“文学性”的作家，其作品往往缺少现实性，而很多缺少所谓“文学性”的作家，其作品倒呈现了当代中国的现代性。就像现在正热的职场小说，对读者来说，它自有实用性的一面，但它也真实描述了年轻的白领阶层在职场中的生存处境，以及他们的喜怒哀乐和灵魂的挣扎。
这种现代性是不是“文学性”的内涵之一呢？或者说，我们所谓“文学性”是否应该为现代性所引领呢？这种情况在文学史上并非没有先例，据说，法国小说家左拉的《妇女乐园》，就被称为“百货公司小说 ”，因为，它叙述了当年百货公司的登场和经营策略，其写作资料也来自百货公司的先行者—号称全世界第一家百货公司的好商佳和另一家百货公司萨马利丹。这似乎并不影响它成为一部小说，而且，有人甚至认为，这部小说具有丰富的想象色彩。它把法兰西第二帝国的消费文化融入作品之中，现在，我们要了解现代消费的初级阶段，还是非读这部小说不可。
(中国青年报)
Now the novel has many names, there is something called a "market fiction," is writing about workplace life. But it seems not entirely. I read some of them, such as a one called "drifting", and another called "Du Lala Getting Promoted", just like and not like this between. Of course, are the lives of his writing career, but in the narrative, the use of traditional literary perspective, then mixed with too many non-literary factors. So, people have this question: can this novel writing?
If you replace the reader's point of view, then what will happen? I think there will be quite different. It is said that sales of the two novels are more than ten million copies or more 100 000. This is pure literature or pure fiction often sold several thousand copies or 10,000 copies a stark contrast to the situation. Sales of at least shows that such a large audience is welcome such books. This brings us difficult to judge. We believe in fresh, lively, sales in front of us then? Still believe that the cold, stiff, fiction writing ideas and principles?
In fact, in our literary tradition, has always been only on the location, not the location of the reader. Since the 80s of last century stressed the subjectivity of writers, writers say I was writing for himself, not writing for readers. This time China is a huge step forward. Writer and not truly express themselves seen and heard distortion are thinking love the touch and feel the hate, this writer is not too much but too little.
But this brings up another worrying situation: Once the writer's individual expression and spiritual legitimacy and rationality of the confession was improperly magnified the tension between writer and reader presents the relationship. I do not oppose the writer to maintain its independence, I also admit that the tests of literature made tremendous contributions to narrative, but there is not only a literary writer, need a reader. Since ancient times, there are really works of possession of the mountains, but always has its reasons that are hard, at least for contemporary readers do not trust, that the Concert difficult to find, had to wait until the afterlife. This does not constitute the mainstream of literature.
In my view, the vast majority of authors still hope to get the reader writing their own recognition, the more readers, writers, the more pleased. Few writers claim that readers do not need to assert themselves through, I was idle and, of talking, self esteem and self-love, so, very impressive!
I always believed that literature exists for reading. Experts, scholars have the right to be a writer or a work of literary history from the "ignore" out, readers can also read after many years this writer or this work back to life. One of many examples. Real life the same way, writers or literary critic can exclude a number of works for various reasons, that they lack literary or vulgar, but the reader has to pass out our other information. Like "Du Lala Getting Promoted" or "rise and fall" like popular fiction, since so many readers to accept it, love it, how can we ignore the readers of this choice?
Instead, we should study and reflect on that choice contained in the aspirations and needs of readers. Literature is not important what is important is what readers want it! Psychology in the perspective from reading out the subtleties, not only publishers to understand that writers should understand, especially those willing to establish equal relations between the reader writer, in particular, should know.
Alone in terms of literature, I think, things are not as simple as what writers have thought that the more readers, the less literary; and fewer readers, and the more literary. Love and literary readers against it, or literary bias and the readers against it? At the moment I have not yet concluded. However, as I read these novels, the fear can not say that there is no literary. Literature of how much is a problem, how to understand literature, literary home in the literature in what position, it is a problem.
In fact, a lot of very "literary" writer, whose works often lack reality, but many lack the so-called "literary" writers, their works fall show of contemporary Chinese modernity. Like a hot job market is novel, the reader, it's own practical side, but it also a true description of the young white-collar existence in the workplace situation and their emotions and spiritual struggles.
(China Youth Daily)
|