現在的小說有許多名目，有一種叫做“職場小說”，大約就是寫職場的生活。但似乎又不盡然。我讀了其中的一些，比如有一部叫《浮沉》，還有一部叫《杜拉拉升職記》，就在這似與不似之間。固然，作者筆下的生活是屬於職場的，但在小說敘事中，用傳統文學的眼光去看，又夾雜了太多的非文學因素。於是，人們會有這樣的疑問：小說可以這樣寫嗎？
如果換成讀者的角度來看，又會怎麽樣呢？我想一定會有很大的不同。據說，這兩部小說的銷量都在十幾萬册或幾十萬册。這和純文學或純小說往往衹銷幾千册或萬把册的情況形成了強烈反差。這麽大的銷量至少說明讀者是歡迎這種讀物的。這就給我們的判斷帶來了睏難。我們是相信鮮活的、生動的、擺在我們面前的銷量呢？還是相信那些冰冷的、僵硬的、小說寫作的觀念和原則呢？
實際上，在我們的文學傳統中，從來都是衹有作者的位置，而沒有讀者的位置。上世紀80年代以來強調作傢的主體性，作傢敢說我是為自己寫作，而不是為讀者寫作。這在當時的中國是巨大的進步。作傢真實地而不是扭麯地表達自己的所見所聞所思所想所觸所感所愛所恨，這樣的作傢不是太多，而是太少。
但這又帶來了另外一種令人憂慮的局面：一旦作傢個性表達和精神自白的合法性與合理性被不適當地放大，作傢與讀者之間的緊張關係就呈現出來。我不反對作傢維護自身的獨立性，我也承認文學試驗對於小說敘事做出了巨大貢獻，但文學的存在不僅需要有作傢，也需要有讀者。古來確有將作品藏之名山的，但總有其難言之隱，至少是對當代讀者不信任，以為知音難覓，衹好以待來世。這並不構成文學的主流。
在筆者看來，絶大多數作傢還是希望自己的寫作能夠得到讀者認可，讀者越多，作傢就越高興。很少有作傢宣稱不需要通過讀者肯定自己，我就是孤芳自賞，自說自話，自憐自愛，真是這樣，也很令人欽佩！
我一直堅信文學因閱讀而存在。專傢、學者有權將一個作傢或一部作品從文學史中“忽略”掉，廣大讀者多年之後還可以通過閱讀將這個作傢或這部作品起死回生。這樣的例子很多。現實生活當中也是這樣，作傢或文學批評傢們可以因種種理由排斥一些作品，以為它們是缺少文學性或庸俗的，但讀者的閱讀卻嚮我們傳遞出另外的信息。就像《杜拉拉升職記》或《浮沉》這樣的通俗小說，既然有那麽多的讀者接受它、喜歡它，我們怎能無視讀者的這種選擇呢？
相反，我們應該研究和思考這種選擇中所包含的讀者的閱讀願望和需求。文學是什麽並不重要，重要的是讀者希望它是什麽！從閱讀心理中所透視出來的微妙之處，不僅出版商要瞭解，作傢更應該有所瞭解，特別是那些願意和讀者建立平等關係的作傢，尤其應該瞭解。
單就文學性而言，我想，事情也不像文學家們想的那麽簡單，以為讀者越多的，文學性就越少；而讀者越少的，文學性就越多。是讀者喜歡和文學性作對呢，還是文學性偏和讀者作對呢？我一時也還沒有結論。不過，就我讀過的這些小說而言，怕也不能說就沒有文學性。文學性的多少是一個問題，怎麽來認識文學性，文學性在文學中居怎樣的地位，更是個問題。
其實，現在很多很有“文學性”的作傢，其作品往往缺少現實性，而很多缺少所謂“文學性”的作傢，其作品倒呈現了當代中國的現代性。就像現在正熱的職場小說，對讀者來說，它自有實用性的一面，但它也真實描述了年輕的白領階層在職場中的生存處境，以及他們的喜怒哀樂和靈魂的掙紮。
這種現代性是不是“文學性”的內涵之一呢？或者說，我們所謂“文學性”是否應該為現代性所引領呢？這種情況在文學史上並非沒有先例，據說，法國小說傢左拉的《婦女樂園》，就被稱為“百貨公司小說 ”，因為，它敘述了當年百貨公司的登場和經營策略，其寫作資料也來自百貨公司的先行者—號稱全世界第一傢百貨公司的好商佳和另一傢百貨公司薩馬利丹。這似乎並不影響它成為一部小說，而且，有人甚至認為，這部小說具有豐富的想象色彩。它把法蘭西第二帝國的消費文化融入作品之中，現在，我們要瞭解現代消費的初級階段，還是非讀這部小說不可。
(中國青年報)
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)
|