傅修延

倪爱珍的《史传与中国文学叙事传统》问世，是一件值得庆贺的事情。这些年来我一直在思考与中国叙事传统相关的问题，指导的博士生也自然而然地跟着我进入了这一领域，他们的工作不但延伸和深化了这方面的研究，还常常反过来给我启发和激励，这就是带学生的好处与乐趣。所谓教学相长，主要来源于师生之间的这种思想激荡。倪爱珍毕业后花了不少时间与精力，对自己的博士学位论文进行了充实完善，最终形成读者所见到的这部学术著作。学术著作的出版是一个人学术道路上的重要里程碑，我为她收获的第一枚有分量的学术果实感到由衷的欣喜。

史传是中国叙事文学的源头，在我们这个“史贵于文”观念长期流行的文明古国，研究叙事传统不可能不首先注意史传。本书选择的这一方向虽有不少人拓垦在先，但作者仍能找到前人研究中的一些空白，另辟蹊径提出自己的创见。作者认为文史共处的母体生产了文学叙事的可能性与规则，它们在后世的文学叙事中打下了根深蒂固的烙印，后来的叙事形式和功能虽然发生了一定程度的变化，但却割不断与史传的血脉联系。书中对史传叙事到文学叙事的发展脉络做出了较为细致的梳理与勾勒，所讨论的一些问题，如虚构与真实、预叙与应验以及“春秋笔法”等，在古代文学领域虽然是司空见惯，但由于引入了当代叙事学的一些范畴与概念，从理论高度进行烛照和分析，因而读来仍不乏新意。作者的文笔素来流畅，她对域外理论的援引不是时下常见的简单搬运，而是有较强针对性的自如化用，做到这一点并不容易。普林斯顿大学的汉学教授浦安迪（有《中国叙事学》等著作）当初在主持作者的博士学位论文答辩时，便和其他答辩委员一样对她的这种努力给予了认可。

当然，本书也不可能一举解决与中国叙事传统有关的所有问题。史传之所以会对文学叙事产生影响，归根结底要到古人的观念意识中去寻求答案。罗兰·巴特在《文之悦》中说“写”本是“一体无分”的，小说家的“写”与其他人的“写”都是“文的编织”，这样的认识在我们古人那里其实早有产生，他们对虚构与非虚构的区别并不执着就是明证。先秦之后文史虽然分道扬镳，但在主流意识形态中，《春秋》和“春秋笔法”仍然是衡量一切叙事的标准：将某部小说比之为《春秋》，乃是对其叙事水平的最大赞誉；说某位作者深谙“春秋笔法”，亦为对其叙事能力的高度肯定。戚蓼生《〈石头记〉 序》称《红楼梦》“如《春秋》之有微词，史家之多曲笔”，就是此类评论的典型。《史记》与《汉书》横空出世之后，“史迁”、“班马”之类又成了叙事高手的代名词，古人所说的“史才”、“史笔”并非专指修史才能，而“六经皆史”在一定意义上也可理解为“六经”之中皆有叙事——不管是什么样的叙事。20世纪美国的文学理论家雷·韦勒克和奥·沃伦曾经指出叙事的“跨文类”性质，西方叙事学近期呈现出来的“跨学科趋势”印证了这一先见之明，但我觉得我们的古人早就察觉到讲故事行为不受任何文类约束。因此只有开展“知识考古”般的四处寻访与刨根问底，从人类学、宗教学、神话学、语言学、符号学、民俗学和社会学等相关领域广泛征求材料，才有可能最终探明和缕清中国文学叙事的谱系，为中国叙事传统的发生与形成提供更为合理的解释。

如此看来，本书的出版对作者来说意味着既有研究告一段落，更具挑战性的学术攀登还在前头。庄子《逍遥游》说“适百里者，宿舂粮；适千里者，三月聚粮”，为了给自己新的攀登准备理论粮草，作者目前正在四川大学赵毅衡教授旗下接受博士后训练，这一抉择体现了她“三月聚粮”的决心与勇气——赵毅衡教授是真正当得起“学贯中西”四字的学者，在符号学大本营里的深造将给作者带来脱胎换骨般的变化，使其具备“适千里”的长途跋涉能力。从我与作者的多年接触中，我感到她身上最不缺乏的便是敢于面对挑战的决心与勇气——2009年她向我表示要报考叙事学博士生时，脸上流露的就是这样一种义无返顾的表情，当时我担心她的现当代文学基础可能难于适应叙事学专业的理论要求，但她最终以刻苦的学习消除了我的担心。

《优婆塞戒经》讲述了一个“三兽渡河”的故事：“兔不至底，浮水而过；马或至底，或不至底；象则尽底。”假如说把做学问看成是渡河，那么当前许多人追求的是像兔子那样“浮水而过”，他们进入学术领域为的是获取学位、职称或其他好处；还有一些人是像马儿一样半浮半沉地渡河，其学术脚步并不是每一下都触到实处；只有少数人能像大象那样一步一个脚印地走到对岸，凡成大事业者必定都取这种脚踏实地的跋涉方式。《光明日报》最近以《独骑瘦马取长途》为标题报道了扬州大学的车锡伦教授，这位年近八旬的退休教师一直默默无闻地为自己的宝卷研究做着辛苦的田野调查，直到最近其成果获得教育部优秀成果一等奖等奖励之后，学界才有更多人理解其工作的意义。我自己这辈子的学业最多是深一脚浅一脚的“马渡”，但我希望倪爱珍和有志于学的青年才俊都能像车锡伦先生那样，坚持用“象渡”方式走向自己的学术目标，这就是“三兽渡河”故事给我们的启示。

是为序。

2015年6月1日

The publication of Fu Xiuyan and Ni Aizhen's "Historical Biography and the Narrative Tradition of Chinese Literature" is something to celebrate. Over the years, I have been thinking about issues related to the Chinese narrative tradition, and the PhD students I have supervised have naturally followed me into this field, and their work not only extends and deepens this research, but often in turn inspires and motivates me, which is the benefit and fun of taking students. The so-called teaching benefit mainly comes from this kind of ideological agitation between teachers and students. After graduation, Ni Aizhen spent a lot of time and energy to enrich and improve her doctoral dissertation, and finally formed this academic work that readers see. The publication of academic works is an important milestone in one's academic journey, and I am sincerely delighted that she has harvested the first weighty academic fruit. Historical tradition is the source of Chinese narrative literature, and in our ancient civilization where the concept of "history is more expensive than literature" has long been popular, it is impossible to study narrative tradition without paying attention to historical legend first. Although many people have pioneered this direction chosen in this book, the author can still find some gaps in previous research and create new ways to put forward his own ideas. The author believes that the matrix of literary and historical coexistence produces the possibilities and rules of literary narrative, which has left a deep-rooted imprint in the literary narrative of later generations, and although the form and function of later narrative have undergone certain changes, they are constantly connected with historical tradition. Although the book is commonplace in the field of ancient literature, due to the introduction of some categories and concepts of contemporary narratology, candlelight and analysis from a theoretical height, it is still fresh to read. The author's writing is always fluent, and her invocation of extraterritorial theories is not a simple transfer that is common nowadays, but a highly targeted and free use, which is not easy to achieve. Andy Pu, a professor of sinology at Princeton University (who has written books such as Chinese Narratology), recognized her efforts as well as other defense committee members when she defended her doctoral dissertation. Of course, this book cannot solve all the problems related to the Chinese narrative tradition in one fell swoop. The reason why historical biography will have an impact on literary narrative is, in the final analysis, to seek answers in the conceptual consciousness of the ancients. Roland Barthes said in "The Joy of Literature" that "writing" is "one and the same", and the novelist's "writing" and other people's "writing" are "weaving of literature", which has actually arisen in our ancients, and their lack of attachment to the difference between fiction and non-fiction is proof of this. Although literary history after the pre-Qin dynasty diverged, in the mainstream ideology, "Spring and Autumn" and "Spring and Autumn Brushwork" are still the standards for measuring all narratives: comparing a novel to "Spring and Autumn" is the greatest praise for its narrative level; To say that a certain author is well versed in "Spring and Autumn Brushwork" is also a high affirmation of his narrative ability. Qi Yingsheng's "Preface to the Stone Record" said that "Dream of Red Mansions" is "like the "Spring and Autumn" with a few words, and the historians' many curved pens", which is a typical example of such comments. After the birth of the "Shiji" and the "Book of Han", "Shi Qian" and "Banma" have become synonymous with narrative masters, and the ancients said "Shicai" and "Shi Pen" do not specifically refer to the ability to cultivate history, and "Six Classics are History" in a certain sense can also be understood that there are narratives in the "Six Classics" - no matter what kind of narrative. The 20th-century American literary theorists Ray Welleck and O. Warren once pointed out the "cross-literary" nature of narrative, and the recent "interdisciplinary trend" in Western narratology confirms this prescience, but I think our ancients have long been aware that storytelling is not constrained by any literary category. Therefore, only by conducting "archaeology of knowledge" and conducting extensive inquiries from anthropology, religious studies, mythology, linguistics, semiotics, folklore and sociology and other related fields can it be possible to finally explore and clarify the genealogy of Chinese literary narratives and provide a more reasonable explanation for the emergence and formation of Chinese narrative traditions. In this way, the publication of this book means for the author that the existing research has come to an end, and more challenging academic climbs are ahead. Zhuangzi's "Getaway" says, "Those who are fit for a hundred miles, stay in the grain; In order to prepare theoretical food and grass for her new climb, the author is currently receiving postdoctoral training under Professor Zhao Yiheng of Sichuan University, this choice reflects her determination and courage of "March Gathering Food" - Professor Zhao Yiheng is a scholar who truly deserves the four characters of "learning Chinese and Western", and further study in the semiotics base camp will bring the author a reborn change, so that he has the ability to travel long distances "suitable for thousands of miles". From my years of contact with the author, I feel that the last thing she lacks is the determination and courage to face challenges – when she told me in 2009 that she wanted to apply for a PhD in narratology, she had such an expression on her face, and I was worried that her modern and contemporary literary foundation might not be able to adapt to the theoretical requirements of the narratology major, but she finally dispelled my fears with hard study. The Upasai Sutra tells the story of "three beasts crossing the river": "The rabbit does not reach the bottom, but floats through the water; Horses or to the bottom, or not to the bottom; The elephant is at the end. If learning is seen as crossing a river, then many people today seek to "float through the water" like rabbits, entering the academic field to obtain degrees, titles or other benefits; Still others cross the river half-floating and half-sinking like horses, and their academic footsteps are not touched by every step; Only a few people can walk to the other shore step by step like elephants, and everyone who achieves great business must take this down-to-earth way of trekking. Guangming Daily recently reported on Professor Che Xilun of Yangzhou University under the headline "Riding a Thin Horse Alone for Long Distances", a retired teacher in his eighties who has been doing painstaking fieldwork for his treasure scroll research in obscurity, and it was only after his work was recently won the first prize of the Ministry of Education's outstanding achievement that more people in the academic community understood the significance of his work. My own studies in this life are at most "Madu", one foot deep and one foot shallow, but I hope that Ni Aizhen and young talents who are interested in learning can insist on using the "elephant crossing" method to move towards their academic goals like Mr. Che Xilun, which is the inspiration given to us by the story of "Three Beasts Crossing the River". is the order. June 1, 2015（AI翻译）