摘要
比较济慈的"消极能力"和克里利的诗歌尺度,发现二者之间在否定主体性,摒弃陈规,反对理性和逻辑等方面有契合之处。二者之间也存在着差异。它们否定主体性和摒弃陈规的途径不一,反对理性和逻辑的方法也不一。"消极能力"诗学观追求真理和永恒,而克里利的诗歌尺度则消解真理和永恒。二者之间的异同说明克里利受到了济慈的影响,克里利的诗歌尺度是"消极能力"在后现代语境下的变体。
A comparison of Keats＇ ＇negative capability＇ and Creeley＇s poetic measure shows that they have a lot in common in these respects： negating subjectivity, abandoning preexistent rules and opposing reason and logic. Meanwhile, they differ a lot in the means they negate subjectivity and abandon preexistent rules and in the way they oppose reason and logic. The poetics of negative capability seeks after truth and timelessness while Creeley＇s poetic measure deconstructs truth and timelessness. The similarities and differences between Creeley＇s poetic measure and Keats＇ ＇negative capability＇ indicate that Creeley has been influenced by Keats and that his poetic measure is a variant of ＇negative capability＇ in the context of postmodernism.
出处
《深圳职业技术学院学报》
CAS
2010年第2期14-19,共6页
Journal of Shenzhen Polytechnic
基金
深圳职业技术学院人文社会科学研究项目阶段性研究成果(课题编号:2209s3030049)
