读有关《暗示》的批评

《暗示》的批评文章,首先涉及的问题是“文体”。在并不深奥的层面上,它最受注意,也最引起争议。具体说到《暗示》究竟“是什么”,不同文章有不同理解,有时同一文章也经常出现判断上的犹豫。在“文体”上,《暗示》的评论提出的另一问题,是它的出现能否看作“传统”小说艺术形式疲惫、衰落的一个征兆?答案似乎是,《暗示》于小说整体变革之间的征兆式关系是否能够成立,现在还不得而知。如果说《暗示》是一种“新的”文体,那么,对批评者来说,就需要寻找文本中的“新的”元素,观察各种元素如何建立一种“新的”关系。在一些批评文章中被提到的几组关系有：“叙事”(具象描述)与说理,“真实”与“虚构”,片断与整体等。《暗示》的出版似乎意味着一个“事件”,原因是出于《暗示》本身的力量,部分则由批评的合力所促成。

An Analysis of Criticism on Innuendo

The criticism on Innuendo involves, first of all, its "style", which is most noticeable and controversial. Critical articles are divided as to what Innuendois about, and there are often hesitations over judgments even in the same article. Another issue for criticism concerning the style of Innuendo is whether the publication of the novel can be considered a symptom of exhaustion and decline in the 'traditional" artistic form of novel; and it is still unknown whether there is a symptomatic relationship between Innuendo and the holistic novel reform. If Innuendo is presented in a "new" style, critics need to seek the "new" elements in the novel and to observe how various elements have integrated to form a "new" relationship. The relationship mentioned in critical articles concerns "narration" and arguments, "factuality" and "fabrication", fragments and entirety, etc. The publication of Innuendo seems sensational , the cause of which stems partly from its inner power and partly from the critical reviews on it.