德萊頓　《論戲劇詩》

約翰·德萊頓?（1631—1700）

約翰·德萊頓是英國文藝復(fù)興時(shí)代的文學(xué)名家，縱橫穿梭于各門文類，集詩人、戲劇家、批評家、翻譯家、散文家于一身。在詩歌領(lǐng)域，他是彌爾頓死后最偉大的英國詩人，1668年榮膺桂冠詩人的頭銜；在戲劇領(lǐng)域，他總共創(chuàng)作了27部作品，有悲劇、英雄悲劇、鬧劇、悲喜劇、歌劇，幾乎涉足全部戲劇題材，構(gòu)成了王政復(fù)辟時(shí)代（1660—1688）戲劇創(chuàng)作的主流；在文學(xué)批評領(lǐng)域，他是英國第一位戲劇理論家和批評家，被稱為“英國文學(xué)批評之父”（塞繆爾·約翰遜語）；他的散文簡潔明朗，平易如話，議題有感而發(fā)，其流風(fēng)余韻，延及18世紀(jì)；受崇古風(fēng)氣的熏染，他翻譯過維吉爾、普魯塔克等古羅馬作家的名作，譯筆曉暢，可讀性強(qiáng)。

德萊頓出生在清教色彩濃厚的資產(chǎn)階級家庭，畢業(yè)于劍橋大學(xué)的三一學(xué)院。他曾是英國革命的支持者，克倫威爾統(tǒng)治時(shí)期，他在革命政府中任職。克倫威爾去世之際，他同約翰·彌爾頓、安德魯·馬維爾一道出席葬禮。查理二世復(fù)辟之后，他改宗天主教，寫詩稱頌查理二世，批評英國國教。這種首鼠兩端的投機(jī)行為，最為時(shí)人詬病。王政復(fù)辟時(shí)期，他獲得桂冠詩人的稱號；但是，1688年“光榮革命”之后，這一頭銜又被新政府剝奪。

德萊頓的作品主要寫于王政復(fù)辟時(shí)代。查理二世從法國翩然而歸，不僅帶回來了奢靡的凡爾賽宮廷生活方式，也帶回來了法蘭西的新古典主義理念。在此之前，新古典主義風(fēng)格已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)在本·瓊生的作品中；但是，本·瓊生的新古典主義理念主要來自意大利。王政復(fù)辟之后，法國的新古典主義對英國文壇開始產(chǎn)生強(qiáng)勁而全面的影響。對于這套舶來的理論，德萊頓總體上贊成，但沒有生吞活剝地接受或亦步亦趨地頂禮膜拜，而是始終保持一種批判式的認(rèn)可。正因?yàn)檫@個(gè)原因，他的文學(xué)批評顯得非常具有靈活性。法國新古典主義熱衷于制定絕對的理論標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，例如“三一律”，敦促后人加以師法；德萊頓則無意去構(gòu)建普遍性法則，而是有的放矢，品評和鑒賞具體作家的風(fēng)格、具體作品的技巧。就此而言，他是實(shí)踐型的批評家，而非理論型的批評家。他認(rèn)為，在不同的國家，觀眾的稟性和需求不盡相同，作家的創(chuàng)作要因時(shí)因地、量體裁衣，切不可泥古不化、刻舟求劍?！霸娙怂鎸Φ娘L(fēng)尚、時(shí)代以及觀眾的性情大不相同，那些讓古希臘人滿意的作品不一定讓英國觀眾滿意”，這條論斷挑戰(zhàn)了法國新古典主義的一個(gè)重要觀點(diǎn)，即在任何時(shí)空、任何文化中，人性都是恒定不變的。就某種程度而言，這條論斷發(fā)出了現(xiàn)代讀者反映批評的先聲。他還給戲劇下了一個(gè)定義：戲劇是對人性公正而生動的描述。所謂公正，就是不偏不倚、如實(shí)地模仿描述，這就是亞里士多德提倡的藝術(shù)模仿自然的原則；然而，“生動”就要求劇作家要顧及觀眾的口味，這就很可能有悖于新古典主義的典范性原則（decorum）。

內(nèi)容提要

本文選自德萊頓最有代表性的批評論作《論戲劇詩》。全文以四人對話形式展開，討論當(dāng)時(shí)英國文壇上的熱門問題：古代戲劇與現(xiàn)代戲劇孰優(yōu)孰劣，法國新古典主義戲劇理論對于當(dāng)代英國戲劇是否具有指導(dǎo)意義，以及戲劇創(chuàng)作中可能涉及的一些具體問題。在第一個(gè)問題上，德萊頓基本上持有厚今薄古的態(tài)度；在第二個(gè)問題上，他認(rèn)為法國新古典主義的三一律原則過于刻板，妨礙了戲劇內(nèi)容的豐贍。

文中四位對話者的名字是尤吉涅斯（Eugius）、克里提斯（Crites）、利西迪亞斯（Lisideius）和尼安達(dá)（Neander），分別影射王政復(fù)辟時(shí)代的詩人查爾斯·塞克威爾（Charles Sackville）、羅伯特·霍華德（Robert Howard）、查爾斯·塞德利（Charles Sedley）以及德萊頓本人。據(jù)后來的學(xué)者推測，Neander可能由希臘文中的neo和andros組合而成，意為newman（新人）。這篇選文是尼安達(dá)在四人討論中的發(fā)言。這種利用人名來影射個(gè)人主張的做法，在新古典主義時(shí)代屢見不鮮。

作者對莎士比亞的才能推崇備至，認(rèn)為他在古今文學(xué)家當(dāng)中才智最廣博、悟性最強(qiáng)；他洞悉世間百態(tài)，行文運(yùn)筆得心應(yīng)手，渾然天成，毫無斧鑿之痕；他寫人狀物栩栩如生，仿佛伸手可及。至于有人說莎士比亞學(xué)問不濟(jì)，德萊頓反倒認(rèn)為這是一種恭維，因?yàn)樗膶W(xué)問純屬天賜，無需借助書本之力；他只需借助自己的心智，即可洞察世態(tài)人情，而無需旁視他途。不過，莎士比亞的創(chuàng)作并非白璧無瑕、無可指責(zé)。在德萊頓看來，他的作品有時(shí)平淡無味，他的一些詼諧妙語（comic wit）有時(shí)淪為插科打諢，而一些嚴(yán)肅妙語又過于渲染、流于浮詞虛飾。但不管怎么說，他總能以大手筆表現(xiàn)大題材，讓二者珠聯(lián)璧合，相得益彰；他信筆所至，總能遠(yuǎn)邁時(shí)賢。因此，伊頓公學(xué)的約翰·黑爾說，其他作家寫過的題材，莎士比亞都能寫，而且寫得更好。在同時(shí)代的作家當(dāng)中，有人在現(xiàn)今時(shí)代更受推崇，聲譽(yù)在他之上；但是，在莎翁時(shí)代，比起弗萊徹和本·瓊生這些人，人們更尊崇的是莎士比亞。查理一世在位時(shí)期，正值本·瓊生的文名如日中天之際；但約翰·薩克靈和大部分朝臣都認(rèn)為，莎士比亞勝過本·瓊生。

德萊頓認(rèn)為，在戲劇領(lǐng)域，瓊生是最為博學(xué)、最有文學(xué)判斷眼光的作家；他不僅嚴(yán)于察己，也嚴(yán)于察人。我們不能說他缺少文學(xué)才華（wit），只能說他珍惜這種才華而不肯濫用。他下筆極簡，要言不煩，作品既成，無須修改。在他之前，妙語的運(yùn)用、辭藻的遴選、個(gè)人癖性的描寫，在戲劇界已屢見不鮮；但是，直到本·瓊生橫空出世，戲劇藝術(shù)才臻于完美。比起前人，他更能揚(yáng)長避短。在他的作品中，很少發(fā)現(xiàn)描寫男女求愛或震撼心靈的場面；他本人的文學(xué)才質(zhì)過于陰沉憂郁，不能出色地做到這一點(diǎn)；而且，他也深知，在這方面，前人的成就已經(jīng)達(dá)到了相當(dāng)高的程度。他的專長在于描寫人物的癖性，他喜歡表現(xiàn)工匠這樣的人物。他諳熟古希臘古羅馬作家的作品，并從中進(jìn)行了大膽借鑒。兩部直接以羅馬故事為題材的悲劇中，他幾乎引用和翻譯了古羅馬所有作家和史家的作品。這種公然剽竊的行徑，他干起來毫不顧忌。他劫掠起作家，猶如帝王盤剝百姓，毫無懼色；以別人之所失，化為自己之所得。于是，在他筆下，古羅馬時(shí)代的典章制度、禮儀風(fēng)俗，悉數(shù)呈現(xiàn)在今人眼前；即便由時(shí)人執(zhí)筆，也不見得在他之上。他行文刻意追求拉丁化，這在他的喜劇中表現(xiàn)得尤為明顯。結(jié)果，他筆下的文字不符合英文的特色，讀來不像英文，更像拉丁文。與莎士比亞相比，他以錘煉字句見長，而莎士比亞更有才華。莎士比亞相當(dāng)于荷馬，開風(fēng)氣之先，為后世的戲劇詩人效仿；本·瓊生相當(dāng)于維吉爾，為工巧細(xì)致的典范。他固然讓人對他欽佩有加，但更讓人心儀的則是莎士比亞。

John Dryden (1631—1700)

From An Essay of Dramatic Poesy

To begin, then, with Shakespeare. He was the man who of all modern, and perhaps ancient poets, had the largest and most comprehensive soul. All the images of nature were still present to him, and he drew them, not laboriously, but luckily; when he describes anything, you more than see it, you feel it too. Those who accuse him to have wanted learning, give him the greater commendation: he was naturally learned; he needed not the spectacles of books to read nature; he looked inwards, and found her there. I cannot say he is everywhere alike; were he so, I should do him injury to compare him with the greatest of mankind. He is many times flat, insipid; his comic wit degenerating into clenches, his serious swelling into bombast. But he is always great, when some great occasion is presented to him; no man can say he ever had a fit subject for his wit, and did not then raise himself as high as above the rest of poets,

Quantum lenta solent inter viburna cupressi.

The consideration of this made Mr. Hales of Eton say, that there was no subject of which any poet ever writ, but he would produce it much better done in Shakespeare; and however others are now generally preferred before him, yet the age wherein he lived, which had contemporaries with him Fletcher and Jonson, never equalled them to him in their esteem: and in the last king's court, when Ben's reputation was at highest, Sir John Suckling, and with him the greater part of the courtiers, set our Shakespeare far above him.

Beaumont and Fletcher, of whom I am next to speak, had, with the advantage of Shakespeare's wit, which was their precedent, great natural gifts, improved by study: Beaumont especially being so accurate a judge of plays, that Ben Jonson, while he lived, submitted all his writings to his censure, and, 'tis thought, used his judgment in correcting, if not contriving, all his plots. What value he had for him, appears by the verses he writ to him; and therefore I need speak no farther of it. The first play that brought Fletcher and him in esteem was their Philaster: for before that, they had written two or three very unsuccessfully, as the like is reported of Ben Jonson, before he writ Every Man in His Humor. Their plots were generally more regular than Shakespeare's, especially those which were made before Beaumont's death; and they understood and imitated the conversation of gentlemen much better; whose wild debaucheries, and quickness of wit in repartees, no poet before them could paint as they have done. Humor, which Ben Jonson derived from particular persons, they made it not their business to describe: they represented all the passions very lively, but above all, love. I am apt to believe the English language in them arrived to its highest perfection: what words have since been taken in, are rather superfluous than ornamental. Their plays are now the most pleasant and frequent entertainments of the stage; two of theirs being acted through the year for one of Shakespeare's or Jonson's: the reason is, because there is a certain gaiety in their comedies, and pathos in their more serious plays, which suit generally with all men's humors. Shakespeare's language is likewise a little obsolete, and Ben Jonson's wit comes short of theirs.

As for Jonson, to whose character I am now arrived, if we look upon him while he was himself (for his last plays were but his dotages), I think him the most learned and judicious writer which any theater ever had. He was a most severe judge of himself, as well as others. One cannot say he wanted wit, but rather that he was frugal of it. In his works you find little to retrench or alter. Wit, and language, and humor also in some measure, we had before him; but something of art was wanting to the drama till he came. You seldom find him making love in any of his scenes, or endeavoring to move the passions; his genius was too sullen and saturnine to do it gracefully, especially when he knew he came after those who had performed both to such a height. Humor was his proper sphere; and in that he delighted most to represent mechanic people. He was deeply conversant in the ancients, both Greek and Latin, and he borrowed boldly from them: there is scarce a poet or historian among the Roman authors of those times whom he has not translated in Sejanus and Catiline. But he has done his robberies so openly, that one may see he fears not to be taxed by any law. He invades authors like a monarch; and what would be theft in other poets is only victory in him. With the spoils of these writers he so represents old Rome to us, in its rites, ceremonies, and customs, that if one of their poets had written either of his tragedies, we had seen less of it than in him. If there was any fault in his language, 'twas that he weaved it too closely and laboriously, in his comedies especially: perhaps, too, he did a little too much Romanise our tongue, leaving the words which he translated almost as much Latin as he found them: wherein, though he learnedly followed their language, he did not enough comply with the idiom of ours. If I would compare him with Shakespeare, I must acknowledge him the more correct poet, but Shakespeare the greater wit. Shakespeare was the Homer, or father of our dramatic poets; Jonson was the Virgil, the pattern of elaborate writing; I admire him, but I love Shakspeare.

1. 這里的nature，不專指自然界，而是泛指宇宙之間的事態(tài)萬物。

2. wanted：缺少。

3. naturally learned：（他的學(xué)問）渾然天成，他無須讀書即可洞悉世間百態(tài)。

4. looked inwards：反諸自心，無須旁視。

5. he is everywhere alike：他處處都對。

6. I should do him injury to compare him with the greatest of mankind：莎士比亞橫絕古今，即便把他與人類最偉大的作家相比，那對他也是一種侮辱。意即，莎士比亞不可超越。

7. clenches：插科打諢。

8. no man can say he ever had a subject for wit：一旦莎士比亞找到與他的天才相稱的題材，他的作品就會遠(yuǎn)邁時(shí)賢。wit這里指天才，而非“詼諧妙語”。

9. 拉丁文，語出維吉爾的《牧歌》（Ecologues），意為“猶如低矮灌木叢中的翠柏”，類似漢語中的“鶴立雞群”。

10. Mr. Hales of Eton: John Hales（1584—1656），伊頓公學(xué)的教師。

11. writ：write的過去式；本文中的poet，不單指詩人，而泛指“作家”。

12. Fletcher：弗萊徹（John Fletcher，1579—1625），英國詹姆士一世統(tǒng)治時(shí)期的著名劇作家，與弗朗西斯·博蒙特密切合作，創(chuàng)作劇本10余部，尤以悲喜劇見長，主要有《菲拉斯特》《少女的悲劇》等。

13. Jonson：瓊生（Ben Jonson, 1572—1637），英國劇作家、詩人、評論家，劇作有《煉金術(shù)士》（The Alchemist）和《圣巴托羅繆市集》（Bartholomew Fair）等。

14. 指查理一世統(tǒng)治時(shí)期（1625—1649）。

15. Sir John Suckling：薩克林（1609—1642），英國詩人、廷臣。

16. 指本·瓊生所作的箴言詩《致弗朗西斯·博蒙特》。

17. Philaster：《菲拉斯特》，弗萊徹與博蒙特合著的悲喜劇，講述王子與美人戀愛的故事，情節(jié)復(fù)雜，懸念迭起，很受貴族和市民階層的歡迎。菲拉斯特為劇中主人公的名字。

18. 本·瓊生的“癖性喜劇”《人人高興》（Every Man in His Humor, 1598）。故事大意為：老愛德華好管閑事，對小愛德華經(jīng)常疑神疑鬼，唯恐他濫交匪人。劇中另有疑心極大的商人凱特利，唯恐自己年輕的妻子另覓情郎，誤會由此而產(chǎn)生。經(jīng)過一系列波折之后，真相終于大白，小愛德華愛的是凱特利的妹妹，最后有情人終成眷屬。

19. humor：這里的humor，既不是通常所說的“幽默”，也不是指“心情”，而是本·瓊生所謂的“癖性”。本·瓊生在《人人高興》的序言中解釋說，“當(dāng)一個(gè)人被某種特性所控制，以至于他的情感、精神和力量都被指向某一特定方向，那么這種特性就可被稱作‘癖性’”。“癖性”一說來自中世紀(jì)生理學(xué)中著名的體液論。按照這種理論，人體有四種體液（humor），分別為血液、黏液、膽汁和憂郁液。如果四種體液比例協(xié)調(diào)，人的情緒就穩(wěn)定平和；如果其中一種比例過高，則使人易怒、膽怯、多疑、嫉妒、貪婪。癖性喜劇挖苦和諷刺的就是具有上述特殊氣質(zhì)的人物。參見王佐良、何其莘《英國文藝復(fù)興時(shí)期的文學(xué)史》。

20. 這里指的是本·瓊生的一些晚期劇作，如《新聞批發(fā)客棧》（1629）和《一只桶的故事》（1633）。這些作品質(zhì)量平庸，沒有創(chuàng)新，并不成功。作者在句子中指出，這些失敗之作表明，本·瓊生的創(chuàng)作已呈現(xiàn)老邁疲態(tài)。

21. saturnine：陰沉、憂郁。

22. mechanic people：體力勞動者、工匠。

23. 這是瓊生以羅馬故事為題材的兩部戲劇，分別作于1603和1611年。

24. taxed：受到懲罰。

25. romanise our tongue：使英語拉丁化。