{"title":"从安倍知次的《北京》看认识中国的可能性</ <","authors":"Guanwei SU","doi":"10.22628/bcjjl.2023.16.1.59","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"None of Tomoji Abe’s works has attracted as much attention from Japanese and Chinese scholars as <i>Beijing</i>. To this point, these scholars and critics have developed two main perspectives on the text. As the scholars Ichiro Ando and Isao Mizukami point out, the first perspective is comprised of an interpretation of <i>Beijing</i> that is based on the author’s critical stance on the brutal war. The other angle, expressed by Wang Shengyuan and Xiao Dongyuan, is to critique the Orientalism evident in the novel. However, because <i>Beijing</i> was written in a time of turmoil and conflict, there are aspects of the text that do not fit into either one of these categories. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the two conventional interpretations and to identify a new perspective on Abe’s perception of China. Much like exchanging spectacle lenses, which implies the swapping of two different values, I initially try to get a little closer to the <i>Beijing</i> that Tomoji Abe, who was familiar with English and American literature and who also loved reading classical Chinese literature, saw in 1935. I then focus on the changes in the perspective of the protagonist, Daimon, in order to reevaluate Tomoji Abe’s perception of China and his new interpretation of it contained in <i>Beijing</i>.","PeriodicalId":33066,"journal":{"name":"Gwagyeong Ilboneo Munhak Yeongu","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The (Im)possibility of Understanding China in Abe Tomoji’s <i>Beijing</i>\",\"authors\":\"Guanwei SU\",\"doi\":\"10.22628/bcjjl.2023.16.1.59\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"None of Tomoji Abe’s works has attracted as much attention from Japanese and Chinese scholars as <i>Beijing</i>. To this point, these scholars and critics have developed two main perspectives on the text. As the scholars Ichiro Ando and Isao Mizukami point out, the first perspective is comprised of an interpretation of <i>Beijing</i> that is based on the author’s critical stance on the brutal war. The other angle, expressed by Wang Shengyuan and Xiao Dongyuan, is to critique the Orientalism evident in the novel. However, because <i>Beijing</i> was written in a time of turmoil and conflict, there are aspects of the text that do not fit into either one of these categories. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the two conventional interpretations and to identify a new perspective on Abe’s perception of China. Much like exchanging spectacle lenses, which implies the swapping of two different values, I initially try to get a little closer to the <i>Beijing</i> that Tomoji Abe, who was familiar with English and American literature and who also loved reading classical Chinese literature, saw in 1935. I then focus on the changes in the perspective of the protagonist, Daimon, in order to reevaluate Tomoji Abe’s perception of China and his new interpretation of it contained in <i>Beijing</i>.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gwagyeong Ilboneo Munhak Yeongu\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gwagyeong Ilboneo Munhak Yeongu\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22628/bcjjl.2023.16.1.59\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gwagyeong Ilboneo Munhak Yeongu","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22628/bcjjl.2023.16.1.59","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
安倍知司的作品中,没有哪部作品像《北京》那样受到中日学者的关注。到目前为止,这些学者和评论家对文本发展了两种主要观点。正如学者安藤一郎(Ichiro Ando)和水上志雄(Isao Mizukami)所指出的那样,第一种视角是由对“北京”的解释构成的。这是基于作者对残酷战争的批判立场。另一个角度是王生源和肖东源所表达的,对小说中明显的东方主义进行批判。然而,因为<i>Beijing</i>是在一个动荡和冲突的时代写的,文本的一些方面不适合这些类别之一。本文的目的是重新审视两种传统的解释,并确定安倍对中国的看法的新视角。就像交换眼镜镜片意味着交换两种不同的价值一样,我最初试图更接近北京< I > / I >熟悉英美文学、也喜欢阅读中国古典文学的安倍友司(Tomoji Abe)在1935年看到了这幅画。然后,我将重点放在主人公戴蒙视角的变化上,以便重新评估安倍智治对中国的看法以及他在《北京》中对中国的新解读。
The (Im)possibility of Understanding China in Abe Tomoji’s <i>Beijing</i>
None of Tomoji Abe’s works has attracted as much attention from Japanese and Chinese scholars as Beijing. To this point, these scholars and critics have developed two main perspectives on the text. As the scholars Ichiro Ando and Isao Mizukami point out, the first perspective is comprised of an interpretation of Beijing that is based on the author’s critical stance on the brutal war. The other angle, expressed by Wang Shengyuan and Xiao Dongyuan, is to critique the Orientalism evident in the novel. However, because Beijing was written in a time of turmoil and conflict, there are aspects of the text that do not fit into either one of these categories. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the two conventional interpretations and to identify a new perspective on Abe’s perception of China. Much like exchanging spectacle lenses, which implies the swapping of two different values, I initially try to get a little closer to the Beijing that Tomoji Abe, who was familiar with English and American literature and who also loved reading classical Chinese literature, saw in 1935. I then focus on the changes in the perspective of the protagonist, Daimon, in order to reevaluate Tomoji Abe’s perception of China and his new interpretation of it contained in Beijing.