9-10月的阅读双钩的背景资料－－请考过的兄弟姐妹们确认一下

kittyclock

<div class="maxcode-quote"><b>以下是引用<i>kathleenlpp</i>在2009/9/26 13:15:00的发言：</b><br/><p>接着来 </p><p>提到的流派诗人</p><p>浪漫主义文学的基本特征： <br/>1 强烈的主观色彩，偏爱表现主观思想，注重抒发个人的感受和体验。重主观，轻客观和重自我表现，轻客观模仿。 <br/>2 喜欢描写和歌颂大自然。(尤为突出) <br/>作者们喜欢将自己的理解人物置身于纯朴宁静的大自然中，衬托现实社会的丑恶及自身理解的美好。 <br/>3重视中世纪民间文学。想象比较丰富、感情真挚、表达自由、语言朴素自然。 <br/>4注重艺术效果：异国青岛情调、对比、夸张、人物形象的超凡性。 <br/>消极浪漫主义者则不然。他们不能正视社会现实的尖锐矛盾，采取消极逃避的态度，他们的思想是同那个被推翻了的封建贵族阶级的思想意识相联系的。他们从对抗资产阶级单命运动出发，反对现状，留恋过去，美化中世纪的宗法制，幻想从古老的封建社会中去寻找精神上的安慰与寄托。消极浪漫主义的出现，。实际上是被打倒的封建贵族阶级没落的思想情绪在文学上的反映。代表作家有德国的史雷格尔兄弟，即奥·史雷格尔和弗·史雷格尔，诺瓦里斯，法国的夏多布里昂，拉马丁、维尼，俄国有茹科夫斯基，英国有彭斯、布莱克、华兹华斯、克勒律治、拜伦、雪莱、济慈，等等。<br/><br/>济慈的《夜莺颂&gt; 《忧郁颂》华兹华斯的《丁登寺》&nbsp; 拜伦的《密涅瓦的诅咒》《东方故事诗》。 雪莱的&lt;西风颂》等等<br/><br/><br/><br/>象征主义在法国产生于十九世纪七十和八十年代。正式确立的时间是1886年。这一年年轻诗人让•莫雷阿斯发表了一篇象征主义宣言。象征主义的三位主将是马拉梅、魏尔伦和兰波。《恶之花》的作者波德莱尔被认为是象征主义的先驱（鼻祖）。象征主义者反对现实主义和自然主义者如实地描写客观现实。他们认为现实的物质世界是虚幻而痛苦的，只有隐匿在背后的内在的世界才是真实的。作品中运用大量的暗示和象征来隐喻表现人的内心世界。诗歌中有不少 模糊的、扑朔迷离的诗句，十分晦涩，诗中意象令人厌恶。魏尔伦有些诗表达的感情极为深刻，如《无言浪漫曲》。也有不少粗俗淫秽的内容，他自己称晚年的一部诗集为“粪池”。 兰波的代表作有《母音》（《元音字母》）、《醉舟》。马拉梅最重要的作品是《牧神的午后》。在“马拉梅星期二茶话会”的与会诗人中有的成了诗坛的大师，如保尔•瓦雷里。象征主义诗人在思想与艺术上的特点是神秘主义、唯美主义和悲观主义。他们的诗歌晦涩、朦胧。法国象征主义作为一个流派到九十年代初就解体了。但它的思潮却传到了比利时、奥地利、德国和俄国。到二十世纪，象征主义又以更大的声势发展开来，是谓后期象征主义。比利时的梅特林克是象征派最重要的剧作家。 </p></div><p></p>我记得有篇双钩说是objective poet 不知道是不是 象征主义 我在google上找到objective poet 的东西很少

sophie_into

<p>太强了，鸡骨头那篇应该是完全重现了。</p><p>objective poetry, 刚查了下是和艾略特相关的，搜到的下面这篇英文似乎很有GMAT的风格！！！</p><p>The concept of the objective correlative and the criticism surrounding it make it an important consideration for writers even though literary theory has changed.</p><p>The term "objective correlative" was first used by Washington Allston, a poet and painter who was singularly influential in the Romantic movement of American landscape painting. However, it was brought to currency by T.S. Eliot, who was associated with the Formalist literary school, in a 1920 essay entitled "Hamlet and His Problems."</p><p>A Formula for Conveying Emotion<br/>In the essay, Eliot offers a critical reading of William Shakespeare's Hamlet and asserts that "the only way of expressing emotion in the form of art is by finding an "objective correlative"; in other words, a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked."</p><p>Having established that the objective correlative is the only way for art to show emotion, Eliot goes so far as to conclude that Hamlet is an artistic failure because Hamlet's emotions are out of proportion with the events of the play. These strong statements have garnered criticism regarding how "objective" an author and reader can be, and caused Eliot's original idea to seem like a dated product of Modernism.</p><p>Criticisms<br/>However, the concept is still used by advertisers looking for a measure of how well their message is getting across, and many writers are familiar with it. In writing as in advertising, it is often associated with a psychological approach, because its insistence on objectivity arguably implies the existence of an ingrained human nature.</p><p>Eliot himself used the objective correlative, and similar earlier doctrines, in his own poetry, filling it with outward imagery which was meant to convey the mood of the narrator. He believed that concrete, immediate imagery was necessary to create the objective correlative, which caused Peter Barry to liken Eliot's rubric to Plato's idea of mimesis and diegesis. That is, the objective correlative for Eliot might be as simply expressed as the old writer's advice of "show, don't tell."</p><p></p><p>Read more: <a href="http://writingfiction.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_objective_correlative#ixzz0SDmid1Wk"><a href="http://writingfiction.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_objective_correlative#ixzz0SDmid1Wk" target="_blank">http://writingfiction.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_objective_correlative#ixzz0SDmid1Wk</a></a></p><p>Implications<br/>Both the idea of the objective correlative and literary mimesis, whether or not one takes them as the same, are open to epistemological scrutiny: how sure can a writer be that external details can create the same state of mind in the reader, and is diegesis -- or the narrative, confessional mode -- more subjective? Is objectivity an attainable goal, and is objectivity mean a work is more effective, on the whole? (In philosophical terms, the debate is between internalism and externalism.)</p><p>The objective correlative therefore seems in direct opposition to the fashionable confessional mode. In fact, the poet Nuala Ni Dhomhnaill has suggested that Irish poets' use of the objective correlative as a "distancing lens" has given it a staying power that confessional American poetry does not have. Conversely, Cynthia Ozick has said that Eliot's method was only a shield from the "raw shame of confession," though in her opinion this meant Eliot's poetry was in fact quite confessional underneath.</p><p>The debate in this critique which writers would do well to consider is how much the events depicted in mimesis are to be taken at face value and how much they are references or symbols for something else, what has been called the "subjective correlative."</p><p><br/></p>

zhang200824

顶顶

瑞气横秋

了不起的lz，还有其他所有帮大家整理的同学！

Boot

<p>嗯，鸡骨头我也找到了英文版原来的新闻，其中有storey和Polynisia，但是吃不准是不是原文，就没放上来，省得误导。</p><br /><div align="right"><font color="#000066">[此贴子已经被作者于2009/9/27 8:01:20编辑过]</font></div>

gmathong

<img src="/static/legacy-emoticon/Dvbbs/em10.gif" />

GMAT_onjob

<p>辛苦啦，楼主都是从wiki上搜到的吗？</p><p>是不是我们再把英文的也整理出来效果会更好？</p>

k51

<p>牛~~~</p>

blythehu

<p>这些知识太好了~谢谢大家的汇总~~</p>

zhang200824

顶