I agree to some extent with my imaginary English reader. American literary historians are perhaps prone to view their own nation

admin2011-02-10  41

问题     I agree to some extent with my imaginary English reader. American literary historians are perhaps prone to view their own national scene too narrowly, mistaking prominence for uniqueness. They do over-phrase their own literature, or certainly its minor figures. And Americans do swing from aggressive overphrase of their literature to an equally unfortunate, imitative deference. But then, the English themselves are somewhat insular in their literary appraisals. Moreover, in fields where they are not pre-eminent--e, g. in painting and music—they too alternate between boasting of native products and copying those of the Continent. How many English paintings try to look as though they were done in Paris; how many times have we read in articles that they really represent an "English tradition" after all.

选项

答案 在某种程度上,我赞同我那假想中的英国读者的观点。美国文学史家或许惯于过分狭隘地看待其本国文坛,误将卓著当做独特。他们确实会用过多的笔墨来渲染其本国文学,至少,对其次要作家他们肯定会这样做。此外,美国人确实会走极端,要么咄咄逼人地大肆渲染其文学,要么进行着同样不幸的亦步亦趋式的顶礼膜拜。但反过来说,英国人自己在其文学鉴赏中也显得有些狭隘愚陋。此外,在他们并无上乘表现的领域——例如绘画与音乐,他们也会走极端,不是吹嘘他们本国的作品,就是大肆模仿欧洲大陆的作品。有多少幅英国绘画试图看上去仿佛是在巴黎完成的;但我们又有多少次曾在文章中读到它们真正代表着一种“英国式的传统”呢?

解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/OVcO777K
0

最新回复(0)