论文部分内容阅读
三年前由欧阳健引发的“甲戌本、脂砚斋是刘铨福所伪造,又是民国年间的书贾重抄,骗住了胡适以致流毒红学界七十年”的所谓“新辨”,很是热闹了一阵子。但经过辨论,似乎有点澄清了。只是宛青、林辰等人不承认脂砚斋与曹雪芹相识的议论还没有人触及,克非的《红楼雾瘴》在《峨眉》大型双月刊杂志连载了两年还没有完。最近我又收到一本《红楼》杂志,压卷第一篇论文就是吴国柱的《程前脂后 铁证如山》,是“铁证”还“如山”,可见欧阳健的影响还远没有消除。脂砚斋问题比较复杂,这里暂且不提,我还准备写一篇《红楼解雾》与克非商榷,同时也为宛青、林辰释疑。现在专就比较简单、带常识性质的“铁证”问题谈一点意见,与曲沐、吴国柱、张训等同志辨论。
The so-called “new identification” of “Jia Xu Ben and Zhi Yan Zhai was forged by Liu Quanfu three years ago triggered by Ouyang Jian and was also copied from the books of the Republic of China during the Republican era by seventy years of” Very busy for a while. But after the argument, it seems a bit clarified. Only Wan Qing, Lin Chen and others do not recognize the discussion Zhizaozhai and Cao Xueqin no one touched, Ke Fei’s “Red House Fog” in the “Emei” large bi-monthly magazine serialized two years has not finished. Recently, I received another magazine, “Red House.” The first essay in the volume roll is Wu Guozhu’s “Chengqianzhezhe Tiezhengshan”, is “ironclad” but also “mountain”, showing that Ouyangjian’s influence is far from eliminated. Zhi Yan Zhai issue is more complicated, not to mention here for the time being, I also prepared to write a “red floor fog” and non-gram, but also for Wan Qing, Lin Chen misunderstood. Now I will talk a little bit about the “ironclad” issue that is relatively simple in nature and contains the common sense. I will discuss with Comrades Qu Mu, Wu Guozhu and Zhang Xun.