The Review Of 《The Critical Review》

As a conservative school of thought in China's new literature history, Critical Review school was subject to cold shoulder and criticism for a long period, meanwhile its debate with Neoculture School ended in failure. But in the atmosphere of opening culture in the new period, Critical Review school draws a number of scholars' attention again.Then, some contents to be discussed in this thesis are the questions why Critical Review school chose to maintain the traditional culture as the then New Culture Movement was flourishing, what was its historical gist and what learning meaning did it make and how we resurvey this school of thought starting from present learning angles.Psychologically, Critical Review school has blood relationship with Chinese traditional culture, especially the Confucian culture. Bearing in their mind the long-cherished wish of the revitalization of the local culture, many scholars of this school studied western culture so as to find out a possible path for conversation between Chinese and western cultures. Fortunately, they found Neohumanism, which brought the development of the traditional culture into the trend of conservatism worldwide. In this sense, Critical Review school's choice had its own inevitability.Critical Review school existed as a marginal school of thought of the mainstream discourse during Chinese New Culture Movement, which counterbalanced and rectified deviations of the mainstream learning movement to some degree, made up for the learning omissions of the Neoculture School and corrected its extreme value judgment to some degree.Its proposition to conciliate Chinese and western cultures with a prudent and mild attitude is somewhat reasonable.When the tradition regression current is on the rise nowadays, the independent learning spirit, elites' knowledge rationality and stress on humanistic spirit represented by Critical Review school make this school's learning viewpoints regain their vigour against the impact of the modern commodity currents. Furthermore, the modern significance of this school's scholars as conservatists needs to be reevaluated.