Collation Of The Edition Of Li Changzhi’s Critique Of Lu Xun And Research On Related Issues

There are three editions of Critique of LuXun by Li Changzhi:the newspaper version in 1935,the book-form edition in 1936,the third edition in 1943 by Oriental Publishing House.The first three chapters of this paper mainly take the collation of the three editions as an entry point of research and discovery,then,by the way of combining"historical facts" and "historical interpretation",probes into the basic problems existing in the edition and the related literary criticism ideas revealed by Li Changzhi in the book.The last chapter brings the Beijing edition and anthology republished by later generations into the scope of investigation,in which the preliminary discussion of the literature type of "Lu Xun in citation" shake the legitimacy of the concept of "rare edition" or "new rare edition" in modern literary collation as the evaluation of collation achievements.Specifically,chapter one explores the book’s publication time and title.The former is a reiteration of a common sense of proofreading,while the latter focuses on two viewpoints of the origin of the word "critique" used by Li Changzhi:German theory and Japanese theory.The German theory emphasizes the origin of Li’s thought,who absorbed the "systematism" of Kant’s critical philosophy and used the philosophical term "critique" as literary "criticism".This personal creation ignored the social identification of "criticism" by Marxists and he was ultimately held responsible for"critique" in the political sense.While the Japanese theory prefers the translation,dissemination,lexical ization,popularization,variation and stereotyping of words in the etymological sense,this paper found "critique" can be regarded as "Japanese activating word" to a certain extent.Li’s choice and persistence of the word "critique" is the result of the joint construction of its ideological origin and etymological connotation.However,Li didn’t keep enough sensitivity and vigilance to the incident of "misreading"on the word,the academic belief behind his insistence on "critique" and the immature materialist view of history are worth pondering again.Chapter two is based on the supplement of publication information and related evaluation of Russian Fairy Tales and Watch in the first edition.This paper finds that this is not the deletion of Yishi newspaper as emphasized by Li Changzhi in his postscript,but Li’s second modification,which is closely related to the social acceptance of the work and Li’s attention to children’s issues.Li’s view of children’s education has a great change in the early and late period,which is obviously mixed.It is different from Zhou Zuoren’s emphasis on children’s interest and Lu Xun’s understanding of "people".His view of children’s education has always been closely connected with the needs of reality,which can be called the view of "establishing people"on the basis of "establishing the country".Combining with his fairy tale translation and creation,the article has sorted out the source,contradiction and transformation of this view.In chapter three,it begins Li Changzhi’s view on translation with the deletion of a passage from the first edition,it is likely that the deletion was made by BeiXin Publishng House rather than Li’s initiative to cut back on his intention of befriend Zhao Jingshen,which is related to Zhao Jingshen’s mood changes around the "Milky Way"incident.In the mid-1930s,Li thought that there was no contradiction between "hard translation" and "consecutive translation".After a long period of translation practice,in the early 1940s,Li has had much in common with Lu Xun’s view on translation,that is,it is not only in the input of new content but also to input the idea of a new method of expression.This paper also points out that Li is lack of the idea of language ontology,which affects his understanding of many problems profoundly.The fourth chapter,combined with the concrete collation practice of the Beijing edition and the collected works,on the one hand,corrects some errors in the editor’s revision of Li’s remarks.on the other hand,focus on the discussion of the literature type of "Lu Xun in the quotation",it mainly shows whether it is appropriate to revise Lu Xun’s original text quoted in critique of Lu Xun with the new edition of Lu Xun’s complete works,whether it is appropriate to ignore changes to the quoted Lu Xun article in order to meet the so called "author’s intent" in determining the merits of the version.This paper discusses some vague ideas in the concept of "Good edition",in order to arouse people’s attention to the "overlapping constitution" of Lu Xun’s text in literary works.