2016年5月9日 星期一

《容安館札記》206~210則



Jean-Frédéric Schall, La comparaison (1789)



二百六[1]



            《倪雲林先生詩集》六卷、《附錄雜著》一卷。詩求清隽者,味淺韻短,在張伯雨詩之下。求恣肆者,如七古之〈延陵道〉、〈螮蝀〉二首,以文為詩,殊嫌腐㳫。求峭健者,如七律〈楊鐵厓〉之多作拗體、首句不押韻、對仗流走、使語助詞,亦木直不耐諷詠。通觀全集,衹一律一絕可采。又好作禪語,却未見箭鋒機也。編集者蹇曦想非通人。《潛研堂文集》卷三十〈跋倪雲林詩集〉已言此本多贋作,今觀其以七律拗體編入七古,如卷二之〈寄張徐二秀才〉、〈十二月七日岳季堅夜坐走筆書贈〉、〈提曹文貞公墓道奉先亭〉、〈古意答曹德昭〉、〈鄭有道隱居梁鴻山〉、〈題柯敬仲竹〉、〈賦清隱閣〉、〈寄徐元度〉、〈送顧生歸四明〉、〈題陳氏齋璧〉、〈宿薩判官家聽琴〉、〈十一月廿三日率性德原共載過林下〉、〈贈丘氏兄弟及周生〉諸篇皆是。而卷四之〈初書記以詩來別〉、〈寄曹德昭〉等篇,却仍編入七律,何哉?(康熙時,曹培廉編十二卷《清閟閣集》,仍沿而不改。)〈奉寄沈理問〉一篇,卷二先後兩見。【董其昌《容臺別集》卷四:「余所藏雲林〈秋林圖〉有詩云:『雲開見山高,木落知風勁。亭下不逢人,夕陽澹秋影。』」(曹本收入卷三,注云:「陳則題雲林畫〈林亭遠岫〉。」)】【曹本卷十〈與介石〉多索沉香燒。卷十一〈外紀潔癖門〉載其爇龍涎香為人蹤跡。】【吾鄉尤長鏜作《清賢紀》六卷,皆稱述雲林者。尤為王弇州弟子,刻意為隽語而詰屈不達,然頗存雲林集外詩詞、書札、題跋。】【李詡《戒菴老人漫筆》卷五:「倪雲林畫其亡婦像自題二絕并跋。」卷七兩柬。】【《少室山房類稿》卷一百十八〈與顧叔時論宋元二代詩書之十二〉云:「倪元鎮詩之於虞、揭四家,正猶其畫之於趙、黃、王、吳四氏。清空簡遠,纖𡏖不侵。」】【《清賢紀》卷二記陳眉公云:「倪先生詩如陶、韋、王、孟,不帶一點縱橫習氣。」】【阮元《石渠隨筆》卷四:「內府藏張雨題倪元鎮小象,其左目眇。」】【《遊居杮錄》卷三雲林題畫七絕,卷八題所畫山水五古,卷十〈枯木竹石〉七絕。】【阮元《石渠隨筆》卷八倪瓚〈葉湖別墅圖〉五古、〈南峰園〉七律。】【《清賢紀》卷二載〈柳梢青〉詞,卷三載剡源二札、〈介石帖〉(見《古文品外錄》)、〈雲門帖〉、〈答友人次韻詩〉七絕、〈慕藺帖〉、〈題張伯雨畫石〉七絕、〈題大痴溪山雨意圖〉,卷四〈題雅宜山圖詩〉、〈為潘仲暉作畫題〉七古、〈在高尚書園作畫題〉七律。」】【馬位《秋窗隨筆》載〈贈孫照〉、〈次韻答謝士英〉、〈中秋夜月明勝常年〉、〈四月二十日過江渚茅屋雜興〉、〈泖渚人有遺余石酒巵〉、〈留別曹元博〉、〈趨熱〉、〈題清閟閣圖〉、又〈送葉道士東歸〉與集小異。】

            卷四〈三月一日自松陵過華亭〉:「竹西鶯語太丁寧,斜日山光澹翠屏。春與繁花俱欲謝,愁如中酒不能醒。鷗明野水孤帆影,鶻沒長天遠樹清。舟楫何堪更留滯,更窮幽賞過華亭。」按「謝」字、兩「更」字皆未妥。

            卷六〈十月〉:「十月江南未隕霜,青楓欲赤碧梧黃。停橈坐對西山晚,新雁題書已着行。」按《香祖筆記》卷十二云:「雲林題畫詩多率意漫興,惟《妮古錄》載一詩最佳。」即指此絕也。翁文恭公《瓶廬詩稿》卷七〈中秋月出復翳夜坐悄然見荊門畫漫題〉云:「木葉蕭蕭柳已黃,回汀曲渚路茫茫。不知嬾瓚何情緒,衹說江南未下霜。」「一輪才吐暈微黃,又見浮雲白渺茫。我不勝寒何足道,瓊樓玉宇有風霜。」寄託既深,聲情並茂,尤為佳作也。董曲江元度《舊雨草堂詩》卷五〈過周秀才韓江話舊〉云:「逢君莫話綈袍舊,萬里龍沙雪窖寒。」自注:「謂曉嵐學士。」與第二首機杼略近,而意味遠遜。吳天章〈題雲林秋山圖〉云:「豈但穠華謝桃李,空林黄葉亦無多。」與雲林此絕適針鋒相對。

            《附錄謝仲野詩序》:「《詩》亡而為〈騷〉,至漢為五言吟咏。得性情之正者,其惟淵明乎。韋、柳冲淡蕭散,皆得陶之旨趣。下此則王摩詰矣。」

            〈書畫竹〉:「余之竹,聊以寫胸中逸氣耳。豈得較其似與非、葉之繁與疎、枝之斜與直哉?他人視以為麻為蘆,僕亦不能強辯為竹,真沒奈覽者何。」曹本卷十〈答張藻仲書〉亦云:「僕之所謂畫者,不過逸筆草草,不求形似,聊以自娛耳。」



二百七[2]



            王冕《竹齋詩集》四卷。直書胸臆,不斤斤於詞藻格律,五古寫亂世苛政,尤言之痛切。惜冗率欠琢鍊,入人不深耳。【吾子行《閒居錄》稱元章「白石皆成佛,蒼頭半是僧」、「生前不繫黃金帶,死後空餘白玉簪」二聯。】【《七修類稿》卷二十四:「圖書,古人皆以銅鑄。至元末,會稽王冕以花乳石刻之。」卷二十九引其畫梅、應制兩絕,頗見稱於葉盛《水東日記》卷六。卷三十一則又謂非元章作[3],乃朱太祖、劉伯溫作。】

            卷一〈傷亭戶〉:「草牀未成眠,忽起西鄰哭。敲門問野老,謂是鹽亭族」;「田園供給盡,鹺數屢不足」;「夜永聲語冷,幽咽向古木。天明風啟門,僵尸挂荒屋。」【《鐵厓樂府注》卷十〈海鄉竹枝歌〉三首自序:「於以達亭民之疾苦也。」句如「苦海熬乾是何日?免得儂來爬雪沙」;「顏面似墨雙腳頳,當官脫袴受黃荊」等皆似歌語。】

            〈翼州道中〉:「切問老何族,云是奕世儒。自從大朝來,所習亮非初。民人籍征戍,悉為弓矢徒。縱有好兒孫,無異犬與豬。至今成老翁,不識一字書。」

            〈歷棗強縣〉:「解凍燎枯蒿,屏寒貰黃酒。驅奴問程途,炊糧借升斗。休言美其味,且自餬其口。膩垢不能去,面貌殊覺厚。」

            卷二〈江南婦〉:「官輸未了憂心觸,門外又聞私債促。大家揭帖播通衢,生穀十年還未足。長兒五歲方離手,小女三周未能走。社長呼名散戶田,下季官鹽添兩口。」                〈陌上桑〉:「陌上桑,無人采,入夏綠陰深似海。行人來往得清涼,借問蠶姑無個在。蠶姑不在在何處?聞說官司要官布。」

            〈江南民〉、〈花驢兒〉、〈悲苦行〉、〈猛虎行〉、〈徙馬歎〉。

            卷三〈漫興〉:「流沙連竺國,大磧間和寧。雲合陰山黑,天垂瀚海青。穹廬駢騕闖,𨊹蓋建鈴釘。多少花門子,相逢喚不丁。」「天時今亦異,地醜古來非。馬乳供宦酒,羊皮當禮衣。一時風色變,萬里雪花飛。小大持弓矢,相呼出打圍。」

            卷四〈次韻〉:「生民日日歎零丁,唯聽中朝說太平。」

            〈懷古〉:「閉門種菜殊無策,坐石看松不記年。」

            卷四五言絕、六言絕、七言絕舍〈題曹雲西山水〉五絕一首外,皆詠梅花。又卷六〈梅先生傳〉一首,仿〈毛穎傳〉者。竹垞作〈元章傳〉謂:「危太樸過元章,元章與語,告人曰:『其文有詭氣,其人舉止亦然。』」按卷四有〈題危太樸借船圖〉七律,若是亦未嘗絕不與通也。



二百八[4]



            Henri Peyre, Le Classicisme français 議論明通。Valéry, Variété II, p. 15: “Tout classicisme suppose un romantisme antérieur. L’essence du classicisme est de venir après. L’ordre suppose un certain désordre qu’il vient réduire”; André Gide, Incidences, p. 38: “L’oeuvre classique ne sera forte et belle qu’en raison de son romantisme dompté” 之旨,實發於 Nietzsche, Die Geburt der Tragödie, III,至此書而發揮無遺蘊矣。參觀七三四則。T.S. Eliot, On Poetry & Poets, p. 35: “Maturity... a classic can only occur when the civilization is mature” etc. (pp. 44-5, 47-8, 149-50, 334, 228; Cocteau: “L’ordre après la crise, voilà l’ordre que réclame”). 新古典主義之病,正緣未絢爛而求造平淡,未大胆而衹為小心(語本謝枋得《文章規範》)(p. 219: “Leur réserve n’a jamais connu l’exubérance, leur sagesse pincée n’a jamais éprouve la folie”),如 Roy Campbell, “On Some South African Novelists”: “You praise the firm restraint with which they write — / I’m with you there, of course, / They use the snaffle & the curb alright / But where’s the bloody horse?”The London Magazine, July 1959, p. 51, William Plomer 自云 Roy Campbell 聞其評一南非洲小說家所………著云[5]“like a dog-collar without a dog inside”,遂成此詩,此小說家以 restraint 聞名者。(參觀同期 p. 70: “The modern... writing is jamming the brakes on a vehicle which is scarcely moving....”)】惜 Peyre 引古今英國詩句敷說,偏遺此耳。參觀第七三四則、七六七則。【參觀 H. Focillon, Vie des Forms (1934), p. 17-8: “Il [le classicisme] est stabilité, sécurité, après l’inquiétude expérimentale... Brève minute de pleine possession des formes” etc.; J. Dewey, Art as Experience, p. 144: “The ‘classic’ when it was produced bore the marks of adventure. This fact is ignored by classicists in their protest against romantics”; Mme de Staël on Fr. Lit.: “Trop de freins pour des coursiers si peu fougueux!” (P. Moreau, La crit. litt. en France, p. 102).

            Pp. 26 ff. “trois emplois du mot classique。按不如 Kurt Herbert Halbach: “Zu Begriff und Wesen der Klassik” 分為 “Wertbegriff” (“die Besten oder der Beste auf einem ganzen Kultur gebiet im Rahmen eines Volks oder einer ganzen geschichtlichen Ewe”, Festschrift für Paul Kluckhohn und Hermann Schneider, 1948, S. 169; “Klassische wäre... so viel wie ‘kanonisch’”, S. 176) “Wesenbegriff” (“in den reinen wertfreien Stilbegriff als Parteibegriff”, S. 168; “als Ideal typisches Wesen”, S. 183) 之簡哉。

            P. 33: “‘Tout est dans tout et réciproquement,’ disaient autrefois en souriant les professeurs de rhétorique.” 按此實神秘宗之說,變為老生常談耳。Proclus, The Elements of Theology, Prop. 103: “All things are in all things, but in each according to its proper nature” (Eng. tr. by E.R. Dodds, p. 93).

            Pp. 46-7: “La ‘grande siècle’ est venue après une longue suite de guerres extérieures, de discussion religieuses acharnées, d’incertitude politique... Une époque classique s’annonce en effet par un soupir de soulagement... Le classicism est ainsi un moment fortuné d’équilibre forcément instable.” Halbach: “‘Klassik’ bleibt begrenzt auf jene Hoch-Zeiten der Blüte, in denen sich eine ‘Akme’... ein unüberbietbarer Reifezustand einer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, eine Wachstums im Rahmen eines Volkes oder eines ganzen Zeitalters im Abendland darstellt” (S. 177); “Sie [Klassiker] erwachsen nicht im Augenblick der Formstraffheit, der Formverfestigung... sondern in einem Augenblick des Schon und Noch: schon Freiheit, Lösung; gerade noch einmal (und auch: schon wieder) im alten Sinn Bindung — aus ‘Wellenberge’ (die französische ‘Klassik’ dagegen ist eindeutig schon wieder Bindung” (S. 185); “‘Klassik’ als Erfüllung durch handelndes Schaffen, unter Umständen unter Führung des Staatmanns und Herrschers: Augustus; Richelieu; Mazarin; Louis XIV — der ‘Klassik’ am Brennpunkt des ‘Leistungscharakters’. Dem gegenüber steht die ‘Klassik’ beim Brennpunkt des Blossen Wachstumscharakters. Eher unbewusst meist höchstens nur sehr mittle bar staatlich... Was ist Weimar z.b. politisch-staatlich gegen Rom, Paris, Madrid oder London?” (p. 189) 可相發明。【Jacques Barzun,  Romanticism & the Modern Ego, p. 56: “This classical age followed appropriately upon a period of political disorders, national disunity, & dynastic troubles... Classicism must begin by making, by manufacturing, its unity. Then, when this artificial unity has been enforced long enough to have some habitual, classicism pretends that it has been found ready-made in nature.[6]

            P. 96 Goethe, Was wir bringen, Sz. XIX: “In der Beschränkung zeigt sich erst der Meister, / Und das Gesetz nur kann uns Freiheit geben” (Goethe, Auswahl in 3 Bänden, II, 155). Hegel, Ästhetik, III Theil, iii Abschnitt, 2 Kap. “Melodie” 語是其註腳:“Denn die echte Freiheit steht nicht dem Notwendigen als einer fremden und deshalb drückenden und unterdrückenden Macht gegenüber, sondern hat dies Substantielle als das ihr selbst einwohnende, mit ihr identische Wesen, in dessen Forderungen sie deshalb so sehr nur ihren eigenen Gesetzen folgt und ihrer eigenen Natur Genüge tut, dass sie sich erst in dem Abgehen von diesen Vorschriften von sich abwenden und sich selber ungetreu werden würde” (Sämtl. Werk., hrsg. H. Glockner, Bd. XIV, S. 182).“die schöne freie Notwendigkeit”】【Kant, Kritik der Urteilskraft, Buch I, ad fon. “Allgemeine Anmerkung” on “die freie Gesetzmässigkeit der Einbildungskraft” (Werke, ed. E. Cassirer, et al., V, 331). 】【A.W. Schlegel: “Briefe über Poesie, Sylbemass und Sprache”, IV: “die geordnete Freiheit” [of prosody] (Kritische Schriften und Briefe, W. Kohlhammer, Bd. I, S. 174); T.S. Eliot, On Poetry & Poets, p. 38: “The liberties that he may take are for the sake of order.” 】【Pascal, Pensées, Vi, 397-9, ed. Victor Giraud, p. 209 on man’s self-consciousness is the source of his “grandeur.”】【Cicero, Pro Cluentio, LIII, 146: “omnes legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus.”】(參觀第六百三十則)即 Wordsworth, “Nuns fret not in the convent’s narrow room” 一篇(又 “Education of Nature”: “Both law and impulse”)之旨也。Hegel 論人事亦同此意,System der Philosophie, I Theil, ii Abtheilung, §158: “Die Wahrheit der Notwendigkeit ist die Freiheit... Die Freiheit hat die Notwendigkeit zu ihrer Voraussetzung” (Bd. VIII, S. 348-9)Engels 本之云:“Für ihn [Hegel] ist die Freiheit die Einsicht in die Notwendigkeit” (Anti-Dühring, I, xi, Peking ed., p. 147) Massimo D’Azeglio, I Miei Ricordi 亦云:“la mia definizione: la libertà stare nell’ubbidienza” (“Biblioteca Classica Hoepliana,” p. 23)。參觀 “Libertas est potestas faciendi id, quod jure licet”。實則Pindar, The Pythian Odes, II: “Yet is it best to bear lightly the yoke that resteth on one’s neck, for, as ye know, it is a slippery course to kick against the goads[7]” (Pindar, Eng. tr. by John Sandys, “The Loeb Classical Library”, p. 89); Ovid, Amores, I, ii, 10: “Cedamus! leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus / ... verbera plura ferunt quam quos iuvat usus aratri, / detractant prensi dum iuga prima boves. / Asper equus duris contunditur ora lupatis, / frena minus sentit, quisquis ad arma facit.” Orlando Furioso, XXIII, 105 [Orlando’s suspicion & jealousy]: “Ma sempre più raccende e più rinuova, / Quanto spenger più cerca, il rio sospetto; / Come l’incauto augel che si ritrova / In ragna o in visco aver dato di petto. / Quanto più batte l’ale e più si prova / Di disbrigar, più vi si lega stretto” (Ed. Ulrico Hoepli, p. 245).Hebbel: “Die poetische Lizenz”: “Nur, dass sein Geist zur Höhe drang, / Wo man nicht kämpft, nur spielt mit Schranken” (Werke, hrsg. T. Poppe, I, 205). Cf. Th. Storm: “Ich bedarf äusserlich der Enge, um innerlich ins Weite zu sehen” (Sämtl. Werk., Aufbau 1965, I, 7); Lavater: “Der Mensch ist frei wie der Vogel im Käfig; er kann sich innerhalb gewisser Grenzen bewegen.” Cf. Boileau: “Et pour le rendre libre, il le faut enchaîner” — Landor in the “Imaginary Conversations between Abbé Delille & Landor” calls this “indeed the most violent antithesis... ever constructed” (H. Cairns, The Limits of Art, p. 84).】【Montesquieu, De l’Esprit des lois, XI, iii: “La liberté es le droit de faire tout ce que les lois permettent” (“Bibliothèque de la Pléiade”) II, p. 395. 此意早見之 Epictetus, Fragments, viii: “To accept of his own accord what needs must befall him.” (Epictetus, tr. W.A. Oldfather, “The Loeb Class. Lib.”, II, p. 449); Seneca, Ep., XCI, 15: “in gratiam cum fato revertere”; 又第七百三則論 Wordsworth: “The Sonnet”。】曾異撰《紡授堂文集》卷五〈與邱小魯書〉云:「我輩既帖括應制,正如網中魚鳥,度無脫理。倘安意其中,尚可移之盆甕,畜之樊籠。雖不有邱壑之樂,猶庶幾茍全鱗羽[8],得為人耳目近玩。一或恃勇跳躍,幾幸决網而出,其力愈大,其縛愈急,必至摧鬢損毛」云云,則是師儒之至言妙道,不過現禽犢身而說法。誤落世網中人,安得不自哀時命乎!

            P. 170: “Un pays qui se souvent qui Diderot lui a été révélé en grande partie par Goethe, Musset dramaturge par la Russie, Gobin eau par l’Allemagne... que Mallarmé a prononcé à Oxford des conférences que nul n’eût écoutées alors à la Sorbonne, etc. etc. Se doit être modeste dans ses prétentions au nationalisme littéraire.” Maurice Baring, Have You Anything to Delare? p. 123: “I once bewailed to a French writer that French criticism was hard & severe on Maupassant, & I quoted a sentence. He admitted the sentence was a good one, & said: ‘Heureusement il y a l’étranger.’” 參觀 F. Baldensperger, Orientation étrangères chez Honoré de Balzac, “Avant-Propos” Balzac 在德、俄、英皆已享大名,而在法反聲稱寥落,因云:“L’opinion a ton jours corrigé, hors de France, certaines pusillanimités quelques étroitesse provisoire du goût français. Témoignage contestables, dira-t-on, parce qu’étrangers? Jugements irrécusables, parce dénués de la force d’adhésion qui émane de critiques strictement compatriotes de l’auteur? — Soit, mais nous vivons à une époque où l’on ne va plus très loin avec des ‘valeurs’ cotées sur une seule place” (p. xiv). T.S. Eliot: “From Poe to Valéry”: “Now, we all of us like to believe that we understand our own poets better than any foreigner can do; but I think we should be prepared to entertain the possibility that these Frenchmen have seen something in Poe that English-speaking readers have missed.” (To Criticize the Critic & Other Writings, p. 28); R.W.B. Lewis: “Contemporary American Literature”: “American criticism has lagged behind the Europeans in the very identification of native talent [e.g., Sartre, Malraux, E. Cecchi & others in the recognition of Faulkner’s genius & originality]” (L. Leary, ed., Contemporary Literary Scholarship, p. 214). Croce on the rediscovery of Bonardo, Ruzzante & Italian folk poetry by English, French & German scholars (Gian N.G. Orsini, Benedetto Croce, p. 119). Spanish veneration of Don Quixote was stimulated by English (A. Close, The Romantic Approach to ‘D. Q.’, pp. 10-11).



二百九[9]



            馮班定遠《鈍吟老人遺稿》,二十三年前舊經眼者也。定遠才力甚薄,雖深思好學,而邊幅隘仄。詩衹工近體,學義山幾如白晝現形,用意力求微處,屈而不申,悶而不醒,遂爾味寡韻短。七律之語切直而調流轉,學唐彥謙、吳融者如《馮氏小集》上〈友人書問行止〉、〈上所知〉、中〈甲子歲作〉、〈暮春閒步長句〉、〈重經沈氏園〉、《鈍吟集》上〈偶書〉、中〈追和泰上人見贈〉、〈訪源公〉、〈書情〉、下〈和錢求赤飲張氏池亭〉、〈醉吟次陳在兹韻〉等,又苦纖滑。吳修齡推其詩為「六百年所無」,宜姚南青比之「東家王媼謂西鄰李嫗姝,李嫗又謂王媼俊,不顧旁人笑破口也」(《援鶉堂筆記》卷四十四)。文亦短章修潔,偶為駢語則落凡俗。《雜錄》議論多可節取,恨其每複出耳。定遠雖出蒙叟之門,自成宗派,隱然敵國。虞山當時言詩之士,不歸錢則歸馮。觀王東溆《柳南文鈔》卷二〈西橋小集序〉、陶元淳《陶子師先生集》卷四〈沈秋士傳〉可見。

            《馮氏小集》上〈假寐〉:「亂烟叢木月絲絲,薄醉濃愁欹枕時。斷續數番如有夢,曉來已是不堪思。」

            〈友人書問行止兼有鞭策之詞〉:「也知萬事都為夢,因此新來亦怕眠。」

            中〈甲子歲作〉:「笑顏前此已裁減,淚眼從今亦酌量。」

            《鈍吟集》上〈燕〉:「長養嬌雛翅未齊,一圜竹樹晚低迷。當時若愛吳宮住,爭向茅簷得穩栖。」

            〈經瞿起周曇園〉:「華屋重來淚暗彈,桐陰滿地作秋寒。遊絲風撼啼鴉樹,積草烟生鬥鴨闌。誰論絕交思任昉,空憐誄德有潘安。壞墻醉後曾題處,遍撿蒼苔自讀看。」

            中〈贈妓是杭人〉:「花繞閶門千樹新,可堪風物逐行塵。吳兒莫漫誇佳麗,一個西施是越人。」按明末吳人薄越人,《豆棚閒話》第二則云:「近日吳中有位士夫,宦遊過越,至苧蘿村,選聘女子。一鄉老云:『你道西施是個國色天香,當初乃是敝地一個老大嫁不出門的滯貨,若果絕色奇姿,怎肯送到你下路受用!』」張宗子《瑯環文集》卷三〈又與毅儒八弟〉云:「吾浙人極無主見,蘇人所尚,極力摹仿。蘇人巾高袖大,浙人效之,俗尚未遍,而蘇人忽巾低袖小。故蘇人常笑吾浙人為『趕不着』」云云。

            〈梅花‧之二〉:「偏與山家物色宜,不須歌板却須詩。若教帶影和香賞,難得無風有月時。石上苔生寒已較,籬邊雀鬧暖來遲。廉前日影朝來早,開盡南枝到北枝。」按《柳南隨筆》卷二極稱「若教帶影」一聯,又謂:「馬扶曦元馭反其意云:『無風有月尋常事,難得人間對此花。』」

            《鈍吟文稿‧古今樂府論》:「近代李于鱗取晉、宋、齊、隋《樂志》所載,章截而句摘之,,曰『擬樂府』。至於宗子相之樂府,全不可通。陳子龍輩效之,使人笑來。」按〈論樂府與錢頤仲〉一書可參觀。

            〈論二十一史書〉:「宋鄭漁仲、蘇子由亟言太史公之失,且譏其不學。嗚呼!二君讀一《史記》,尚不能盡詳其文,審剔其自,而莠言自口,輕議古人,不已戲乎?《五代史》紀傳之文,《史》、《漢》殆無以過。愚嘗讀馮瀛王一傳,不抑不抗,只此一篇,便應突過宋人。然歐公文人,又生於太平,不知武事,每叙戰陳之際,則使人思鉅鹿、陔下。愚每壯夾寨之戰,恨不更左丘明、太史公執筆也。」「《宋史》冗長也,非詳;漏脫也,非略。」

            〈錢履之尺五集序〉:「吾朝詩人自嘉、隆以來,捧心逾醜,學步未妍,撒彼披後之花,享其敝餘之帚。」

            《鈍吟雜錄》馮武記云:「公嘗過家塾,見案頭有《少微通鑑》一書,正色命武曰:『為此者,不過好立異論,求免耳食之誚耳。此書及《致堂管見》,以至近世《李氏藏書》、金聖嘆《才子書》,當如毒蛇蚖蠍,以不見為幸。』」

            卷一:「俗語亦有益人處,吳人諺云:『風潮過了世界在。』吾一生用之,雖經歷事變,至今無大患。」

            「以筆墨勸淫,詩之戒,然猶勝於風刺而輕薄不近理者。此有韻之謗書,唐人以前無此。」

            「昔人有作〈中山狼傳〉者,為負恩者喻也。中山狼所在有之,但無與老牸枯樹語[10],則可矣。斯言也,不更事者不知也。小人之敢於為惡,有助之者耳。天下惟助惡者為無人心。」

            卷二「我目所見二君子皆不得中道:趙儕鶴不容小人,黃石齋不容君子。二君俱不可居上者也,不寬也。」

            「書是君子之藝。先學間架,間架明,則學用筆。」「錐畫沙、印印泥、屋漏痕是古人秘法,姜白石云不必如此,知此君憒憒。」

            卷三:「近代詩選必自上古,年祀綿邈,真贋相雜。」「《三百五篇》既是仲尼所定,不應掇其所棄。昔嘗與程孟陽言詩,譬之犬之拾骨,非徒戲言也。鍾伯敬掊擊王、李不遺餘力,獨於此處不知矯正。《詩歸》之作,較之《詩刪》殆有甚焉。」

            「古人文章,自有阡陌。《禮》有湯之〈盤銘〉、孔子之〈誄〉,其體古矣。乃《三百五篇》都無銘、誄,故知孔子當時不以爲詩也。馮惟訥《詩紀古逸》盡載銘、誄、箴、誡,殆失之矣。」「騷、賦亦出於詩,與詩畫界。」「有韻之文,不得直謂詩。[11]

            「《書》曰:『詩言志』,《詩序》曰:『發乎情。』王司寇欲以《易林》爲詩,直是不解詩,非但不解《易林》也。夫鏡圓餅亦圓,餅可謂鏡乎?[12]

            「高棣〈唐詩品彙〉出今人,不知絕句是律矣。又創『排律』之名,雖古人有『排比聲律』之言,然未聞呼作『排律』。此一字大有害於詩。」

            「古詩法漢、魏,近體學開元、天寶,譬如儒者願學周、孔,有志者諒當如此。近之惡王、李者,并此言而排之,則過矣。顧學之何如耳。」

            「杜陵云:『讀書破萬卷,下筆如有神。』近日鍾、譚之藥石也。元微之云:『憐伊直道當時語,不着心源傍古人。』王、李之藥石也。子美〈解悶〉、〈戲為〉諸絕句,不知當今學杜者何以都不讀?」

            「人皆病鍾伯敬不學,余以為此君天資太俗,雖學無益。所謂性情,乃鄙夫鄙婦市井猥媟之談耳。」

            「王、李、李、何之論詩,如貴冑子弟倚恃門閥,傲忽自大,時時不會人情。鍾、譚如屠沽家兒,時有慧黠,異乎雅流。牧翁選《國朝詩》,余謂止合編論李、何、王、李。如伯敬輩,本非詩人,棄而不取可也。」按此即吳修齡《圍鑪詩話》卷六「鍾、譚為誰?有何著作?吾皆不之知也」一段議論所本。後世論明詩,以公安、竟陵與何、李、王、李鼎足驂靳,實則當時竟陵與何、李、王、李相為雄長,公安瞠乎莫及,觀定遠此數語可知。他如申鳧盟〈蕉林詩集序〉云:「詩至濟南,而調始純。空同才大,不屑檢繩尺,混語梗詞,龐然並進。濟南極意煅煉之。自唐以來,語音節者,以濟南為至。慕者效之,滿目蒼黃,至不解意欲道何事。性情之靈,障於浮藻,激而為竟陵,勢使然耳。竟陵久為海內所詬詈,無足言者。相提而論,各去其偏,就彼音節,舒我性情。」陳確菴《從游集》卷上論王抃云:「當代作者,鍾、譚、王、李,各有宗師,物我異觀,更相嘲笑。」潘雪帆《拜鵑堂詩集》卷三〈懷鄧孝威〉云:「竟陵與歷下,各以偏師攻。」《詩觀初集‧凡例》第一則:「首此竟陵矯七子之偏,而流為細弱,華亭出而以壯麗矯之。」卷四許承家〈留別宗鶴問〉評云:「大樽一派,格調非不高敞,然只是應付矯之者,又趨而之竟陵。」呂晚村《萬感集子度歸自晟舍以新詩見示》云:「七子萊奧富著作,沙飯塵羹事摽掠。攀龍無忌恣顛狂,世貞拉雜自言博。竟陵兩傖矯此弊,不學無術惡其鑿。」魏憲《詩持二集‧自序》云:「明興,一洗宋、元積習,如日月經天,照耀四表。青田、長沙、北地、信陽、歷下、竟陵諸派,變而愈盛。」〈凡例〉云:「濟南、竟陵,日相操戈,殊屬無謂。」卷八釋函可〈古樂府〉評語:「樂府失傳久矣,濟南起而振之,竟陵曰:『吾非不能為,畏此一副擬古面目。』」卷十張霍詩評云:「既不為歷下,仍不能竟陵,翹翹楚楚,自成一家。」杜茶村《變雅堂詩集》卷十《三山草‧自序》云:「此近日王、李、鍾、譚所以兩失其意也。」潘雪帆《宋詩啜醨集自序》云:「于鱗主盟壇坫,迄今百餘年。以淺熟為和平,以疲癃為溫厚。詞歸餖飣,調入癡肥。使非竟陵起而抉隱摘微,一一表章,不幾等祖龍一燼耶?」傅青主《霜紅龕全集》卷三十一〈與戴楓仲〉云:「真正個中人,可與王、李、何、李、鍾、譚共坐一堂之上。」王爾綱《天下名家詩永》卷首〈雜述〉云:「杜于皇為詩,取徑在王、李、鍾、譚之外。」又云:「吳次尾先生曰:『弘、嘉諸君之失也,以拘體法而詩在;今人之得也,以言性情而詩亡。嗚呼,與其得也,寧失而已矣。吾非惡夫竟陵也,惡夫學竟陵之流失也。』」卷二錢牧齋評云:「歷下、竟陵、雲間代興。」卷九張㹅評云:「南村論歷下、竟陵得失,極為持平。」卷十孔尚大評云:「王、李、鍾、譚,各有其大,各有其弊。」卷十四附王氏自作詩〈呈宗遺山〉弟一首:「昔在有明時,七子何光輝。鍾譚尚中晚,出語輕詆譏。簡遠固足貴,壯麗安可非?」周櫟園《賴古堂集》卷十三〈賴古堂集[自]序〉云:「膚七子,戔竟陵,薾驛騎兩家者。」卷十四〈南昌先生四部稿序〉云:「竟陵、歷下各樹旌旗,不相統一。」卷二十一〈書程石門舟遊燕台詩後〉云:「虞山毒詈北地,於竟陵尤不可恕。西蜀范仲闇起而調劑之,然意在李而筆在鍾。近日為兩家驛騎者,筆在李而意又實在鍾。」吳修齡《圍鑪詩話》卷四曰:「鍾、譚派於世無用,一蹶不振。二李法門,實為不祚之祖,皆不及三袁。」(又第六百一則。)又《通雅》卷首之三[13]、《詩筏》(皆見第三十七則)。【吳梅村〈與宋尚木論詩書〉:「號於人曰:我盛唐,我王、李,則何以服竟陵之心哉?」】【《漁洋詩問》卷下:「問:有以『尖』、『笨』二字評鍾、譚、王、李者[14],何如?答:王、李自是大方家,鍾、譚餘分閏位,何足比擬。」】

            卷四:「作文不可不識字。『誶』、『訊』一字也,王弇州誤重用。『祝』、『呪』古今字也,錢牧齋誤作二字。[15]」(亦見卷六。)

            「君子之文必莊重。蘇公自有大文字,今小人只讀《坡仙集》。」

            「《新唐書‧高祖本紀》書禁浮屠、老子之學,當時只沙汰僧、道耳,未嘗禁其學也。老子是唐人之祖,如何禁得?」

            「圖騕褭之形,極其神駿,若求伏轅,不免駕欸段之駟。寫西施之貌,極其美麗,若須薦枕,不如求里門之嫗。萬曆時王、李學漢、魏、盛唐,所謂圖騕褭、寫西施者也。虞山詩人好言後代詩,所謂欸段之駟、里門之嫗也。遂謂里門之嫗勝於西施,欸段之駟勝於騕褭,豈其然乎!況今日之虞山詩人,撏撦剽剝,其弊與王、李正同,而文不及王、李,是圖欸段之馬、寫里門之嫗者也。」

            「楊用修好妄而健忘,其著書幾於一字不可信。」

            「余於前人,未嘗輕詆。然有五人不可容:李禿之《談道》,此誅絕之罪也;程大昌之《演繁露》,妄議紛紛;楊用修之談古,欺天下後世為無一人;鍾、譚之論詩,俚而猥,不通文理,乃狹邪小人之俗者。」

            「今人看《史記》,只看得太史公文集,不曾看史。」按此語亦見卷六。掃空震川、鹿門輩矣,可與《陳東塾遺詩‧讀書八首‧之四》云:「論語二十篇,束髮即受讀。古人讀半部,謂治天下足。今人誰不讀,讀者誰不熟?非讀聖賢語,讀試場題目。讀書盡如此,恐非天下福」參觀。【《南宋文範》四十七胡寅〈洙泗文集序〉:「龍谿陳君元忠以後世文體求之《論語》,得其義類,分門而編之,以為文章之祖也。」】

            「夫子曰:『信而好古。』宋人讀書,未聞『好古』,只是一肚皮『不信』。」

            卷五〈嚴氏糾謬〉。

            卷七:「趙松雪書,出入古人,無所不學,貫穿斟酌,自成一家,當時誠為獨絕。自近代李楨伯創『奴書』之論,後生恥以為師。晉、唐舊法,於今掃地,松雪正是子孫之守家法者耳。詆之以『奴』,不已過乎?(參觀卷二)」

            「錢牧齋學元裕之,不啻過之。每稱宋、元人,矯王、李之失也。陸孟鳧本無所知,乃云唐人不足學。錢公極學唐,但齊、梁已上,未免憒憒耳。元遺山不解陸士衡,比之布穀,知其胸中未嘗有古人一字也。錢公知文,過於王、李,而其後人不足與鍾、譚為奴。」按《柳南隨筆》卷三云:「蒙叟於古人詩推元裕之,今人詩推程孟陽,皆過當。家次山兄云:『推裕之者,因晚節既墜,欲借野史亭以自文耳。若孟陽,乃其師承所自。』」《續筆》卷三云:「何義門謂宗伯為元人拘縛,逐歐、蘇末流。宗伯言宋、元,為王、李發藥耳。自為文,亦有上攀《史》、《漢》,平揖韓、柳之作,如〈高陽行狀〉、〈應山墓志〉是也。且元文清真雅正,不離本色,宗伯詞華較勝,派別不同」云云,可相發。「元文清真雅正」却非所以語於遺山,遺山之文亦有詞華,蒙叟特加縟耳。

            卷八:「每見村塾小兒讀《文章規範》,意中常發惡。此書全不論理。學文初要小心,後來學問博、識見高、筆端老,則可放胆,能細而後能粗。疊山句句倒說了。至於俗氣,一毫着不得,乃云:『由俗入雅』,真戲論也」云云。按疊山、鈍吟各明一義。少陵詩云:「老去漸於詩律細。」《小倉山房詩集》卷二十〈續詩品‧辨微〉云:「老手頹唐,才人胆大。」《竹莊詩話》卷一載呂居仁〈與曾吉甫論詩帖〉云:「東坡、太白詩雖規模廣大,學者難依,然讀之使人敢道,澡雪滯思,無窮苦艱難之狀,亦一助也。」又引呂氏《童蒙訓》云:「讀《莊子》,令人意寬思大,敢作;讀《左傳》,便使人入法度,不敢容易。二書不可偏廢也。近世讀東坡、魯直詩亦此類。」疊山「大胆」、「小心」之說蓋有所承。日本齋藤謙《拙堂文話》卷七云:「凡作文,始戒率易,終要縱橫。昌黎云:『吾又懼其雜也,迎而拒之,平心而察之』,是『戒率易』之謂也。老泉云:『出而書之,再三讀之,渾渾乎覺其來之易矣』,是『要縱橫』之謂也。書家有『布置小心,下筆大胆』之語,亦是意也。」王筠〈教童子法〉:「作詩文必須放,放之如野馬,踶跳咆嘷,不受羈絆。桐城人傳其先輩語曰:『學生二十歲不狂,沒出息。』」



二百十[16]



            Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists, Eng. tr. by C.B. Gulick, “The Loeb Classical Library”. 《梁書‧卷十三‧沈約傳》「豫州獻栗,徑寸半,帝奇之,與約各疏所憶」事(又見《太平廣記》卷一九七《盧氏雜說》),此書洋洋數十萬言,莫非因盤飧而搜腹笥。Barbey d’Aurevilly 所謂 “La littérature qui mange” (參觀 R. Dumesnil, L’Époque réaliste et naturaliste, p. 80) 又得一解。J. de Maistre: “C’était une assez belle idée que celle de faire asseoir Bacchus et Minerve à la même table, pour défendre à l’un d’étre libertin et à l’autre d'être pédante” (Les soirées de Saint- Pétersbourg, “Classiques Garnier”, I, p. 7). 觀是作乃知其說不然,而 Nietzsche: “Wie verstehe ich es, dass Epikur bei Tische sich die ästhetischen Gespräche verbat? — er dachte zu gut vom Essen und von den Dichtern, als dass er das eine zur Zukost des andern machen wollte!” (Kunst und Künstler, §79, Werke, Taschenausgabe, Alfred Kröner, Bd. XII, S. 45) 為近理也。然古來名章隽句,賴以不墜,李穆堂所謂「功同拾骼」者。

            第一冊 Bk. I. 3: Apollodorus: “When a man enters a friend’s house, he may discover his friend’s welcome as soon as he enters the door. The janitor smiles at him, the dog wags his tail & cornes to him, a slave rises to meet him & promptly sets a chair for him” (pp. 11-13). 按杜茶村《變雅堂詩集》卷三〈客京師數月與錢漁叟朱越流〉第五首云:「交道看童僕,迎余有好顏。」《潛邱劄記》卷五稱引之。

            4: Archestratus of Syracuse: “There should be 3 or 4 in all, or at most not more than 5” (p. 19). Aulus Gellius, XIII, 11 Marcus Varro 語并說之曰:“Convivarum numerum incipere oportere a Gratiarum numero et progredi ad Musarum, ut, cum paucissimi convivae sunt, non pauciores sint quam tres, cum plurimi, non plures quam novem” (“The Loeb Classical Library”, vol. II, pp. 436-8). Kant, Anthropologie, §88 轉引 Lord Chesterfield 語而申說之曰:“Zehn an einem Tische: weil der Wirth, der die Gäste bedient, sich nicht mitzählt” (Werke, hrsg. E. Cassirer, Bd. VIII, S. 169). 又云:Allein zu essen (solipsismus convictorii) ist für einen philosophierenden Gelehrten ungesund; nicht Restauration, sondern (vornehmlich wenn es gar einsames Schwelgen wird) Exhaustion” (S. 171). 又拉丁諺云:“Quinque advocavi[17]; sex enim convivium cum rege iustum; si super, convicium est”;法諺云:“Compagne de trois, compagne de rois”;英國 William King, Art of Cookery: “Crowd not your table; let your number be / Not more than seven, & never less than three.” Leopardi: “Il mangiar soli... era infame presso i greci e i latini... Io avrei meritata quest’infamia presso gli antichi” ecc. (Zibaldone, ed. F. Flora, II, pp. 1012-3).

            7: Nicomedes 欲食魚不可得,庖人治蘿菔作魚狀,調味以進 (p. 31)。按吾國亦有素魚、素鷄、素鴨、素火腿之類,最可笑者,莫如《說郛》卷二十二所載林洪《山家清供》以蔬食作種種張致、般般文飾,「素蒸鴨」、「假煎肉」之類無不有,命名皆取「金」、「玉」、「魚」、「肉」,山人口淡而心濁腸肥矣。《北夢瑣言》:「崔安奉釋氏,鎮西川三年,宴諸司以麵及蒟蒻染色,像豚肩、羊臑,皆逼真。」【《湧幢小品》斯謂「何不開葷」者也[18]

            17: Aeschylus, Sophocles 詩詠飲酒半酣,命僕持溺器進 (p. 77)。按 Petronius, Satiricon, XLVII, Trimalchio 尚未至此。

            18: “Whereas in the Odyssey Homer represents men as washing their hands before eating, in the Iliad one cannot find them doing that. This is because life in the Odyssey was leisurely” (p. 83). Werner Jaeger, Paideia, tr. by Gilbert Highet, vol. I, pp. 17-18, 22: “In the elder epic we see a world at war.... the Odyssey depicts the existence of the heroes after the war.... Besides the traditional warlike valour, it also exalts the intellectual & social virtues” 已發於此。又 Vico 語見第二百九則尾[19]。【18: “Whereas in the Odyssey Homer represents men as washing their hands before eating, in the Iliad one cannot find them doing that. This is because life in the Odyssey was leisurely.” Vico Iliad Odyssey 之作相去數百年,故前書中人 “found pleasure in coarseness”,後書中人 found pleasure in luxury” (New Science, tr. T.G. Bergin & M.H. Fisch, pp. 290-1, §879-880)。此亦一證也。】

            Bk. II. 63: “Hesiod calls the snail ‘carry-house’ (Op. 569). Anaxilas: ‘Snails in distrust carry their houses about with them’” (p. 275). Lyly, Euphues: “I would it were in Naples a law, which was a custome in Aegypt, that women should always go bare-foot, to the intent they might keepe themselves always at home, that they should be euer like to the Snaile, which hath euer his house on his head” (Complete Works, ed. R.W. Bond, pp. 223-4). John Donne: “Verses to Henry Wotton”: “Be then thine own home, & in thyself dwell; / Inn anywhere; continuance maketh hell. / And seeing the snail which everywhere doth roam, / Carrying his own house still, is still at home.” Thomas Dekker, The Honest Whore, Pt. II, Act III, Sc. 3, Wife: “I am a Snaile, sir, seldome leaue my house, if’t please her to visit me, she shall be welcome” (Dramatic Works, ed. F. Bowers, II, 179).

            63-4: The aphrodisiac properties of the bulb (pp. 27-9). 按參觀 Hans Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, tr. by J.H. Freese, p. 513; Havelock Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, V, p. 174,皆未引 Ovid, Ars Amat., II, 420: “Candidus bulbus”, Remed. Am., 797, Martial, III, lxxv: “erucae faciunt bulbique salaces”

            Bk. III. 105: Epicharmus 稱蝦為 “sea phallus” (p. 451),以其形似。按希臘人蓋未知有海參耳。《五雜組》卷五[20]:「海參一名『海男子』,其狀如男子勢。」《品花寶鑑》第三十六回[21],奚十一戲杜琴言,夾了一條海參笑道:「別樣或吃不得,這東西吃了下去,滑滑溜溜,在腸子裏也不甚漲的。」

            第二冊 Bk. IV. 129 (p. 95) 所言烤豬腹中以鴨、雀等填實,又見 Bk. IX. 376 (vo. IV, p. 205), 383 (p. 235),即 Macrobius, Sat., iii. 13 所謂 “porcus Troianus” 也。Satiricon, XL: “Secutum est hos repositorium, in quo positus erat primae magnitudinis aper... ex cuius plaga turdi evolaverunt” (“Loeb”, p. 64) 亦記此饌。後來 Thomas Nashe, The Unfortunate Traveller: "Ever at the [German] Emperour’s coronation there is an ox roasted with a stag in the belly, & that stag in his belly hath a kid, & that kid is stuffed full of birds” (Works, ed. R.B. McKerrow, vol. II, p. 253) 可謂踵事增華。Cyril Connolly, Shade Those Laurels 中,Cressida 所言 “perfect dish” (Bustard, turkey, goose, pheasant, chicken, duck, guinea fowl, teal, woodcock, partridge, plover, quail, fieldfare, ortolan, beccafico, a large olive” (Encounter, no. 30, pp. 32-3) 正襲此[22],與《負曝閒談》第一回陸鵬誇府裏飯菜云:「有一隻鵝,鵝裏面包著一隻鷄,鷄裏面包著一隻鴿子,鴿子裏面包著一隻黃雀,味道鮮得不得了」無獨有偶。參觀《頻羅菴遺集》卷十四〈直語補證〉引《盧世雜記》(《太平廣記》卷二三四〈御廚〉條引):「京都燕設,鵝去毛及五臟,釀以肉及粳米飯,五味調和。取羊一口,剝去腸胃,鵝置其中縫合。炙之熟,便去羊取鵝渾食,謂之『渾羊沒忽』。」(「渾羊沒忽」亦見《南部新書》壬。)時希聖《家庭新食譜》:「套鷄,一稱『三套頭』(鴨中有野鷄,野鷄中有鴿)」亦即此[23]。【Don Quixote, Pt. II, ch. 20: “Sewed inside the steer’s big belly, twelve delicate little suckling pigs gave it flavour & tenderness” (tr. S. Putnam, II, p. 637).

            159: Cynulcus: “These gentlemen... being troubled with word-diarrhoea (λογοδιάρροια)”[24] (p. 227). 按法文有 “flux de bouche” 之說,英文 Coleridge “mouth-diarrhoea” 一字(皆見 De Quincey, Collected Writings, ed. D. Masson, vol. V, p. 236),而未流行。十九世紀心理學家之 “logorrhoea” 則專門學名 (J.M. Baldwin, ed., Dict. of Philos. & Psych., vol. II, pp. 30-1: “Excessive volubility, a symptom of mania”)。至 A.P. Herbert, What a Word 而庶幾與 Cynulcus 之意隱合矣。Theodor Lipps, Komik und Humor, S. 177 “die witzige Wortschmelzung” 諸例有 “Sprechruhr” (ex “Sprachrohr”),譯此字尤妙。

            第三冊 Bk. VI 此卷寫幫閒食客諛媚無恥之狀,可與 Juvenal, Satura III “Graeculus esuriens”、《野獲編》寫「山人」、《豆棚閒話》第十則寫「清客」、李笠翁《玉搔頭》寫「篾片」、《照世盃》卷二寫「游客」相發明。

            223: Timocles: “What a benefit the tragedians are to everybody. The poor man, for instance, learns that Telephus was more beggarly than himself, & from that time on he bears his poverty more easily. One has a disease of the eyes — blind are the sons of Phineus” etc. (p. 7). 按即 Lucretius, II, 1 ff. 之意,參觀第四十則。Petrarch, Triónfo di Castítà,: “Io presi esempio di loro stati rei / Facendomi profitto l’altrui male, / In consolar i casi e dolor miei” (Works, Bohn ed. P. 361) 亦申此意。

            237 (p. 73). 見七六三則。

            244: “The nearer the bone, they say, the sweeter the meat” (p. 97). The Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs, p. 454 未能溯源引此書。吾鄉亦有「好肉在骨頭邊」之語。周自菴《思益堂日札》卷七引諺云:「骨邊肉,五更睡,雖不多,最有味。」馮夢龍《山歌》卷五〈瘦妓〉云:「闝小娘子沒闝個胖婆娘,寧可增錢瘦個強。你勿見肥豬肉吃子一星兩星便覺油烟氣,骨炙兒牙得裏頭香。」則 Partridge, Dictionary of Slang, p. 515: “Meat, the nearer the bone, the sweeter” 之說也[25]。法諺則謂:“Il n’y a point de belle chair près des os.”

            248 Philip 病目,Cleisophus 則以布蔽一眼。嘗會食,Philip 誤嘗苦物,Cleisophus 亦攢眉作欲吐狀 (p. 121)。按參觀 Juvenal, Satura III, 102-3: “Igniculum brumae si tempore poscas / accipit endromidem; si dixeris aestuo, sudat.” Charles Sorel, Histoire Comique, éd. E. Roy, IV, p. 19: “Ce n’est pas imiter un homme de ne faire que peter ou tousser comme luy.”[26] 註引 Femmes Savantes, I, 1: “Et ce n'est point du tout la prendre pour modèle, / Ma soeur, que de tousser et de cracher comme elle.” Malherbe: “Mort Dieu! si je fais un pet, en voulez-vous faire un autre?”《大正新修大藏經‧第四卷‧百喻經之二十六》云:「昔有一人,欲得王意,問餘人言:『云何得之?』有人語言:『若欲得意,汝當效之。』此人見王眼𥌎,便效王𥌎。王問之言:『汝為病耶?為著風耶?何以眼𥌎?』其人答王:『我不病眼,亦不著風。欲得王意,見王眼𥌎,故效王也。」王聞是語,即大瞋恚,使人加害。」《容齋續筆》卷十五云:「楊愿善佞,動作悉效秦檜。檜嘗因噴嚏失笑,愿於倉卒間,亦佯噴飯而笑,左右皆哂。檜察其奉己,愈喜。」馮夢龍《廣笑府》卷一云:「或人命其子曰:『爾一言一動,皆當效師所為。』子領命。侍食於前,師食亦食,師飲亦飲。師嚏,生不能強為,乃揖而謝曰:『吾師此等妙處,其實難學也。』」Demetrius, On Style Philip 聞人道「眼」字或 Cyclops 名輒大怒 (tr. by W. Rhys Roberts, “The Loeb Classical Library”, p. 479),則以布障目,豈不適觸其諱耶?(餘見第二百十六則眉[27]。)【[補二百十則]Athenaeus, VI. 248. Du Bellay, Les Regrets, 150: “Seigneur, je ne sçaurois regarder d’un bon oeil / Ces vieux Singes de court, qui ne scavent rien faire, / Sinon en leur marcher les Princes contrefaire, / Et se vêtir, comme eux, d’un pompeux appareil. / ... / Mais ce qui plus contre eux quelquefois me dépite, / C’est quand devant le roi, d’un visage hypocrite, / Ilz se prennent à rire, et ne sçavent pourquoy.” La Fontaine, Fables, VIII. 14: “Peuple caméléon, peuple singe, on dirait qu’un esprit anime mille corps; / C’est bien là que les gens sont de simples ressorts.”Cf. Anatomy of Melancholy: “Democritus to Reader”: “Alexander stooped, so did his courtiers; Alphonsus turned his head, & so did his parasites. Sabina Poppaea, Nero’s wife, wore amber-colour’d hair, so did all the Roman Ladies in an instant...” (George Bell, I, p. 71).《韓非子外儲說左上》:「魯人有自喜者,見長者飲酒不能釂則唾之,亦效唾之。」Du Bellay, Les Regrets, 150: “Les vieux Singes de Cour” etc.; La Fontaine, Fables, VIII, 14: “Peuple cameléon, peuple singe.”

            249 Cheirisophus 遙見 Dionysius 稠人中笑語,亦捧腹而笑,Dionysius 怪而問之,答曰:“I put my trust in you, that whatever was said was laughable” (p. 125). Juvenal, Satura III, 100-1: “Rides, maiore cachinno concutitur.” 清都散客《笑贊》云:「一瞽者與眾人坐,眾人有見而笑,瞽者亦笑。眾問之曰:『何所見而笑?』瞽者曰:『你們所笑,定然不差。』」可參觀。

            268-289 Telecleides, Pherecrates, Nicophon 寫古時酒食遍地,人人饜飫之狀 (pp. 205-213)。按 Lucian, A True Story 亦云浮海至一處:“A sea of milk, with a white island of solid cheese” (“The Loeb Classical Lib.”, tr. by A.M. Harmon, p. 307),即 “Lubberland”, “Pays de cocagne”, “Schlaraffenland” 所本。英國詩中寫此者,備見 A.L. Morton: “The English Utopia”, ch. I (pp. 77 ff.)Morton 知引 Diodorus Siculus,而未始溯源至希臘詩人,亦其陋也。Merlin Cocaio, Maccaronea: “Illic ad bassum currunt cava flumina brodae, / quae lagum suppae generant, pelagumque guacetti. / Hic de materia tortarum mille vìdentur / ire redire rates... / Sunt ibi costerae jreschi tenerique botiri” (Luigi Russo, Gli scrittori d’Italia, I, p. 391).《大正新修大藏經‧第一卷‧長阿含經之三十‧世紀經(即西晉譯《大樓炭經》、隋譯《起世經》)‧鬱單越品第二》記古時自然衣食一節(參觀《彌勒下生經》)可相發明,左仁、周詒樸同輯《九烟先生遺集》卷五〈鬱單越頌序〉所謂「思此趣為神往」者也。餘見第三十三則。

            270: Achaeus 語見第百四十三則。

            第四冊 Bk. VIII. 349 (p. 83). 按分別見第百四十三則及第八十六則。

            B. IX. 370: “So help me cabbage!” (p. 177). 按意大利人尚有 “Cavalo!” 之語,詳見 Julian Sharman, A Cursory History of Swearing, ch. iii

            第五冊 Bk. XI. 494: Aeschylus: “Not by others, but by thine own feathers art thou caught” (p. 199). Gulick 註謂:“The eagle in Helm, Aesop. Fab. 4, Chambray i. 44, La Fontaine, Fables, II. 6.” 笑林每載 “A boot-maker: ‘I went to collect a long standing account for a pair of boots & the fellow actually licked me out with them’”; “A dentist: ‘She not only wouldn’t settle the bill but even bit me with the teeth I made for her. No wonder I should have felt hurt!’” C.A. Alington, Things Ancient & Modern: “Gore on drinking chocolate & eating a chocolate-cake: ‘This is the nearest approach to seething a kid in its mother’s milk that I have ever encountered.’” 皆煮豆然萁之類。又第七百二十八則。Herodotus, IV. 61 on the Scythians cooking a victim’s flesh by using its own bones as fuel.】【《百喻經》:「一者念言:『甘蔗極甜,若壓取汁,還灌甘蔗樹,甘美必甚。』」】【《樊山集》卷一〈東溪詩〉:「舉網得雙魚,貫鰓行自語。本藉溪水活,更就溪水煮。」】【《封神演義》八十三(萬仙陣):「原是他的寶劍,還絕他的門人。」】

            Bk. XII. 535: Pherecrates: “For although Alcibiades is not a man, yet he is today the one man of all the women” (p. 417). Gulick 註引 Diog. Laert. iv. 49; Suetonius, Iul. 52; Cic. Verr. ii. 78 (192)。按 The Greek Anthology, Bk. X, 272: “The cinaedi denied their manhood & did not become women, nor were they born men, as they have suffered what women do; nor are they women, since a man’s nature was theirs. They are men to women & women to men” (Eng. tr. W.R. Paton, “The Loeb Classical Library”, IV, p. 199).  Diog. Laert.: “When he was a young boy he lured husbands away from their wives, but when he was a young man he lured wives away from their husbands.” 尤可與 Lucian, A True Story 論月中人云:“They marry men & do not even know woman at all! Up to the age of 25 each is a wife, & thereafter a husband” (“The Loeb Classical Library”, tr. A.M. Harmon, I, p. 275) 參觀。馮夢龍《山歌》卷五〈姹童〉按語云:「張伯起先生有所歡,既婚而瘦,贈以歌云:『個樣新郎忒煞矬,看看面上肉無多。思量家公真難做,弗如依舊做家婆。』俊絕,一時誦之。」亦其類也。

            Bk. XII. 554 Syracuse 農家二女皆擅「白玉綿團」語本袁子才《子不語》卷二十一〈蔡京後身〉條[28],子才蓋亦賞此者,參觀卷十六〈全姑〉條所謂全姑「兩臀隆然,如一團白雪,日炙之猶慮其消」,又卷二十三〈風流具〉條[29]。至〈蔡京後身〉之「紅霞仙杵」,則卷十九〈錢仲玉〉條所謂「紅鮮如玉」者之美,不肯相下,乞富人二子衡鑑,遂各娶作婦,因為 Aphrodite Kallipygos 建廟[30] (pp. 519-521)。按 The Greek Anthology, Bk. V. 35: Rufinus: “I judged the hinder charms of three... Et prima quidem signata sulculis rotundis candido florebat et molli decore; alterius vero divaricatae nivea caro rubescebat purpurea rosa rubicun dior; terbia velut mare tranquillum sulcabatur fluctibus mutis, delicata eius cute sponte palpitante” (tr. by W.R. Paton, “The Loeb Classical Library”, I, pp. 145-7). Hans Licht, Beiträge zur antiken Erotik, S. 115-6,尚有 Alciphron 一函寫 Thryallis Myrrhina 賽臀 (Alciphron, Bk. IV, Letter 14, “Loeb Class. Lib.”, pp. 297-9)J.F. Schall “La Statue ou la comparaison” 一畫可參證。又 Charles Sorel, Histoire Comique de Francion, éd. Émile Roy, T. III, pp. 8-10: “[La femme montra] une paire de fesses des plus grosses et des mieux nourries du monde... Raymond dit: Je prends autant de plaisir à voir le [cul] qu’un sein, n’a-t’il pas la même forme, et si n’est il pas tout aussi plaisant à manier? Il n’y arien que l’opinion du vulgaire qui l’ait rendu désagréable... Il faut que chacun fasse hommages a ces belles fesses cy” etc. 可參觀。Heine: “Citronia” (Werke und Briefe, Aufbau, II, 407-9) 則讚臀而并及餘竅。

            第六冊 Bk. XIII. 558: Anaxilas, The Chick: “To cut it short, not one of the wild beasts is more devastating than a harlot” (p. 21). Iwan Block, Die Prostitution, Bd. I, S. 331 引此謂已開 Zola, Nana “[die] Schilderung des einem alles verschlingenden Ungeheuer gleichenden destruktiven Elementes im Dirnentum”。又 Plautus, Truculentus, 569-70 謂妓女貪得無厭,物來斯受,有如大海併吞不溢 (meretricum ego item esse reor, mare ut est: / Quod des devorat nee datis umquam abundat) (“The Loeb Classical Library”, tr. P. Nixon, II, p. 282)

            560: “Even the gravest wars have broken out because of women. Helen was the cause of the Trojan War” etc.  (p. 27). Gulick 註謂 “Cherchez la femme” 之意,可參觀 Aristoph., Ach., 523 ff.; Herodotus, Priapeum XXIX; Tristram Shandy, Bk. VI, ch. 32: “Was I not as much concerned for the destruction of the Greeks & Trojans...? Had I not 3 strokes of a ferula given me... for calling Helena a bitch for it?” (Modern Lib., p. 418); Giuseppe Artale: “Elena invecchiata”: “La rovina del mondo e rovinata” (G.G. Ferrero, Marino e i marinisti, p. 1029)按即吾國傾國禍水之意。吳巢松《鳳巢山樵求是錄》卷六〈題寇白門小像〉云:「縷杉檀板記當年,嗚咽秦淮比杜鵑。自古興亡家國恨,个中偏要著嬋娟。」余嘗笑其小題大做,若移詠褒、妲,便是絕好議論矣。《隱居通議》卷十一論「一代之亡,必有誤國者為人所指目,見於吟咏」,所舉女禍,如李泰伯咏漢宮云:「哀平外立國權分,只為當時乏嗣君。試問莽新誰佐命,衹應飛燕是元勲。」鄭獬咏范蠡云:「十重越甲夜成圍,宴罷君王醉不知。若論破吳功第一,黃金只合鑄西施。」趙漢宗咏張麗華云:「陳事分明屬綺羅,香塵吹盡井無波。行軍長史何勞怒?次第論功妾更多。」然而羅隱(一作狄師昌)〈題馬嵬驛〉云:「馬嵬烟柳正依依,重見鑾輿幸蜀歸。泉下阿蠻應有語,者回休更怨楊妃。」(「阿蠻」即唐玄宗。《酉陽雜俎》卷一:「玄宗自稱阿瞞,亦稱鴉。」柳珵《常侍言旨》亦記:「上皇泣曰:『阿瞞將爲兵死。』」)又〈西施〉云:「西施若解傾吳國,越國亡來又是誰?」韋莊〈立春作〉(庚子年冬大駕幸蜀後作):「今日不關妃妾事,始知辜負馬嵬人。」徐芳《懸榻編》卷一〈褒姒論〉云:「天下美婦人多矣,豈盡亡人之國者?呂雉、賈南風,一老一短黑,以亂天下有餘也。使遇文王、太公,姒雖美,宫中一姬耳。」王安石〈詠宰嚭〉云:「但願君王誅宰嚭,不愁宫裏有西施。」《王荆文公詩箋註》卷 48:「謀臣本自繫安危,賤妾何能作禍基?但願君王誅宰嚭,不愁宫裏有西施。」呂江〈姑蘇懷古〉云:「自是誤君由宰嚭,孰云亡國為西施?」(陸心源《宋詩紀事補遺》卷十八)方回《桐江續集》卷二十四〈西湖答〉:「濃粧淡抹比蛾眉,多謝蘇仙內翰詩。若使朝廷無宰嚭,未妨宮掖有西施。」周密《草窗韻語》二稿〈姑蘇臺〉:「堪笑吳傖太痴绝,不仇宰嚭恨西施。」張鎡《南湖集》卷六〈姑蘇懷古〉:「宰嚭若能容國士,西施那解誤君王?」汪瑔《松烟小錄》卷一:「宋張文定〈華清宮〉詩:『姚宋未亡妃子在,胡塵那得到中華?』(《詩話總龜》)乃知隨園『若使姚崇還作相,君王妃子共長生』二語故有所本。」張船山〈美人篇〉:「美人實無罪,溺者自亡身。佛罪逮花鳥,何獨憎美人?革囊斥玉女,狠語殊津津。」〈題沈舫西太守觀空觀色圖〉亦申此意[31]。江文通〈麗色賦〉乃云:「亦可駐髮還質,驂星馭龍。蠲憂忘死,保其家邦。」則更言女寵可延國祚矣。《後村大全集》一七四:「安晚丞相〈昭君〉云:『解移尤物柔強虜,延壽當年合議功。』」參觀第二百九十三則鄭清之〈昭君〉詩。《封神演義》九十六回:「九頭雉鷄精見楊戩趕來,罵道:『我們姊妹斷送了成湯天下,與你們的功名,你反來害我等,何無天理也!』」明人支允堅《軼史隨筆》謂飛燕、合德無損於漢,妲已、妹喜怨蒙不白。《隨園詩話》卷三謂女禍不至傾國,厥過實在男子。各明一義。又按《隱居通議》所舉諸絕句之意,可參觀《復堂日記》卷四載歐陽軒赤城《月到山房詩‧詠趙高》云:「當年舉世欲誅秦,那計為名與殺身。先去扶蘇後胡亥,趙高功冠漢諸臣。」又〈閱古逸史趙高為趙公子抱忠義之性自宮為趙報仇張良大索時即避高家賦一律〉:「大賈滅嬴憑女子,奇謀興漢詎蕭曹。留侯椎鐵荊卿匕,不及秦宮一趙高。」(按《陔餘叢考》卷四十一引《史記索隱》載高此事。《霞外捃屑》卷八上則謂今本《索隱》無其文。《雲自在堪筆記》卷一引《周禮折衷》則有此說。歐陽「古逸史」云,當稗販《叢考》耳。)

            568: Alexis 詠妓女飾容掩醜諸法 (p. 69),可與 Ovid, Ars amat., III, 263 et seq. 參觀。I. Block, Die Prostitution, Bd. I, S. 332-346 於希臘、羅馬詩文中寫妓女衣飾者,採摭極備,此兩節均在內。餘見第八十六則。

            572: Alexis or Antiphanes: “This male whore never took any leeks because he did not want to offend his lover when he kissed him” (p. 91). 按《大般湼槃經‧四相品第七之一》:「如人啖蒜,臭穢可惡。餘人見之,聞臭捨去。設遠見者,猶不欲視,況當近之」云云,此之謂也。然在歡子懊儂,則尚未得竅。屈翁山《詩外》卷十四〈勸姬人酒〉云:「每嫌明月夜,酒氣太薰卿。不若同沾醉,氤氳直到明。」Swift: “Verses Made for Fruit-Women”: “But, lest your kissing should be spoil’d, / Your onions must be thoroughly boil’d: / Or else you may spare / Your mistress a share, / The secret will never be known: / She cannot discover / The breath of her lover, / But think it as sweet as her own.” Collected Letters of S.T. Coleridge, ed. E.L. Griggs, I, p. 50: “as a lady of quality being reprimanded by her husband for having eaten onions (or garlick) answered — Why don’t you eat onions yourself, my Dove, & then you would not smell them!” 近人 David L. Cohn, Love in America, p. 142: “The other morning I saw the ‘question of onion or a Man’s Love’ in the column of Dorothy Dix. Jane wrote that she loved a young man but dislike the aura of onion in which he was enveloped. ‘Would it be too much to ask him to refrain from eating onion?’ she inquired. She was told by Miss Dix to become an onion eater herself.” Oliver Herford & J.C. Clay, Cupid’s Cyclopedia, p. 50: “Onions. Should never be eaten alone.” 參觀第六百二十七則。

            581 記一人與名妓 Gnathaena 同榻達旦,欲去,復求狎其後庭,此妓答云:“You wretch! tu a me clunes postulas, when it is now high time you were driving out the pigs to pasture?” (p. 135). Gulick 註謂 ὗς pudenda muliebra。按Hans Licht, Beiträge zur antiken Erotik, S. 49: “Das Wort ‘Säue’ bedeutet im Griechischen auch Exkrementa.” 其說較長。張元一〈嘲武懿宗〉詩云:「忽然逢著賊,騎猪向南竄。」謂「夾豕」也。「豕」、「矢」同音,正此意也。《國語‧晉語四》胥臣對晉文公有云:「少溲於豕牢。」韋注:「厠也。」可參觀。言晨起汝與我皆須如厠,乃復塞我尾閭,使宿物不得宣洩耶?又按明清小說以「豚」為「臀」之雙關,如李笠翁《十二樓》第六種《萃雅樓》第二回「豚白如雪」,第三回「汝戲我豚」,又第八種《十卺樓》第一回:「怎肯愛惜此豚,不為陽貨之獻?」可參觀。《廣雅》云:「豚,臀也。」(參觀《潛研堂文集》卷三十五〈與洪稚存書〉。)唐寅《六如居士全集》(唐仲冕輯訂本[32])外集卷一〈為皂隸題畫〉云:「只待人來打窟豚。」烟霞散人〈斬鬼傳〉第二回:「呵豚的,他也肯呵豚。」Aristophane, Les Archarniens, l. 758, “‎Collection des universités de France”, T. I, p. 42, note: “χοῖρος signifie ‘petit cochon’ et ‘parties de la femme.’”

            581 一補履匠以重金㗖 Gnathaena ab illa se quinquies deinceps inequitatum esse,所歡怒詰之,答曰:“‘I did not think it to fit to clasp in my arms a man who was covered with soot up to his mouth... so I cleverly contrived to touch the part of his person which projects farthest & is smallest” (pp. 137-9).[33] Gulick 註引 Horace, Sat. II.50: “Agitavit equum lasciva supinum”。按此即 “pendula Venus” (語見Apuleius, Metamorphoses, I. 17: “lubricisque gestibus mobilem spinam quatiens, pendulae Veneris fructu me satiavit”),古詩中數道之。Ovid, Ars amat., III, 777: “parva vehatur equo”; Martial, XI. 104: “Hectoreo sederat uxor equo.” Licht, Beiträge, S. 214-5 說其姿勢甚詳,書中插圖其一即古瓶上繪此式也。

            604: Ion Sophocles 贊一司酒童子 “crimson cheeks”,同座一學究云:“If a painter should brush a crimson colour on this boy’s cheeks he would no longer look handsome.” Sophocles 笑曰然則 Simonides “crimson lips” Pindar “Gold-haired Apollo” 皆宜訶斥矣:“For if a painter had made the God’s locks golden instead of black, the picture would not be so good. And for the poet who said ‘rosy-fingered’; for if one should dip his fingers into a rose-dye, he would produce the hands of a purple-dyer and not those of a lovely woman” (pp. 235-7)。按可與陳簡齋〈水墨梅花詩〉所謂「意足不求顏色似」發明。駁 ut pictora poesis無早於此者,而未見人稱引,何也?(後見 Jean H. Hagstrum, The Sister Arts, p. 6 引此節,謂是古人論 “limits of the arts” 之例。)詩文中比喻形容,無不作如是觀。Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime & Beautiful, Pt. V, sect. v: “Poetry would lose a very considerable part of its energy, if the sensible images were always excited. Vergil’s description of Vulcan’s cavern in Etna seems to me admirably sublime; yet if we attend cooly to the kind of sensible images, which a combination of ideas of this sort must form, the chimeras of madmen cannot appear more wild & absurd than such a picture” etc. (Works, G. Bell & Sons, vol. I, p. 176). Diderot, Lettre sur les sourds et muets Enéide, I, 128-31 而論之曰:“Par quelle singularité le peintre ne pourrait prendre le moment frappant?... Pourquoi le dieu ne paraissant alors qu’un homme décollé, sa tête, si majestueuse dans le poème, ferait-elle un mauvais effet sur les ondes?[34] Comment arrive-t’il que ce qui ravit notre imagination déplaise à nos yeux” (Oeurvres, éd. Assézat, I, p. 386); Salon de 1767: “Ce qui fait bien en peinture fait toujours bien en poésie... cela n’est pas réciproque. J’en reviens toujours au Neptune de Virgile: Summa placidum caput extulit unda. Que le plus habile artiste, s’arrêtant strictement à l’image du poëte, nous montre (sortant de l’eau) cette tête si belle, si sublime de l’ Enéide, et vous verrez l’effet sur la toile” (Oeuvres, XI, pp. 72-3; cf. pp. 107-8). 又論 Carle Vanloo, L’Amour menaçant 云:“Les peintres n’ont pas la même liberté que les poètes, dans l’usage des flèches de l’Amour. En poésie, ces flèches partent, atteignent et blessent; cela ne se peut en peinture. Dans un tableau, l’Amour peut menacer de sa flèche, mais il ne la peut jamais lancer sans produire un mauvais effet. Ici le physique répugne;... ce n’est plus un homme percé d’une métaphore, mais un homme percé d’un trait réel qu’on aperçoit” (Salon de 1767, Oeuv., X, pp. 121-2).《青溪遺稿》卷二十四〈題畫〉云:「『洞庭湖西秋月輝,瀟湘江北早鴻飛。』華亭愛誦此語,曰:『說得出,畫不就。』余曰:『畫也畫得,就只不像詩。』華亭大笑。」蓋「杏臉」、「桃腮」、「氷肌」、「玉膚」等字,乃動情而非狀物,正 K.O. Erdmann, Die Bedeutung des Wortes (3te Aufl.), S. 196 “Anschaungswert” “Gefühlswert” 之別,見第二十九則。即侔色揣稱,如「蝤蠐」、「瓠犀」、 “Thy neck is as a tower of ivory... thy nose is as the tower of Lebanon which looketh toward Damascus” (The Song of Solomon, VII. 4)“Fair one, with thighs like the trunks of elephants” (Kuttanīmatum,見 Ploss, Bartels, & Bartels, Woman, I, p. 209 ) 之類,死在句下,布之丹青,亦成怪物。Michael Roberts, Critique of Poetry, p. 54: “There are many fine passages in Shakespeare & Milton which are absurd if they are visualized, but the passages are good because they do not themselves compel visualisation in any but the most persistent visualisers. Fully visualized, The Song of Solomon becomes riotous nonsense; whoever saw a woman with breasts that looked like a pair of roes & hair like a flock of goats?” R. Wellek & A. Warren, Theory of Literature, pp. 16-17: “Imagery is not essential to literature.... Much great literature does not evoke sensuous images, or only incidentally. We can scarcely visualize any of Dostoevsky’s or Henry James’s characters.... If we had to visualize every metaphor in poetry we would become completely bewildered.” 參觀第百二十二則、第百四十則、第二百四則、第六百五十五則,又第五百八十八則。I. Disraeli, Curiosities of Literature, vol. II, p. 108 (The Chandos Classics): “The ancients seem to have designated by purpureus anything beautiful & bright. Albinovanus: ‘nivem purpureum’; Catullus: ‘Quercus ramos pnrpureos’; Horace; ‘Purpureo bibet nectar’, ‘olores purpureos’; Virgil: ‘purpuream vomit ille animam’, ‘lumenque juventae purpureum’; Tasso: ‘il bel purpureo lume’; Addison: ‘covered with a kind of purple light’; Gray: ‘the purple light of love.’” Wordsworth, “Laodamia” 尚有 “And fields invested with purpureal gleams” (Bernard Groom, Diction of Poetry, p. 173 謂本之 Aeneid, VI. 640-1: “Largior hic campos aether et lumine vestit purpureo”,又 p.182 Shelley 最喜此字,詩中有 “purple waves”; “purple sky”; “purple moon”; “purple sea”; “purple mountains”),皆 “Süsses Gold”[35], “und grün des Lebens goldner Baum” 之類也。【G. Tillotson, Augustan Studies, pp. 205-6 (on “And wake the purple year” in Gray’s “Ode on the Spring”); Montaigne, Essais, III, iii (Pléiade, p. 794).

            605: “Even boys are handsome as the courtesan Glycera was wont to say, only so long as they look like a woman” (p. 263). 按《左傳》:「孔父之妻美而艷」,「公子鮑美而艷」。男女之色,初無差別。李頎〈鄭櫻桃歌〉亦逕以「美人」及「娥娥」狀之《儒林外史》三十四回:「季葦蕭道:『我最惱人稱贊美男子,動不動說像個女人。這最可笑!如果像女人,不如去看女人了!天下原另有一種男美,只是人不知道!』杜慎卿拍著案道:『只這一句話,就該圈了!』」矯情之談,不如此婦之言無枝葉也。季葦蕭語可參觀《天方夜譚》中 “Girls or Boys?” 一則所謂:“I have always noticed, too, that you, who love boys & wish to describe them, compare their caresses with [i.e. “to”] those of girls” (The Thousand Nights & One Night, tr. P. Mathers, II, p. 575)。觀楊掌生《京塵雜錄》,便知此妓之言不虛。《堅瓠補集》卷五俞琬綸〈贈歌童小徐曲〉皆以女貌擬男容也(《日札》六六四則、六八八則)。柳如是《戊寅草》有〈男洛神賦〉(「惟隽郎之莫忘」),亦此類,而陳寅恪謂為賦陳臥子,迂謬可笑。Dio Chrisostom, Discourses, no. XXI: “on Beauty”, §3: “Critias said that the most beautiful figure anong males was the effeminate... 4. The Persians made eunuchs of the beautiful males... So greatly superior in beauty did they think the female to be” (Loeb, vol. II, p. 275).【《儒林外史》杜慎卿訪來霞士。】

            606: “Dumb animals have fallen in love with human beings” (p. 267). 舉雄鷄愛一童子事為例,殆《子不語》卷六所謂「鴨嬖」者乎?Heine: “Der weisse Elefant” (Werke und Briefe, Aufbau-Verlag). Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Part III, Sect. ii, Mem. 2, Subs. 2: “The edge of a sharp sword is dulled with a beautiful aspect” 一節舉例尤詳,不特馬避女身、蠅戀童頰,乃至燭淚、浪花、蘭湯、明鏡,無不好色 (“Everyman’s Library”, vol. III, pp. 70-72)Shakerley Marmion, The Legend of Cupid & Psyche: “Nor rose nor lily durst their silks unfold, / But shut their leaves up like the marigold”; Nathaniel Whiting, Albino & Bellama: “The sea-born planet popped out her lamp, / And t’ see herself outshin’d by her, did rage” (Minor Poets of the Caroline Period, ed. G. Saintsbury, II, p. 11; III, p. 440) 尤即閉月羞花之說也。

            Bk. XIV. 614 Parmeniscus 忽得奇疾,不能笑,遍治無效,一日遊 Delos Leto 廟,“thinking that he should find the statue of Apollo’s mother something remarkable to look at; but he discovered that it was an ugly block of wood, he burst unexpectedly into laughter” (p. 307). Kant, Krit. d. Urteilskraft, §54: “Das Lachen ist ein Affekt aus der plötzlichen Verwandlung einer gespannten Erwartung in nichts”; Jean Paul, Vorschule der Ästhetik, §26: “Das Lächerliche besteht in der plötzlichen Auflösung der Erwarten von etwas Ernsten” (Werke, hrsg. R. Wustmann, Bd. IV, S. 150); Spencer, Essays: “A Physiology of Laughter”: “A descending incongruity”; Lipps, Grundlegung Der Ästhetik, S. 575: “Komisch ist das Kleine, minder Eindrucksvolle, minder Bedeutsame, Gewichtige, also nicht Erhabene, das an Stelle eines relativ Grossen, Eindrucksvollen, Bedeutsamen, Gewichtigen, Erhabenen tritt. Es ist das Kleine, das sich wie ein Grosses gebärdet, dazu aufbauscht, die Rolle eines solchen spielt, und dann doch wiederum als ein Kleines, ein relatives Nichts erscheint, oder in ein solches zergeht.” 此事乃大好例證,而古今無人徵引。【W. Hogarth, The Analysis of Beauty, ch. 6: “When improper, or incompatible excesses meet, they always excite laughter... It is from the same joining of opposite ideas that makes us laugh at the owl & the ass...” (ed. J. Burke, pp. 48-9).



[1]《手稿集》291-2 頁。
[2]《手稿集》292-3 頁。
[3] 原文脫落「一」字。
[4]《手稿集》293-5 頁。
[5] 此處數字漫漶不辨。原文作:“I said I had noticed that a certain South African novelist, then much reviewed in England, was constantly being praised for ‘restraint’: I said I could not see what this writer was supposed to be restraining, and that the only novel by this writer which I had read seemed to me like a dog-collar without a dog inside.”
[6] 巴順原書「classicism pretends that...」作「classicism is sure that...」。
[7]is it」原作「it is」。
[8]「猶」原作「倘」。
[9]《手稿集》295-300 頁。
[10]「與」原作「有」。
[11]《雜錄》原文作:「有韻之文,體自相涉,若直謂之詩,則不可矣。」。
[12]《管錐編焦氏易林焦延壽易林》併摘此二節而駁之。
[13]「三」原作「二」。
[14]「笨」一本作「岔」。
[15]《雜錄》原文未指名牧齋,只謂「今人」云云。
[16]《手稿集》301-11 頁。
[17]Quinque advocavi」原作「Quincumque advocati」。
[18]《湧幢小品》卷十七「貴人持齋」條:「余笑曰:『何不開齋?』」
[19] 即下文,見《手稿集》300 頁書眉、夾縫,引文重複。
[20]「組」原作「俎」。
[21]「三十六」原作「二十六」。
[22] 此饌實即十九世紀法國名餚「至尊烤」(rôti sans pareil),食材自外而內依序為: “bustard, turkey, goose, pheasant, chicken, duck, guinea fowl, teal, woodcock, partridge, plover, lapwing, quail, thrush, lark, ortolan bunting, garden warbler & a single olive stuffed with anchovy paste”
[23] 今日西餐「三套頭」大菜名曰「火鴨鷄」(turducken,即以 turkeyduckchicken 三名去尾截頭套併而成)。
[24]λογοδιάρροια」原作「λογοδιαρροἰας」。
[25] 釋云:“a low catch-phrase applied by men to a thin woman.”
[26]de ne faire que peter」原作「que de petter」。
[27] 即下文,見《手稿集》319-320 頁眉。
[28] 美臀之喻。《子不語蔡京後身》「崇禎時,某相公常自言為蔡京後身,以仙官墮地獄,每世間誦《仁王經》,耳目為之一亮。又罰作揚州寡婦,守空房四十年。故癖好尤奇。好觀美婦之臀,美男之勢,以為男子之美在前,女子之美在後,世人易之,非好色者也。常使婦衣袍褶,男飾裙釵,而摸其臀勢,以為得味外味。又常戲取姬妾優童數十,以被蒙其首,而露其下體,互猜為某郎某姬,以為笑樂。有內閣供事石俊者,微有姿,而私處甚佳,公甘為咂弄。有求書者,非石郎磨墨不可得也。號臀曰:『白玉綿團』,勢曰:『紅霞仙杵』。」
[29]「二十三」原作「三十三」。
[30] Venus Callipyge,或 Callipygian Venus (“Venus of the beautiful buttocks”),下文 J.F. Schall 畫中石像即此。
[31]「沈舫西」原作「沈西舫」。
[32]「唐仲冕」原作「陶仲冕」。
[33]Gnathaena」有誤,當為其孫女「Gnathaenion」。
[34]ferait-elle」原作「fait-elle」。
[35]Süsses」原作「Susses」。

沒有留言:

張貼留言