普羅文藝批評的文化轉向－－論吳坤煌對鄉土文學的批判與繼承

The Cultural Diversion of Proletarian Literature Critics: On the Critical Inheritance of Folklore Literature from Wu Kung-Hung

本文討論三０年代吳坤煌根據文藝上的列寧主義，批判地繼承鄉土文學的特徵，變成無產階級的內容，民族文化形式的新文學。鄉土文學論戰期間，普羅派的廖毓文、賴明弘採取「文學鬥爭」論，批判鄉土文學是資產階級文學；吳坤煌認為台灣是日本帝國主義宰制的殖民地，除了階級鬥爭的問題之外，更存在著民族問題。因此，他引進文藝的列寧主義，批判地繼承文化遺產、民族文化，豐富無產階級文化。用唯物辯證法，一方面批判鄉土文學的封建、資產階級意識，一方面擷取地方色彩、民族性等特性，將普羅文學的內容，　與鄉土文學的形式形成辯證統一。

This article is to discuss how Wu Kung-Hung criticized and inherited the traits of folklore literature, became the new genre of proletarian contents with ethnic cultural forms. The Taiwan proletarian literature critics Liou Yu-Win and Lai Ming-Hong took literary-struggle theory to criticize the folklore literature reflecting the bourgeois class consciousness. Wu Kung-Hung took Taiwan as the Japan emperor occupied colony, existed the problems of classes and ethnics oppression. He imported Leninism on literature, to inherit national culture heritage, ethnic cultural forms. He used the materialist dialectics methods, in one way to criticize the class consciousness of feudal and bougeous, in other way to capture the traits of local colors and nationality, made the proletarian literature and folklore literature become dialectic united.