「忖度予心，百不失一」－－論「桃花扇」評本中批評語境之提示性與詮釋性

The Embedded Critical Dimensions of the Commentated Taohua shan

清初孔尚任之《桃花塌》於康熙四十七年（1708）由介安堂首度刊行，此一版本除了每齣均有眉批與總評外，劇本前後亦臚列眾多序跋、題辭，這批序跋、題辭與批語顯示出劇本在刊行之前，曾透過傳抄、閱讀、演出、觀賞、傳播與刊行的過程，融合了讀者、觀眾與評者的反應。有趣的是，作者不僅邀請名人同好贈序題辭，他還洋洋灑灑地撰寫了〈小引〉、〈小識〉、〈凡例〉、〈考據〉、〈網領〉、〈本末〉、〈小識〉與〈砌末〉等，表達了完整的創作理念與藝術構思。有鑑於此，本文以《桃花扇》評本為對象，分別從《桃花扇》之創作演出、孔尚任之「批評意識」與「讀者意識」、《桃花扇》之文本構思、文本構成、藝術境界之呈現、人物塑造綱領與筆法等層面，探討評本中「批評語境」之提示性與詮釋性。透過對評語之思維結構與藝術理念之層層討論，我們可以說，《桃花扇》批語之撰筆人，藉由評點作了某種程度的「詮釋性閱讀」（interpretive reading）的示範，展現其對於戲劇觀賞、戲劇理論與戲劇表演的「期待視界」（horizon of expectation），因此在相當程度上，他不僅符合了「歷史的讀者」甚或「理想讀者」（ideal reader）的角色功能，並在爾後的文本閱讀中，產生一種鉅大的附加影響力。這種讀者與作者密切關聯，且進而由「評本」而「設定」讀者的方式，展現了藝術家在創作過程中，深植在其文本中的「批評意識」與「讀者意識」，以及作者透過分化「評論者」、「讀者／觀眾」與「創作者」，以達致真正的「批評語境」的詩學全圖。Of Chinese plays with commentaries, Kong Shangren's Taohua shan (The Peach Blossom Fan) is a masterpiece that deserves special attention. Taohua shan was first published by Jieantang in 1708. The Jieantang edition of Taohua shan carries many prefaces, afterwords, poems before and after the text, and commentaries inserted within the text. This demonstrates that before the play was formally published, the author had incorporated the responses from readers, audiences, and commentators into the text: the processes of copying, reading, acting, appreciating, transmitting and pubLushing transformed the final work. The author invited contemporary celebrities and his friends to write prefaces for him, and he himself penned the 'introduction,' 'postscript,' 'textual criticism,' and 'stage props' to formulate his idea of creativity and artistic construction. This paper explores the embedded critical dimensions of the commentated Taohua shan. It addresses, among others, the following issues: the writing and performance of the play; the 'critical consciousness' and 'reader's consciousness' of Kong Shangren; the dramatic structure and textual construction of the play; the presentation of his artistic visions; the principles of characterization; and the techniques of description. By analyzing the thinking and design of the commentaries, we suggest that the commentator has given a demonstration of 'interpretative reading' and 'horizon of expectation' for drama appreciation, theory and performance. In this light, the commentator not only plays the functional role of 'historical reader' or 'ideal reader,' but also exerts a great influence on later readings. The symbiosis of the author and the reader and the direction that the commentator left for the reader in the commentaries point to the artist's critical consciousness and a poetics of contextuality in which the commentator, the reader, the audience and the author are fused into one.