《芝龕記》傳奇敘錄

Introduction to Chuanqi Drama–Zhi Kan Ji

傳奇盛於明。清代傳奇作家及劇曲數量，已不及前明之盛。康熙乾隆間董榕作《芝龕記》，全劇六卷六十齣，是明清二代少數的長篇傳奇，論者認為可媲美《桃花扇》。依《芝龕記》劇本中的鐫印、時人序文及題詞時間推論，《芝》劇至遲撰成於乾隆十六年，並於是年付刊。目前依國家圖書館善本古籍聯合目錄所登錄，東海大學圖書館、國立臺灣大學圖書館、中國國家圖書館等三處皆有藏本。《芝龕記》本史傳而作，以明末女將秦良玉沈雲英的故事為主線、組織明萬曆天啟崇禎三朝史事和明朝滅亡始末；旨在表彰純忠奇孝。而作為歷史劇，其既循實記史，同時根據主題思想要求，加上文學的虛構和誇張，以達到戲劇教化和娛樂的目的。《芝》劇寫作亦有為論者爭議處。如：劇情冗長、頭緒過多；闡揚忠孝節烈之說教意味濃厚；對清廷和鎮壓起義軍將領的歌頌、對起義軍及其領袖的鞭撻等。凡此或可從作者堅持思想內容重於文字形式的敘事觀點、明清文人傳奇餘勢期的內容道德化傾向、作者傳統士大夫忠君愛國而反起義為亂的觀念侷限，以及清廷時興文字獄、對小說戲曲禁毁迫害的時代背景等各方面因素加以理解。整體而言，《芝龕記》表現出明清傳奇餘勢期文人創作之宜作案頭文學觀而與舞台表演脫節的特色。

Chuanqi drama is prosperous in Ming Dynasty. The numbers of Chuanqi dramatists and works in Ching Dynasty are far fewer than those in Ming. During the reigns of Kang-his and Ch'ien-lung, Dong Rong's Zhi Kan Ji, consisting of six volums made up of 60 chapters, is one of the very few long Chuanqi works in both Ming and Ching. Critics consider it a great artistic work, comparable to Fan of Peach Blossom. Based on the engravings, prefaces and inscriptions on the play, Zhi Kan Ji was composed not later than the 16th year of Ch'ien-lung, and was published in the same year. According to the united catalog of ancient books compiled by National Central Library, Tunghai University Library, National Taiwan University Library, and National Library of China all hold copies of the play. Zhi Kan Ji is based on history. It depicts the stories of Liang-yi Ch'in and Yuan-ying Shen in the end of Ming Dynasty. It portrays the historical events in three imperial courts from Wan-li, T'ien-chi, to Ch'ung-chen, and the fall of Ming Dynasty. It aims at praising the loyalty and filial duty shown in these stories. As a history play, it records historical events. It also infuses fiction and imagination to achieve higher artistic value, and thus serves the dramatic functions of teaching and entertaining. Scholars sometimes complain about its lengthy plot, multiple digressions, and overt didacticism. They do not appreciate its praise on the Ching generals who oppress the revolution, and its scold on the leaders of revolution. But if considered from different angles, these problems may be excused. For example, the dramatist insists on a narrative perspective that values content more than form. The didactic tendency of the scholar chuanqi literary tradition in both Ming and Ching dynasties is still potent. The dramatist is confined by his traditional patriotic concept that depreciates revolution. The political persecution on novels and dramatic works in Ching Dynasty should also be considered. To conclude, Zhi Kan Ji is a closet drama, not meant to be staged for its loose links to dramatic performance.