论历史叙事与文学想象中的荆轲形象
On the Image of Jing Ke in Historical Narration and Literary Imagination
DOI: 10.12677/jc.2026.147180, PDF,   
作者: 郑淑文, 鲁家旭:北京印刷学院出版学院,北京
关键词: 荆轲《史记》《资治通鉴》Jing Ke “Historical Records” “Zizhi Tongjian”
摘要: 荆轲刺秦是中国历史上极具标志性的事件,荆轲的人物形象并非固定不变,而是在历史叙事与文学想象的共同作用下不断被重塑与丰富。本文旨在梳理史实基底与文学象征中的荆轲形象。通过文本细读与比较分析,本文发现:以《战国策》《史记》为代表的历史叙事,通过选择、编排与文学化笔法,建构了荆轲作为“侠义刺客”与“悲剧英雄”的立体形象;以《资治通鉴》为代表的史评,则从政治伦理角度对其进行“去魅化”的批判性重塑;而以陶渊明《咏荆轲》为代表的文学想象,则超越了具体史实,将荆轲升华为反抗强权、寄托士人情怀的精神符号。荆轲形象的动态变化,揭示了历史人物如何在不同时代语境、不同文本载体中被持续阐释与再创造,最终凝聚为一个承载复杂文化记忆的不朽形象。本文的研究,为理解中国传统文化中历史与文学的互动关系提供了一个经典个案。
Abstract: Jing Ke’s stabbing of Qin is a landmark event in the history of China. Jing Ke’s characters are not fixed, but are constantly being reshaped and enriched under the joint action of historical narration and literary imagination. This paper aims to sort out the image of Jing Ke in historical base and literary symbol. Through close reading and comparative analysis of the texts, this paper finds that the historical narrative represented by “Warring States Policy” and “Historical Records” constructs the three-dimensional image of Jing Ke as a “chivalrous assassin” and a “tragic hero” through selection, arrangement and literary brushwork; The historical criticism represented by “Zizhi Tongjian” critically reshapes it from the perspective of political ethics. The literary imagination, represented by Tao Yuanming’s “Ode to Jing Ke”, transcends the specific historical facts and sublimates Jing Ke into a spiritual symbol of resisting power and pinning the feelings of scholars. The dynamic change of Jing Ke’s image reveals how historical figures have been continuously interpreted and recreated in different times and in different text carriers, and finally condensed into an immortal image bearing complex cultural memories. This study provides a classic case for understanding the interactive relationship between history and literature in China traditional culture.
文章引用:郑淑文, 鲁家旭. 论历史叙事与文学想象中的荆轲形象[J]. 新闻传播科学, 2026, 14(7): 119-124. https://doi.org/10.12677/jc.2026.147180

参考文献

[1] 叶岗. 《燕丹子》研究[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2021: 612.
[2] 张海明. 《史记∙荆轲传》与《战国策∙燕太子丹质于秦》关系考论[J]. 清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2013, 28(1): 94-113, 161.
[3] 张海明. 《燕丹子》与《史记·荆轲传》之关系[J]. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2012(6): 21-37.
[4] 张海明. 《史记∙荆轲传》与《燕丹子》比较论——兼谈《燕丹子》的小说文体属性及意义[J]. 文学评论, 2013(3): 152-163.
[5] 孟蒙. 论《史记∙刺客列传》中荆轲形象的复杂性[J]. 三峡论坛(三峡文学∙理论版), 2014(5): 96-101.
[6] 贺根民. 荆轲形象的文学移位与道德人格的嬗变[J]. 井冈山大学学报(社会科学版), 2011, 32(1): 87-92.
[7] 武建雄. 从《咏荆轲》诗看陶渊明的侠义思想[J]. 太原学院学报(社会科学版), 2017, 18(4): 49-52.
[8] 张桂萍. 论《史记》刺客、游侠传的仁义主旨及其多维视角[J]. 西南大学学报(社会科学版), 2017, 43(1): 122-133+191.
[9] 司马光. 资治通鉴[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2023: 916.
[10] 龚斌. 陶渊明“忠愤”说平议[J]. 华东师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 1995(2): 33-39.