The jingfan of literature is literariness

A writer is a literary addict. However, literariness has not been brought into the common literary principles and discussed in depth. For a long time, literariness seems to be only the topic of foreign literature science, and the definition of literariness has been wandering in Chinese and foreign literary discourse. This is as true for writers and readers as it is for literary researchers. In the early years of this century, at a literary gathering in a university in central China, a writer asked several literature professors about literariness. One of them, who was highly respected, pointed out that this was a false proposition, but the others kept silent. Among experts, at least at the time, there was about an established definition of literature and an idea of what literature could do to deal with problems related to literariness.

The exception is in editorial departments that review literary works. In rooms where books and newspapers are laid out at random, editors who sit at their desks for years, tired of commenting at length on submissions, often use the simple judgment that they are not good at literature when they shoot down an unsatisfactory work. Even if occasionally replaced with “barely breathing” or “not quite finished”, the meaning is the same – lack of literature; As time passed, they shook their heads, smiled and sucked, and expressed their regret for the literary quality of the manuscript. Thankfully, flaubert, Tolstoy and Lu Xun on the walls can not only bear witness to this, but always encourage and support them with silent solemnity.

So what do they value about literariness?

If the question were put to them, they too would, in all likelihood, start in a violent stupefy for a moment, and then slowly frown, and begin to wanders their answers — like casting a net into the boundless sea, or “shooting a pheasant” into the sky — with a definite but uncertain aim; Although the target is uncertain, it can always catch or hit its scales.

First, they say that literariness comes from language, which is its precision, vitality, sensitivity, uniqueness and meaning. Moreover, with the intervention and help of figures of speech such as metaphor, personification, exaggeration, parallelism, borrowing, duality, repetition, synaesthesia and intertextuality, language makes narration and lyricism vivid and appealing. For example, “When I was gone, willows and willows lay in wait”, “Picking chrysanthemums under the eastern hedge, I leisurely and leisurely see the Southern mountain”, “withered vines, old trees and crows fall into darkness, small Bridges and houses run with water”; Such as “she is beautiful, like the night”, “if life has deceived you, don’t be sad, don’t be impatient”, “I was weak as precocious grain”, such as lu xun’s “looking angrily condemned, head bowed as a willing ox”, “the wall in my backyard, you can see two trees, is a date tree, the other is also a date tree”… For example, the language of wang Meng, Mo Yan, A Cheng, Jia Pingwa, Tie Ning, He Liwei, Han Shaogong, Li Peifu, Feng Jicai, A Lai, Yu Hua, Liu Zhenyun, Su Tong, Bi Feiyu, Wang Anyi, Jin Yucheng, Chi Zijian, Li Jingze, Li er, Han Dong and others who are still writing — how advanced and charming language can be.

Then they say literariness comes from the plot and details of the story, or the mood and image. They talked from small stories to big ones, from Soushen Ji, Three Stories and Two Pats, and Strange Tales from A Studio to Journey to the West, Romance of The Three Kingdoms, Water Border, and a Dream of red Mansions, from Chekhov, Maupassant, and O. Henry to Balzac, Hugo, Flaubert, and Tolstoy. In terms of plot, such as Song Jiang killing Yan Po Xi, such as the death of Old Man Gao; In terms of details, for example, Grandma Liu started the self-black mode when she laughed in front of the grand Garden. For example, Anna couldn’t help looking mad when her lover’s horse fell down in front of her husband at the horse race. The details support the plot, and the plot drives the story. As for artistic conception, it exists in a large number of old Chinese poems, which can be easily taken from them, such as Wang Zhihuan’s “Climbing the Stork Tower”; Modern poetry, such as Shu Ting’s “Rock and Lamp”, is used as imagery. To sum up: details appeal to perception, plot contains aesthetic, story attracts reading; The artistic conception is greater than the idea, the image shows the sentiment.

Then they say that literariness comes from the character and fate of the characters. The galleries of human literary images, from gods to humans (animals), are crowded with living artistic images: Such as nuwa, yu gong, fan4 jin4, yan guo-zi-jian diploma in China, the west door celebrate, sun wukong, pig eight quit, sung river, lu, zhuge liang, guan yu, zhang fei, the lotus of pan gold, jia baoyu, Lin daiyu, search, Q, a whiner, kong yiji, Wu Sun just, high sense of new, cui cui, camel xiangzi, square hong gradually, forest-road static, sister jiang, Zhu Laozhong, Chen Huansheng, NiWuCheng, Xu Ling, title, Shangguan Jintong, Xu Sanguan, Bai Jiaxuan, Zhuang Zhidie, Gao Jialin… Such as foreign Jesus, Athena and Don Quixote, Hamlet, Faust, don Juan, the observed, jean valjean, Quasimodo, Yu Lian mount Kilimanjaro, Emma, my blue-veined one, Krakow, begging, Mr Lo, and Anna karenina, Andre, NieHe leave Christopher, Carla Ivan karamazov brothers, suet ball, chameleon, small civil servants, gatsby, Jim pell, San Diego, buck (dog ), Connie, Buendia, The Beetle, Morsau… Each artistic image has a nose and eyes, lifelike, distinctive character, destiny is different, let people sigh life.

Then they say that literariness comes from the discovery of life and the innovation of art. Literature constantly brings strange and new life and aesthetics, and they are genuinely excited, even grateful, to see something that has never been done before. Since the new period, they have successively introduced scar literature, reflective literature, root-seeking literature, avant-garde literature, new realistic literature, new historicism literature, “non-fiction” literature, “style change” literature… Now, they enthusiastically cheer for the new literary stars born in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, and without hesitation cheer for the outstanding works in online literature, as well as the “nirvana new system” of older writers… The tree of life is ever green, the flower of literature is ever new, and art is as good as a flower.

They went on to talk about the wonderful imagination of literature, the charm of emotion, interest and intellectual thinking, the mission and significance of literary creation to face the reality, recall the past and fantasize about the future, and the offense and change of art… If there is nothing urgent at hand, they will talk on and on. All in all, a qualified literary editor is familiar with the literature of all times and all over the world. Once he opens his mouth, he can talk with a flourish.

The problem, however, is that they have finally failed to define literariness.

It is certainly not their negligence. For literature, they are the gatekeepers of published works. Compared with ordinary readers and researchers, even if they are not “clear in words”, they are “clear in heart”. They just haven’t had time to do the abstract processing. But whether or not there is a definition of literariness, the results of literary creation are always considerable: A country or a group, in an age (30-50 years), there are about one over ten million of the population of outstanding writer, they have literary talent, timely realize the core of literariness, instinct and sincere and affinity, enthusiasm and reasonably with the hand in hand, in the inspired it guaranteed the diligence, quite response to life, to serve the excellent work, Bring literary surprise. This has been pretty much the case in civilized times so far, and may be the case in the future.


However, the fact that there is no definition of literature does not hinder the development of literary creation and literary enterprise. It is not — this will be explained later.

There is now an established universal concept of literature — not literariness — as the art of using language to create images, reflect social life, and express thoughts and feelings. Unfortunately, there are only two valid keywords in this concept — “image” and “reflection”. The others are either not literary or create some kind of intellectual ambiguity. For example, “using language”, non-literary texts also use language. “Shaping image”, it is difficult to say that poetry and prose are shaping image in a narrow sense; “Social life”, reflected not only in literature, but also in other arts, or summarized and revealed in other texts; As for “expressing thoughts and feelings”, it is the first duty of almost all art and social science articles. In addition, the so-called “four functions” of literature are not unique to literature. Among them, the cognitive function and educational function are the functions of all texts or articles, and the entertainment function and aesthetic function are the functions of all arts including literature (music, painting, dance and film and television).

If the concept of literature is such, how can literariness be obtained?

Obviously, it is unscientific to carry out literature research with the existing concept of literature, and it is extensive and ineffective to treat and guide literary creation with this concept.

In order to approach effectively the essential characteristics of literature, a complementary approach has been taken: literature is compared with journalism, history, and philosophy. For example, literature focuses on people, news reports events; Literature describes the details of behavior, history Outlines the evolution of society; Literature explores the image of the individual, philosophy reveals the meaning of the group. At the same time, literature often takes news, history and philosophy as the background and obtains aesthetic resources from news, history and philosophy. Journalism, history and philosophy can learn from literature to change the dullness and tightness of expression. Thus, in the various texts that also “use language”, literature does further distinguish itself from other “languages” — just like pointing out that a tiger is not a pig, a fox, or a leopard; What the tiger itself looked like, however, was not directly revealed.

So our modern knowledge of literature and literariness is stuck here.

If using Chinese and foreign literary theory in the past, about the exploration of literariness is scattered thering is no lack of insight, such as “will” of the ancient Chinese “tao”, xie zhen art, literary theory notation in the point of view, such as the western classical philosophy, aesthetics and poetics in the literature and art, such as the creation of the classical writers of the Chinese and foreign ancient and modern, In particular, the academic achievements of subconsciousness, formalism, textualism, postmodern literary theory and theoretical transformation in the last hundred years… All these add up to almost make a person haoshou difficult to poor, perhaps it is still a fog to see flowers, but after all, we can see the quality and change of literature.

Moreover, some people are the first to get close to the nature of literature

At the beginning of the 20th century, Russian scholars tried to make literary research scientific, and the “scientific” theorists pursued the object of literary research one after another — even proposed and confirmed literariness. In this aspect of research, Roman Jacobson is a representative figure. In 1921, Roman Jacobson, a 25-year-old Russian linguist and university professor who had moved to Czechoslovakia and later to the United States, argued that “the object of literary science is not literature, but ‘literarability, even if a given work becomes literature. (See Poetics problems). His formalist colleague Eichenbaum immediately responded: “The purpose of literary science should be to study the characteristics peculiar to literary works that distinguish them from any other works.” (See On the Method of Formalism). However, after Jacobson put forward the concept of literariness, the academic circle generally chose to break away from Jacobson’s expression of linguistics and poetics and jump to another founder and representative figure of Russian formalism School, Shklovsky, as to what literariness is.

In his article Art as Technique, Shklovsky reveals literariness — or “what is called art” — by using five concurrent verbs: 1. Restores one’s sense of life; 2. make people feel concrete; 3. Make the stone look like stone; 4. Make things strange; 5. Make the form difficult in order to increase the difficulty and length of the feeling, because the process of artistic feeling is itself the purpose of art. The views expressed in these “five causative sentences” are completely to the point, and they are thoughtful to the basic level of literature. It should be noted that the words “strange” in “making things strange” and “difficult” in “making a situation difficult” have specific meanings: “Strange” derived from g rove, theory of defamiliarization, before he by observation and human responses to things in our daily life, find a common things are feeling after several times, would be the unconscious “automatic state, let things wither”, henceforth no longer cause enough attention, the essence of this “automation” phenomenon is the numbness and rigidity of ordinary things, However, art is to restore people’s sense of things, and things must be “defamiliarization” through the language of visualization. The “strange” here is not to make people confused, but to make people feel fresh and curious, and produce a strong and continuous aesthetic “feeling”. “Difficulty” echoes and supports the art of defamiliarization. In essence, it rejects straightforward and simple communication in daily life or non-literary abstract and direct expression, so that life and characters become novel and full images with abundant resources and worthy of continuous taste.

Why do these “five causative sentences” glow with the sun and the moon? Because its pertinence and thoughtful revealed three constant characteristics of literariness: one is the occurrence of literature. The emergence of literature needs both authors and readers. For authors, in the words of Mr. Zhu Guangqian, creation is for “catharsis” and “sharing”. On the part of readers, the desire to “share” reading was latent; The so-called “catharsis” and “sharing” can not be imposed or forced on others, but can only rely on common life feelings and appeals. Second, the occurrence of artistic effect. Art appeals to the senses — the senses are so acute that they perceive things at once; Feeling connects the heart and triggers emotions; The senses are concrete and holographic, and therefore the senses are enriched; Feeling connects rationality or thought through the mind and drives aesthetic sublimation. Third, he discovered and invented “defamiliarization”. Because of the need to understand and forgive people’s “automation” problems, literary texts must banish the old, dry and plain things, give new, bright and vivid stories and images, and confirm that novelty is the core of literature. Can a work with these “three constant characteristics” still not be literature? Moreover, with Shklovsky’s “five verbs” as the yardstick, a large number of works can be easily invited out of the literary territory. As for many non-literary works or articles, literary techniques are also used in order to make the expression lively, and the technique is only the glove of the hand rather than the hand. Only when the content expressed by literary techniques exceeds half of the total volume can we consider inviting the work back to the country of literature.

At this point, the definition of literariness or literary characteristics should be clearly defined, but we should proceed cautiously. Firstly, four key words (groups) of “art as technique” should be selected from the “five causative sentences” which reflect the “three constant characteristics”, and temporarily placed below:

Specific image, vivid, novel, image stretching

Of course, believing and confirming these four key words (groups), we have reason to compliment Shklovsky at this point: if literature were a company, he owned fifty-one percent of the company, was the absolute majority shareholder, and had the right to approve or disapprove any operation of the company. As a writer, everyone should consciously follow the 51 percent Shklovsky rule. This is not a stubborn bigotry and hypocritical, but a respect for literariness, and a good thought that wishes literariness to shine in literary works.

However, we still cannot define literariness or the essential characteristics of literature based on the above four key words. This is because Shklovsky’s “five causative sentences” to a large extent cut off the other two important factors of the “basic level” of literature — language and content; While western textualism and postmodern literary theory have made remarkable achievements along with the exploration of formalism, they have encountered great theoretical trouble and practical embarrassment, resulting in “post-theoretical turn”. Now, regardless of those explorations, the most direct problem is that these four key words reflect the commonness of all arts. Literature, as one of the arts, is language art. Language is the first-hand section and lifelong difficulty of writers’ creation.

In fact, the study of literary language, the beginning is jacobson and assorted korolev, and others in the form of the poetics of its main business, is a group of them with linguist saussure, put the language into the literariness of the category, gave such as “metaphor” and “metonymy”, “context”, “poetry function”, “defamiliarization” linguistics research results; At the same time, other literary theorists and writers at home and abroad have also made great comments on literary language. There is no doubt that, in terms of literature, the past study and discourse on language are the complement and enrichment of the “five causes”.

However, there is a technical deficiency: the past research and discourse is generally in the state of language, not from language to literature literature. From the point of view of reality, language is the key entrance to the study of literariness.

Language must involve content. As far as literary narration is concerned, language seems to present the form of things, or is very much like the carrier of things. In fact, all languages are corresponding to concrete things and are fundamentally based on the carrier, which is the thing or content. In literary texts, language is both the means and the end, the form and the content (wang Zengqi, a classical writer, once said this). Under this logic, language is derived from the problem of literary content.

According to the aforementioned four keywords – the literariness of literature content is not an abstract concept statement and logical deduction, but the characters and events, the environment of representational devices and rendering, details, plot, image, emotion is natural, is the view, intention, answer the hidden things and he equation, in fact, the entire contents of the literature is to imagine, The so-called written language is nothing more than the transcription or implementation of imaginary language. Games, and literature, not just think back to the view of literature and its effect, the subject of “anger” and “share” is based on the experience of life, cognition, emotion and demands, that is, literature aesthetic “factor” to promote and accompanied by the image of the growth, development and diffusion – eventually formed the aesthetic implication. In writing the True Story of Ah Q, Lu Xun did not analyze and criticize the national character and the method of spiritual victory, but concentrated on describing ah Q’s predicament and behavior with visual language. The “Ah Q spirit” reflected by Ah Q’s behavior was both ridiculous and deplorable, which made people feel mixed emotions. Tolstoy does not need to demonstrate and promote ideas, and his “War and Peace”, “Anna Karenina” and “Resurrection” are filled with humanitarian aesthetic meaning, expressing sincere and broad understanding, sympathy, prayer and compassion of human beings with facts, which is particularly shocking. — So far, we can sum up three characteristics of literary content: first, content visualization, its content visualization and language visualization are consistent, and the content of visualization has uncertain divergence or ductility, usually greater than abstract thinking; Second, the content of visualization is the product of imagination, and the text language transcribing imaginary language is also image. The third is the aesthetic of the content. During the creation and reading, the feeling is direct to the emotion – the emotion conducts the rationality – the rationality inspires the emotion – the emotion guides the feeling, and the aesthetic is in the circular fermentation state. Therefore, the “three features” of literary content add the following four key words (groups) to literariness:

Language visualization, imagination, image divergence, aesthetic implication

Now, we take the four key words (groups) of “art as a technique” and put them together with the four key words (groups) of the characteristics of literary content, try to combine the same term and make a simple statement, and then we can give the definition of literariness:

Literariness is characterized by the vivid presentation of novel and meaningful life with visualized language.

Here, “visualization”, “lively”, “novelty” and “implication” adverbial and attribute, you can’t get rid of them is not an adverb in the definition, content words, is a qualitative difference, is the watershed of literature and art with the art and literature, is the life of the literary state – are elements of abandoned the theory of literary theory. When literariness is established, the concept of literature follows, namely, the “literariness” in this definition is replaced by “literature”, and the “characteristic” is replaced by “art”.

Perhaps writers are less interested in conceptual inquiry and more used to perceptual cognition; Theorists, on the other hand, may think that literary issues are not big theoretical issues, and need not be tackled. But such broad-mindedness is risky. Literariness is the essence of literature, the center of aesthetics, and the foothold and starting point of creation and theory. In fact, literariness has always been a prominent problem in our literary reality, which is discovered based on the observation of writers’ creation, the understanding of literature’s external environment, and the prediction of literature’s trend.

Yes, no one doubts that great and gifted writers emerge from time to time. They seem to be born with a keen sense of art (including language), unhesitatingly defend literariness, and are never misled by strong “guidance” from authority figures; They hardly ever ask for advice or talk about literariness, as if literariness were inherent to them, and they were born ambassadors for it. They are Qu Yuan, Li Bai, Su Shi, Guan Hanqing, Cao Xueqin, Lu Xun, Xiao Hong and Zhang Ailing. They are Homer, Dante, Cervantes, Shakespeare, Byron, Pushkin, Goethe, Flaubert, Tolstoy, Hemingway, Kafka, Gabriel Marquez, Jorge Borges and Albert Camus. But most people who write literature are not born ambassadors of literature: some people have great artistic talent but are unfortunately led astray by their masters (usually by their own choice) and miss the golden age of creativity; Some talent in cowardly latent state, after a long exploration to find light, late bloomer; Other people (ordinary people), according to Gorky, everyone has the possibility to become a writer. They study and create very hard, and know a lot of literary principles and methods, but they do not grasp the root of literature, and stubbornly believe that their mediocrity is the direction to greatness. Because they remember and listen to a certain or a few important people are not involved in the real literary discourse, they have long in the literary efforts and intoxicated, sometimes even temper is very bad, listen to others criticism. In fact, as long as the majority of these people are on the path of true literature and blessed with more gifts of life, everyone can be on a par with the genius. This is the situation of grassroots literary creation in China, but it should be different in other countries.

When literary editors communicate with authors, they are occasionally tempted to borrow Maugham’s warning: I am a third-rate writer, but I am a second-rate editor and a first-class reader. Indeed, for a senior editor, no matter what tricks the manuscript uses, there is almost no hidden bones, their joy or regret arising spontaneously in the process of reading the manuscript, clear and determined; Writers, on the other hand, usually want to hear two words — yes, three words are their favorite — really good, and never want to hear anything after a lot of incomprehensible praise — but. Unfortunately, the judgment and attitude of good editors can only be determined by literariness, and their brilliance and ease are nothing more than holding literariness in their hands — and the scale on the ruler is correct and complete. On one occasion, an editor is pointed out that the plot of a young writer is not in conformity with the life, he said he is absurd, and so-and-so foreign writer claims as its evidence, the editor had to say tell you: the somebody else tell you wear a suit this right, but I can’t speak his underwear is not equal to the somebody else you can say the somebody else not wearing underwear.


Most of the time, when we talk about a talented young writer, we mean the literary excellence of his work, not anything else. Literariness should be a writer’s character and belief. It takes less than two minutes to remember the definition of literariness, but for most creators, to turn literariness into an instinct requires long-term experience, understanding and consolidation in creative practice. Literariness does not directly determine the height of a work, but it is the path and guarantee to reach the height of a work. Great works depend on great aesthetic meaning, and aesthetic meaning can only grow on the hotbed of literature. People who fall in love with literary creation tend to be obsessed with it and devote their time and energy recklessly. If they fail to grasp the basis of literary creation, it will inevitably lead to investment losses in their life (in the 1980s, someone in China once called on “don’t crowd in the path of literature”). If, on the other hand, literature is mastered and maintained, there is a golden thread in reading and creative practice that gathers all efforts and finally makes the kite fly high.

All along, literariness is facing the test and examination of reality.

In reality, as a social undertaking, literature and creation are inevitably dominated and influenced by the society. When society entrusts literature with the task of preaching and propagandizing, there comes a responsibility and a reason to call for and organize specific creation, often with explicit requirements and guidelines, policies of rewards and restrictions — and then with the expectation of a fruitful harvest. However, at this time, it is easy to appear “straight to the theme” and “graphic theme” creative pitfalls; In the past literary ecology, people often kindly reminded “we should respect the laws of literature”. The so-called respect for the law of literature is, above all, respect for literariness. Schiller was one of the representative playwrights and poets of Romanticism during the German Whirlwind Movement. Marx praised him, but did not agree with him that he “turned individuals into a simple voice of the spirit of The Times”. Engels pointed out that only the combination of “Schiller style” and “Shakespearean” was the ideal art. Now, many “thematic creation” proposals are good, such as “poverty alleviation”; But the grassroots organizers blindly assign tasks, emphasize the completion time, and even stipulate the “caliber” of writing, clearly to get a number of “sounding board” like works. When the time comes, although they have successfully obtained one or several anthological achievements, the literary quality of most works also “smoothly” disappeared. If such practices are speculative, they are no longer literary topics. If this is not the case, the organizers will support and guide the “theme creation” in a sincere and respectful attitude towards the rules of literature, and the “theme” works of great literary splendor will surely be harvested. When Liu Qing wrote the rural cooperative movement, it was also a “main creation”. Because writers like Liu Qing respected the rules of literature and literariness, she wrote an excellent novel history of Entrepreneurship after a long period of deep life. Then again, people who don’t understand literariness at all can’t respect it. A writer should always know what he is dealing with and how he should do it.

The more lasting and profound social impact may come from the “collective literary unconsciousness” of the writer’s time. “Collective unconsciousness of literature” is a literary ideology that is led by the discourse of the industry and integrated with each other under the common background. It also involves the consciousness of non-literature. It has no text present temporarily, is freely infected and consciously used, and is very elastic — but often ignores and distorts the literariness. In fact, the “collective literary unconscious” has been controlling the acquisition, discretion and reward of literature, solidifying literary knowledge and literary history, and controlling readers’ taste and publication choices. Undeniably, in the context of “collective unconsciousness of literature”, there will also be outstanding writers with outstanding individual literary consciousness; But the individual faces the collective, and because of the power of engagement, most individuals will converge on the extra parts of themselves — most likely the creative parts. “Literary collective unconsciousness” is the best way to maintain the existing literary structure and protect the “inner volume” of literature and creation. Facing the “collective unconsciousness of literature”, a writer can only get out of the myth, maintain the spirit of creation and rebuild the dignity of literature by absorbing the strength of literature and finding confidence.

Literariness can be a governing force for literature. When the definition of literariness is accepted by the public as common sense, writers, readers and theorists can be autonomous according to it, and the whole society will communicate and conspire according to it, so that literature can play a better aesthetic role.

The real provocation, however, came

Because of the Internet, because of online reading, because of the national writing or participation in writing, a network for publication/reading platform “happy literature” has been surging. At first it was a traditional popular story, then time travel, suspense, fairies come in droves. They do not seek to claim the fame of “pure literature” or “serious literature”, nor do they seem to care about them. They are guided by the interests of readers or the needs of the market. At first, “pure literature” or “serious literature” ignored them, maintaining a lofty attitude of “not having the same knowledge as it”; However, Pure Literature soon found that a “network novel” has millions or tens of millions of fans. In comparison, it is difficult for a new book to sell more than 10,000 copies. So attention and discussion. Fortunately, “pure literature” was powerful and immediately established a reason for masturbation: The popularity of online literature to satisfy the quick divert the appeal, quickly divert the appeal in the spiritual demand of shallow, can’t be as “pure literature” bring plentiful full of aesthetic pleasure, they can be a a crops are popular, but they never represent the literature and the height of the civilization, the human spirit appeal, after all, is toward higher and more beautiful. “Pure literature” also found evidence from abroad: there is no popular online literature in developed countries, online “happy literature” is just a Chinese characteristic. Soon, social authorities began to pay attention to, manage and guide online literature; And “pure literature” began to realize that the Internet is only a medium of communication, “pure literature” can, should and should also use the Internet. Unfortunately, “pure literature” from paper to the Internet after the reading volume is still dry than “Kuaiyue literature.”

The actual “situation” is that the content of online literature is quite different from the way it is written, and the profound “problem” is that the tastes of readers have changed. What the public want to read online is two words: cool and fast. A “cool” word, let the story on the strange way, let the witticism, plain speaking, literary cavity, malicious vulgar words popular; A word “fast”, without wearing shoes and hats, cut away the branches and vines, take away the wrinkles of details, simplify the wool, speed up the flow of language — some “pure literature” things. Why cool, fast? The first reason lies outside literature. Because of rapid economic and social development, survival and lifestyle changes, more and more new information, new knowledge and interest in the idea of people constantly deconstructed (plus had time to the concept of deconstruction and interest), the time is pressing, temporarily can only to the great and fast, and eager to construct in the great and fast reading new ideas and interests, and everything is still waiting for the new change of life. Old-school people are less willing to accept the reality that their children and grandchildren have become. Faced with the reality, the traditional “pure literature”, even with the ambition of “setting up the heart for heaven and earth, setting up the life for the people”, is often frustrated by the ocean.

Fatally, this reality is changing literature and invention literature. In the reality of network literature, the structure and clever writing of “pure literature” is a boring old cow pulling a broken car, and even the author feels very low if he writes according to that kind of routine. In terms of what to write and how to write, beyond the aforementioned “pass through” and “fast and easy,” writers are particularly good at creating “impact points” for the emotions, tastes, and intellect of their readers. They believe in the market, use the psychology of need to cultivate readers, and readers become readers themselves: the popularity of the work is like religion. Given the rapid development of artificial intelligence in recent years, it is reasonable to assume that ai robots will join the writing team in the near future. Intelligent robot writers will be more knowledgeable and responsive to readers’ interests than online writers. There is no way to predict how robot writers will interact or compete with online writers, but it is certain that robot writers will move ahead of online writers — becoming the new online writers. Such a change makes pure literature more and more worried: I do not know which pillar of the confirmed literariness will be removed by network literature.

However, literariness is extremely likely to be saved by network literature.

At the moment, as long as we calmly examine and investigate network literature, we will find that it changes only literature, not literature. Literariness requires that literature be “new”, and if literature does not change, there is no “new” and it will die. Take a look at some of the best online literature: they speed up the narrative process by using novel stories and fresher visualisms according to the principle of “cool and fast”, all for the sake of “refreshing” readers. They create “impact points” that are effectively aimed at readers’ tastes; They provide “quick joy”, is to meet the needs of readers, is the market choice; They have the interaction of the subject (creator, character and reader). The subject of creation writes the characters in the works to adapt to the attitude of the subject of reader, and the subject of reader participates in the creation according to the character’s personality, which is the advance intervention of aesthetics. The author adjusts and changes his writing in line with the progress and changes of his readers. The readers continue to progress and change with the adjustment and change of literature. They have won market benefits, but that does not negate their social benefits… From this point of view, literariness is actually the common gene of network literature and “pure literature”. Network literature does not contradict literariness, but seeks and opens up a new way for literariness. Human affairs are leisurely, network writers and “pure literature” writers will eventually come to the same destination in essence.

Indeed, it is hard to argue that literature changed by life does not bring about minor literary adjustments. However, even if literariness is slightly adjusted, it is relatively stable compared with literary style. Literariness has two unshakable fulcrum points: one is that people’s mind inevitably appeals to life; the other is that people’s mind can obtain aesthetic pleasure through experiencing artistic life. As long as there are people in the world, there is life, literature and art are needed, and real literariness is indispensable. In the mountain of literature, literary pennant is always floating.