• 《花营锦阵》第四图的疑惑 - [搞名堂]

    2009-04-17

    版权声明:转载时请以超链接形式标明文章原始出处和作者信息及本声明
    http://www.blogbus.com/sb94nb-logs/38045384.html

    江晓原在《高罗佩<秘戏图考>与<房内考>之得失及有关问题(2008修订版)》一文中提到:“春宫图的评述、鉴赏,应是高氏无可争议的“强项”,然而他在这方面也有令人不解的硬伤。最突出的一例,是在谈到春宫图册《花营锦阵》第四图时,高氏描述其画面云:

    一个头戴官帽的男子褪下了裤子,姑娘(此处高氏原文为girl)的裤子则脱在桌上。姑娘的一只靴子已脱落。

    然而检视《秘戏图考》中所印原图,这个所谓的“姑娘”穿的却是男式靴子,脱落了靴子的那只脚完全赤裸着,是一只未经任何缠裹摧残的健康天足。这样问题就大了:因为按晚明春宫图的惯例,女子必定是缠足,而且在图中女子全身任何部位皆可裸露描绘,只有足绝不能裸露;对于这一惯例高氏知之甚稔,并不止一次强调指出过,例如他说:

    我尤其要指出中国人对表现女性裸足的传统厌恶。……只要让读者知道女子的裸足完全是禁忌就够了。即使最淫秽的春宫版画的描绘者也不敢冒犯这种特殊禁忌。

    既然如此,此《花营锦阵》第四图(高氏指出它是从另一春宫图册《风流绝畅》中移补而来)就不可能是描绘男女之间的事。事实上它描绘的是两男肛交,其题辞《翰林风》也明确指示是如此。高氏之误,可能是因原图上那少年梳了女式发型而起———其实这种换妆在当时并不罕见,《金瓶梅》中就有确切的例证。”

    江晓原论高氏房内考总体缺失及具体失误等皆为不痛不痒。中国古代典籍宏富,国人亦未必竟览,况高氏一外国人乎?至于所谓花营锦阵第四图的硬伤,我看GIRL未必不可以指称男同中姑娘一方,此处宜存疑待考,不必遽然指为硬伤。

    吴存存《明中晚期社会男风流行状况叙略》(《中国文化》,2001/17/18):

    “晚明纵欲主义思潮曾使金陵、姑苏、杭州等印刷出版高度发达的城市大量出版春宫画册,而受男风之渐,这些画册中很不乏同性恋的场面。如晚明十分着名的、印刷精美的《花营锦阵》,其中第四幅即为一成年男人与一小厮的性行为画面,图旁题诗云:

    座上香盈果满车,谁家少年润无暇。
    为采蔷薇颜色媚,赚来试折后庭花。
    半似含羞半推脱,不比寻常浪风月。
    回头低唤快些儿,叮咛休与他人说。

    (注:高罗佩《秘戏图考》第237页,广东人民出版社1992年。案,此诗题作《翰林风》,明人有称男风为“翰林风月”的习惯(见小说《石点头》第十四卷开篇)。此外,诗中如“香盈果满车”,用潘安典,喻指美男。“试折后庭花”,是明清时期最常用的关于男性同性恋行为的隐语。高罗佩认为此图及诗所叙乃异性恋,误。)

    诗中点明了画里主人公追求新奇和刺激的心态,推崇同性恋而贬抑异性恋为“寻常浪风月”。类似的画图在这个时期的其他画册和小说插图中亦颇不少见。”

    案:依吴存存之见此图当指南风无疑,惟高氏所指GIRL乃误为女性还是特指南风中所谓“受”方?据查高氏此处原文如下:

    PICTURE 4. The Way of the Academicians

    Description:

    A shadowy courtyard corner. On the table, covered with a mat, a book and a rolled up scroll. The man, wearing an official cap, has lowered his trousers; those of the girl are lying on the table. One of the girl’s boots has slipped off.

    Text:

    “Surrounded by a lingering fragrance, and so handsome as to make the ladies pelt him with fruit till his carriage is full, who is that gentleman of dignified mien? In order to explore the Charm of the Rose he has inveigled his partner into allowing him to try the Flower of the Hindgarden.

    “She is a little bashful and gently pushes him away, for this is quite a departure from the ordinary! Looking over her shoulder she calls out softly: ‘Hurry a bit! And please don’t say anything to the others!’

    (signed) “The Candidate from the South”

    Notes:

    The first line contains two references to famous handsome men. The first is HSÜN TS’AN荀粲, a scholar of the Chin period, who is said to have always been surrounded by a sweet-fragrance.

    The second is P’AN YÜEN (潘岳, died 300 A.D.), a young poet famous for his good looks. Whenever he went out in his chariot the ladies who saw him pass used to pelt him with fruit till his carriage was full.

    Han-lin, “Forest of Writing 13 rushes” was the Imperial Academy of letters. Its members often practised pederasty and hence were also supposed to be prone to the anal coitus when copulating with women.

    经比照原文,高氏所用确为GIRL/SHE/WOMEN等。而经查《花营锦阵》其余各图,所绘女子均为小脚,且无一裸露。如此看来,高氏难道确实将此人误为女性了?

    近日重读高氏《秘戏图考》,在卷一中篇“春宫画简史”第二章中谈到春宫版画的普通特征时,高氏提到“古代中国人对女足的性联想,以及这与女子缠足的关系,直到如今尚未获满意解释”。译者杨权在小注(185页)中说:作者在书末的勘误页补充说:“在有关女足禁忌的讨论中,应更清楚地说明,这种禁忌仅适用于小脚。表现女子裸露的天足是常有的事,参见画册《花营锦阵》第四图中的姑娘——显然是一个丫鬟——的裸足。女子裸足也见于道家和佛家的绘画中。”

    看来,高氏依然还是认定《花营锦阵》第四图中是女子而不是男子。不管怎样,高氏毕竟可以自圆其说。我们不能肯定那一定就是女子,也无法肯定那一定就是男子(江晓原氏的理由吾以为略显牵强),高氏给出的理由是:若是缠足女子,则露足就是禁忌;若是天足女子,则露足则为常见。并举出佛道两家的绘画予以佐证。高氏认定图中所绘之人乃丫鬟无疑,所以可以露足(天足)。我们没有更多的材料来作为高氏认定其为丫鬟的证据。在两种可能性依然存在的情况下,我们只能继续存疑待考。

    分享到:

    历史上的今天: