Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

白先勇細說紅樓夢

Rate this book
三冊60萬字,十八開本,特殊裱紅卡書盒+精緻大書衣包覆三大冊珍藏

《紅樓夢》導讀是白先勇先生在美國加州大學聖塔芭芭拉分校東亞系主要授課之一,分中英文兩種課程,持續二十多年。

2014年,臺大邀請回母校開設《紅樓夢》導讀通識課,由於《紅樓夢》這本「天書」歷來的研究、批評、考據、索隱,林林總總,汗牛充棟,各方爭議熱烈,任何一家之言,都難下斷論。

白先勇藉三學期的細說,正本清源,把這部文學經典完全當作小說來導讀,側重解析《紅樓夢》的小說藝術:神話架構、人物塑造、文字風格、敘事手法、觀點運用、對話技巧、象徵隱喻、平行對比、千里伏筆,檢視《紅樓夢》的作者曹雪芹如何將各種構成小說的元素發揮到極致。

透過這套書詳實而精準的整理呈現,不僅對《紅樓夢》的欣賞與理解,指出一條康莊大道,更帶給讀者對傳統、對文學、對文化、對人生的感悟與啟發。

1040 pages, Paperback

Published July 5, 2016

5 people are currently reading
20 people want to read

About the author

Pai Hsien-yung

42 books57 followers
Chinese name: 白先勇

Kenneth Hsien-yung Pai (Chinese: 白先勇; pinyin: Bái Xiānyǒng; Wade–Giles: Pai Hsien-yung), born July 11, 1937) is a writer who has been described as a "melancholy pioneer." He was born in Guilin, Guangxi, China at the cusp of both the Second Sino-Japanese War and subsequent Chinese Civil War. Pai's father was the famous Kuomintang (KMT) general Bai Chongxi (Pai Chung-hsi), whom he later described as a "stern, Confucian father" with "some soft spots in his heart." Pai was diagnosed with tuberculosis at the age of seven, during which time he would have to live in a separate house from his siblings (of which he would have a total of nine). He lived with his family in Chongqing, Shanghai, and Nanjing before moving to the British-controlled Hong Kong in 1948 as CPC forces turned the tide of the Chinese Civil War. In 1952, Pai and his family resettled in Taiwan, where the KMT had relocated the Republic of China after Japan's defeat in 1945.

(from Wikipedia)

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
3 (50%)
4 stars
1 (16%)
3 stars
2 (33%)
2 stars
0 (0%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Profile Image for Cherry Wang.
118 reviews4 followers
May 28, 2021
白先勇說《紅樓夢》是天下第一書,我想的確是如此--《紅樓夢》寫於清朝乾隆時期,清朝是中國古典小說所屬年代裡的最後一個朝代,而乾隆又是清朝的盛世,因此在中國歷代累積出來深厚的文化背景下,讓《紅樓夢》涵蓋了大量的詩詞歌賦、小說戲曲這些文化資產,還有儒道佛的哲學思想、人生觀,當然也展現了屬於中國人特有的人性及人情世故,完全不亞於重哲思、人性的西方經典小說。

在看這本白先勇的導讀前,早已把《紅樓夢》看過了三次,在不同的年齡看這本書,看的重點不一樣,感受也是各自不相同。書裡半白話文的文體以及大量的詩詞歌賦,沒有深厚的中國古典文學底子,不是那麼容易看得懂,因此雖說看過三次,但總覺得對這本書仍然是一知半解,只能了解個大概,對於這本書為什麼這麼吸引我是無法說出一個所以然來的,好像始終在夢境中,看事情都是一個矇矓的影子,然後覺得這個夢境真是太迷人了,直到看了《白先勇細說紅樓夢》後,方才大夢初醒,才把這本書真正看進心裡,有了更多深刻的體悟。

《紅樓夢》的主要內容雖然是賈寶玉這些主要人物間的『情』,還有賈家的興衰過程,但在整個故事架構之上有一個神話故事做為中流砥柱。。。話說女媧煉石補天,獨留一塊靈石沒用上,這塊有了靈氣的石頭後來成了神瑛侍者。神瑛侍者看到有一株絳珠仙草需要灌溉,否則不能活,所以就常常拿水灌溉這株仙草,當絳珠仙草知道神瑛侍者要下凡歷劫,仙草為了報答侍者灌溉之恩也跟著下凡,所以林黛玉愛哭是其來有自的,她以淚水償還神瑛侍者化身的寶玉(所以寶玉生下來嘴裡便銜下一塊五彩晶瑩的玉)的灌溉之恩,曹雪芹把一個情愛故事昇華成一個神話,用一個更寬的宇宙觀來說一個關於『情』的故事,也因為這個神話的前提,讓《紅樓夢》的『宿命』(第5章及第116章裡十二金釵的命運及十二曲的輓歌)成了必然,所有的悲情成了在看破紅塵後的大徹大悟。。。

看完紅樓夢都不免會問自己最喜歡書中的哪個人物,其實年輕時看紅樓夢時就不是那麼喜歡林黛玉,她太敏感、太小心眼、太愛哭,但想想她是絳珠仙草,是要下凡來以淚報恩的,雖然不喜歡她,但還是同情她,而且她終究是賈寶玉的最愛,所以不得不以她的心情為自己的心情,總是怕她受太多的委曲,也因為她而討厭薛寶釵和襲人。不過到了現在這個年紀,在看完白先勇的解說後,我要說曹雪芹創造出來的人物,最有血有肉、最生靈活現、最淋漓盡致的就屬王熙鳯了,同時在第五章裡揭示紅樓夢結局的十二曲輓歌裡,關於王熙鳯的曲子不就正是整個賈家命運的寫照--『【聰明累(王熙鳳)】機關算盡太聰明,反算了卿卿性命。生前心已碎,死後性空靈。家富人寧,終有個家亡人散各奔騰。枉費了,意懸懸半世心;好一似,蕩悠悠三更夢。忽喇喇似大廈傾,昏慘慘似燈將盡。呀!一場歡喜忽悲辛,歎人世,終難定!』--曹雪芹在前八十回極盡能事的堆砌出賈家的繁華盛世,就是要對比八十回後的『忽喇喇似大廈傾,昏慘慘似燈將盡』蒼涼蕭瑟、好景不常的宿命,原來都是一場夢。

以前唸書時教科書說《紅樓夢》前八十回是曹雪芹寫的,後四十回是由高鴞補上的,關於這個說法,白先勇有不同的意見,他認為整整一百二十回都是曹雪芹自己寫的,因為很多前八十回作者舖陳細膩的梗在後四十回陸續用上,只有同一個作者才可以如此自然且環環相扣地寫下去,從前面的繁花似錦、富貴滿堂到後來的『忽喇喇似大廈傾,昏慘慘似燈將盡』,本來就是曹雪芹設定好的情境,白先勇認為《紅樓夢》是曹雪芹的自傳,是他的《追憶似水年華》,《紅樓夢》的賈府由盛走衰正也映照著曹雪芹自己的身世,江寧織造曹府,康熙南巡六次,四次是由曹家接駕的,到了雍正時,過著錦衣玉食的曹府被抄家了。。。

個人覺得曹雪芹有林黛玉的敏感細膩,有薛寶釵的縝密周到,就是不曉得寶玉是曹雪芹的化身嗎?他本人是不是也像寶玉一樣既多情又專一呢?白先勇也是總能洞悉人性以細膩文思寫下許多又美、又現實的動人故事,是一個擅長描述人物的大師級文學創作者,隨著他娓娓道來讓我看到一個更加深刻且引人入勝的《紅樓夢》。
Profile Image for ツツ.
501 reviews10 followers
August 11, 2024
I appreciate this book because it was perfect for when I was too sleepy or too full or too tried to read anything more demanding. It’s highly readable (and very long). I also appreciate the unpopular opinions and the careful reasoning behind them. It definitely gave me a new outlook on the source material (tho I only read a few chapters years ago).

This book was incredibly repetitive, with some key points being reiterated a dozen times throughout. The frequent use of "rational/rationality" and "logical/logic" in place of "sensible" or "conformity" became a bit grating. There’s also a tiny bit of casual misogyny.

All in all, it’s hard to believe this was an undergraduate course spanning 3 semesters.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.