luody

狂欢的宗教之维—巴赫金狂欢理论研究

Religious Dimension of "Carnival": On Bakhtin's theory of "Carnival"

【作者】宋春香 【导师】杨慧林

【作者基本信息】中国人民大学，文艺学，2008年，博士


【摘要 (中文/英文)】 在宏大的宗教文化历史背景下,此文考察了狂欢与宗教(主要是多神教和基督教)丰富的渊源关系及巴赫金狂欢理论内容中的宗教性主题和宗教文化意义,并试图通过狂欢理论与宗教文化之间的关系问题的个案分析,强调“他山之石,可以攻玉”,进行一种跨文学、跨文化的比较研究和影响研究的理论尝试。宗教是狂欢得以产生的基本起源,也是巴赫金狂欢理论形成体系规模的理论生发点。如果从史的角度来考察,学界有关狂欢与宗教的探讨可以在此达成共识,即狂欢源于宗教。若对此再加以细化考量,狂欢同宗教的渊源关系不容质疑:一方面狂欢源于多神教,一方面狂欢源于基督教。狂欢可谓是多神教和基督教综合作用的产物,这在欧洲文化史上都有着清晰的记载。巴赫金博古通今,在其代表性的学术著作《陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题》和《弗朗索瓦·拉伯雷的创作和中世纪与文艺复兴时期的民间文化》中,直接陈述的宗教观念是其体系中的重要组成部分,间接表达的宗教理想是其重要叙事策略。诸如:巴赫金的宗教人生,反映了鲜明的宗教意识;西方基督教文化和俄罗斯“白银时代”的影响,成为其理论得以产生的宗教背景;对话理论和酒神理论成为其可供挖掘的理论资源之一;狂欢的笑和宗教禁忌、狂欢的身体和...更多宗教美学、狂欢的形象和宗教圣贤、狂欢的戏仿和宗教文本等,都通过狂欢理论的内容要素同宗教主题取得了紧密的联系,张扬着宗教精神诉求,构建了文学与宗教文化亲和中的乌托邦理想,从而对中国当代文学研究、中国的外国文学研究和宗教史研究产生了一定的影响。在批驳其超离现实的虚幻性同时,肯定了巴赫金狂欢理论的宗教内涵和对文学研究和宗教研究的重要价值。 全文共分六部分: 第一部分为导论,主要是概述巴赫金狂欢理研究的主要内容。主要包括狂欢与宗教关系的历史渊源追溯、宗教与巴赫金思想体系的建构问题、国内外巴赫金狂欢理论的研究现状和本论文研究方法及相关术语的范围界定,进一步厘清狂欢理论中基本概念的客观含义,进一步明确巴赫金狂欢理论的研究对象、论证方法、研究原则和基本内容,并有针对性地说明本论文的基本内容和理论框架。巴赫金狂欢理论同宗教的联系有着历史和逻辑两方面的依据。如果从史的角度来考察,学界有关狂欢与宗教的探讨可以在此达成共识,即狂欢源于宗教。在巴赫金的著作中,以新的二元对立思维模式为论证方法、以民间立场为研究原则、以狂欢节、狂欢式、狂欢化三个关键词为基本范畴、以宗教层、文化层、文学层为具体的分析结构,从而体现出一种理论建构的体系性特征。关于巴赫金的研究现状问题,东西方各不相同。巴赫金研究在其故乡最突出的研究特色就是——俄罗斯的巴赫金研究注重俄国本土精神文化内涵的挖掘,明显地走着一条“本土化”的研究路线。比如,探讨狂欢同古罗斯之笑的关系、研究狂欢同中世纪的历史渊源、以及由此引申而来的知识分子的命运问题等。在西方不仅首次发现了巴赫金,而且对巴赫金的研究更多的是迎合当时文论思潮的话语解读,表现为解读视角与20世纪西方文论关键词的某种契合及其相关焦点问题的论争。西方的巴赫金研究明显不同于俄罗斯的巴赫金研究。二者的一个很重要的不同之处就是——西方的巴赫金研究并不注重俄国本土精神文化内涵的挖掘,而是在还未充分理解巴赫金概念及其内涵之前,就已经强化了诠释其理论的“拓展与挑战”的学术情绪。在我国,巴赫金研究与俄国的“本土化”路线和西方的“他者化”路线截然不同,巴赫金狂欢理论研究可以说已经大致走出搜集整理的初级研究阶段,向着渊源探索、文化寻根和中西文化比较的更高研究阶段迈进。 第二部分,主要论述巴赫金的宗教人格及其挥之不去的宗教情结。从微观角度把握巴赫金的宗教人生和“非宗教的宗教追求”。巴赫金关注狂欢与宗教并不偶然,有着主观和客观的环境因素。主观在于本身的基督徒身份和世界观,客观在于俄罗斯东正教的氛围,巴赫金学术研讨兴趣起初就是围绕着宗教哲学来展开的。若从巴赫金的宗教身份来考证的话,巴赫金本人是一个基督徒,而且终身信仰宗教。可以说,巴赫金的一生,凝结了挥之不去的宗教情结。在童年,巴赫金就受到了俄国东正教的熏陶。一个没有宗教意识的思想家,是绝对创作不出具有宗教内涵的理论的。巴赫金是一位拥有宗教意识的思想家。在他的学术人生和研究理论中,不时闪现宗教的真知灼见。早期,巴赫金关于主体的哲学和美学思考,就具有浓厚的新康德主义色彩。巴赫金同本国宗教思想家的对话与交流,更是其重要的学术活动之一。 第三部分,主要论述巴赫金狂欢理论的宗教渊源和学理基础。巴赫金在其狂欢理论的论述中,无论在思维方式,还是在理论借鉴和影响上,都有着深刻的学理基础。这主要是对对话理论和酒神理论的承接与发展。具体内容包括:第一,侧重论述对话理论和酒神理论是巴赫金狂欢理论的宗教哲学基础。一方面,就对话理论来讲,从哲学的高度而言,对话是人的基本存在方式;从语言的角度而言,语言的本质是对话,对话是与独白相对立并存的两种言语方式;不管巴赫金的“他人”与“我”具有怎样的基督教人格论意义,也不管巴赫金的狂欢理论彰显怎样的自由精神,仅是巴赫金的这种对话理想,就已经承继了宗教话语“我/你”关系的阐释问题。当伊凡诺夫从酒神迷狂状态中总结出了“我”和“你”关系在超越个体经验的集体无意识中所具有的“绝对平等”性质时,巴赫金在对话基础上的兼收并蓄,完全使得狂欢-宗教之间的对立和共存成为对话后的必然结果。也正是在对话这个层面上,巴赫金的狂欢理论始终以对话哲学为基础,不断延伸深化,形成同上帝的长久对话取向。另一方面,就酒神理论来讲,酒神理论是巴赫金狂欢理论的重要基础来源之一。从始作俑者角度讲,德国的尼采和俄罗斯的维·伊凡诺夫是其直接影响者。若从酒神理论对巴赫金的影响来讲,巴赫金从中汲取的主要是宗教的生死哲学观,而远非酒神的短暂狂欢。一段源于神话的故事,在经尼采和伊万诺夫的形而上升华诠释后,强烈地影响了巴赫金的理论起点和价值取向。尼采的酒神理论和巴赫金的狂欢理论之间,存在着无比亲密的“对话关系”:一方面巴赫金从神话世界中索取理论资源,通过话语的置换,用“狂欢”取代了“酒神”,将尼采倡导的酒神精神发展成自己独特的狂欢精神;另一方面巴赫金又在遵循酒神理论精髓的同时,在阐释语境、宗教态度、精神所指上,与尼采存在明显的不同,并最终将尼采“梦与醉”的审美艺术理想转换为走向“两种生活”的宗教精神诉求,实现了一种“从神到人的超越之路”。在俄罗斯本土,伊凡诺夫有关酒神理论的宗教阐释视角,也很大程度上影响了巴赫金狂欢理论中的某些论说。显然,俄罗斯本土文化的亲和性与地域沟通的便利性,无疑强化了巴赫金对酒神理论的深层次解读和理解,而对酒神理论的接受就更加偏重于宗教层面。第二,侧重论述巴赫金狂欢理论产生的宗教背景基础,这以西方基督教文化影响和俄罗斯的“白银时代”为代表,尤其是从宏观角度叙述俄罗斯不同于西方的独特的宗教背景。诸如拜占庭文化影响的东正教传统,割舍不掉的基督教文化渊源,宗教哲学复兴的“白银时代”等。 第四部分,主要论述巴赫金狂欢理论的要素及其宗教主题。通过狂欢的“笑”论与宗教冲突问题、狂欢的身体与宗教亲和问题、狂欢的形象与宗教圣贤的问题、狂欢的戏仿与宗教文本问题四个方面内容来论述狂欢理论同宗教文化的内在联系与文化内涵。其间,笑是狂欢同宗教关系的一个基本要素。在巴赫金狂欢理论中,狂欢之“笑”与渎神游戏唇齿相依,狂欢之“笑”与宗教禁忌互动共生,狂欢之“笑”与宗教态度相辅相成,由此巴赫金极力批驳那些将诙谐与宗教相对立的观念,提倡二者的亲和与关联。在巴赫金的狂欢理论中,由于同宗教的亲和关系,狂欢的身体是走出了禁欲的樊篱,突破了西方传统哲学的二元论认知,拥有了一种宗教文化内涵,一种“宗教价值”和一种宗教美学蕴涵。在狂欢理论的阐释中,巴赫金史无前例地将小丑、傻瓜和骗子列入文学形象体系之中,并且认为这些形象具有世界性的文学意义,同时,巴赫金又赋予“小丑”和“傻瓜”一种神秘的内涵。这同古老神话中的文化英雄——造物主,及俄罗斯传统中的“圣愚”,都有着亲缘关系,并在巴赫金所言及的颠覆、“贬低化”、“加冕和脱冕”和“他者”的视野中,获得了独特的宗教性内涵,拥有着宗教圣贤的文化原型。若从正统文学的角度来审视的话,狂欢化文学无疑是“下里巴人”对“阳春白雪”的勇敢挑战。但是,若从宗教的视角来考察的话,这不为人正视的“小丑”和“傻瓜”,恰是由宗教中的“文化英雄”和“圣愚”原型演化而来。因为,无论是“文化英雄”,还是“圣愚”现象,都绝非为单一的“敌基督教的”文化,反而是一种亲基督教的文化。在狂欢的戏仿和宗教文本的论述中,巴赫金强调了“梅尼普体和狂欢化”对宗教文本创作的影响、“基督文学”中的“狂欢化”因素和“拉丁语诙谐文学”与“神圣的戏仿”的密切关系,更为直接地表述了狂欢同宗教文学创作之间的文化联系。 第五部分,主要论述巴赫金狂欢理论的精神诉求问题。不可否认,“理想世界是宗教和文学的永恒主题”。作为宗教,都含有一种否定现实人生的怀疑态度。如佛教的追求来世、基督教的救赎意识,最终在此岸世界和彼岸世界的选择中,获得精神的满足和心理的安慰。在狂欢理论中,从表面看,巴赫金对狂欢活动中的物质存在大加描摹,但从深层次讲,他在颠覆现有存在的众多束缚中,始终期盼一种人的精神存在和精神彼岸,一种十分抽象的宗教精神上的东西。在诸如“交替与更新”、“肯定与否定”、“第二种生活”等看似对立的二元论概念中,巴赫金都赋予其精神解放的深刻内涵,从而在人性追问中,显出人类生命诉求间的原初样态,在狂欢中寻找人终极的归宿,在颠覆中期盼人的精神解放,凸显一种宗教精神诉求。 第六部分,主要论述巴赫金狂欢理论在中国当代文学研究、中国的外国文学研究和宗教史研究中的宗教反馈问题。巴赫金狂欢理论宗教性维度的价值还不仅在于它同宗教传统、宗教观念的关联。从更深层的意义上说,狂欢理论也拓展了人们对宗教传统和宗教观念的理解,甚至使“狂欢”本身成为带有某种宗教意味的元素,以至于在中国的现当代文学、中国的外国文学研究和宗教史研究中,不时地反馈着由“狂欢”带来的新鲜视点。在中国的当代文学研究中,出现了狂欢化文学创作和对狂欢理论进行宗教视角的探讨和研究。在中国的外国文学研究中,尤其是在俄国文学中的陀思妥耶夫斯基研究和法国文学的拉伯雷研究中,巴赫金狂欢理论丰富了相关研究的理论视角,并且为如上文学作品宗教层面的认识和理解提供了可资运用的话语资源和方法论基础。同时,巴赫金的狂欢理论远远超出文艺学和哲学的范畴,一定程度上介入到宗教史研究的学理层面,并从一个侧面反映出了宗教史理解的多元性特征,深深影响了宗教史中的狂欢研究和笑研究,诸如儒思·蔻斯、英格维尔特·萨利特·吉尔胡斯等,就将巴赫金的狂欢思想同基督教相联系,同宗教史相沟通,在充分认识到狂欢的宗教价值的同时,进行了有益的吸收和改造,从而使宗教史研究呈现出较之从前截然不同的理论风貌。 总之,狂欢与宗教的关系复杂而暧昧,其文化亲和中的乌托邦理想日益成为学人予以褒奖的论题。而狂欢与宗教的暧昧关系问题,狂欢文化与宗教文化的亲和问题,以及由此衍生出来的巴赫金的宗教观问题和生命哲学问题,也将在中西文化的交融互通中,在当代学者的阐释中获得新的内涵。由此可以得出结论:狂欢在宗教方面的意义和影响都是很大的。巴赫金狂欢理论在文学研究中的宗教视角是一个值得进一步深入探讨和研究的学术课题。

By other's faults, wise men correct their own. The dissertation aims at a theoretic and comparative study in cross-literature and cross-culture against the background of vast religious culture. It examines the relationship between the carnival and religions (mainly the polytheism and the Christianity), themes and cultural significances of the religion in Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory. It’s the commencement of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory that the carnival is originated from the religion. Historically, the academia has already reached a consensus, in which the carnival is derived from the religion. By scrutinizing, we can find a definite relation of its origin: the carnival is derived from polytheism as well as the Christianity. To some extent, the carnival is the synthetic product by mixing polytheism and the Christianity, which has been clearly proved in the European cultural history. In his seminal works of Dostoyevsky’s Poets and Rabelais’s novels and Folk Culture during Middle-age and Renaissance, Mikhail Mikhailoviech Bahktin, who is erudite and well-informed, directly put religious thoughts as the crucial components, and regards embedded religious ideals as its important narrative strategies. For instance, Bakhtin’s religious life reflects his prominent religious consciousness; Influences from the Christian culture and Russia’s“Silver Times”serve as its religious background for his theory; Discourse Theory and Dionysiac Theory are taken as one of the theoretic resources which can be further delved into. Carnival elements in content forges a close relationship with the religious theme: carnival laughs and religious taboos, carnival body and religious aesthetics, carnival images and saints of the religion, carnival parodies and religious texts; In doing so, religious and spiritual appeals pervade, constructing a in the intimacy between the literature and the culture, and having an influence on contemporary literature and foreign literature studies in China. This dissertation, though criticizing Bahktin’s illusion, i.e. a detachment of the reality, gives applause to religious connotations in Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory and values in the study of the religion. This dissertation can be divided into six parts. The first chapter introduces contents of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory, including the origin of the carnival and the religion, the construction of the religion and Bakhtin’s frame of work, the research status quo of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory in addition to his research methods. The author clarifies some key term’s defining boundaries, and elaborates its research objects, approaches, principles, etc, to explain the framework of the dissertation in terms of contents and theories. On a historical and logical basis is Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory connected with the religion. Historically, the academia has already reached a consensus, in which the carnival is derived from the religion. The new reasoning approach of dualistic way of thinking, the research principle in the folklore, the basic domain limited into three key words, carnival day, carnival style and carnivaleque, combined with the concrete analyzing structure on the religious, cultural and literary level, contributes to some kind of systematic features of theory constructing in Bakhtin’s works. The study on Bakhtin nowadays differs from western to oriental states. One prominent feature of the study on Bakhtin in his homeland is—paying more attention on the discovery of Russia’s local denotations of the spiritual culture, and distinctively practicing a route of“localization”, for instance, by discussing the relation of carnivals and laughs, researching on historical relations between carnivals and the Ages, and studying extended issues, such as intellectuals’fate. The western world not only discovers Bakhtin, but also studies him in line with the interpretation in discourse towards trends of literary thoughts of the day. It distinguishes itself as correspondences between the angle of reading and key words of 20th century western literary theory and contests of related issues. The western study on Bakhtin is markedly different from that in Russia. One important distinction is that western study on Bakhtin has no concern about Russia’s local spiritual culture. Rather, they have already intensified the theory’s academic aspects of“expansion and challenge”before the fully understandings of Bakhtin’s definitions and connotations. Markedly distinguished from Russia’s“localization’and western“otherness”, the research on Bakhtin in China is stepping beyond the elementary stage of data collection and settlement, and striving upward to discover origins, cultural roots, and comparisons in Chinese and western culture. The second chapter holds a microscopic view by describing Bakhtin’s religious personality and his religious complex,“un-religiously religious pursuit”. Bakhtin’s concern with the carnivals and the religion is not accidental, but derived from subjective elements and objective environments. With his Christian identity and religious tendencies as subjective elements and objectively influenced by Russia’s Orthodox, Bakhtin develops his academic interest initially beginning with the religious philosophy. Considered from the religious identity, Bakhtin is a Christian, and also, a lifelong believer of the religion. To some extent, Bakhtin’s life is permeated with the overwhelming religious complex. Russian Othodox acts as the edification for Bakhtin’s childhood. An ideologist without the religious thought is totally insulated from creating theories full of religious connotations. As an ideologist with religious thought, Bakhtin enlightens his academic life and research theories with religious philosophy. Bakhtin’s early thought on philosophical and aesthetic aspects of the subjects takes on the thick Neo-Kantian color. Bakhtin’s discourse and communication with Russia’s other religious ideologists is one of his more important academic activities. The third chapter explains religious origins and theoretical basis of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory. Bakhtin builds his theory with a solid theoretical basis, no mater in terms of thinking patterns or its theoretical reference and influences. It’s an inheritance and development of Discourse Theory and Dionysiac Theory. Firstly, the paper focuses upon the claim that Discourse Theory and Dionysiac Theory are philosophical and religious foundations of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory. On the one hand, dialogue, in a philosophical sense and within a boundary of discourse theory, is human’s basic way of existence; from the perspective of languages, the dialogue is the essence of language. Dialogue and monologue, coexisting and opposing, are two speech patterns. No matter to what extent the religiously humanistic significance that Bakhtin’s“others”and“I”have, and to what extent the free spirit is presented in Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory, it is only his ideal of dialogue that inherits the interpretation of“I”and“others”in the religious discourse. When Ivanov concludes that“absolute equality”exists in the collective unconsciousness in“I”and“others”from Dionysiac Theory, Bakhtin’s absorption and development on the basis of the dialogue, totally impels contradictions and co-existences between the carnival and the religion become inevitable after the dialogue. It is also on the level of dialogue that Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory insists upon the basis of the dialogic philosophy, continuously enriches itself, and develops into an eternal direction of dialogue with the God. On the other hand, Dionysiac Theory is an important source for Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory, to which Nietzsche and Ivanov are both directly contributing. The Dionysiac Theory enlightens Bakhtin’s philosophy of birth and death, rather than temporary carnival. A passage from the mythology, after Nietzsche and Ivanov’s metaphysical and refined interpreting, has greatly influenced Bakhtin’s theoretic commencement and his value-orientations. Between Nietzsche’s Dionysiac Theory and Bakhtin’s carnival an extreme intimacy of“dialogic relation”exists. On the one side, Bakhtin borrows resources from the mythological world, and permutes“Dionysus”with the“Carnival”by way of“displacement”in discourse, and at last, develops Nietzsche’s Dionysian spirit into his unique carnival spirit; on the other side, Bakhtin apparently leads a different way from Nietzsche ranging from interpreting contexts to religious attitudes and spiritual orientations in the following souls of the Dionysiac Theory. He eventually transforms Nietzsche’s aesthetically artistic ideal of“Traum und Rausch”(“Dream and Drunk”) into a religious spiritual demand of“leading two lives”, and fulfills“a transcendental journey from the God to the man”. Within the territory of Russia, Ivanov’s explanation of Dionysiac Theory has also influenced some parts of Bakhtin’s theory. Apparently, Bakhtin’s intimacy with Russian local culture and convenience in communications has strengthened his understanding of the Dionysus Theory in a deep level, which contributes to Bakhtin’s religious preference in his theoretic acceptations. Secondly, focusing on the religious basis for Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory, the paper lays emphasis upon the influence of Christian culture and Russia’s“Silver Time”,and in particular macroscopically discusses Russia’s unique religious background; including the Orthodox tradition under Byzantium culture, Christian culture origin and“Silver Time”in philosophy renaissance. Generally speaking, Orthodox plays an important role in Russia’s social life and spirit in terms of scale and culture. It exerts an enormously immeasurable influence over Russian’s humanistic culture, philosophy, social science, literature and arts. The fourth chapter explains crucial elements and its religious theme in Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory. It elaborates on the internal relationship and cultural connotations between Carnival Theory and the religious culture, from the following four aspects: laughs and religious conflicts, carnival bodies and the religious intimacy, carnival images and religious saints, carnival parody and religious texts. Among them, laughter is a basic element in the relationship with the religion. Bakhtin’s carnival is closely next to profaneness, taboos and religious attitude, and thus, he zealously argues against opposing jocosity with the religion, and calls for intimacy and connection between two parties. Deriving from its intimacy with the religion, the carnival human bodies unbridle their asceticism and break through the dualist acquisition in the western philosophy tradition; thus it embraces some essence of religious culture, a portion of“religious value”and sort of religious esthetics. In the Carnival Theory, Bakhtin describes clowns, fools and cheaters in literatures, and endows them with sort of mysterious connotations as well as worldwide literary meanings. They are of the same kinship with heroic figures like the Creator, the Devine Fool in Russian tradition, and have obtained special religious meanings in Bakhtin’s topple, debasement,“crown and de-crown”and“others”. In the context of the Orthodox literature, the carnival literature can be considered as a challenge of“high literature”against the“low literature”. But if regarded from a religious perspective, the degraded fool and clown develops from the prototype of the“cultural hero”and“divine fool”in religion, because neither the cultural hero nor the divine fool is a single anti-Christian culture. On the contrary, they belong to a pro-Christian culture. In carnival parodies and religious text-telling, Bakhtin emphasizes impacts of“Mennippean and Carnivalesque”upon religious texts, relationships between“carnival”elements in Christian literature and“Latin Satire”together with“sacred parody”, and more directly presents cultural links between the carnival and the making of religious literature. The fifth chapter mainly describes the religious resort in Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory. Ideal world is the eternal theme to the religion and the literature. Religion tends to negate the real world, such as the return of life in Buddhism, the idea of redemption in Christianity, in order to eventually obtain spiritual fulfillments and psychological comforts. Less caring the physical presence, or not at all, Bakhtin subverts the existing fetters. He always expects human’s spiritual presence and the“spiritual otherness”, one extremely abstract religious spirit. Among seemingly contradictory binary oppositions, such as the“alternation and upgrade”,“affirm and negate”,“a second life”, Bakhtin endows them with connotations of spiritual emancipations and exposes human’s original resort towards the human personalities. He is seeking human’s“ultimate home”in the carnival, the spiritual emancipation in the subversion, the Dionysiac increasingly fierce spirit in the carnival, together with a kind of religious and spiritual resort. The sixth chapter discusses Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory and its influences in China. The value of Bahktin’s Carnival Theory lies in its religious tradition and ideas. Moreover,it goes so deep as to expand our understanding about religious culture and ideas, and find the carnival itself as some elements in a religious background. In this way, ideas concerning the carnival in China’s contemporary literature and foreign literature studies come up now and again with fresh views brought about by the carnival. Bahktin’s Carnival Theory enriches perspectives on China’s research on Dostoevsky and Rabelais, and adds useful language resources and methodology foundations on the religious aspects of the literary works. Far beyond the literary arts and the philosophy, Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory touches upon the religious history studies; it also shows the plural features in the understanding of religious history with a far-reaching influence over carnival and laughs research; for example, Ruth Coates have connected Bakhin’s Carnival Theory with the Christianity and the religious history, and they have made useful adjustments on the foundations of carnival’s religious value, which helps the research on religious history with different features and styles. In a word, the relationship between the carnival and religions are complex and ambiguous, among which the utopia ideals in the cultural intimacy become heated issues for scholars. Issues around ambiguous relationships between the carnival and the religion, intimacy between the carnival culture and the religious culture, and the broadened topic concerning Bakhtin’s religious view and life philosophy, will obtain new meanings during communications of eastern and western culture, and contemporary scholars’interpretations. Thus, we can draw a conclusion that the carnival is immeasurably important in terms of religious significance and its impact. The religious research of Bakhtin’s Carnival Theory in the literary study is worthwhile for a deep exploration academically.

【关键词 (中文/英文)】 巴赫金; 狂欢理论; 宗教Bakhtin; Carnival; Religion; Utopia

【发表年期】2008年09期 【网络出版投稿人】宋春香 【DOI】CNKI:CDMD:1.2008.117042