The connotations of lyric reading have always been pejorative. Paul de Man coins the term in “Anthropomorphism and Trope in the Lyric,” an essay in which he presents one sonnet by Charles Baudelaire as a “lyrical reading,” or rewriting, of another; the “engraved, marmorean gnomic wisdom” of “Correspondences” (the impersonal, “neoclassical” sonnet), he argues, is negated and inverted in the psychological, personal “interiorization” of “Obsession” (254, 257). The latter poem—the lyrical one, with its expressive “pathos,” its “pattern of exchange” between interiority and exteriority, and most significantly, its “represented voice” (256, 261)—is, according to de Man, “deluded” and “fallacious”; it renders the unintelligible falsely intelligible and disavows “the materiality of actual history” in favor of “the desired consciousness of eternity” (262). In the very different context of the New Lyric Studies, in which Virginia Jackson and Yopie Prins have revived de Man’s idea that “lyric is not a genre” at all, but rather a name that designates “the possibility of a future hermeneutics” (261), lyric reading describes the reductive practice through which twentiethand twenty-first-century critics have come to interpret all kinds of poems (“songs, riddles, epigrams, sonnets, epitaphs, blasons, lieder, elegies, marches, dialogues, conceits, ballads, epistles, hymns, odes, eclogues, and monodramas” [Jackson 183]) as if they were intimate utterances of personal feeling. Anthony Reed observes that the default hermeneutic practice that Jackson and Prins describe, the lyric reading that “forms the basis of the common sense of professional [poetry] criticism,” is predicated on an exclusionary concept of

中文翻译：

---

重温歌词阅读：《公民》中的激情、地址和形式

抒情读物的内涵一直都是贬义的。保罗·德曼在“抒情中的拟人化和比喻”中创造了这个词，在这篇文章中，他将查尔斯·波德莱尔的一首十四行诗描述为对另一首十四行诗的“抒情阅读”或重写；他认为，“信函”（客观的、“新古典主义的”十四行诗）中“铭刻的、马尔默式的智慧”在“痴迷”（254、257）的心理、个人“内化”中被否定和倒置。后一首诗——抒情诗，以其富有表现力的“悲情”、内在与外在之间的“交换模式”，以及最重要的是，它的“被再现的声音”(256, 261)——据德曼说，“被迷惑了。 ”和“谬误”；它使不可理解的东西错误地理解，并否认“实际历史的物质性”，而支持“所期望的永恒意识”（262）。在新抒情研究的非常不同的背景下，弗吉尼亚杰克逊和尤皮普林斯复兴了德曼的观点，即“抒情根本不是一种类型”，而是一个指明“未来诠释学的可能性”的名称（261 ），抒情阅读描述了二十世纪二十一世纪批评家对各种诗歌（“歌曲，谜语，警句，十四行诗，墓志铭，blasons，谎言，挽歌，进行曲，对话，自负，民谣、书信、赞美诗、颂歌、颂歌和单曲”[Jackson 183]），就好像它们是个人情感的亲密表达。安东尼·里德 (Anthony Reed) 观察到，杰克逊和普林斯所描述的默认诠释学实践，即“构成专业[诗歌]批评常识基础”的抒情阅读，是基于排他性的概念