Abstract:
Chinese “poetic prose criticism” differs from western “literary criticism” with its distinctive national characteristics. The two are similar in appearance but different in essence. No one can deny the fact that there is enormous discrepancy between Chinese “poetic prose criticism” and its western counterpart. Thus the crucial reason for those negative effects from borrowing western concepts and terms of “literary criticism” is that some Chinese scholars care more about “similarities” and “commensurability” between Chinese and western literary theories than about “discrepancies” and “incommensurability” between the two theories. In fact, however, it is depending upon respective “discrepancies”, “incommensurability” and “difference”, namely, its own characteristics, that a national literature gains its identity and value of existence in global life. Therefore, we should cease to mechanically apply western academic and disciplinary titles by forcing the name of “literary criticism” on Chinese ancient literary theory. The “poetic prose criticism”, the original name of Chinese literary criticism, should be restored, and the “Chinese history of literary criticism” should also be renamed as the “Chinese history of poetic prose criticism”.
