对汉赋的文本性质或政教功能,学界向来认同《史记》《汉书》的记载,而结合当时的历史事实与文学状况,汉赋文本皆有其独立的文本性质,甚至隐含着不为史书记载的政治动机。扬雄的《甘泉赋》《河东赋》,《汉书》以为有“风劝”之功能,这就认为其具有特定的政治目的。然深入考察二赋文本,我们会发现二者主要写神仙与祭祀过程,与“风劝”、讽谏、歌功颂德等并无直接关系。由此看来,《史记》《汉书》记载司马相如、扬雄等西汉赋作中的“风谏”“风劝”之论,很有可能是“史臣追书”所致。汉赋的政教功能,其实是在一定历史阶段,被人为纳入《诗经》等经学政教功能、社会功能的轨道,从而遮蔽了汉赋文本的思想原貌。对汉赋文本性质与政教功能的认识,就需要重新予以检讨。

As for the textual nature and political-civilizing function of Han Fu (汉赋), the academics has generally approved what is recorded in Records of the Historian (《史记》) and Chronicles of the Han Dynasty (《汉书》). However, each piece of Han Fu texts had its own independent textual nature in accordance with the historical facts and literary conditions at that time, and even implied political motives that were not recorded in historical books. According to Chronicles of the Han Dynasty , Yang Xiong's (扬雄) works like Ganquan Fu(甘泉赋)and Hedong Fu(河东赋)had the function of euphemistic advice (风劝) , which suggested that they had a specific political goal. However, if we make an in-depth study of the two texts above mentioned, we can find that they mainly wrote about the immortals and the sacrificial process, and had no direct relationship with euphemistic advice, euphemistic remonstrance (讽谏), praises and eulogies (歌功颂德). It seems that the ideas of euphemistic advice (风谏) and euphemistic remonstrance from the works of Fu written by Sima Xiangru (司马相如) and Yang Xiong of the Western Han Dynasty, which were recorded in Records of the Historian and Chronicles of the Han Dynasty, were probably written by later official historians. In fact, the political-civilizing function of Han Fu was artificially incorporated into the track of the political, civilizing and social functions of such Confucian classics as The Book of Songs(诗经)in a specific historical period, which masked the original thought of the texts of Han Fu. Therefore, our understanding of the textual nature and political-civilizing function of Han Fu texts needs to be re-examined.