作品原文

鲁迅 《文学和出汗》

上海的教授对人讲文学，以为文学当描写永久不变的人性，否则便不久长。例如英国，莎士比亚和别的一两个人所写的是永久不变的人性，所以至今流传，其余的不这样，就都消灭了云。

这真是所谓“你不说我倒是还明白，你越说我越胡涂”了。英国有许多先前的文章不流传，我想，这是总会有的，但没有想到它们的消灭，乃因为不写永久不变的人性。现在既然知道了这一层，却更不解它们既已消灭，现在的教授何从看见，却居然断定它们所写的都不是永久的人性了。

只要流传的便是好文学，只要消灭的便是坏文学；抢得天下的便是王，抢不到天下的便是贼。莫非中国式的历史论，也将沟通了中国人的文学论欤？

而且，人性是永久不变的么？

类人猿，类猿人，原人，古人，今人，未来的人，……如果生物真的会进化，人性就不能永久不变。不说类人猿，就是原人的脾气，我们大约就很难猜得着的，则我们的脾气，恐怕未来的人也未必会明白。要写永久不变的人性，实在难哪。

譬如出汗罢，我想，似乎与古有之，于今也有，将来一定暂时也还有，该可以算得较为“永久不变的人性”了。然而“弱不禁风”的小姐出的是香汗，“蠢笨如牛”的工人出的是臭汗。不知道倘要做长留世上文字，要充长留世上的文学家，是描写香汗如呢，还是描写臭汗好？这问题倘不先行解决，则在将来的文学史上的位置，委是“岌岌乎殆哉”。

听说，例如英国，那小说，先前大抵写给太太小姐们看的，其中自然的香汗多；到十九世纪后半，受了俄国文学的影响，就很有些臭汗气了。那一种的命长，现在似乎还在不可知之数。

在中国，从道士听论道，从批评家听谈文，都令人毛孔痉挛，汗不敢出。然而这也许倒是中国的“永久不变的人性”罢。

作品译文

Literature and Perspiration
Lu Xun

A Shanghai professor lecturing on literature states that literature should describe the eternal human qualities, otherwise it will not live. For example, in England Shakespeare and a few others wrote about the eternal human qualities, hence they are still read today; other writers failed to do this, and their work perished.

This is true a case of: “The more you explain the more confused I grow.” I am sure it is possible that many earlier English works of literature have been lost, but I never knew that they perished because they failed to describe the eternal human qualities. Now that I know this, I am at a loss to understand where this professor saw these works, since they have perished, so that he can be sure that none of them described the eternal human qualities.

What has lasted is good literature, what has perished is bad literature. If you seize a country you are king, if you fail you are a bandit. Don’t tell me the Chinese theory of history is going to be applied to the Chinese theory of literature！

And do human qualities really never change?

Man-like ape, ape-like man, primitive man, ancient man, modern man, future man..if living creatures can evolve, human qualities cannot remain unchanged. I doubt if we can guess even prehistoric men’s feelings, let alone those of apemen; and the men of the future will probably not understand us either. It is really hard to write and about eternal human qualities.

Take perspiration, for example. I believe we have always perspired, we perspire today, and we shall perspire for some time to come; so I suppose this can be counted as a comparatively “eternal human quality.” But delicate young ladies have sweet perspiration, workers who are as stupid as oxen have foul perspiration. If I want to be a writer whose name will live, and write works that will be immortal, is it better for me to describe the sweet perspiration or the foul perspiration? Until we solve this problem your position in the history of literature is “in fearful jeopardy.”

I hear that In England, for instance, most of the earliest novels were written for ladies, so naturally there was a preponderance of sweet perspiration; but towards the end of the nineteenth century they were influenced by Russian literature, so there was quite a little foul perspiration. Which kind will last it is too early to say?

In China, hearing Taoists speak about Tao or critics hold forth on literature makes your fresh creep, and no perspiration dares come. But perhaps this is the eternal human quality of the Chinese.