Abstract: Lu Xun’s “Preface to the Chinese Translation of Art Theory” has always been cited as an important document for the study of Lu Xun’s literary and aesthetic thoughts. However, it has not been found that most of the first and second sections are translated from History of the Russian Revolutionary Movement written by the Japanese scholar Yamauchi Fūsuke, rather than Lu Xun’s own views. By comparing “Preface to the Chinese Translation of Art Theory” with the Japanese version of History of the Russian Revolutionary Movement and Wei Renshan’s Chinese version, this phenomenon of Lu Xun’s translation as interpretation can be identified. Although Lu Xun’s criticism is based on translation, his subjective soberness and theoretical sensitivity can still be seen in the process of selecting translations.

Key words: Lu Xun, “Preface to the Chinese Translation of Art Theory”, History of the Russian Revolutionary Movement, translation as interpretation

摘要： 鲁迅“《艺术论》译本序”历来被学界援引为研究鲁迅文学思想与美学思想的重要文献、论据,然而引者却未能发现其中第一、二节的大部分文字系译自日本学者山内封介所著《俄国革命运动史》,而非鲁迅自己的见解。通过对读“《艺术论》译本序”与《俄国革命运动史》日文版以及卫仁山的中译本,适可辨明鲁迅的这一以译代评现象。虽说是以译代评,但在选取译本等过程中仍可见出鲁迅“拿来主义”式的主体清醒与不失新锐的理论敏感。

关键词: 鲁迅, “《艺术论》译本序”, 《俄国革命运动史》, 以译代评