本文主要以《聊齋誌異》的〈王六郎〉與〈水莽草〉為研究對象，抉發二文之詮釋空間再開展的可能。過往之研究一般將〈王六郎〉與〈水莽草〉兩篇文本置於「水鬼漁夫」類型故事中討論，因此多聚焦於主人翁的自我犧牲情節，而寓以「己所不欲，勿施於人」之道德性解讀，連帶也在某程度上影響著〈水莽草〉、〈王六郎〉的閱讀詮釋。然而〈王六郎〉、〈水莽草〉二文本與「水鬼漁夫」類型故事雖有其相似性，並同受「暴死相代」民俗信仰影響，但在特殊的情節營設裡卻改換了「暴死相代」之關鍵與核心意涵，據此可見二文與「水鬼漁夫」類型故事有其不同的人文關懷。本文以二文本置換俗信之關鍵與核心為論述焦點，爬梳吾人在其中可見的文本的轉向、關懷轉向，並深廣其詮釋可能。 This article mainly takes “Wang Liulang” and “Shuimancao” in “Strange Tales from a Liaozhai Studio” as the research objects, and decides the possibility of further development of the interpretation space of the two articles. Previous studies generally placed the two texts “Wang Liulang” and “Water Mangcao” in the “water ghost fisherman” type of story, so they mostly focused on the hero's self-sacrifice plot, and embody “what you don't want, don't The moral interpretation of “doing to others” also affects the reading interpretation of “Water Mangcao” and “Wang Liulang” to a certain extent. However, although the two texts of “Wang Liulang” and “Water Mangcao” have similarities with the “Water Ghost Fisherman” type of story, and are also influenced by the folk belief of “Scapegoat for Accidental Death”, they have been changed in the special plot setting. According to the key and core meaning of “Violent Death Interchanges”, it can be seen that Erwen and “Water Ghost Fisherman” have different humanistic concerns. This article focuses on the key and core of the replacement of common beliefs by the two texts, sorts out the textual turns and caring turns that we can see in it, and deepens its interpretation possibilities.
