All poems

唐 Tang · 诗 Poem

蚕妇

The Silkworm Woman

杜荀鹤

Du Xunhe

悯农Farmers' hardship 劳动Theme 阶级剥削Theme 妇女Theme

粉色全无饥色加,岂知人世有荣华。
年年道我蚕辛苦,底事浑身着苎麻。

No trace of rouge, only the pallor of hunger on her face; how could she know the world holds glory and wealth?
Year after year they say my silkworms labor bitterly - why then am I clad head to toe in rough ramie?
Listen

Meaning

A silkworm-raising woman, starved and dressed in coarse cloth, asks why her own toil clothes the rich.

我脸上全无脂粉之色,只添了饥馑的憔悴;哪里知道人世间还有荣华富贵。年年都诉说着养蚕的辛苦,为何浑身上下只穿着苎麻粗衣。

Appreciation

The silkworm woman's two-line cry turns a domestic scene into a verdict: those who make the luxury never wear it. The question needs no answer.

【白话串讲】 “粉色全无饥色加,岂知人世有荣华”——杜荀鹤写蚕妇:脸上没有粉,只有饥饿。“年年道我蚕辛苦,底事浑身着苎麻”——年年养蚕最辛苦,为什么我浑身穿的是粗麻布?养蚕人穿不上绸缎。 【意象与手法】 以女性劳动者第一人称自诉,“粉色全无饥色加”与“荣华”形成刺目反差;“底事浑身着苎麻”以问句收束,引而不发。比第三人称的旁观叹息更具直击人心的力量。 【情感与主旨】 唐末“悯农”一脉之作,与聂夷中《伤田家》、白居易《观刈麦》并读,以养蚕者无帛的反讽写制度性的剥夺,可见唐末赋税之苛,是中晚唐悯农诗中以劳动者自身口吻发声的演变代表。 【名句点睛】 常考“年年道我蚕辛苦,底事浑身着苎麻”以养蚕者无帛写反讽;“粉色全无饥色加”以饥色写蚕妇之苦。

Background

Du Xunhe (846-904), a late-Tang poet of humble origin, wrote several poems of compassion for farmers. This one gives voice to the woman who tends silkworms yet wears only hemp.

杜荀鹤这首《蚕妇》,写于唐末动荡、民困赋重之世。杜荀鹤出身寒微,久困科场,对底层劳动者的苦况有切肤之痛,其诗多『言事』『讽时』,号称『杜荀鹤体』。此诗以第一人称、以一个蚕妇的自述口吻写成,在中晚唐悯农诗中别具一格。唐代蚕桑为农家要业,女子终岁养蚕缲丝,而所产绢帛多输官税、供豪门,自己却衣不蔽体——这是当时普遍的社会悖论。杜荀鹤偏让蚕妇自己开口,把这种制度性剥夺说得平常而刺心。放在唐末背景下看,藩镇割据、战乱频仍,赋敛较承平更苛,『蚕妇』之悲实是整个时代农妇命运的缩影。此诗看似只写一个女人,背后却是千千万万终岁劳碌而不得温饱的劳动者;它的力量,正来自这种以个体代群体的典型化。杜荀鹤生当黄巢乱后,唐室名存实亡,赋敛较承平更酷,民不聊生。他久困场屋,深知底层疾苦,故诗多写田家、写乱离,被后人称为『诗史』之亚。此诗以蚕妇自道,正是对那个时代无数农妇命运的一次聚焦:她们终岁劳作,却连一身像样的衣衫都得不到。把这样个人的悲苦写得平静而刺心,需要的不是技巧的炫目,而是将心比心的诚实。这也是杜荀鹤诗虽浅白却能动人千年的根本原因。

Art

Striking contrast between 'rouge versus hunger-pallor' and 'silkworms' labor versus her ramie clothes.' The closing question is a silent indictment of unjust distribution.

此诗的艺术,首在视角的选择:它用第一人称『我』,让蚕妇自己说话,而非诗人居高临下的旁观。首句『粉色全无饥色加』以容颜写命运——脂粉之色本属女子常事,她却『全无』,添上的只有饥馑的憔悴,七个字便画出一副被劳作与饥饿蚀空的面容。次句『岂知人世有荣华』以反问写认知的剥夺:她不是不想荣华,而是终岁困顿,根本无缘见识那另一种人生,比直接写『苦』更沉。后两句『年年道我蚕辛苦,底事浑身着苎麻』转为一记质问:年年都在说养蚕辛苦,可为何浑身只穿粗麻?『底事』二字把剥削的逻辑悬成问号,引而不发,留给读者去填答案。全诗由貌及识、由诉说及质问,语皆浅白如话,却句句带血,是中晚唐『以俗为雅』悯农小诗的代表。此诗的另一个妙处,是『对比』用得不着痕迹。粉色与饥色、荣华与苎麻、说苦与著麻,三组成对的概念,不用『对比』二字,却句句在对照。尤其『岂知人世有荣华』一句,把阶级的鸿沟写得比贫富之差更深一层——不是没有好日子,而是连想象好日子的资格都被剥夺。这种写法,比直呼『我好苦』有力十倍。全诗语皆如话,却字字带血,正是中晚唐『以俗为雅』诗风在悯农题材上的成功实践,也预示了宋人白话诗的一脉先声。

Allusions

Ramie is the coarse plant fiber worn by the poor, set against the silk they produce.

此诗用典极省,几乎全用白描,却暗中承接了一条悠久的悯农传统。『蚕妇』形象可上溯至《诗经·豳风·七月》『蚕月条桑』『猗彼女桑』,那是农妇岁事的最早剪影;至陶渊明《桃花源诗》『相命肆农耕,日入从所憩』虽写安乐,已开田园劳动之笔。唐代白居易新乐府标举『为事而作』,其《缭绫》《红线毯》皆写织女蚕娘『夺我身上暖』的被剥夺;杜荀鹤此诗则把视角进一步收进蚕妇自身,以『我』代言,是对白氏『惟歌生民病』的纵深推进。『苎麻』用粗麻代指劳动者仅有的衣料,与『荣华』『绢帛』形成阶级对照,这一对比结构本自汉乐府『城中好高髻,四方高一尺』式的贫富反差书写。诗人不引经据典,却把千年悯农的血脉,凝进一个农妇的自白里。此诗的血脉,上接《诗经·七月》的农事书写,下启宋代梅尧臣、张俞一类田家、蚕妇题材。『粉色全无』暗用女子傅粉的常习以反衬劳悴,『苎麻』则代指劳动者仅有的粗衣,与绢帛形成阶级对照,这一结构本自汉乐府贫富反差的传统。杜荀鹤的推进在于视角:前人多第三人称旁观叹息,他让劳动者自己开口,使『缘事而发』的乐府精神落实为『代民立言』。一个『我』字,把千年悯农诗从同情者手中,交还给了被同情者自己。

Commentary

The poem belongs to the 'sufferings of the people' tradition; its power lies in letting the subject speak in her own puzzled, unanswerable question.

此诗在杜荀鹤集中与《山中寡妇》《田翁》等并誉为『乱世民谣』。宋人计有功《唐诗纪事》、明人胡震亨《唐音癸签》论杜荀鹤,皆许其『能以浅语写深痛』;清人沈德潜《唐诗别裁》选此诗,赞其『朴至』,即质朴而直达。近人论唐末诗,多指杜荀鹤上承白居易新乐府、下开宋人通俗诗风,此诗以第一人称自诉,正见其『代民立言』的自觉。今人注本更将其与聂夷中《伤田家》、王建《田家行》并提,认为三诗同写赋税之害,而杜诗以女性劳动者口吻出之,更具直击人心的力量。值得注意的是,此诗末句以问收束、不答而答,恰是乐府『缘事而发』的含蓄处——答案不在诗中,而在读者心里那个不言而喻的『制度』二字。宋元以降,此诗常与聂夷中《伤田家》、张俞《蚕妇》并举,视为悯农双璧;张俞『遍身罗绮者,不是养蚕人』立意相近,可见这一题材之盛。近人论杜荀鹤,许其『朴至』,即质朴而直达痛处,此诗正是标本。它与《山中寡妇》同写乱世民瘼,一写赋敛、一写兵燹,合观可见唐末社会的全面崩坏。值得注意的是,诗中『底事』一问不答,正是乐府含蓄处——答案太重,不宜说破,这种留白反而让剥削的逻辑在读者心中自行显形。

Prosody

Form Seven-character quatrain (qijue)七言绝句(仄起首句入韵)
Rhyme Rhymes on 'wealth' (hua) and 'ramie' (ma), level-tone ma group.押平水韵下平六麻韵:加、华、麻三字一韵到底,首句即入韵,音节朴质宽缓,与悯农题材相称。
Tone pattern Seven-character regulated form.仄仄平平平仄平,仄平平仄仄平平;平平仄仄平平仄,仄仄平平仄仄平。平仄合七绝常格,二四六字分明。
Reading note Plain diction, sharp social irony - characteristic of Du Xunhe's reformist realism.此诗声律平正,却因用麻韵而自带一种朴厚的音色。麻韵开口度大、音色偏沉,读来不似纤巧之作,恰配悯农的厚重题材。首句『粉色全无饥色加』以平声『加』收,把一个『加』字的沉重稳稳托住;末句『底事浑身着苎麻』仍以平声『麻』收,与『苎麻』的粗衣意象呼应,余味像粗布一样涩而长。七绝本贵含蓄,此诗却因用第一人称自诉,句句如话,近乎民歌——这正是杜荀鹤『以俗为雅』的用心:不避浅白,反借浅白直抵痛处。平易的韵脚配上直白的字句,让一个农妇的声音清清楚楚传到千年之后,声情与辞情彼此成全,也证明好诗从不以艰深为门槛。麻韵音色偏沉而开阔,与悯农的厚重正相宜;首句以平声『加』收,把『饥色』之重稳稳托住,末句仍以平声『麻』收,与『苎麻』意象呼应,余味如粗布般涩而长。七绝本贵含蓄,此诗却因第一人称自诉而近乎民歌,这恰是杜荀鹤的用心:不避浅白,反借浅白直抵痛处。平易的韵脚配直白的字句,让一个农妇的声音清清楚楚传到千年之后。

Line by line

粉色全无饥色加,岂知人世有荣华。

No trace of rouge, only the pallor of hunger on her face; how could she know the world holds glory and wealth?

我脸上全无脂粉之色,只添了饥馑的憔悴;哪里知道人世间还有荣华富贵。

No trace of rouge on my face, only hunger's care added; how should I know the world has splendor?

起二句以容颜为镜,照出蚕妇被剥夺的一生。『粉色全无』写她连女子最平常的脂粉都无暇也无资去施,『饥色加』却补上一笔饥饿的憔悴——一个『加』字说明这憔悴是经年累月叠加上去的,不是一时的瘦。最沉的是次句『岂知人世有荣华』:她不是不想要好日子,而是终岁困在蚕事里,根本无缘见识另一种人生。这种『不知』比『知而不得』更悲,因为它连痛苦的比较对象都没有。诗人不写『我很苦』,而写『我不知荣华』,把阶级的鸿沟写得不动声色却触目惊心。两句由貌及识,把一个农妇被劳作与贫困双重蚀空的命运,轻轻托出。

The opening two lines use the face as a mirror, reflecting the silkworm woman's deprived life. No trace of rouge writes that she has neither the time nor the means for even a woman's common powder; hunger's care added adds the brush of famine - the single word added shows this haggardness is piled up over the years, not a moment's thinness. The heaviest is the second line, how should I know the world has splendor: she does not not want a good life, but is trapped all the year in the silkworm work, with no chance to know another kind of life. This not knowing is more grief than knowing and not having, because it has not even a comparison for suffering. The poet does not write I am very bitter, but I do not know splendor, writing the class chasm quietly yet shockingly. The two lines from the face to the knowledge, lightly hold out the fate of a farm woman hollowed by toil and poverty.

年年道我蚕辛苦,底事浑身着苎麻。

Year after year they say my silkworms labor bitterly - why then am I clad head to toe in rough ramie?

年年都诉说着养蚕的辛苦,为何浑身上下只穿着苎麻粗衣。

Year after year they say I toil at the silkworms; why is it that I am clothed in hemp from head to foot?

后二句由诉说转为质问,是全诗最痛的一笔。『年年道我蚕辛苦』是她的自陈,也是她对世界反复发出的申诉——养蚕的辛苦,年年都在说,可年年都石沉大海。紧接『底事浑身着苎麻』,『底事』即为什么,把积压的怨愤凝成一个问号:既然我养的蚕吐出那么好的丝,为什么我浑身只配穿粗麻?这一问直指剥削的核心逻辑,却并不咄咄逼人,而是像一个被亏待的人喃喃自语。妙在诗人不替她给出答案——答案太明显也太沉重,留给读者自己去填那个『制度』二字。以问收束、引而不发,正是乐府悯农诗最高明处:不说破,却字字都破。

The last two lines turn from the complaint to the question, the most painful brush of the whole. Year after year they say I toil at the silkworms is her own statement, and her repeated appeal to the world - the hardship of silkworm-raising, spoken year after year, yet year after year sinking without trace. Followed by why is it that I am clothed in hemp from head to foot?, the word why condenses the accumulated grievance into a question: since the silkworms I raise spin such fine silk, why am I fit only to wear coarse hemp? This question points straight at the core logic of exploitation, yet is not aggressive, but like a wronged person muttering to herself. The beauty is that the poet does not give her the answer - the answer is too obvious and too heavy, left to the reader himself to fill in the two words institution. Closing in a question, drawing the bow without releasing, exactly the yuefu farmer-pity poem's highest art: not speaking it out, yet every character breaks it.

Study

Word focus

饥色加 A key expression in the poem. Read it as an image, mood, or grammar point in context. 『饥色加』三字极有重量。『饥色』是饥饿写在脸上的憔悴,本已刺目;一个『加』字更妙,它表明这憔悴不是偶发的,而是一点一点、年复一年叠加上去的,像一笔永远还不清的债。与前面的『粉色全无』对照,一减一加,把女子从『应有』到『实无』的坠落写得极具过程感。这三个字不事形容,却让读者看见一副被岁月和饥饿共同雕刻的面容。在悯农诗中,写『饥』易,写『饥之累积』难;杜荀鹤用一个『加』字,把静态的穷写成了动态的、 ongoing 的剥削,分量顿时不同。
岂知 A key expression in the poem. Read it as an image, mood, or grammar point in context. 『岂知』是全诗认知维度的关键。它不是『不知』,而是『哪有机会知道』——带着一种被剥夺了见识权的悲凉。蚕妇终岁困在蚕事与贫困里,荣华富贵对她不是遥不可及,而是根本不在视野之内。这个词的妙处在于:它把阶级鸿沟写得比贫富之差更深一层,那是经验世界的隔绝。诗人借此避开廉价的『诉苦』,转而写出一种更根本的不公——不仅是不给你好日子,连让你想象好日子的资格都没收了。两个字,举重若轻地托起了全诗的社会批判厚度。
底事 A key expression in the poem. Read it as an image, mood, or grammar point in context. 『底事』即『为什么』,是蚕妇那记喃喃的质问,也是全诗情绪的爆发点。它前面连着『年年道我蚕辛苦』的漫长申诉,后面悬着一个不言而喻的答案。这个词的好处在于它不愤怒、不控诉,而像一个被亏待的人终于忍不住的一句低问,反而更让人心酸。从修辞看,『底事』把全诗的矛头从一个具体的『我好苦』,转向了一个普遍的制度之问:养蚕者何以衣麻?这一问不答而答,把乐府『缘事而发』的含蓄用到极致。两个字,收束了前面所有铺垫,也打开了读者心里的那个答案。

Related Reading

田家行 Song of the Farming Household 王建 · 同写赋税之害,一聚焦个体一铺展全景 Related reading

Compare this related work with the poem above through theme, imagery, tone, and emotional movement.

王建《田家行》以『欲抑先扬』写农家麦茧双收之乐,终归『不见县门身即乐』的辛酸,铺展田家全景;杜荀鹤此诗则以蚕妇第一人称自诉,聚焦个体命运。二者同属中晚唐悯农一脉,皆以反讽收束(一写『不见县门身即乐』,一写『底事浑身着苎麻』)。差异在视角:王诗第三人称、客观叙事;杜诗第一人称、主体发声。并读可见唐代悯农诗由旁观叹息到劳动者自我言说的演变,两诗互为表里,共成『以乐写哀』的双璧。

伤田家 伤田家 聂夷中 · 同写农人丰年亦苦,一写二月卖新丝一写蚕妇衣麻 Related reading

Compare this related work with the poem above through theme, imagery, tone, and emotional movement.

聂夷中『二月卖新丝,五月粜新谷』写农人为完税被迫预售收成,『医得眼前疮,剜却心头肉』道尽剜肉补疮之痛;杜荀鹤此诗写蚕妇终岁养蚕却浑身苎麻,同为赋税剥夺的写照。二者皆以农人自身命运入诗,皆重白描与反差。不同在:聂诗写『卖』(未获先失),杜诗写『衣』(有丝无帛);聂诗剜肉之喻惨烈,杜诗质问之语沉郁。并读可见唐末赋敛之苛如何逼出两种不同的血泪书写。

缭绫 缭绫 白居易 · 同写织者不得衣,唐人新乐府的两种焦距 Related reading

Compare this related work with the poem above through theme, imagery, tone, and emotional movement.

白居易《缭绫》『缭绫织成费功绩,莫比寻常缯与帛……昭阳殿里歌舞人,若见织时应也惜』写织女辛苦而衣者不知,与杜诗『养蚕者衣麻』同一『生产者不得享用』的结构。差异在:白诗第三人称铺陈、以对比结,属典型新乐府;杜诗第一人称自诉、以质问结,更近民歌。并读可见白居易『为事而作』的精神如何被杜荀鹤接过来、又推向更贴肉的个体发声,是唐人悯农书写的一条清晰脉络。