題名:戰後台灣原住民族的文學形成研究
推薦分享
資源連結
連結到原始資料 (您即將開啟新視窗離開本站)後設資料
- 資料類型：
- 來源資料庫:學位論文
- 著作者：
- 創作者名稱:魏貽君
- 主題與關鍵字：
- 主要分類:民間文學傳說
- 中文關鍵詞:臺灣
- 中文關鍵詞:民間傳說
- 中文關鍵詞:口傳文學
- 中文關鍵詞:原住民族文學
- 外文關鍵詞:Taiwan
- 外文關鍵詞:Taiwan Aboriginal Literature
- 外文關鍵詞:folk literature
- 外文關鍵詞:writing
- 外文關鍵詞:identity
- 外文關鍵詞:cultures of production
- 外文關鍵詞:production of culture
- 外文關鍵詞:circuit of culture
- 外文關鍵詞:authorship
- 描述：
- 頁碼:457
- 中文摘要:本文嘗試以文化社會學、文學社會學的概念取徑，探討「戰後台灣原住民族文學形成」的諸多作用機制及因素。 台灣的原住民族在戰後初期漸次湧現的文學表述、書寫景觀，時序轉進一九九○年代迄今，因著諸多內在的條件、外在的機緣，已然躋身於台灣文學研究構圖的重點基石之一；惟若深入檢視戰後台灣原住民族文學構成的總體發展脈絡，在這段長達半甲子之久的時程當中，各族的原住民以敘事性的文學表述、書寫形式，做為疏理、尋繹以及復振族群文化、身分認同的策略之用，或者是根本無涉於原住民文化身分自覺意識的文學作品，已在一九八○年代中期之後的「創作／出版」、「書寫／閱讀」、「研究／學位」的文學消費市場、學術研究場域，獲得一定程度的影響效應確認。 本文認為，戰後台灣的原住民族文學兼具著「文化的生產」、「生產的文化」的雙重屬性；主要的理論參考架構獲益於英國文化社會學者史圖亞特•霍爾（Stuart Hall）、保羅•杜蓋伊（Paul du Gay）提出的「文化的迴路」（circuit of culture）分析模式，亦即「為了能對文化的文本或加工品獲得充分瞭解，也就必須分析再現、認同、生產、消費及其規約的循環過程」，是以在探討戰後台灣原住民族文學的理論準備工作上，除了賡續以往關於作者研究、文本分析的範疇之外，亦須理解並詮釋這些作者、文本是在什麼樣的歷史結構、社會情境、心理狀態底下被生產出來的，及其內蘊或外顯的認同政治、文化抵抗、歷史記憶、再現敘事、離散書寫的等等面向，同時也須一併處理當被擺置於商業生產、展演、流通、消費的文化經濟市場以及學術研究場域、國家政策法令的規約機制底下，原住民文學或原住民族文學可能出現內在肌理、外在形貌的諸多變體。 本文針對戰後台灣的原住民族文學進行「作者」（authorship）研究，嘗試透過政治經濟學、文學社會學的概念分析架構，一方面探討戰後台灣原住民族文學「作者」來源、身分的多義性及多重性構造，另一方面以辯證的論述角度擴充原住民族「文學」的認識及定義容量。本文嘗試經由「作者」研究以論證原住民族文學的歷史構成、社會形構、文本構造及其文學的表現形式、傳播模式的基礎（ fundamental），複雜於台灣其他族裔的文學類型，惟此論斷並不是建築在原漢之間互為文化差異性、本質論式的二元分析模式之上，而是按察原住民族對於「文學」的認識方式、生產形式、接收模式及傳播樣式在遭遇國家機器的權力凝視、漢人意識的文化滲透之下，逐漸形變而質變的過程。 本文確認，一九八○年代之後原住民族的文化復振運動、文學書寫行動，並非外在於台灣的文學本土化、政治改革化及人權法益化而獨立存在，俱皆聯結於當時的黨外政治運動、新興社會運動而被一併認識及解讀。另從原住民族文學形成的內部角度以觀，一九八○年代以迄一九九○年代初期的原住民族漢語文學書寫者經由不同的書寫位置、參與方式，環繞著原運的相關組織、周邊議題以進行豐沃彼此的創造性對話關係，進而成為台灣社會認識的原住民族文學主要代表性景觀；換句話說，一九八○年代以迄一九九○年代初期原住民族文學的「作者」形成，允應架構於原運的發展脈絡、論辯範疇及認同實踐之中去觀察、理解與探討。 一九九○年代初期，《山海文化雙月刊》扮演原住民族「文學建構運動」的主要奠基者角色，一方面透過原漢族群接合、文化意理結盟的形式以擴充原運的社會感應層面及作用效能，另一方面也讓戰後台灣原住民族的文學創述成果、「作者」形成肌理有了更為寬敞的發展可能性；廿一世紀後的原住民族文學表述、書寫的作者形成模式，以及閱聽受眾的讀者類型板塊，逐漸地向童話、繪本、視訊、影音及數位化空間移動、拓展的現象，無疑是為今後的原住民族文學表述形式、社會認識、傳播平台及流通場域，開發了另一種可能性的影音發展面向。 本文亦檢視原住民文學工作者如何在其文本之中召喚往昔的認同線索，據以重建新的族群認同線索，並對口傳文學的神話、傳說及故事給予重新詮釋，以此做為抵抗國家記憶滲透的「反記憶」（counter-memory），從而成為自我生命主體的敘事者；另在「書寫／語言」的認同政治脈絡底下，本文探討原住民文學工作者以漢語、族語、雙語、混語的書寫策略所構築的身分認同效能，測量原住民文學「書寫與差異」的敘事模式為台灣文學添增的重量刻尺，並在這個基點之上，進一步探討原住民文學的混語書寫策略已為原住民族尋求文化自主性、族群主體性的敘事表現。 本文也以批判性解讀的角度，探討廿一世紀當下的原住民文學工作者及其作品，置身於「創作／出版」、「書寫／閱讀」、「研究／學位」的文學消費市場、研究場域底下，是否可能出現「文學拜物教」現象？亦即為了滿足研究者、出版商對於原住民「異國情調」的文化想像，原住民文學工作者遂以「符合」原住民想像的文詞操作、敘事形式及文化裝扮而進行書寫。 要言之，廿一世紀當下的現在，對於戰後台灣原住民族文學形成的研究，愈來愈需要處理關於書寫者、研究者、出版者及閱讀者的意念、動機、利益及其影響效應加總而成的「力系」（system of force）問題。
- 英文摘要:This paper attempts to discuss the many functions, systems, and factors about “Taiwan Aboriginal Literature formative after World War II” with cultural sociology and literature sociology. The literary representations and writing scopes emerged firstly in the initial phase of post World War II. As time enters 1990s, with the development of interior and exterior factors, Taiwan Aboriginal Literature has become one of the key stones in Taiwanese literary research study landscape. But if we further the examinations on the overlook context of Taiwanese aboriginal literature formation, we will discover that during the past thirty years, the aboriginal literature, whether it serves as the revival of cultural identity of self-consciousness or not, has made a lot of influences such as, creation／publishing, writing／reading, and research／degree on Taiwanese literature market ever since mid-1980s. This paper argues that post-war Taiwanese Aboriginal Literature has the duality of the“production of culture”as well as the“cultures of production”. Its primary theoretical framework focuses on“circuit of culture”proposed by Stuart Hall and Paul du Gay, which says that “in order to gain a full understanding of a cultural text or artefact, it is necessary to analyse the processes of representation, identity, production, consumption and regulation.” Therefore, to make the post-war Taiwanese Aboriginal Literature theoretical preparations, it is necessary to precede the textual analysis and author studies in the past as well as to understand the exterior（historical, social, and psychological） factors. We also need to examine the different dimensions of identity politics, cultural resistance, historical memory, the representation narration, and the Diaspora writing; besides, it is necessary to scrutinise aboriginal literature and its vicissitudes under the systems of academic research fields, national policy, commercial production, performtivity, circulation, and consumption. This paper will also focus on the studies of authorship, attempting with the ecopolitics（political economy）and literature sociology. It deals with the origins of authorship, multi-identity and multi-formation of post-war Taiwanese Aboriginal Literature, as well as to broaden the scope of aboriginal literature. This paper tries to debate how the historical, social, and cultural formation, as well as the literature presentation, fundamental communication will complicate the literature types about other Taiwanese ethnicity. This model relies specifically on the knowledge of literature, and the production formation, reception model, and communication types will be modified by the power gaze of State Apparatus, Han consciousness and the cultural infiltration. This paper confirms that during 1980s, the aboriginal cultural resurgence movements and literary writings were not perceived independent, and were oftentimes strongly associated with the contemporary Tangwai political Movements（黨外政治運動） and other emergent social movements. From inner aboriginal perspective, from 1980s to early 1990s, aboriginal writers tried to write about and participate in many aboriginal movements and related issues, which reciprocated the innovative inventive dialogues among one another, and also formed the representative aboriginal literary landscape. In other words, from 1980s to early 1990s, the formation of aboriginal “authorship” should be constructed and further discussed on the contexts of aboriginal movement development, debating areas, and practices. In early 1990s, Taiwan Indigenous Voice Bimonthly（《山海文化雙月刊》）played a fundamental and primary part in aboriginal literature construction movements. It simultaneously combined with the Han ethnicity in cultural and social movements, and opened up the possibilities of post-war aboriginal formation of “authorship” and literature creation performance. Yet when it enters the 21st century, the authorship of aboriginal literature has extended to the fields of fairytales, picture books, audio / visual and spatial movement, which undoubtedly discovers the new potential audio dimension of the literary expression form, social consciousness, broadcast platform and logistic champs for the aboriginal literature. This paper would also examine how aboriginal writers summon the identity of the past, and reinterpret the oral literature, sagas, and stories from the identity perspective. Based on this, aboriginal writers are able to resist the counter-memory of state apparatus infiltration, and then construct the narrator of self-identification. Under the writing / language context of identity, this paper will also discuss how the aboriginal writers’ multi-lingual writing strategies may differ from one another, and measure the depth that the narrating mode of writing and difference in aboriginal literature has brought to Taiwanese literature. This paper would conclude that the multi-lingual / mixed language writing strategy has become the narrating of aboriginal cultural and ethnic autonomy. This paper would then critically debate on “the literary fetishism” that one aboriginal writer may encounter in this literary consumption market. In other words, one aboriginal writer may write about the exoticism in aboriginal materials to satisfy the cultural misconception of readers, published, and even researchers. To sum up, one has to face the formation of aboriginal literature and to deal with the system of force that writer, publishers, and readers could mutually interfere in 21st century aboriginal writings.
- 出版者：
- 主要出版者:國立成功大學臺灣文學研究所
- 出版地:臺南市
- 日期：
- 出版日期:2007
- 語言：
- 語文:中文
- 關聯：
- 全文電子檔:http://etds.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/service/say.jsp?FT=Y&id=095NCKU5625013
- 管理權：
- 典藏單位:國家圖書館
授權聯絡窗口
- 圖文授權請逕洽出版者或作者。 資料庫相關問題請洽國家圖書館知識服務組 ref@ncl.edu.tw
