DSpace collection: 第45卷第1期

Reception of Du Fu in the Anglophone World and the Issue of Poetic Transparency

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 06:03:57 GMT

title: Reception of Du Fu in the Anglophone World and the Issue of Poetic Transparency abstract: 本文審視了英語世界中杜甫接受的歷史，並專就「詩之透明」這一問題進行了討論。隨著二十世紀中期杜甫研究及其詩歌翻譯的顯著提升，以洪業為代表的學者們開始觸及這一在傳統中國中頗具影響力的詩歌閱讀模式。二十世紀八十年代以來，杜甫研究中比較及理論方法的進一步引入使得「詩之透明」這一問題更具爭議。宇文所安對於杜甫和華茲華斯的比較閱讀凸顯了中國傳統詩歌閱讀中的透明與非虛構性，並將其與西方傳統中視詩歌為虛構產物的重要理念進行對比。儘管宇文所安借助充滿矛盾和複雜性的閱讀模式巧妙地規避了特定的闡釋危險，仍有一些學者指出在運用「詩之透明」來區分中西方詩學假設的實踐中潛在的文化相對主義威脅。本文以閱讀杜甫為例，在「詩之透明」的閱讀模式上構建一場跨文化的對話，進而展現這一閱讀方式在傳統中國杜甫闡釋中的活力。文章認為我們既不應當將這一閱讀模式單純地視為傳統中國中存在的真實歷史現象，也不應當將其視為一種有缺陷的閱讀模式而予以排斥。為了能夠公正地對待「詩之透明」所具有的複雜性，我們應當將其置於特定的歷史文化語境中，探索這一閱讀模式在傳統中國中的不同功用。 This paper examines the history of reception of Du Fu in the Anglophone world, with particular emphasis on the issue of ＂poetic transparency.＂ Along with significant improvement in both Du Fu studies and the translation of his poems in the middle of the twentieth century, scholars such as William Hung began to touch on this influential mode of reading poetry in traditional China. Since the 1980s, the issue of ＂poetic transparency＂ has become more controversial with further incorporation of comparative and theoretical approaches into Du Fu studies. Stephen Owen's comparative reading of Du Fu and Wordsworth highlights ＂poetic transparency＂ and the non-fictionality in traditional Chinese poetry as opposed to one dominant conception of poetry as a fictional product in Western tradition. Although Owen skillfully skirts certain interpretive dangers through a mode of paradoxical and complex reading, other scholars still identify the potential threat of cultural relativism in the practice of using poetic transparency to distinguish Chinese and European poetic assumptions. This paper initiates a cross-cultural dialogue on ＂poetic transparency＂ in the case of reading Du Fu and exposes the dynamics of this approach implied by the hermeneutics of Du Fu in traditional China. It argues that we should neither confirm poetic transparency merely as a historically true phenomenon in traditional China nor dismiss it as a defective interpretive practice. Instead, in order to do full justice to the complexity of ＂poetic transparency,＂ we should situate it into the specific historical and cultural context and explore various functions of such a mode of reading poetry in traditional China.

Navigating between Shakespeare and ＂Jingju＂: Wu Hsing-Kuo's ＂Li Er Zaici＂

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:53:02 GMT

title: Navigating between Shakespeare and ＂Jingju＂: Wu Hsing-Kuo's ＂Li Er Zaici＂ abstract: 本文運用法國哲學家德勒茲與瓜達希發展出的概念，以當代傳奇劇場《李爾在此》為例，探討跨文化劇場中之政治性。《李爾在此》為當代傳奇劇場藝術總監吳興國編導演之作品，吳興國在作品裡跨越行當的限制，一人擔任十個角色的演出。學者已經指出，吳興國的個人面向影響此作極深，尤其反應吳興國與其師父之間的關係；然而，除了對照藝術家的個人經驗之外，此作亦開展其他的閱讀可能性。德勒茲與瓜達希的概念，對舞台再現性與文化認同之間的連結提出質疑，並有助於理解跨文化劇場展演脈絡中的政治性；以此閱讀《李爾在此》，則可觀察出，作品中對於京劇藝術以及莎士比亞《李爾王》演出史的去領域化。 This article discusses ＂Li Er Zaici＂, a performance created by Taiwanese actor Wu Hsing-Kuo, the artistic director of the Contemporary Legend Theatre. In this production Wu performs ten characters from Shakespeare's ＂King Lear＂ in three acts, drawing on performing styles and techniques from the ＂jingju＂ (Peking Opera) tradition. This internationally touring production offers an example of the dilemmas encountered by many intercultural theatre performances that explore the possibilities of mingling different cultural elements. Several scholars have discussed the personal dimension of this production, suggesting that it can be seen as the artist's attempt to reconcile with his mentor, who severed their relationship because of Wu's desire to step out of the confines of the tradition. Drawing on concepts proposed by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, which raise questions about taken-forgranted assumptions about onstage performance and cultural representation, this paper calls for a reconsideration of the presumed link between ＂jingju＂ and Chinese cultural identity. I argue that, reflective of the affliction brought upon by the modern situation, Wu's response was more a complication than a straightforward answer. From this perspective, Wu's rendition produces deterritorialisations of both the traditional confines of ＂jingju＂ and the staging history of ＂King Lear＂, and opens up new possibilities in both fields.

Translation and World Literature in Goethe's ＂West-East Divan＂

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:50:08 GMT

title: Translation and World Literature in Goethe's ＂West-East Divan＂ abstract: 由於全球化的潮流影響，歌德的「世界文學」概念再度受到重視，並且普遍認為是個恰當的術語，用來描述全球化時代之下的文學。然而，近年來相關的討論，大部分都著重在政治與經濟社會面向，較忽略原本歌德的「世界文學」概念中非常核心的文藝與美學上的問題。因此，本文將藉由對《西東詩集》這部歌德晚年重要文學作品的探討，試圖勾勒出原本歌德在「世界文學」概念中，所要透露出的美學與詩學上的意涵。而以《西東詩集》為研究文本，不只因為它超越地理疆界，融合歐洲與中東的文學與文化傳統，體裁上詩體與散文體並存，同時也隱含對「世界文學」概念中，相當關鍵的翻譯與詩學上的反思。另外本文也將以班雅明的翻譯理論為基礎，論證《西東詩集》裡的詩學理論中，將文學視為具有關聯性與翻譯性的基本特質，而此基本特質同樣也出現在歌德對翻譯與世界文學的思考上。 Due to the emergence of the globalized world, much attention has been paid to Goethe's concept of world literature, which can be considered an appropriate term to describe literature in the age of globalization. However, many current discussions are so dominated by the political and socialeconomic issues that the literary-aesthetic dimension, which plays an important role in Goethe's considerations, is to some extent neglected. To describe the literary-aesthetic significance in Goethe's concept of world literature, the present paper suggests an indirect approach by exploring his ＂West-East Divan＂ which consists not only of poetic cycles, but also of notes and essays discussing the literature and culture in both Orient and Occident as well as the problems of translation and poetics. In addition, with Walter Benjamin's theory of translation, the present paper argues that translation and world literature shares the poetic concept considered in ＂West-East Divan＂, which assumes that poetry or literature is essentially relational and translational.

Problematics of Translation in Ha Jin's Poetry: Poet, Critic, Translator

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:46:56 GMT

title: Problematics of Translation in Ha Jin's Poetry: Poet, Critic, Translator abstract: 哈金喜歡把玩中英文不同的語言特色，在創作中將兩者合而為一。他以本土化的英語論述重塑中文的諺語、譬喻與句構，翻譯、挪用並重組中文的語法，創造出饒富中文色彩的英語創作。閱讀哈金的詩集《殘骸》(Wreckage)，受過中文教育的讀者很容易就可以發現詩中有許多中國古典詩詞的翻譯及改寫。作品中的詩人引述古典詩詞，以抒發個人情懷，而讀者不禁會思考：哈金的詩作源頭到底有多大的成分是來自中國文學？我們能夠依據哪些特點以及哪些標準來辨識所謂的創意？我們要如何區分「創新」與「改造」？而這樣的區分是否會改變我們對於哈金詩作的解讀與評斷？在哈金的詩作中，對中國古典詩詞的引述與對美國現今情境的感觸，二者或並置、或融合、或相互對照、或互相影響，這其中透露著何種訊息？被翻譯的是什麼，是中國詩詞還是美國情感？被移植的又是什麼，是文學還是文化？當中國的詩文被翻譯成英文、移植至美國之後，意義是否會有所轉化？是否會因應哈金複雜的美國移民經驗而呈現出某種迥異於以往的新義？而哈金的三重身份－詩者、評者、譯者－是彼此互補或彼此衝突？而這種種文學、文化再現，又訴說了何種華人離散的意涵，這些將是本文討論的重點。 Ha Jin's works bespeak an impressive linguistic creativity. Reconfigurating Chinese language through a nativized discourse of English, Ha Jin has translated, appropriated, and reconstructed Chinese linguistic norms and specifics into English-language literature in remarkable fashion. Studying Ha Jin's ＂Wreckage＂, a reader with Chinese education will be ready to identity fragments of renowned Chinese classical verse. Thus the reader is invited to ponder: To what extent does Ha Jin draw his poetic inspiration from the corpus of Chinese literature? How shall we measure accredited creativity? How do we distinguish innovation from renovation, and do those distinctions change our reading of the poems? Although Ha Jin has written exclusively of the reality of Chinese politics and society (with ＂A Free Life＂ the only exception so far), this material does not obviate the possibility of reading his works as belonging to a tradition of US immigrant literature. In Ha Jin's poetry, the juxtaposition, interaction and fusion of classical Chinese verse and contemporary American sensibility can be telling. Which has been translated, the Chinese verse or the American sensibility? What has been transplanted and translated? Have the Chinese poetry texts, after being transplanted into the English verse, undergone a transformation of meaning and resurfaced with new significance corresponding to the complexity of Ha Jin's immigrant experiences in America? This paper aims to explore how Ha Jin's Chinese poetry texts show significance corresponding to the complexity of his immigrant experiences in America.

An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization: A Forum

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:44:04 GMT

title: An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization: A Forum

The World According to Nishida Kitaro: A New Proposal

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:42:16 GMT

title: The World According to Nishida Kitaro: A New Proposal abstract: 當代解決衝突的典型做法，多半根據黑格爾的辯證法則或是古希臘哲學家巴門尼德的邏輯，兩者皆以存有與同一等概念為基礎。然而，解決衝突的效果往往不令人滿意，因此我提出另一種方案，以日本哲學家西田幾多郎的概念來解決衝突；他所看到的世界同時是自我同一也是自我矛盾，這顯然較符合我們的世界，而他的論證以場域（Field）做為基礎，顯然亦較有幫助。 The typical way of solving conflicts in today's world is based on Hegelian dialectics and Parmenidean logic, both based on the notion of Being and Identity. As the result of the solution is not really satisfactory, I propose another way proposed by Nishida Kitaro, a Japanese philosopher. His vision of the world as self-identical and self-contradictory at the same time seems more useful to our world. His dialectics based on the notion of Field seems more helpful to us.

A Comparative Frame of Mind

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:39:45 GMT

title: A Comparative Frame of Mind abstract: 表面上看來，比較文學似乎永遠處於學科危機之中，但在本篇論文裡，藉由回應這個危機，我認為應該將焦點轉移，焦點不應放在擴張與開拓的邏輯，而應重新反思「比較」此一概念。我主張比較文學應被視為一項實踐，透過一個相對的思維框架，將不同想法納入並予以實現；我認為的「比較」這個概念是分析性，而非操作可比較或不可比較的物品；作為一種分析，「比較」不會衍生出詮釋的行為，亦即詮釋文學作品或文化物件之間的相似處或差異，反而可以指出任何物品都具有本質上的相對性。相對的思維框架也認真考量物品本身的獨斷任意性，因此不獨厚文學作品；這意味著，比較此一實踐將文化物件放置在相對的情境，無論情境中其他物品為何；此一實踐不再強調文化物件與文學作品之間是否具有內在關連，如同傳統比較文學學者意圖完成的目標，也不再企圖揭露無法相容的差異，如同後殖民比較學學者做的事。相對的思維框架將尋找有意義的圖像，無論研究的對象是文學作品或文化檔案。 In this paper, I suggest a shift of focus from the logic of expansion and extension towards a reflective reconsideration of the very notion of comparison by way of responding to the seemingly perpetual state of disciplinary crisis in comparative literature. I argue that comparative literature ought to be viewed as a practice of engaging and realizing ideas through a comparative frame of mind. My notion of comparison is an analytics as opposed to an operation on comparable or incommensurable objects. Comparison as an analytics does not entail an act of interpreting the similarities or differences between literary or cultural objects, but recognizes instead that any work is inherently comparative. A comparative frame of mind also takes seriously the arbitrariness of the object itself, and as a result does not privilege the literary object as such. What this implies is that the practice of comparison entails situating any cultural object in relation to whatever else there is. Neither invested in the intrinsic connections between cultural or literary objects, as traditional practitioners of comparative literature aimed to accomplish, nor attempting to disclose the incommensurable differences, as postcolonial comparativists have done, a comparative frame of mind looks for meaningful patterns in whatever literary object or cultural archive one happens to study.

West of Eden: Carrying On

Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:36:34 GMT

title: West of Eden: Carrying On abstract: 「西方」歷史與文化深受所謂「單神學的身份典範」影響，而本文〈伊甸園之西〉試圖重新思考其背後的驅動力。如同聖經故事描述，世界是由單一、排他且萬能的上帝所創造，這也是第一次挪用並闡明「單神學的身份典範」的例子。這個「上帝」在「出埃及記」中告訴摩西他的名字即「我就是我是誰」（或者其他翻譯版本，「我將是誰」），這個上帝可能只是願望的投射，目的是設想一般的存在，以及特別是人類的存在，設想存在是自我一致，且不受時空（因此身體的）改變之影響；若果真如此，那麼所謂世俗文化，其中大部分可以看成是這一模式的延伸，也就是上帝以人的形式出現，降生於世上；耶穌之死絕非上帝之死，而象徵著人透過身體的復活與永生，進而神化；伊甸園的東門雖已關閉，那麼這模式也將是「回到」伊甸園的方式。在全球化的時代，這也意味著我們需要重新思考東方與西方的關係，特別藉由審視這鏡像的（以拉崗解釋「鏡像」的意涵）、不可能成功的企圖，企圖重回那種設想自我為恆常不變的時代。＂West of Eden＂ attempts to rethink the forces driving ＂Western＂ history and culture as informed by what might be called a ＂monotheological identity paradigm,＂ first deployed and articulated in the Biblical narrative of the creation of the world through a single, exclusive and universal God. This God, who can tell Moses in Exodus that his name is ＂I am who I am＂ (or in other translations: ＂...who I will be＂) is perhaps the projection of a wish to conceive being in general and human being in particular as self-identical and impervious to temporal and spatial (and hence bodily) alteration. If this is so, then much of what is called ＂secular culture＂ can be seen as an extension of this model, which is brought down to earth with the appearance of God in human form. The death of Christ, far from being the death of God, would then signify the deification of man through the promise of bodily resurrection and eternal life. This would be the way ＂back＂ to an Eden whose Eastern Gates are barred. In an age of ＂globalization,＂ this model suggests the need to rethink the relation of ＂East＂ and ＂West＂ in terms of this imaginary (in the Lacanian sense) and impossible attempt to ＂return＂ to a life in which the ＂Self＂ could be construed as perennial.