媒介场中“文学事实”的通变问题研究

作者: 专业:文艺学 导师:王臻中 年度:2008 学位:博士 

关键词
媒介场域 欲望主体 虚拟 虚构 互文性

Keywords
the media field, the subject of desire, virtuality, fiction, inter-text
        当前文学研究的核心问题是如何理解和应对“文学边缘化”、“文学终结”、“文学泛化”等文学现象。而上述现象的发生几乎都与媒介相关。本文试图运用相关媒介理论,考察媒介多大程度上改变了文学的存在方式,同时文学在对媒介的同化与顺应中又能在多大程度上保持自身的独立性,即文学的通变之道,通则不乏,变则可久。文章借用布尔迪厄的场域和哈贝马斯的公共领域理论,提出了媒介场的概念,以整体的、动态的、历史化的方式呈现各种力量相互作用的异质趋向,而不是线性的、静态的、抽象的、分散的同质性的考察,力求避免文学阐释中内部/外部的取舍,自律/他律的区分。第一,文学被放置于媒介场的关系网络中考察,受到场域中诸种因素的影响,包括场域中的诸种媒介,以及得媒介助力得以增殖、扩散、膨胀的意识形态、政治、市场等因素。在研究中力避单纯从媒介出发的技术决定论。第二,研究媒介域下的文学后果,媒介的偏向性,即不同媒介影响力的差异性和文学呈现的历史性。文学成之为文学,在文学史的长河中沉淀下来的独立持存性和受场域中诸多因素影响的适变性,即文学在媒介场域中的通变关系,被作为逻辑红线贯穿始终。第三,媒介和文学是研究中的逻辑结点。目前关于二者关系的研究,有的偏向媒介的文学后果的描述,有的把文学当作媒介理论的注脚。此种状况笔者以为没有找到媒介和文学的纽结点、逻辑缝合点。本文从媒介和文学实践两个端点双向推进,使其缝合点落脚于“主体”,媒介建构了主体,而文学作品的存在和存在方式取决于主体。作品存在于两种场域:作家、作品和世界,欣赏者、作品和世界。前者重创作,后者重阅读,但创作和阅读都处于世界之中,同时其在世界中,都离不开主体,是主体的在世界之中,因此作品的存在方式和存在意义都来自于主体的在世界之中。依据上述基本思路,其主要内容如下:第一部分试图通过媒介的变迁揭示某种媒介主导的场域中主体的不同特征。由此从历史主体进入对媒介场域建构现实主体的考察。在现代,很多人的生活都是以某种或某些媒介为主导的多媒介生存。由于不同的媒介有属于自身的不同编码规则,同时形成对主体的不同尺度,因此多媒介场域,让主体具有了处于多种尺度中的可能性,主体可能会拥有很多“化身”,满足不同的需要。媒介场域建构了渴望实现人的多种可能性的欲望的主体。第二部分在“通变”的参照系下,试图通过梳理文学史中创作主体所承担的角色,辨析文学所能够满足的主体欲求,阐明在媒介场域中其他因素的作用下,文学发挥媒介优势的创生之途——超越虚拟的可能性和现实性。第三部分借用“象征”和“互文”的概念,试图用整体观探讨在媒介场域中通过文学阅读满足主体的多种欲求的可能性和现实性,以此论证文学阅读存在的必要性。本文试图突破由于新媒体的异军突起所造成的语码危机、文学的衰落,这种对抗式的思维模式。在媒介场域的整体语境下,把文学置于“通变”的辩证发展观中,既与其他媒介形成交往对话关系,又保持自身的媒介发展优势。
    The key problem of present literary research is to understand and deal with literature phenomena as "literature marginalization", "literature termination", "literature generalization" etc, the emergence of which is nearly all correlated with the media.By using relevant media theories, this article tries to investigate to what extent the media changes the existing way of literature and to what degree literature keeps its own independence in the process of acclimation and assimilation to the media, which means the way of ’’Continuity and Mutation" in literature. Continuity can help the literature to retain its vitality while mutation can help it to last for ever. By borrowing Bourdiu’s Field Theory and Habermas’s Public Sphere Theory, the study puts forward the concept of media field, presents heterogeneous tendency of various interacting strengths through the whole、dynamic and historical method, rather than in the linear、static、abstract and scattered homogeneous way. The study strives to avoid making interior / exterior choice and self-discipline / heteronomy differentiation in literature explanation.First, literature is put into the network of the media field to be investigated, influenced by all kinds of factors in the field, including various media in the field,ideology multiplying, proliferating and inflating with the assistance of the media,political and marketing ones. The author attempts to avoid technology determinism starting off from the media.Second, the text studies literature aftermath in the media field and the deflection of the media, which are differentiation of different media influences、historic nature literature presents. Why literature is literature, the quality of being independent deposited in literature history and the suitability influenced by all kinds of factors in the field, is penetrating the whole article as the main logical line.Third, media and literature are the logical knots of the research. At present among the researches about the relation between them, some deflect to the description of literature aftermath of the media, some regard literature as footnote of the media theory. The author thinks they don’t find the knit of the media and literature or logical stitching. The article carries out a two-way propulsion of two knots from the media and literature, makes the stitching stay in the "main body". The media construct the subject which determines the being and the way of being of literature works. Works exist in two fields: author、works and the world; appreciator、works and the world. The former focuses on creation while the latter pays more attention to reading. However, creation and reading are both in the world. They are both related with the subject in the world. Therefore, the way and meaning of being are from the subject in the world.According to the thinking described above, the main content is as follows:Part one, the article attempts to reveal different characteristics of the subjects in the leading field of a certain medium through the changes of the media. Then, from the historical subject it investigates the construction of the real subject by the field of media. Nowadays, a lot of people survive in various media whether taking a certain medium or some media as the leading factor. Because different media have different code rules and form different yardsticks toward the subject, the field of various media enables the subjects to have much possibility to obtain many kinds of yardsticks. The subject may have a lot of " Avatars " meeting different needs. The media field constructs the subject of desire eager to realize various possibilities.Part two, under the reference system of " Continuity and Mutation ", the article attempts to comb the roles that the creating subjects bear in the literature history, differentiate and analyze the desires of the subjects which literature can meet, and expound the way of creation of literature which gives play to the media advantage—possibility and reality surmounting virtuality under the function of other factors in the media field.Part three, through borrowing the concepts of symbol" and "inter-text", the article probes into the possibility and reality with a whole view that literature reading satisfies the various desires of the subject in media field, so as to prove the necessity of literature reading.This text attempts to break through this kind of opposing thinking mode because the sudden emergence of the new media has caused the crisis of the language code and the decline of literature. Under the whole linguistic context in the field of media, literature should be put into the dialectical development view "Continuity and Mutation ", forming the contacts with other media and at the same time keeping its own advantage of media development.
        

媒介场中“文学事实”的通变问题研究

中文摘要5-6
英文摘要6-7
引言8-18
    一、文学的当前危机与媒介指向8-11
    二、媒介场的空间生成11-13
    三、媒介场中文学研究应直面“文学事实”13-15
    四、文学通变的时间呈现15-16
    五、媒介场的文学建构16-18
第一部分 媒介场中的主体建构18-48
    第一章 媒介变迁中主体的偏向性18-43
        一、机械印刷媒介场中的中心化主体19-21
        二、播放型媒介场域中的非理性主体21-34
        三、互动型媒介场域中的去中心化主体34-43
    第二章 当代媒介场域中欲望主体的空间生成43-48
第二部分 媒介场域中的文学创作48-78
    第三章 媒介场域中文学创作主体的功能演化48-62
        一、文学创作主体的历史功能48-55
        二、媒介场域中文学创作主体的功能分化55-62
    第四章 媒介场域中文学性的多媒介显现62-66
    第五章 媒介场域中文学创作主体的文学性持存和伸张66-78
        一、虚拟现实:没有参照系的真实67-68
        二、虚构:真实与幻觉的游戏68-70
        三、媒介场域中游移于虚构与虚拟之间的文学创作主体70-72
        四、媒介场域中文学创作主体超越虚拟的可能性和现实性72-78
第三部分 媒介场域中的文学阅读78-102
    第六章 媒介场域中电子媒介接受的迷局78-87
        一、图像的诱惑79-81
        二、拟像的施魅81-83
        三、超文本的漫游83-87
    第七章 媒介场中作为“象征”的文学阅读87-94
        一、文学阅读的“间离化”89-90
        二、文学阅读的内视性90-92
        三、文学阅读的时间性92-94
    第八章 媒介场域中的互文性文学阅读94-102
        一、媒介场域中的开放性文学阅读94-99
        二、媒介场域中文学阅读的泛媒介性99-102
总结:媒介场域中文学的未来趋向102-107
附录107-108
参考文献108-113
    一、中文文献(以著/编者姓名音序排列)108-112
    二、外文文献(以作者姓氏字母排列)112-113
后记113


本文地址:

上一篇:国家艺术支持
下一篇:虚实相生

分享到: 分享媒介场中“文学事实”的通变问题研究到腾讯微博           收藏
发表网-媒介场中“文学事实”的通变问题研究-在线咨询