The Transformation of Peripheral Narratives and Multiple Modernities——Reconstructing the Relationship between The Sound and the Fury, One Hundred Years of Solitude and Red Sorghum
-
摘要: 边地叙事发生在现代/中心-传统/边缘的二元对立文化框架中，通过转换思维的视角，从边缘价值体系出发重构边地文化生态和解构一元现代性，提供了表达现代性不平衡发展、地方视角下文学生产和现代性地方化的文学术语和构想。将这个中国民族文学概念置于世界文学语境之中，重新阐释福克纳、马尔克斯和莫言之间的文学创作影响关系，有利于揭示西方中心现代性与地方性交流对话的演变流程，以及一元时间叙事向多元空间叙事的转变历程。在文学地理学的理论视角下，三者的影响关系是边地-叙事-想象三位一体的流变关系。三位作家依托地方性和家族命运，通过时空转化、虚实相融、散点叙事等不同的文学手法，处理地理意识与历史意识、人物命运与人文地理、民族与世界等现代性话语，从而呈现具有不同地域文化内核的地方民族想象。对三者文学影响关系的重构，揭示了全球化进程中边地对现代性的话语重构和边地文学的多元现代性，也表现了一个尊重文明多样性和现代性理念多样化的差异空间。Abstract: Peripheral narratives are featured by a twist of perspective in the binary framework of modernity/center-tradition/periphery opposition, which reconstructs the local culture while complementing the unitary modernity. The literary relationship between William Faulkner, García Márquez and Mo Yan demonstrates the communication between West-centric modernity and locality as well as the transition from unitary temporal narratives to diverse spatial narratives. Proceeding from the perspective of literary geography, their relationships can be defined as rheological relations in a trinity framework of borderland, narrative, and imagination.Relying on local geography and family destiny, their works employ various techniques, such as the spatialization of time, the integration of fiction and reality, and scattered narratives, in order to tend to the complicated relationship between geography and history, character and locality as well as nationality and worldliness, and thus portraying different national imaginations. The reconstruction of the relationship among the three writers reveals the role of peripheral regions in deconstructing West-centric modernity, triggers multiple modernities and unfolds a differential space that respects cultural diversity and honors multiple modernities.
-
Key words:
- literary geography /
- modernity /
- periphery /
- multiple modernities
-
[1] .陈平《〈喧哗与骚动〉的讲述形式和功能研究》,《四川师范大学学报(社会科学版)》2009年第1期。 [2] .陈思和《当代文学中的文化寻根意识》,《文学评论》1986年第6期。 [3] .陈思和《民间的还原——文革后文学史某种走向的解释》,《文艺争鸣》1994年第1期。 [4] .段从学《“边地书写”与“边地中国”的现代性问题——以抗战时期的“大西南”为例》,《西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)》2019年第2期。 [5] .贺桂梅《80年代、“五四”传统与“现代化范式”的耦合——知识社会学视角的考察》,《文艺争鸣》2009年第6期。 [6] .黄炬《构建人类命运共同体对一元现代性的超越》,《四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2020年第5期。 [7] .金耀基《另类现代性在东亚的兴起》,收入多明尼克·萨赫森迈尔等主编的《多元现代性的反思:欧洲、中国及其他的阐释》,郭少棠、王为理译,北京:商务印书馆,2017年。 [8] .刘大先《“边地”作为方法与问题》,《文学评论》2018年第2期。 [9] .刘大先《叙事作为行动:少数民族文学的文化记忆问题》,《南方文坛》2013年第1期。 [10] .塔利《文学空间研究:起源、发展和前景》,方英译,《复旦学报》2020年第6期。 [11] .托多洛夫《文学作品分析》,中国社会科学出版社,1989年。 [12] .吴进《论沈从文与艾芜的边地作品》,《中国现代文学研究丛刊》1988年第1期。 [13] .夏银平,何衍林《从时间叙事到空间叙事:人类命运共同体对全球现代性的话语重构》,《理论与改革》2021年第4期。 [14] .肖明翰《威廉·福克纳研究》,外语教学与研究出版社,1997年。 [15] .于京一《边缘的意义——对新世纪“边地小说”的一种解读》,《扬子江评论》2014 年第3期。 [16] . Anne C. Hegerfeldt, Lies That Tell the Truth: Magic Realism Seen through Contemporary Fiction from Britain, Amsterdam; New York: Rodopi B. V. , 2005. [17] . Amaryll Chanady, “The Territorialization of the Imaginary in Latin America”, in L. P. Zamora & W. B. Faris, ed., Magical Realism: Theory, History, Community, Durham, N.C. : Duke University Press, 1995, p. 133. [18] . Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth, Realism and Consensus in the English Novel, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998. [19] . Franco Moretti, Atlas of the European Novel, 1800-1900, London: Verso, 1998, p.3-4. [20] . Patricia Drechsel Tobin, Time and Novel: The Genealogical Imperative, Princeton, N.J. :Princeton University Press, 1978. [21] . Robert T. Tally Jr., Topophrenia: Place, Narrative and Imagination, Bloomington: Indiana University, 2019. [22] . Shmuel N. Eisenstadt, “Multiple Modernities in an Age of Globalization”, in The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 2(1999): 283-295. [23] . Stephen Slemon, “Magic Realism as Postcolonial Discourse”, in L. P. Zamora & W. B. Faris ed.,Magical Realism: Theory, History, Community, Durham, N.C. : Duke University Press, 1995. [24] . Stuti Khanna, The Contemporary Novel and the City, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 99
- HTML全文浏览量: 19
- PDF下载量: 11
- 被引次数: 0
下载:
