外国文学研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (4): 11-31.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

前帝国、后帝国及灾难叙事:约瑟夫·罗斯的《拉德兹基进行曲》与伊沃·安德里奇的《德里纳河上的桥》

Vladimir Biti   

  • 出版日期:2020-08-25 发布日期:2021-02-25
  • 作者简介:弗拉基米尔·比蒂,维也纳大学斯拉夫文学与比较文学荣休教授,现任浙江大学特聘讲席访问教授,著有《追寻全球民主:文学、理论及创伤政治》(2017)和《附属于剥夺:帝国时代之后的欧洲牺牲叙事》(2018)等。

Past Empire(s), Post-Empire(s), and Narratives of Disaster: Joseph Roth's The Radetzky March and Ivo Andrić's The Bridge over the Drina

Vladimir Bit   

  • Online:2020-08-25 Published:2021-02-25
  • About author:Vladimir Biti, Professor Emeritus of Slavic and Comparative Literature at the University of Vienna, is currently Distinguished Chair Visiting Professor at Zhejiang University and the author of Tracing Global Democracy: Literature, Theory, and the Politics of Trauma (2017) and Attached to Dispossession: Sacrificial Narratives in Post-Imperial Europe (2018), among others. Email: vladimir.biti@univie.ac.at

内容摘要: 东―中欧帝国的分崩瓦解滋生了种类繁多的灾难叙事。本文直面两部此类的小说:一是约瑟夫·罗斯从奥匈帝国统治阶层的视角写成的《拉德兹基进行曲》, 二是伊沃·安德里奇从奥匈及奥特曼帝国子民的视角写成的《德里纳河上的桥》。罗斯注重的是私人家庭, 认为这家孩子们背弃自己的父亲之时, 就是帝国分崩瓦解之始。安德里奇与政治家庭分道扬镳, 认为一旦权贵们抛弃自己的子民, 帝国的崩溃也就发生了。事实上, 一种外在的力量扭曲了父系关系, 并使其属下四分五裂。本文剖析这两部小说针对这一创伤所作的不同回应。罗斯的回应是, 通过确立一个“时代交错”的史诗级叙述者, 不停地嘲讽书中的人物, 因为他们实在是目光短浅、幼稚可笑。安德里奇所做的是, 将作者的自我塑造成一个公正不阿的神圣法官, 向眼下遭以敌视的人物许诺未来会实现的和解与和谐。

关键词: 灾难, 帝国, 父系关系, 后帝国, 自我生存技巧

Abstract: The breakup of East-Central European empires generated various narratives of disaster. This article confronts two such novels, Joseph Roth's The Radetzky March, which is written from the perspective of the Austro-Hungarian Empire's ruling constituency, and Ivo Andrić's The Bridge over the Drina, which is written from the perspective of the subjects of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires. For Roth, who focuses on the private family, the Empire entered its disintegration when its children renounced their fathers. For Andrić, who departs from the political family, that took place when its authorities abandoned their subjects. In fact, an external force distorts the paternal relationship and sets its constituencies apart. The article analyses the two novels' different answers to this trauma. Roth responds to it by establishing an “anachronous” epic narrator who permanently ironizes his protagonists because of their shortsightedness and naivety. Andrić for his part shapes his authorial self on the model of an impartial divine Judge, promising the presently antagonized protagonists future reconciliation and harmony.

Key words: disaster, empire, paternal relationships, post-empire, technologies of self-survival

Journal Integrated Operation and Management Platform with Network