外国文学研究 ›› 2017, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (4): 11-18.

• 中外学者对话世界文学 • 上一篇    下一篇

文学全球化的“不明地带”

弗拉基米尔·比提   

  • 出版日期:2017-08-25 发布日期:2022-06-15
  • 作者简介:弗拉基米尔·比提是奥地利维也纳大学比较文学教授、欧洲科学院院士、国际权威学术期刊《阿卡迪亚:国际文学与文化学刊》联合主编,主要研究比较文学、文学与文化批评、创伤理论、叙事理论等,代表作有《追寻全球民主:文学、理论、创伤政治》(2016)、《历史的奇异本事》(2000)、《诉未言之语:文学、历史、理论》(1994)、《叙事的红利:走向叙事原型理论》(1987)等。

Literary Globalization's “Zones of Indistinction”

Vladimir Biti   

  • Online:2017-08-25 Published:2022-06-15
  • About author:Vladimir Biti is professor of comparative literature at University of Vienna, Austria, Chairperson of the Academia Europaea's Section for Literary and Theatrical Studies, and Co-editor of the A&HCI-indexed Arcadia: International Journal of Literary Cultures (de Gruyter) (with Vivian Liska). His academic research is mainly focused on comparative literature, literary and cultural theory, trauma theory, and narrative theory. He is author of such monographs as Tracing Global Democracy: Literature, Theory and the Politics of Trauma (2016), The Strange Body of Hi/story (2000), Involving the Unsaid: Literature/History/Theory (1994), The Interest of Narrative: Toward a Proto-theory of Narrative (1987). Email: vladimir.biti@univie.ac.at

内容摘要: 近代以来,西方文学与文化作为全球化进程的组成部分,其活跃程度与日俱增,而如何面对这一状况却尚未解决。这一问题,就其承载者而言,无疑有着可喜的一面,而对其受施者来说又有其创伤的一面,这就使得全球化要么作为西方强权自上而下地强制实施的一项策略性工程,要么促成生长于底层的属地自发地联合起来。第一种殖民性的全球化模式以自内而外的联结方式导致各个属地之间的断裂,而后殖民全球化模式则将各个属地联结起来以改变被强加在头上的全球格局。我在拙作《追寻全球民主:文学、理论、创伤政治》一书中已就第一种模式的相关问题进行了探讨,所以本文聚焦于上述第二种模式,这一模式强调文学作品不可缺省的差异性以抵制第一种模式所强调的受市场驱动的共同特征。本文认为第二种模式源于创伤研究与记忆研究交汇之处的跨学科领域,随着艾米丽·阿普特在其《反对世界文学》一书中宣扬“不可互译的”诸多世界文学所具有的丰富性而达到顶峰。本文经过批判性审视,发现这一模式脱离了文学的非归属性,正如第一种模式不假思索地脱离了文学的归属性一样,因而本文提出了一种替代模式,这一模式脱离“创伤群集”而成为一个兼具归属性和非归属性的文学作品的诞生地。

关键词: 全球化, 创伤群系, 不明地带, 身份认同, 记忆

Abstract: The evidence that Western literatures and cultures have been active constituents of globalization processes from early modernity onwards burgeons on a daily basis. However, the question remains open as to the manner in which this state of affairs has to be dealt with. There is an obvious split between the celebratory perspective of its carriers and the traumatized perspective of its victims. This renders globalization either as a strategic project imposed from above by Western powers or as a spontaneous interlocking of the subalterns that grows from below. Whereas the first, colonial model of globalization connects from the center outward and leaves the subalterns disconnected from one another, the postcolonial model of globalization connects these subalterns to one another, transforming the imposed global designs. I have already taken issue with the first model in my Tracing Global Democracy. In this paper I will focus on the second model, which, to oppose the first model's market-driven common denominators, insists on literary works' irreducible difference. As I will try to demonstrate, it emerged in the transdisciplinary field at the intersection of trauma and memory studies, culminating in Emily Apter's advocacy of a plurality of ‘untranslatable' world literatures in her Against World Literature (2013). After critically examining this model, which departs from literature's unhomeliness in the same uncritical way as the first model departs from literature's homeliness, I propose an alternative model, which departs from “traumatic constellation” as a simultaneously homely and unhomely birthplace of literary works.

Key words: globalization, traumatic constellation, zone of indistinction, identification, memory

Journal Integrated Operation and Management Platform with Network