研究生: |
史宗玲 Shih Chung-ling |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
猶太存續 vs. 美國同化:三位美猶小說家的對話論 Jewish Survival vs. Americanization:Dialogisms in Three American-Jewish Fiction Writers |
指導教授: |
田維新
Tien, Wei-Hsin |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
英語學系 Department of English |
論文出版年: | 1998 |
畢業學年度: | 86 |
語文別: | 中文 |
中文關鍵詞: | 【雙軌】猶太意識 、【雙軌】美猶小說家 、存在對話論 、對話視野 、意識形態對話論 、宗教對話論 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:135 下載:3 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
在道德生活、宗教信仰及藝術創作上,美國猶太人皆背負著雙重意識,並表達在文化情感、價值判斷、學術背景及族群認同上。美猶小說中經常流露「保猶」/「守猶」及「棄猶」/「反猶」矛盾情結的對抗,此乃構成「美猶對話論」的基本雛型。本論文擬以馬拉末、羅斯及歐茲克三位美猶小說家的作品為例,指出美猶小說不是彰顯單一的猶太特質,而是傳遞「雙軌」的猶太及非猶太意識的對立/對峙/對話。 瑪拉末、羅斯及歐茲克係二次大戰後備受矚目的美猶作家,在他們的小說中他們分別揭櫫"存在對話論",“意識形態對話論"及“宗教對話論"。面對五零年代戰後的猶太餘悸及道德淪喪,瑪拉末即提倡人道主義與猶太團結,主張一種「汝為我活,我為你活」的存在哲學;在自由開放的在六零年代裡,羅斯則大聲呼籲破除猶太本位主義,並探討兩種族群意識─猶太本位主義及美國民族主義─的相互抗衡;到了七零年代,有鑑於多元文化論蓬勃發展,歐茲克則公開地宣揚猶太宗教的美學,並研究猶太宗教與非猶太文化之間的互動及對比關係。無論是將猶太本質“道德化”或“意識形態化”或“宗教化”,此三位美猶小說家皆注意到猶太意識的雙軌成份。整體觀之他們的小說明顯地顛覆了外人對猶太人的刻板形象;並確定了族群認同的不穩定性與文化屬性的多樣性。要言之, 猶裔美國人的「雙軌」猶太意識乃文化變遷和文化抗衡的自然產物,它是陷入困境的猶裔美國人通往猶太自覺的路徑,而絕非威脅他們安身立命的禁忌或剋星。
This dissertation mainly discusses a shared trait of "dual-track" Jewishness resulting from the dialogical interactions between both Jewish and Gentile cultural ideologies, as demonstrated in a host of literary works by Bernard Malamud, Philip Roth and Cynthia Ozick. These American-Jewish fiction writers,highly visible in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s respectively, inscribe their dual-track" (Jewish and Gentile) creative courses and cultural traces in their works,thereby qualifying themselves as "dual-track" Jewish writers. The conflicts between Jewish affirmation and anti-Jewish liberation, Jewishadherence and anti-Jewish detachment, constitute the American-Jewry's "dual-track" Jewishness as well as Jewish dialogisms. Malamud's moral fictions raiseyou-live-for-me-and-I-live-for-you" existential dialogism," Roth's protest ficitons demonstrate "ideological dialogism," based on the war between anti-Jewish individualism and Jewish ethnocentrism, and Ozick's liturgical fictions illustrate "Judaic dialogism," deriving from some collision between Judaic and Christian cultures. When Malamud "moralizes" Jewishness, Roth "ideologizes" it and Ozick "Judaifies" it, they all approach it from a cross-ethnic, inter-cultural angle; namely, the Jewish vs. Gentile framework. In tackling the subject of "dual-track" Jewishness, they have rendered it, intheir own ways, a caution of or an acess to self-understanding, bringing frominter-ethnic contacts and cultural evolution rather than from a negative tabooor a damaging matter threatening the survival of modern American Jews on the whole.