查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | Ethics without Responsibility : Agambenian Testimony in Saul Bellow’s The Victim=無關責任 : 索爾貝婁《受害者》中的阿岡本式見證 |
---|---|
作者 | 李書雨; | 書刊名 | 小說與戲劇 |
卷期 | 23:1 2013.12[民102.12] |
頁次 | 頁1-22 |
分類號 | 874.57 |
關鍵詞 | 貝婁; 阿岡本; 倫理學; 主體; 法律; 責任; Bellow; Agamben; Ethics; Subject; Law; Responsibility; |
語文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 索爾貝婁於 1947年出版的小說《受害者》 (The Victim) 描述利文撒爾和艾爾比之間的糾紛:艾爾比堅稱利文撒爾毀了他的一生,應該負責賠償。以往的評論多從「責任」議題出發,來探究小說的倫理學意涵,並判斷利文撒爾是否應為艾爾比負責。本文希望透過阿岡本 (Giorgio Agamben) 的見證主體概念,提出另一種解讀:利文撒爾在故事過程中之所以能夠開始以道德方式對待他人,即因他從對責任等規範與律法的執著中脫離出來,體驗到真正的倫理並非責任義務的判定,而是阿岡本所說的見證。 阿岡本在《奧許維茲的殘餘:證人與檔案》 (Remnants of Auschwitz: The Witness and the Archive) 一書中認為,要對奧許維茲做出道德回應,必須重新思考何謂見證:見證主體應由集中營生還者與穆斯林 (the Muselmann) 兩者共同組成,呼應人類主體的雙重結構,以見證不可能被見證之事。 同樣地,做為經濟意義上的生還者,利文撒爾透過一連串幻象,與艾爾比成為見證主體。本文首先簡述阿岡本的赤裸生命 (bare life) 概念以做為理解見證主體的背景。第一部分敘述利文撒爾如何將規範與倫理混淆;第二部分分析利文撒爾與艾爾比組成的雙重結構見證主體;第三部分討論他如何體驗做為人類主體雙重結構的「羞愧」,而將他的倫理行為從法律論述中脫離出來。 |
英文摘要 | Saul Bellow’s 1947 novel The Victim traces the struggle between Asa Leventhal and the antagonist, Kirby Allbee, over whether Leventhal is guilty of causing Allbee’s ruination and whether he should make reparations for his alleged victim. As previous criticism shows, responsibility has been a major topic in the discussion on the ethical implications of the novel. Instead of joining the debate over whether and how much Leventhal is responsible for Allbee’s destitution, this paper considers the protagonist’s transformation during the course of the story to be a process of relinquishing his obsession with responsibility and discovering the truly ethical response to others. I argue that Leventhal, through a series of involuntary visions, discovers the truly ethical response to others lies in testimony rather than the application of law and norms. Drawing on the parallels between the ethical situations in Bellow’s novel and in the Auschwitz concentration camp, as discussed by Giorgio Agamben in Remnants of Auschwitz, this paper employs Agamben’s ethics of testimony, his concept of shame as the structure of human subjectivity, and his differentiation between law and ethics to analyze the change in Leventhal’s attitude toward Allbee and his own brother. The introductory section discusses Agamben’s ideas of bare life and biopolitics, which are essential to an understanding of his ethics of testimony. The first section deals with Leventhal’s confusion of law and ethics; the second part details Leventhal’s experience of the Agambenian ethical subject of testimony; the third section analyzes how Leventhal abandons juridico-normative thinking after experiencing shame. The paper concludes with the meaning of the title of The Victim and the wider applicability of Agamben’s ethics of testimony. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。