再現過去：歷史的多種形式初探——以泰雅族文化的書寫及霧社事件漫畫為例

研究論文Research Article

再現過去：歷史的多種形式初探

—以泰雅族文化的書寫及霧社事件漫畫為例

Representing the Past:A Pilot Study of Various Forms of History

-- Examplied by Atayal Cultural Writing and Wushe Incident related Comics

黃國超

Huang, Kuo-Chao

摘要

在許多的研究中，線性歷史（linear history）與循環歷史（cyclical history）經常被用來區辨兩種不同歷史心性下的歷史時間觀念。這兩種歷史心性之別，或被解釋為西方與非西方的，或被視為文字書寫文化與無文字書寫文化的，或是「近代民族主義下」與「傳統歷史心性」的區分（引自王明珂1999：283-342）。

在本文中，我以泰雅族gaga的故事，先說明泰雅的歷史心性既非線性亦非循環歷史，而是重複強調一種小社會合作的團結基礎—倫理關係—以此形成共罪與共作的生產團體。這些gaga中所表達的，強調人群間根基情感的歷史心性，曾經流行於過去的泰雅社會中，而至今這些理解仍存於許多當代泰雅人的認知裡，我將gaga的敘事故事稱之為根基歷史（primordial history）。本文以「歷史如何再現」的問題意識出發，透過幾個不同階段的文本表現類型，探討泰雅族文化、文學書寫、霧社事件漫畫等再現過程中所呈現的書寫權力問題，並重新思索文化詮釋與建構中，創作者個人與文本成果之間的關係性。

近百年來的外來殖民對於泰雅族來說，是一個從「無文字」到「文字化」的過程，文字書寫的介入伴隨而來不同族群間歷史政治的交混，外來政治勢力與文化的爭霸，不僅造成泰雅人主體的失落、自我扭曲，不同政權間亦不斷競逐、角力各種統治意識型態的詮釋觀點。在歷史解釋權的爭奪中，我們在幾位泰雅族、賽德克族人身上，可以看到gaga/gaya根深蒂固的影響力，這種根基歷史的召喚，也是泰雅族與賽德克族人與其他族群作者在書寫起點的根本差別。

關鍵字：書寫、泰雅族、再現、歷史、霧社事件

Abstract

In many studies, it is common to use linear history and cyclical history to distinguish two kinds of mindsets of time frames. These two historical mindsets sometimes are expressed as western vs non-western, written-form cultures vs non-written-form culture, or ‘modern nationalistic’ vs ‘traditional historical mindset’(王明珂1999：283-342).

In this article, I use Atayal’s‘gaga’ stories as examples. I intend to explain why Atayal’s historical mindset has been neither linear nor cyclical, but an emphasis on repeating a united base for a small society, the relationship in ethic level. Atayal have created a collective production unit around the base, with sharing the sense of guilt- and work . These ‘gaga’ stories show the historical mindset based on interpersonal affections. This kind of historical mindset used to be prevailing in Atayal societies, and still exists in many Atayal people’s perceptions. I call the narrative stories in ‘gaga’ collectively as ‘primordial history.’ This article starts by the awareness to the question of ‘how to represent history,’ then use text expressing forms of different stages to discuss the writing rights issues aroused when the Atayal culture, literature writings and Wushe incident related comics were represented. Finally I would try to reconstruct the connection between authors and resulting texts, in the context of cultural interpretation and construction.

To the Atayal, being ruled by the different colonial authorities in recent hundred years constituted a process, leading them from ‘wordless’ to ‘writing’. When they were firstly exposed to writing, they had to face the associated historical and political conflicts of different ethic groups. Not only the competitions among intruding political forces and cultures made Atayal people lose their own autonomy and twist their self identity, but various ruling regimes constantly competed for the position for interpretation, based on imposed ideologies. We can see the inherent influences of ‘gaga’ in some Atayal and Seediq people. In the beginning toward writing, the calling rooted in history is the fundamental difference between Atayal and Seediq and other ethnics.

Keywords: writing, Atayal, representation, history, Wushe Incident

檢視全文