故事該怎麼說？－重返三個犯罪現場

本文先簡略討論米勒所著之〈亞旦斯多德的伊底帕斯情結〉，然後追隨米勒的解構式閱讀，比較皮藍德羅之《六個尋找作者之劇中人》與周慧玲之《記憶相簿》，於過程中借重後結構主義的敘述學以彰顯兩個面向：戲劇演變史中敘述策略之遞嬗及晚近戲劇研究方法之變革。誠如米勒所言，「所有以理體中心主義為基點的文本，皆包含了破壞其中心思想的逆反論證，包含著編織於其內的解構因子」。《傍底帕斯》表面上為理性代言，但全劇卻奠基於非理性的前提。同樣地，標榜眾聲喧嘩的《六個尋找作者之劇中人》實則極為單音，敘述過程霸氣十足。相對地，《記憶相簿》直接觸碰敘述的政治性質，於述說故事的過程裡頻頻反射性地問道：故事該怎麼說？

關鍵字

故事；敘述；理體；後設劇場

並列摘要

The paper begins by briefly discussing J. Hillis Miller's critical essay, ”Aristotle's Oedipus Complex,” and then, loosely applying Miller's methodology, moves on to compare two plays: Luigi Pirandello's ”Six Characters in Search of an Author” and Catherine Chou's ”Family Album: A Play about Falling” . It is hoped that through the comparison the ever changing strategies of narration in drama will be foregrounded. As is well put by Miller, ”all logocentric texts contain their own undermining counterargument, their own deconstruction woven into them.” On the surface, ”Oedipus the King” seems to emphasize the force of reason in finding the truth about human affairs, but the very premise of the play is in fact based on the irrationality of the gods. Similarly, ”Six Characters in Search of an Author” ostensibly preaches for the multiplicity of reality and human nature, and yet the preaching itself is conducted in a rather monologic manner. By contrast, ”Family Album: A Play about Falling”, by using postmodern techniques of metatheatre, touches upon the politics of narration and, throughout the process of storytelling, constantly confronts the audience with the eternal question about reconstructing past events: how shall I relate?