藝文補助政策下的自主與多元—以國藝會、文建會戲劇類常態性補助為例

The Autonomy and Diversity under Direct Grant Policy: Case Study of The National Culture and Arts Foundation and Ministry of Culture

施惠文(Huei-Wen Shih)

指導教授 ： 林國明

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/社會學研究所/碩士(2017年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201700623

摘要

民國建國百年，政府舉辦系列慶祝活動，其中由文建會負責規劃之國慶晚會邀請國內知名表演團體以音樂劇形式展現，企圖展現我國文化軟實力。然而這齣音樂劇卻意外引爆藝文界長期以來對於文化政策的不滿聲浪，質疑政府資源分配邏輯有所偏頗，而文建會主委先是透過投書報紙公開為政府立場辯護，而後為此次爭議事件下台。從這些討論中，彰顯了台灣當前藝文補助政策中蘊含著政治權力與藝術自主之間的拉扯與不安。

本研究的核心問題意識由此出發，企圖探究台灣的藝文補助政策在經歷幾次重大改革後是否確實有助於藝術自主多元發展，抑或是真如藝文界所擔心，政府仍透過藝文補助機制對藝術創作產生干預。因此，本研究首先從規範層次的爭辯開始，說明無論從藝術場域或是政治場域所關切的核心價值出發，各界對於藝文補助政策的理念具有高度共識—亦即透過政策，必須促進藝術自主與多元發展。從此一規範性命題出發，本研究企圖在經驗層次上進行分析，理解政策結果與規範理念之間是否存在落差？並且追問導致此一落差的運作機制為何？

為此，在分析方法上，本研究首先將以戲劇節目及戲劇團體為單位進行內容分析，檢視不同執政時期的政黨文化偏好是否對藝文補助結果的文化傾向分佈產生影響，藉以推論藝文補助政策結果是否受到政治偏好的干預。接著，將試圖進一步追問導致此一結果的政策運作機制為何？為此，本研究嘗試從兩個角度提出解釋。首先，透過文本分析，本研究將以國家藝術基金會及文化建設委員會所職掌之常態性戲劇類補助辦法作為主要分析文本，檢視既有補助法規所蘊含的內涵是否與原先所期待的「自主多元」價值相符？在這些看似中立的補助辦法當中，又是如何為政治權力留下可能的運作空間？其次，將透過深度訪談，理解行政官員、評審委員及補助申請者等不同行動者如何基於其自身立場與利益考量，對政策做出不同的詮釋和運用，而這些實作如何影響政策後果？透過上述分析，期盼對當前政策提出更為精確的反省與建議。

關鍵字

文化政策 ； 自主性 ； 詮釋制度論 ； 實作邏輯 ； 行動者

並列摘要

In 2011, Taiwan celebrated its 100th anniversary through series of activities, including the musical play directed by one of the most famous troupe in Taiwan and supported by Ministry of Culture. However, the play accidentally triggered the long-term complaint about the grant policy from artists. They questioned that the government assigned resource through their political preference. Minister of Culture delivered a public letter to clarify government’s neutral position; afterward, he even resigned for this controversial issue. The dispute indicated the art grant system is struggling between the political power and art autonomy.

The key question in this research is whether the grant system going through several stages of reform is now beneficial for the art autonomy and diversity, or as the artist worried about, the government still interferes in the artistic creation with direct grant mechanism. Thus, I begin with the normative argument to approve that no matter in the perspective of art or political field, they have a highly common consensus toward the idea of grant system. They both agree that an ideal grant system in democratic country should be beneficial for the development of art autonomy and diversity. Based on the statement, the research intended to empirically investigate whether there is the gap between the policy idea and consequence and what is the mechanism.

In order to answer the question, there is three parts of sub-questions in this research. First, by content analysis, I intend to make sure whether the art grant distributions indeed show the correlation with the cultural ideology preference of the governing party. According to the systematical coding data, I try to answer the controversial dispute about whether the ruling power interferes in the grant system. Besides, I want to explore how the mechanism works. Thus, I review the direct grant regulations for drama in The National Culture and Arts Foundation and Ministry of Culture. Through contextual analysis, I want to know how political manipulation is possible under the neutral-like grant regulations. Is there any inconsistency between the policy idea and regulation context? In the end, I interview stakeholders in the grant system. I want to show the agents under the same regulations have diverse interpretation and practice because of their different position and field accountability logic, which cause the concrete institutional consequence. Through answering these questions, I expect to come up with more accurate reflection and suggestion for the cultural direct grant policy.

並列關鍵字

culture policy ； autonomy ； interpretative institutionalism ； practice logic ； agent

參考文獻

史正怡、謝嘉哲、黃秀慧，2008，〈劇團演出幕後製作群之人力規劃：以台灣戲劇表演家劇團2007年《胭脂盒》為例〉。《藝術研究學報》1(1):33-49。

秦雅君，2009，《國家文化藝術基金會作為企業與藝術中介組織之研究》。台北：臺北藝術大學藝術行政與管理研究所碩士論文。

吳乃德，2002，〈認同衝突和政治信任：現階段台灣族群政治的核心難題〉，《台灣社會學》4:75-118。

王俐容，2005，〈文化政策中的經濟論述：從菁英文化到文化經濟？〉。《文化研究》1:169-195。

廖世璋，2002，〈國家治理下的文化政策：一個歷史回顧〉。《建築與規劃學報》3（2）:160-181。