透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.133.131.168
  • 學位論文

婁燁電影研究:後社會主義中國倫理主體的追尋

A Study of Lou Ye’s Films: The Pursuit of an Ethical Subject in Postsocialist China

指導教授 : 陳儒修
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


身為一個最常和中國當局意見扞格的導演,婁燁用他對後社會中國的獨特觀察與反思在國際影壇揚名立萬。本論文立論於米歇爾.傅柯的「倫理主體」、「自身技藝」與「生存美學」理論,試圖探究婁燁如何在中國當局的控制中拍片,以及婁燁電影的主人翁如何在不同時代的中國社會中尋求各自安身立命的空間。 在婁燁拍片的過程中,他用三種方式實行了他的自身技藝。在拍攝《危情少女》和《紫蝴蝶》時,他和電檢制度共存,但是在這兩部電影中,仍然注入了若干抗爭意涵。至於《週末情人》和《蘇州河》,他在不合乎電檢制度的情況下進行拍攝,並在兩片中注入抗爭意涵。然而,《週末情人》和《蘇州河》在長時間的協商後,最終仍然通過電檢。而在拍攝《頤和園》和《春風沉醉的夜晚》時,婁燁在電檢制度外處理可能觸怒中共當局的禁忌議題,但仍然試圖與當局協商。 在另一方面,婁燁在拍片中也樹立了個人風格,讓他能夠施展自身技藝。這些個人風格包括:(1)透過熟悉的文本或地景所創立的互文性,這些互文性能夠產生一種既陌生又詭異的感覺,(2)對燈光的精準控制,其目的在精準捕捉電影中主人翁如何在黑暗中遭逢創傷的拉扯,(3)具有魔幻元素的寫實主義。 部份社會和文化因素也幫助婁燁得以施展其自身技藝,包括:(1)網路和P2P軟體使觀賞婁燁的禁片成為可能,(2)在北京電影學院和北京師範大學附近的電影俱樂部,(3)國際影展文化。 至於婁燁電影中的主人翁,他們用各自的方式彰顯其自身技藝。在《週末情人》中,年輕人傾向用搖滾樂和性愛的探險抵抗市場化經濟的主控意識型態。在《危情少女》中,主人翁透過現實和夢境的反差質問其所屬時代的社會疏離。在《蘇州河》裡,主人翁利用愛情和真誠抵抗高張的消費主義和犬儒主義。在《紫蝴蝶》當中,主人翁面對愛國主義的籠罩,傾向沉默不語,以反映出他們在中日戰爭的困境。在《頤和園》,主人翁移動於各個城市間,並且服從於他們各自的身體幻象,以抵抗所處的生存困境。至於《春風沉醉的夜晚》,電影中的酷兒主人翁透過在私領域進行性愛並對伴侶忠誠,以抵抗異性戀霸權。整體而言,電影中的主人翁抵抗各自所處時間的主控意識型態,不只是反映婁燁拍片時如何與中共當局共處,更顯示出個體如何在後社會主義的中國中,透過社會主義與市場化經濟的反差,以獲得賦權進行抵抗。

並列摘要


As a director who has clashed with the Chinese authorities most often, Lou Ye impresses the International art circuit cinema with his unique observation and reflection on Postsocialist China. Based on Michel Foucault’s theory of “ethical subject,” “technology of the self,” and “aesthetics of existence,” the thesis aims to fathom how Lou Ye shoots films under the control of the Chinese authorities and how protagonists in Lou Ye’s films survive in the Chinese society of different times. In Lou Ye’s film making, he carries out his technologies of the self in three ways. In the making of Don’t Be Young and Purple Butterfly, he works under the censorship system but still embodies resistance in the two films. As for Weekend Lover and Suzhou River, he works outside the censorship system and embodies resistance in the two films; however, the two films eventually pass the censorship system after long negotiation. When shooting Summer Palace and Spring Fever, he deals with taboo subjects outside the censorship system but still attempts to negotiate with the system. As for the protagonists in Lou Ye’s films, they show their technologies of the selves in respective ways. In Weekend Lover, youngsters tend to resist the dominant ideology of the market economy with rock ‘n’ roll music and sex adventure. In Don’t Be Young, the protagonist questions the social alienation of her time by contrasting her dreams and reality. In Suzhou River, the protagonists resist the upsurge of consumerism and Cynicism with love and sincerity. In Purple Butterfly, the protagonists tend to be silent in the shroud of patriotism, which reveals their plights in Sino-Japanese War. In Summer Palace, protagonists are mobile in different cities and obedient to their body illusions so as to resist the survival predicament. In Spring Fever, queer protagonists have sexual intercourse in their private realms and are loyal to their mates with a view to resisting the heterosexual hegemony. To sum up, the way these protagonists resist the dominant ideology of their times not only reflects how Lou Ye deals with the Chinese authorities but reveals how individuals are empowered in the contrast between socialism and the market economy in Postsocialist China.

參考文獻


成慶(2007),〈張藝謀與賈樟柯的背後:當代中國文化生產的第三隻手〉,《思想》第五期,臺北:臺灣哲學學會,頁290-295。
陳儒修(2000),〈文化研究與電影研究〉,《傳播研究簡訊》第21期,臺北:國立政治大學,頁4-7。
魏玓(2010),〈新亞洲電影的打造與拆解〉,《新聞學研究》第104期,臺北:國立政治大學,頁161-194。
Davis, Darrell William & Yeh, Emilie Yueh-yu (2008). East Asian Screen Industries. London: British Film Institute.
Berry, Chris (2009). Staging Gay Life in China: Zhang Yuan and East Palace, West Palace. In Tan See-Kam, Peter X Fang & Gina Marchetti (Eds.), Chinese Connections: Critical Perspectives on Film, Identity, and Diaspora. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. pp. 165-176.

延伸閱讀