「吃人與禮教」和「吃人的禮教」—論魯迅《狂人日記》的詮釋化過程

在魯迅研究的歷程當中，自八○年代起，由李歐梵和劉再復掀起的「祛魅」方向成為魯迅學研究的新蹊徑。魯迅和他的作品同樣經歷被多重詮釋的過程，包括一些今天我們已經耳熟能詳的解讀魯迅的關鍵詞，在漫長的歷史進程中被不斷轉化和詮釋後，已經成為跟原初文本和作者本意截然不同的象徵物，當中的重要例子是《狂人日記》。歷來關於這篇小說的詮釋，以及有關「吃人」和「禮教」的解讀，都被不同人士、文學或政治團體以各自的觀點來詮釋，甚至魯迅本人對有關這篇小說的說明和解釋，都受到當時政治和文化的各種勢力影響。在這個背景下，本文梳理各項歷史材料，研究《狂人日記》由發表至上世紀八○年代這段時間內被詮釋的過程，並審視在「吃人」、「吃人與禮教」和「吃人的禮教」的轉化過程中，各種政治文化勢力如何借用這些意象，並把它們上升為政治象徵，改寫了解讀《狂人日記》的詮釋角度。

關鍵字

魯迅；《狂人日記》；吃人；禮教；詮釋

並列摘要

In the 1980s, Leo Ou-fan Lee's and Liu Zaifu's advocacy of "disenchantment" sparked a new approach to studying the works of Lu Xun. For half a century, Lu Xun and his works had been widely discussed and analyzed, leading to a range of interpretations. During this continuing historical process of evolution and interpretation, some key phrases attributed to Lu Xun had been understood as important symbols that communicate compelling ideas. Such symbolic associations, however, may deviate from the original messages of the texts and the intent of the author. "A Madman's Diary" is a prominent example. Various individuals, literary organizations, and political groups have proposed differing approaches for how the story should be interpreted, as well as how cannibalism and the ethical system of feudal society should be perceived. In fact, even Lu Xun's own explanation and interpretation of the story went through a series of changes due to the influence of different literary groups. Considering this context, this article evaluates different types of historical materials to explore how "A Madman's Diary" was interpreted from its publication until the 1980s. By examining the shift of literary focus from "cannibalism" to "cannibalism and feudal ethics" and then to "the cannibalistic nature of feudal ethics," this article explains how various political and cultural groups made use of these symbolic associations to convey particular political messages, which in turn reoriented the interpretation of "A Madman's Diary."