是（離）地景還是心景　《郊區佛陀》中的空間和地方

本文探究倫敦及其郊區地景，如何被哈尼夫‧庫雷西的小說《郊區佛陀》轉譯爲角色的心景，從而反映書中人物在不同時空架構中的社會生產關係。本文首先援引地理學者段義孚(Tuan, Yi-fu)與克蘭(Mike Crang)關於地方(place)與空間(space)的概念，認爲空間較地方抽象。地方是人群與社區長期共同經驗產生的地理位置，因爲過於熟悉而爲居民意識所忽略。空間則因其不確定性，象徵了自由與機會。倫敦的都市地景在主角身處郊區地方時，成了他心之所向的想像空間，卻在移居倫敦之後，失去之前作爲空間的魅力。此一過程說明地景與心景互相塑造彼此，又逃離(escape)出對方涵攝(subsumption)的過程。地景在心靈的描繪裡，其實已經有別於當地居民所認識的地方，而成爲本文所稱的「離」地景(Land-escape)。其次，本文在架構上隨著主角移居的過程及社會經濟關係分爲三個部分。第一部份說明對於主角而言郊區的沈悶的地景早已滲入主角未覺察的地理居間性(inbetweenness)與文化異質性(heterogeneity)。主角因爲居住在作爲「地方」的郊區，而對倫敦的「空間」充滿想像與慾望。他未曾察覺自己因爲青少年的餘暇(leisure)而能盡情窺視郊區的細緻風貌，同時將緊鄰郊區的倫敦地景納入自己的心景。此時的主角主要是不滿於郊區的文化現象，期待進入大都會進行階級躍升的文化消費者。「真實」的地景因而逃離想像的心景。第二部分論述主角及其周邊人物搬遷至倫敦以後，都市的「空間」地景迅速淪爲「地方」的過程。主角此時的心景關注如何以自己的族裔外觀發展演員事業。由於主角已被嵌入倫敦的生產關係中，成爲倫敦文化地景的一部份，之前作爲空間的都市地景反而被主角忽略。主角前往紐約並回歸倫敦的過程是本文第三部份的論述對象。由於無法適應以自己情人查理爲中心建構的社會網絡，倫敦再次成爲主角身心歸屬的對象。主角事業上的成功、人際關係的再確立使倫敦被呈現成一個兼具地方認同與空間想像，地景與心景交疊的城市。

關鍵字

空間；地方；庫雷西；地景；心景；居間性

並列摘要

This paper explores how the landscape of London and its suburb are translated into mindscapes of the protagonist, hence reflecting his roles of socio-cultural production in different time-spaces. I would first appropriate the idea of place and space from Yi-Fu Tuan and Mike Crang, both affirming that space is more abstract than place. Place is defined as a geographic location brought forth by common experiences of a crowd or a community, easily ignored for people rarely find it difficult to know their residential areas. On the other hand, space represents freedom and opportunity on account of its uncertainty. While the protagonist long resides in the suburb as a place, London's urbanscape turns to be his imaginative space. Yet the latter soon loses its glamour after the hero has finally become a Londoner. This process illuminates that while landscape and mindscape are mutually molded, each of them constantly escapes the subsuming power of the other party. In this way, the inevitable mental portrayal of the landscape has made it something other than the place recognized by its residents, which turns to be land-(e)scape as this paper calls it. Following the route taken by the hero, together with socio-economic relationships with which he is entangled, I would like to divide this paper into three parts. The first part examines that the suburban landscape, which is always dreary for the protagonist, is never devoid of the geographic in-betweenness and cultural heterogeneity. This is because the hero's suburban residence as a place fascinates him that London is a space. He has never found that his adolescent privilege of leisure enables him to look into the fine texture of his residence, while at the same time includes the landscape of London into his mindscape. Unsatisfied with the suburban mediocrity then, the protagonist is a cultural consumer yearning to upgrade his lower-middle class in the metropolis. The ”real” landscape hence escapes his imaginary mindscape. The second part excavates a process in which urban space rapidly comes down to a place after the hero immigrates into London with other major characters. At this moment he is obsessed with how his ethnic outlook is to facilitate a budding acting career. Since the protagonist is inlayed in the relations of production in London and serves to be a part of its cultural landscape, the urbanscape as space is constantly ignored. The hero's short stay in New York and final homecoming in London turns to be the research object of the third part. Unable to accommodate himself to a social web revolved around his lover Charlie, the protagonist re-attaches himself to London. A successful career and the reassurance of his interpersonal relationship render London as a city where place coexists with space, and landscape overlaps mindscape.