抒情與革命——柏克萊保釣作家研究：劉大任、郭松棻、李渝

考察政治與文學的交鋒在文學史留下的軌跡，七O年代海外保釣運動對柏克萊保釣作家的深刻影響，是其中引人深思的一章。本文聚焦於同樣出身柏克萊釣運左翼的台灣作家劉大任、李渝、郭松棻，探討他們如何以文學書寫回應歷史經驗。透過柏克萊保釣作家的中介，釣魚台問題與全球學潮的革命視景相為呼應，使台灣文學的歷史現場，同步寫下世界的印記。唯革命的挫敗銘刻於柏克萊保釣作家的寫作，使「左翼憂鬱」（Left-Wing Melancholia）成為他們後期作品中揮之不去的命題。然而劉大任、李渝、郭松棻的憂鬱癥狀，並非重蹈西方馬克思主義者的保守頹廢，他們對文學的政治展開反思，尋求以詩學正義替代或延續革命正義的可能性。他們的左翼憂鬱敘事，因此具有積極的歷史再生產意義。細考柏克萊保釣作家的憂鬱情懷，未嘗不可理解為一種以「抒情」對治「革命」的實踐。七O年代「情迷中國」的紅色話語，即出之以鮮明的情感號召，左翼文藝運動的開展，進一步落實「革命的抒情」圖景；他們在八O年代以降，紛紛以寫作對治歷史經驗，更使作為創傷原點的保釣，被重構為由多重文本堆疊而成的抒情現場。劉大任、李渝和郭松棻的小說，從相當唯物的層面印證歷史經驗的複雜性：劉大任不斷重複類似的題材、元素，藉此重申保釣的合法性，李渝和郭松棻則對保釣話題敬而遠之，但以苦行僧般的意志投入舊作的修訂。看似不同的重寫策略，突顯保釣的歷史無法被準確再現。在後革命語境中，時間成為重要的介質，憂鬱則是深層的重複結構——是憂鬱的內在動能，醞釀重寫的欲望，是無法重寫，推動了重寫的發生。對歷史作為對象物的難以確認，使作品永遠處於重寫或等待重寫的中途。而保釣的文本型態又如同千絲萬縷的歷史遺緒，以多音交響的形式遺存。無論不斷重寫的傾向，或文本存在的不同狀態，在在透露他們面向歷史的抒情意圖。更進一步而言，抒情與革命固非新題，柏克萊保釣作家對這系列命題的獨到領會，在於他們將之凝聚於對革命導師魯迅的回應。魯迅在政治與文學的雙重典範意義，為年輕的他們演示——乃至賦予以行動介入現實的合法性。對魯迅的反思，遂成為後期與運動經驗協商的重要介面；相較魯迅的正典性，曾以右翼抒情倡議者之姿，錯落於保釣論述對立面的陳世驤，則映照出他們重拾抒情教義反思革命，更幽微、曖昧的一面。劉大任、李渝和郭松棻的後半生，各以不同方式展開憂鬱的敘述。從「情迷中國」、「走出神話國」到「左翼烏托邦」的轉折與辯證，可謂貫穿劉大任一生的核心命題。保釣的廢墟意識，致使現代主義精神自始便滲入劉大任的現實主義描寫，從挫折重重的歷史經驗提煉烏托邦圖像，將憂鬱情懷轉化為熱切的敘事欲望。與重寫構成鮮明對比的是，劉大任幾乎從不改稿，他對寫作唯物性的信任，成為其曾信仰歷史唯物性之另一鐵證。儘管強迫性的敘事規律，未免衍生製造記憶的危機，卻也由此介入，我們得見劉大任如何從後革命的廢墟召喚馬克思的詩情，見證頹而不衰的左翼精神。郭松棻的憂鬱癥狀，則表現在對歷史經驗的拒認。本文指出郭松棻其實以極為曲折的方式重返歷史的景深：小說、手稿與藏書的劃記批註和魯迅的互文，成為其繞道與保釣對話的途徑。在郭松棻後期的小說中，攸關政治的七O年代總是隱蔽的。考慮到保釣與白色恐怖的左翼內涵共構，他對戰後初期的眺望，未嘗不可理解為一種七O年代的迂迴投射。生前未曾公開的保釣小說〈冰蠶〉與〈保釣自傳〉、〈保釣回憶錄〉，更以美學的失落和書寫的無以為繼，直揭憂鬱的內核。有別於劉大任和郭松棻以過度書寫或不寫之寫演繹憂鬱的極端敘事，在李渝的案例裡，左翼憂鬱以抒情的話語型態延展，開展出「抒情」、「反抒情」與「返抒情」的繁複辯證。魯迅和沈從文的典範共構，映現李渝對文學的政治之深刻思索；其保釣小說從七O年代對運動現場「迴身」，發展到八O年代的旁觀者視角，乃至新世紀以多重渡引美學憶述保釣，一脈相承的敘事策略，切中「反抒情」的內核；重寫行動和烏托邦敘事，則透露李渝以情為媒介，再造記憶、贖救自我的方法。柏克萊保釣作家透過文學實踐，將作為憂鬱起源的保釣，重構為意蘊豐富的抒情領地，歷史因此無限延宕，卻也得到重蓄能量、別開新局的一線生機。這是我們重思台灣文學的歷史敘述、美學典律與批判方法的入口，也構成從台灣觀點介入世界左翼論述的獨特位置。

關鍵字

保釣文學；保釣運動；左翼憂鬱；重寫；魯迅；陳世驤

並列摘要

The profound influence of the overseas Baodiao Movement in the 1970s on Berkeley's Baodiao writers is a thought-provoking chapter in the examination of the traces left by the intersection of politics and literature in the history of Taiwanese literature. This dissertation focuses on Liu Da-ren, Li Yu, and Kuo Sung-Fen, who came from the left wing of the Berkeley Baodiao Movement, and explores how they responded to historical experiences through literary writing. Through the intermediary of Berkeley's Baodiao writers, the Diaoyutai Islands dispute echoed the revolutionary vision of the global student movement, making the historical scene of Taiwanese literature simultaneously write the imprint of the world. The defeat of the revolution was engraved in the writings of Berkeley's Baodiao writers, making "Left-Wing Melancholia" a lingering theme in their later works. However, the melancholic symptoms of Liu Da-ren, Li Yu, and Kuo Sung-Fen are not a repetition of the conservatism and decadence of Western Marxists. These writers reflect on the "politics of literature" and seek the possibility of replacing or extending revolutionary justice with poetic justice. Their left-wing melancholic narratives therefore have positive historical reproduction significance. The melancholic sentiments of Berkeley's Baodiao writers can be understood as a practice of "lyricism" against "revolution". The rhetoric surrounding "Obsession with China" in the 1970s was a clear call to emotion, and the growth of the left-wing literary movement further realized "revolutionary lyricism". Since the 1980s, they have been writing to confront historical experiences, reconstructing the original trauma of the Baodiao Movement into a set of lyrical scenes made up of multiple texts. The works of Liu Da-ren, Li Yu, and Kuo Sung-Fen testify to the complexity of historical experience from a rather materialistic perspective: Liu's novels keep repeating similar themes and elements in order to reaffirm the legitimacy of the Baodiao Movement, while Li Yu and Kuo Sung-Fen stay away from the topic of the Baodiao Movement but devote themselves to revising old works with the will of an ascetic. The seemingly different rewriting strategies highlight the fact that the history of the Baodiao Movement is always difficult to accurately represent. In the post-revolutionary context, "time" has become an important medium, and "melancholy" is a deep repetitive structure—it is the inner kinetic energy of melancholy that constitutes the desire to rewrite; "inability to be rewitten" pushes forward the occurrence of rewriting. The difficulty of confirming history as an object makes the work always in the middle of rewriting or waiting for rewriting. And the textual form of the Baodiao Movement is like the countless traces of history left in the form of a polyphonic symphony. Regardless of the tendency to constantly rewrite or the different states of textual existence, both reveal their lyrical intentions in facing history. Furthermore, while "Lyricism," and "Revolution" are not new topics, Berkeley's Baodiao writers' unique understanding of these series of propositions is that they coalesce them in response to their revolutionary mentor Lu Xun. The dual exemplary significance of Lu Xun in terms of "politics" and "literature" illustrates and even legitimizes their attempts to affect reality. In contrast to Lu Xun's "canonicality," Chen Shih-Hsiang, who was once seen as a right-wing lyrical advocate in opposition to the narrative of the Baodiao Movement, represented their ambiguous reflection on the revolution through a return to lyrical doctrine. Liu Da-ren, Li Yu, and Kuo Sung-Fen, each in a different way, develop a melancholy narrative. From "Obsession with China" and "Out of the Mythical Country" to "Left-Wing Utopia," the dialectic of these concepts is an important proposition throughout Liu's life. The consciousness of the ruins of the Baodiao Movement infuses Liu's realistic portrayal with the spirit of modernism from the very beginning, refining the utopian image from the frustrating historical experience and transforming the melancholy sentiment into a constructive narrative desire. In stark contrast to his rewriting, Liu rarely changed his drafts, and his trust in the materialism of writing is almost another proof of his faith in historical materialism. Despite the compulsive narrative rules that inevitably give rise to the danger of memory-making, it is from this intervention that we can see how Liu seeks out Marx's poetry from the ruins of the post-revolutionary era and testifies to the radical spirit of the left in contemporary Taiwan. Kuo Sung-Fen’s melancholic symptoms manifest in his denial of historical experience. This dissertation points out that Kuo returns to the depths of history in an extremely tortuous way: the intertext with Lu Xun became a way for him to make a detour and to engage in a dialogue with the Baodiao Movement, and the manuscripts and annotations of book collections provide us with more clues. In Kuo's late novels, the politically relevant 1970s are always hidden. Considering the co-construction of the left-wing connotation of the Diaoyu movement and the white terror, his vision of the early post-war period can be understood as a roundabout projection of the 1970s. In addition, Kuo's unpublished novels "Ice Silkworm," "Autobiography of the Baodiao Movement," and "Memoirs of the Baodiao Movement" reveal a melancholic emotional core through two sets of features: aesthetic loss and the inability to continue writing. Unlike Liu Da-ren and Kuo Sung-Fen's two extreme narratives of melancholy, in Li Yu's case, left-wing melancholy is extended and presented in lyrical discourse, opening up a complex debate among "lyricism," "anti-lyricism," and "return to lyricism”. The co-construction of the exemplary images of Lu Xun and Shen Congwen reflects her profound thoughts on the politics of literature. Her novel on the Baodiao Movement has evolved from the "detachment" from the scene of the movement in the 1970s, to the spectator's perspective in the 1980s, to the new century with its “Multiple Transitions” to recall the movement. The rewriting of action and utopian narratives reveals two ways in which Li Yu uses "lyricism" as a medium to redeem herself from the ruins of history. With their literary practice, Berkeley's writers reconstructed the Baodiao Movement as the origin of melancholy in the territory of lyricism. History is thus infinitely delayed, but this delay is also an opportunity for it to regain energy and open up new horizons. This is an entry point for us to rethink the movement landscape and emotional politics of Taiwanese literature, and it also constitutes a unique position to intervene in the world's left-wing discourse from the perspective of Taiwan.