Paradise Lost: Narratives of Violence and Terror(ism) in Salman Rushdie's Shalimar the Clown

失落的樂園：魯西迪《小丑沙利瑪》中的暴力敘述與恐怖主義

Shao-Ming Kung

《Tamkang Review》 40卷2期 (2010/06) Pp. 79-103

https://doi.org/10.6184/TKR.201006_40(2).0004

摘要

本論文擬從後印巴分裂、南亞離散、全球恐怖主義等脈絡下來析論魯西迪《小丑沙利瑪》中呈現的暴力敘述與恐怖主義。本文首先探究喀什米爾的歷史、地緣政治背景，進而揭示英國殖民主義、後殖民衝突、美國新帝國主義等勢力如何將昔日的樂土變成紛爭之地。本文援引托夫特針對爭奪領地引發族群暴力之批判，齊傑克主觀與客觀暴力的深度描述，以及巴特勒對他者持非暴力之倫理論述，來探討魯西迪小說中暴力與恐怖主義的根源，及其對個人的影響。本文認爲，透過一位原本純真、溫和的雜耍小丑如何變爲國際恐怖份子的戲劇性歷程，魯西迪深刻呈現介於全球自我定位和在地化根基之間的多重衝突。有些批評者認爲作者頌揚一種精英式普世主義，這點表現在小說中能跟暴力循環對抗，深具理想雜匯精神的喀什米爾主義。本文主張，這種源自當地歷史悠久的喀什米爾主義正是作者亟力跨越族裔－宗教歧異，橫越印度、巴基斯坦、美國文化與地緣政治界限之後殖民努力。儘管小說結局不明，彷彿糾纏在意識型態驅動的暴力與反暴力之間，但以倫理學的角度來看，魯西迪其實要我們重新省思暴力的本質，正視他者與自我的關係。

關鍵字

暴力 ； 恐怖主義 ； 魯西迪 ； 喀什米爾與喀什米爾主義 ； 托夫特 ； 齊傑克 ； 巴特勒 ； 自我與他者

並列摘要

This paper attempts to investigate the issue of violence and terrorism by means of a critical reading of Salman Rushdie's Shalimar the Clown (2005) in the contexts of post-partition violence, South Asian diasporas and global terrorism. Through exploring the historical, geopolitical backdrop of Kashmir, my paper first reveals how British colonialism, postcolonial conflicts, and American neo-imperialism have vehemently transformed the once paradisal state into a territorial dispute. Drawing upon Monica Duffy Toft's critique of ”ethnic violence” over territory, Slavoj Zizek's thick descriptions of ”subjective and objective violence” as well as Judith Butler's ethical concern of non-violence toward the Other, I argue that Rushdie's novel delves deep into the roots of violence, terrorism, and the effects on the individual. In dramatizing the transformation of an innocent and demure tightrope-walking clown into an international terrorist, Rushdie inscribes the manifold conflicts between global self-position and local up-rootedness. While some critics claim that Rushdie celebrates an elitist vision of cosmopolitanism via his ideal syncretistic ”Kashmiriyat” to counter the cycles of violence, my study contends that ”Kashmiriyat” reveals Rushdie’s postcolonial attempt not only to transgress ethno-religious differences but also to re-imagine spatial possibilities of conviviality to ”step across” the cultural, geopolitical lines between India, Pakistan and America. Although the novel ends as if an entangled knot of ideologically driven violence is followed by counter-violence, I suggest that Rushdie proposes instead an ethical reconsideration of violence that requires a crucial recognition/negotiation of self and other.

並列關鍵字

violence ； terror ism ； Salman Rushdie ； Kashmir and Kashmiriyat ； Monica Duffy Toft ； Slavoj Zizek ； Judith Butler ； self and other

參考文獻

Ahmad, Aijaz(1987).Jameson's Rhetoric of Otherness and the 'National Allegory'.Social Text.17,3-25.

Balibar, Etienne(1997).La crainte des masses: politique et philosophie avant et apres Marx.Paris:Galilee.

Baumeister, Roy(2001).Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty.New York:Barnes and Noble.

Bennett-Jones, Owen(2002).Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.New Haven:Yale UP.

Butler, Judith(2003).Precarious Life: the Powers of Mourning and Violence.London:Verso.