《新客》：從「華語語系」論新馬生產的首部電影

本文從大量1920年代的舊報刊中，搜尋到新馬首部電影《新客》的出品史料證據，糾正國際學界認為《新客》沒有上映的說法，從而確立《新客》作為首部新馬電影史的歷史意義和地位，並追溯「南洋劉貝錦自製影片公司」的成立和社會反應，以及劉貝錦從電影公司老闆到南僑機工、從新馬投奔中國抗戰的悲壯一生。本文也梳理《新客》製作班底和觀眾對此片的討論，探討這部電影當年面對的難題，這涉及1920年代英殖民政府的影片審查制度、《新客》電影劇本內容風格擺蕩於「南洋色彩文藝」和「中國文藝」之間，以及電影對當時南洋兩大華人群體，即新客和土生華人之間的糾葛處理等等。本文要把《新客》和劉貝錦至今被遺忘的問題，置放回一個更普遍的當代新馬華族歷史知識生產的脈絡裡，進行反思和追問。過去至今所謂的離散華人歷史、抑或民族國家的歷史書寫、甚至於第一世界帝國的歷史知識生產話語和以英語霸權行使的「普遍性的沙文主義」，都遮蔽劉貝錦的冤死和《新客》的曾經存在。這說明分別依賴這些理論生產的歷史知識話語，需要一個全新的歷史知識生產理論進行介入和干預。作為弱勢語言研究的華語語系理論，正好可以作為我們借鑒和反思的起點。本文最後指出《新客》劇本所展示的「多元聲音」和「多元拼字」特質，正體現華語語系的「語言揉雜化」。熟諳六種語言的劉貝錦和其《新客》，對我們今天追溯當代新馬電影所頻頻再現的「揉雜化」語言景觀，以及本土性、殖民性和華人性的糾葛，提供一個歷史化的批判維度。

關鍵字

《新客》；劉貝錦；華語語系；語言揉雜化；華人性

並列摘要

Based on historical evidence from a large number of newspapers in 1920s, this article overturns the assertion of the international academic circle that the film ”Xin Ke” was never released. It demonstrates the historical significance of ”Xin Ke” and establishes its status as the first Singaporean-Malaysian film. This article also makes several important contributions to our understanding of ”Xin Ke” and its creators. First, it describes the origins of, and public response to, the Nanyang Liu Bei-jin Film Company. Second, it examines the moving and tragic life of Liu Bei-jin, the film company’s head and former Namchow mechanic, who left Singapore and Malaya to fight in the Chinese War of Resistance against Japan. Third, the article describes the ”Xin Ke” production team and the film’s reception. It investigates the problems that the film confronted at the time of its production, including the censorship imposed by the British colonial government during the 1920s. Fourth, it discusses the oscillation found in ”Xin Ke's” screenplay between the Nanyang and Chinese styles of literature and art. And fifth, it examines the manner in which the film addressed the disputes between the two major Chinese communities in Nanyang; that is, the ”Xin Ke” (the new immigrants) and the Peranakan (the Straits Chinese). In an effort to encourage reflection, this article locates these issues within the general context of contemporary Singapore-Malaysian Chinese historical discourse. The unfortunate death of Liu Bei-jin and the existence of ”Xin Ke” have been obscured in the history of the so-called Chinese diaspora, the history of China, and in the historical discourse regarding imperialism and universal chauvinism that have resulted from English-language hegemony. This obfuscation suggests that the historical discourses that rely on above-mentioned theories must be countered by an entirely new theory. The Sinophone theory, in which Chinese-language is studied as a minority language, can serve as a starting point for our reflection on this topic. Finally, this article discusses how ”Xin Ke” displays the characteristics of multiple sounds and multiple orthographies that typify the creolization of Chinese. Liu Bei-jin was well versed in six languages, and his ”Xin Ke” provides critical historical evidence regarding the origins of the Creole frequently heard in contemporary Singaporean- Malaysian films as well as a valuable perspective on the disputes regarding indigenousness, colonialism and Chineseness.