從民間關懷到歷史書寫──跨時代文人的台灣文學史建構

本論文重新思考書寫台灣文學史的方式及運用材料，主要透過檢討「二世文人」從戰前到戰後不間斷的文壇活動及所留下的成果，針對當前台灣文學史遭逢「斷裂」、失去「遺產」之說，提出重新給予這段文學史新的論述必要性，並且驗證台灣文學史未曾「斷裂」，也未失去「遺產」。所謂的文學「遺產」，如果涉及的範圍，不僅指1920年代新文學運動以降，專屬反帝、反封建內容的文學創作，而考慮殖民處境的日治文壇特殊性，還能包含當時文人廣泛的文化性著作如史料研究、文獻整理，那麼目前文學史「斷層」或「斷裂」看法，應該可以加以修正。其明顯的例子，例如所謂跨時代的文人，如楊雲萍、黃得時、王詩琅、廖漢臣、吳新榮及郭水潭等人從戰前跨到戰後的活動。他們也被稱為是「二世文人」，而本論文梳理戰前戰後的文學史過程中，發現「二世文人」在身份、知識養成、創作、文壇活動、文化工作中有所重疊，亦有所巧合：1910年前後出生，具有漢文學養；1920年代受現代教育並參與新文學運動；1934年加入「台灣文藝聯盟」，為成熟期台灣文壇做出貢獻；而1937年後日本推動皇民化，自主性文學發展嚴重受限之際，他們投入民俗調查、民間文學的書寫，在這過程中也對戰時體制的要求有所回應。戰後初期到1960年代，二世文人持續伏案書寫，在「去日本化」中面對戰前的文學遺產，而後進入中央及地方的文獻委員會中將「遺產」包裹進入「通志」與「方志」中。他們分別是：楊雲萍、黃得時、王詩琅、廖漢臣、吳新榮、郭水潭。具有這些歷程的或許不止這六位，但若以嚴格的條件限制，例如必須有漢學教育、中日文雙語養成、文學創作、文學團體的參與、文獻委員會的職務以及相關的書寫與成果，這六人也就難出其右，換言之，這六人經過具備了以下兩個面向，充分的可作為本論文的研究對象：一是台灣文學史發展歷程中兩次轉換語言所產生的「斷裂」，六人皆跨越了裂縫，成為銜接者；一是填補裂縫的內容，是民間文學、民俗考察、文獻收集及轉化的兒童文學等，六人皆在其中有所成就。本論文所涉及的年代，自1910-1960年代結束，從五個方面進行討論：跨時代文人的文學養成、1930年代文學創作與論爭參與、1940年代對戰時體制的文學回應、戰後初期的活動及角色、1950年代「文獻委員會」及其他活動。章節的安排依照時間時序，主要目的在於呈顯文人的學習與文學行動的實踐、思想與作品的關聯性，並針對文學歷程中所觸碰到的議題，包括：白話文運動中的論爭思想位置、「文藝大眾化」與民間文學的關係、戰後初期的政策與文學的關係。從1930年代《台灣民間文學集》，王詩琅、廖漢臣參與其中，他們所認為的民間文學是要寫給大眾看，所寫的內容也是大眾所熟悉的日常、傳說、俚諺等。到了1940年代，由日人主導的《民俗台灣》，前面一個時代的民間文學消逝在文壇，但楊雲萍等人換了一個方式書寫台灣的鄉土，包括對地方特色的描述、文獻史料的整理，為帝國的「地方」、皇民化運動下的台灣鄉土留下紀錄之外，也是楊雲萍等人面對時局的反應。本文著重對後者的分析，透過《民俗台灣》、《興南新聞》、《新建設》等日人主導的媒體，台灣文人在有限的容身處，累積的能量，成為戰後初期，陳儀政府的「去日本化」、「再中國化」的狹縫中，取得活動空間的能力。六人分別在延續日治時期遺產的智識及文學發展，與中國來台的知識分子及陳儀政府對話，「去日本化」下的台灣保有世界化的能量，「再中國化」中台灣「承接」中國五四運動以降的精神，「賴和是台灣的魯迅」再度被提出作為證明。六人在「再中國化」中包裝日治時期的遺產，成為銜接「斷層」文學史的證據。

關鍵字

台灣文學史；楊雲萍；黃得時；王詩琅；廖漢臣；吳新榮；郭水潭；文獻委員會

並列摘要

The thesis mainly discusses the methods and materials used for constructing the history of Taiwan literature. Through the bilingual trained "second-generation literati", the thesis presents an argument for the current statement on the encounter of “break” and the loss of “heritage" in the history of Taiwan literature in the early postwar period. The argument redefines the literature history in the early postwar period and verifies that the history of Taiwan literature has not ever "broken" nor lost its "heritage.” If the scope of so-called literary heritage not only refers to the exclusive literary creation of anti-empire and anti-feudal after the New Literature Movement in the 1920s, but also includes a wide range of cultural works by literati, such as historical data research and document collation, in consideration of the peculiarities of Japanese literary circles in the colonial status. Thus, the current view of "fracture" or "break" in the literature history should be amended. A solid example is the so-called cross-era literati, as known as "second-generation literati," participated in varied activities from prewar to postwar period. They are Yang Yun-Ping, Huang Te-Shih, Wang Shih-Lang, Liao Han-Chen, Wu Hsin-Jung, Kuo Shui-Tan. The thesis found that there were some overlaps and coincidences in their identity, knowledge construction, literary creation, literary activities, and cultural work. For example, they were all born around 1910 with Chinese literacy; received modern education in the 1920s and participated in the New Literature Movement; joined the "Taiwanese Cultural Association" in 1934 and contributed to the matured Taiwan literary circles; and devoted themselves to folklore surveys and folk literature writing, and in the meantime responded to the requirements of the wartime system while Japan was promoting the imperialism and the liberty of literature development was severely restricted after 1973. From the early postwar period to the 1960s, the second generation literati kept on with their writing. When facing the prewar literary heritage during the time of "de-Japanization," they entered the central and local documentation commission and then put the "heritage" in the "general chronicles (tonzhi)" and "local chronicles (fangzhi)." Yang Yun-Ping et al. all have the following traits, which can be fully used as the research subjects in this thesis: one is all of them had crossed the “break,” which caused by the twice language changes in the development of Taiwan's literature history, and become the cohesion; the other is the content to fill the break is folk literature, folk customs investigation, document collection and transformed children’s literature, and all of them had made great achievements in these fields. The time period covered in the thesis is from the 1910s to the 1960s, and is discussed in five aspects below: the literary cultivation of cross-era literati, the literary creation and participation of literary debates in the 1930s, the literary responses to the wartime system in the 1940s, and the activities and roles playing in the early postwar period, and the “Documentation Commission" and other activities in the 1950s. The chapters are arranged in chronological order, for the purpose of showing literati’s learning and the practice of literary action, the connection between thoughts and works, and the issues addressed in the literary history such as the position of controversial thoughts in the vernacular movement, the relation between "popularization of literature and art" and folk literature, and the connection between policies and literature in the early postwar period. Finally, the thesis verifies that all the six literati, who had crossed the era and language, continued to sustain the intellectual heritage and literary development of the Japanese colonial period. In the transition of "imperialization", "de-Japaneseization", and "re-sinicization", they talked with the colonial government and intellectuals, arguing that even "sinicization" was inevitable after the war, Taiwan literature still had the groundwork and energy to connect with the world even in the multi-layered history. Moreover, the six literati had made up the “break” through folk caring and historical writing, thus the literature history has never broken.