史伯丁．葛瑞，安娜．史密斯與艾瑞克．柏格森單人獨白劇中的表演策略

The Politics of Performance in Solo Performance Monologues of Spalding Gray, Anna Deavere Smith, and Eric Bogosian

張嘉怡(Philip Chang)

指導教授 ： 施琳達教授 ； 蘇子中教授

國立臺灣師範大學/文學院/英語學系/博士(2006年)

摘要

本論文藉由班雅明(Benjamin)的歷史概念(history)與利普茲(Lipsitz)相對記憶(counter-memory)的概念探討史伯丁．葛瑞(Spalding Gray)，安娜．德維爾．史密斯(Anna Deavere Smith)與艾瑞克．柏格森(Eric Bogosian)等三位美國劇場界中單人獨白劇裡的表演策略. 由於三者的作品,不論是在內容與形式上, 均承襲由30至60年代發展出的紀錄劇場(documentary theater).因此,第一章除了追溯紀錄劇場的歷史背景外,亦探討其對史伯丁．葛瑞,安娜．德維爾．史密斯與艾瑞克．柏格森等人的影響.此外,筆者亦彙整評論家對此三位表演者的批評,並點出批評者於分析三位表演者作品時的盲點. 第二章著墨於史伯丁．葛瑞的泳至高棉(Swimming to Cambodia)與盒中怪物(Monster in a Box)二齣劇中如何藉由敘述(narration)與表演(performance)策略學習歷史真相過程中如何呈現劇中所謂社會/政治他者(social/political Other). 第三章探討安娜．德維爾．史密斯之署光:洛杉磯,1992(Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992)與鏡中火(Fires in the Mirror)二劇中史密斯如何運用她的受訪者的話語為其二劇的素材. 本章亦會分析史密斯如何客觀地藉由模仿其受訪者的肢體與語言來呈現這些受訪者. 第四章討論艾瑞克．柏格森的性毒品搖滾樂(Sex, Drugs, Rock & Roll)與歡樂屋(Funhouse)兩劇中柏格森如何經由模仿所謂社會/文化他者(social/cultural Other)的肢體與話語來批判資本主義社會下各眾生相之生活百態. 第五章除了指出三位表演者於呈現劇中社會/政治/文化他者時無意識地將這些他者化約為語言,肢體與外表的元素之外, 筆者另提出表演系譜學(genealogy of performance)概念勾勒出如何於分析時避免將他者化約為表相的模擬. 所謂他者的生存境遇,是指他者在人與人,社會與自然等方面獲得的整體性認識和體驗。可以從共時性地解釋生存境遇與戲劇語言的關係,從理論上分析他者境遇是引起戲劇語言發生變化的主要動力;與歷時性地描述戲劇語言的變化,在實踐中核對總和考察他者境遇對戲劇語言的影響. 因此,共時性與歷史性時為探討他者在現(representation of the Other)時必須考慮的面向.

關鍵字

倫理 ； 單人獨白劇 ； 表演策略 ； 歷史 ； 記憶

並列摘要

This dissertation aims to explore the performance of the Other in works by Spalding Gray, Anna Deavere Smith, and Eric Bogosian in conjunction with applications of two theoretical frameworks: Walter Benjamin’s idea of history, and George Lipsitz’s use of counter-memory in the retelling of history. Through the examination of the Other, as it is articulated and presented in the form of monologues adopted by these three representative voices of documentary performance art, I will seek to illuminate the nature of the playwright’s ethical responsibility when appropriating actual historical/social/political events in performance. Here the term, ethical responsibility, refers to standards of human rights and justice with which to gauge whether or not Gray, Smith, and Bogosian by their strategies of selecting, conducting, and editing actual sociopolitical and historical events for their onstage performances foster prejudicial opinions in the audience. If this is the case, Gray, Smith, and Bogosian might be twisting these historical and sociopolitical materials for their own purposes without recognizing their own subjective shortcomings. Ethical bias would be present if this were the case. Are Gray, Smith, and Bogosian using their privilege as celebrities to gain access to the pain and suffering of the marginalized ethnic groups and/or participants present in their texts for onstage performance? Furthermore, the term ethical responsibility as it is used in this dissertation does not refer to the ends or goals of a moral code outlined by traditional moral philosophy, but rather concentrates on the means by which these three playwrights maintain their subjectivity while objectively formulating their theatrical texts in onstage performances. The purpose of this project is to shed new light on the criticism of contemporary documentary performance art by, as I hope to achieve, constructing a new paradigm for the analysis of solo performance monologues.

並列關鍵字

ethics ； solo performance monologue ； performance politics ； history ； memory

參考文獻

Works Cited

Aune, James Arnt. “Cultures of Discourse: Marxism and Rhetorical Theory.”Argumentation Theory and the Rhetoric of Assent. Eds. David Cratis Williams and Michael David Hazen. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P., 1990. 155-72.

Bal, Mieke. Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narration. Trans. by Christine van Boheemen. Toronto: U of Toronto P., 1985.

---. “Will the Real…Please Stand Up?” TDR 34.4 (1990): 21-7.

Belsey, Catherine. Critical Practice. New York: Semiotext(e), 1983.