戲仿歷史中的對話論: 薩爾曼·魯西迪的《佛羅倫斯的女巫》

薩爾曼·魯西迪的小說經常使用奇幻元素和歷史的強烈存在感來檢視絕對真理的可能性。《佛羅倫斯的女巫》展現了一個對話論的世界，其世界的產生不僅是因為事實（文藝復興時期和蒙古歷史）與虛構（東西方的相遇和矛盾的展示）的融合，也是因為公共歷史論述與魯西迪特定化的、戲仿的歷史相互作用的結果。魯西迪的《佛羅倫斯的女巫》中的戲仿歷史成功地跨越了幾種不同體制的邊界。此文本的不確定狀態不僅來自於從真實世界到超現實世界的過境，從而解決了主觀客觀的二分法，也審視了真理的核心價值。我試圖透過巴赫汀的《對話論》，以及杭琪恩(Linda Hutcheon)的《戲仿理論》來處理這個議題。我的論文分為四個章節。第一章介紹小說家薩爾曼·魯西迪的生平和作品，《午夜之子》和《佛羅倫斯的女巫》的比較以及文獻回顧。第二章著重在介紹本論文涵蓋的理論框架: 對話論，戲仿後現代主義以及歷史。第三章：後現代的戲仿:《佛羅倫斯的女巫》試圖透過互文性，雙聲話語以及檢視在想像與現實之間跨界的對話論將《佛羅倫斯的女巫》分析為一部戲仿歷史。第四章是結論，我提及戲仿的功能，以及此小說中的雙重聲調，互文性和矛盾關係並非創造出超越任何時間和空間概念的反歷史論述。相反的，這部諧擬的文本展現了一個既強調現在也強調歷史的多元化世界。

關鍵字

薩爾曼·魯西迪；《佛羅倫斯的女巫》；巴赫汀；對話論；杭琪恩；《戲仿理論》

並列摘要

Salman Rushdie’s novels constantly confront the possibility of absolute truth with fantastic elements and the strong presence of history. The Enchantress of Florence is deeply rooted in a dialogized world; a result of the merging of the factual (the Renaissance and Mongol histories) and the fictional (the encounter between the East and West and the display of paradoxes) and also the interaction between the public historical discourse and Rushdie’s particularized, parodied history. Rushdie’s parodied history in The Enchantress of Florence successfully crosses several kinds of boundaries in different regimes. The text’s indeterminate status results from not only the boundary-crossing from the real to the surreal worlds, thus resolving the subjective-objective dichotomy, but it also problematizes the core value of reality. I intend to approach the issue by Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism, together with the appropriation of Linda Hutcheon’s theory of parody. My thesis is divided into four parts. Chapter one is the introduction of the thesis, the novelist Salman Rushdie’s life and works, the comparison between Midnight’s Children and The Enchantress of Florence and finally, the reviews of literature. Chapter two focuses on the theoretical framework and key concepts covered in this thesis: dialogism, parody, postmodernism and history. Chapter three intends to rationalize The Enchantress of Florence as a parodied history through intertextuality, double-voiced speeches and the investigation of the dialogic discourse regarding boundary-crossing between imagination and reality. In the concluding chapter, I mention the functions of parody. The parodic factors of the novel—double-voicedness, intertextuality and paradoxes do not create an ahistorical discourse that seeks to transcend any concept of time and space. On the contrary, this parodied text exemplifies a pluralized world which emphasizes both the present and the past.