運動技術的褶曲：「聽」與「說」的邏輯

The Fold of Sport Techniques: The Logic of “Listening” and “Telling”

蔡承祐(Tsai Cheng-Yu)

指導教授 ： 劉一民

國立臺灣師範大學/運動與休閒學院/體育學系/博士(2016年)

https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202203655

摘要

運動技術能不能被「說」？這是一個兩難的問題：被「說」出似乎就是被固定了，這與運動技術流變不居的特質並不相符；但若拒斥任何固定化的「說」，而只著眼於每一個當下的情境流轉並作適切的反應, 即本研究所謂的「聽」，那麼運動技術便無法被呈現，這也與一般的經驗相去甚遠。為了釐清「聽」與「說」之於運動技術的作用，本研究首先對運動經驗文獻進行討論。《網球的心靈遊戲》中，我發現語言與身體、清晰與模糊這兩組常見的對立都不足以闡明「聽」與「說」的關係，它們其實同樣有著清晰的焦點與模糊的背景，「聽」與「說」真正的區別應該是在場與不在場；在《射藝中的禪》中我們進一步發現，「說」之於「聽」的兩種必要性，一是作為「聽」的素材，一是作為「聽」的指引。接著，本研究轉向德勒茲在《褶曲》中對單子的探討，發現運動員的每一次「聽」都是對同一技術的不同褶曲，而此一褶曲旋即轉變為一個「說」，並成為往後的「聽」的指引或素材。當「聽」與「說」如此相輔相成、反覆運作，此即本研究所謂的「邏輯」。隨後本研究進入運動技術實踐的考察，進一步描述「邏輯」的運作，研究者指出，「說」作為指引只是指出一個大概的方向、作為素材也只是無數可能性的其中一個。質言之，「說」這樣一種不在場的存在方式，雖然是「聽」的條件，卻不能決定「聽」的樣貌。儘管在「邏輯」中，「聽」表現出某種程度的一致性，但是「邏輯」並非常態，「說」作為素材與指引也並非總是那麼的穩定，因此，「聽」在本質上依然是流變不居的。循此，本研究建議運動技術的研究者與實踐者，一方面要大量累積各式各樣的「說」以作為「聽」的素材，一方面也要盡可能將「說」控制在最低限度以促使「聽」的產生。因為在運動場上真正發生作用的，不是任何一種特定的「說」，而是「聽」。

關鍵字

褶曲 ； 流變 ； 單子 ； 運動技術 ； 聽與說

並列摘要

Can a sport technique be “told”? This is a dilemmatic question. While being “told” seems to be fixed and thus excludes the possibility of becoming, being “listened”, meaning concentrate on every current situation and react differently, seems to exclude any form of fixed “telling” and thus is not possible to be presented. Neither of them correspond the nature of sport techniques. To clarify the function of “listening” and “telling” to sport techniques, this research begins with reviewing the literature of sport experience. As to The Inner Game of Tennis, I find that although the dilemma above is frequently disguised in the opposition of the ambiguity of body and the clarity of language, in fact, “listening” and “telling” both have an ambiguous background and a clear focus. The real distinction of them should be “presence and absence”. Further, after the discussion of Zen in the Art of Archery, I propose that there are two ways of “telling” required to “listening”, one is to be the material, and another is to be the guidance. Then, the research focuses on Deleuze’s discussion on monad in The Fold. It is discovered that, for each athlete, every “listening” is a fold to a certain sport technique, and it immediately turns into a “telling” which becomes the material or guidance of the later “listenings”. When “telling” and “listening” work together in such complementarity, it is the so-called “logic” in this research. The research then turns to examine the practice of sport techniques and describes the operation of the logic. It is declared that, when being a guidance, a “telling” can only guide a rough direction; and, when being a material, a “telling” is just one of the myriad materials. To conclude, although “tellings” are required to a “listening”, they cannot determine it. Further, although “listenings” show kind of consistency during the operation of the “logic”, it is not normal for a sport technique to exist in this way. In fact, being materials or guidances, “tellings” are not that consistent; therefore, “listenings” are essentially in becoming. Finally, for both researching and practicing of sport techniques, the research suggests accumulate any kind of “telling” to enrich the material of “listening” on one hand, and lower the volume of “tellings” to bring about another “listening” on the other hand. For it is not “telling” which really works during the practice, but “listening”.

並列關鍵字

fold ； becoming ； monad ； sport technique ； “listening” and “telling”

參考文獻

一、英文文獻

Deleuze, Gills, The Logic of Sense (translated by Mark Lester). Columbia University Press, 1969.

Deleuze, Gills& Guattari, Felix, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (translated by Brian Massumi), University of Minnesota Press, 1987.

Deleuze, Gills, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque (translated by Tom Conley). Continuum, 2006.

El Greco,Christ in the Mount Olive 2. http://www.el-greco-foundation.org/Christ-on-the-