公共空間的意識形態印記─臺北新公園政治地景的權力流變

Ideological Marks on Public Space – On the Becoming of Power of Political Landscape in Taipei Park

蕭國邦(Kuo-Pang Hsiao)

指導教授 ： 夏鑄九

國立臺灣大學/工學院/建築與城鄉研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.00334

摘要

本文以台北新公園空間變革作為研究取向，試圖探索各統治時期，權力關係如何透過地景展現特定意識象徵，以達政治目的。簡言之，作為政治中心的都市公園，如何兼具現代性與公共性，錨定都市政治性格，它的歷史進程深刻地表徵了台北政治發展史與都市的中心性：自封建中國地方邊緣起始，驟轉納入亞洲殖民擴張的政治版圖，接續戰後國族主義倉促成形而整裝待發。至八○年代末，政治民主化曙光，掀開被歷史隱藏許久的政治災變，利用民主機制，重新尋回過往的歷史習題。這一系列政治意識形態的變遷，以空間鑲嵌成深刻的政治地景，不假掩飾地屹立於都市公共空間中，爭奇鬥艷，猶如一場政治表演，促使置身其中的人們，不自覺地被織入那意識形態的纖維裡，無法明析因果。
這如羊皮紙般“抹去重寫”後留下的權力痕跡，新公園顯影如一座政治紀念碑林，象徵過往遺事與歷史傳承：象徵封建王朝的官制天后宮，在殖民空間意識覬覦下，重新打造成陳列統治成果的透明展示櫃，讓博物館以展示作為文化技術，蓄意刻畫臺灣原住民在殖民過程中的他者角色；重建後的國族國家，以削除軍國主義身體規訓為起點，營造一座刻意攬奪正統的國族鄉愁；至三○年代末，擔任戰時資訊流通的現代化堡壘，轉型成為戰後反共抗俄的心戰基地，而突發的二二八事件卻讓其施展權術、破除邊界，塑造其關鍵地位；政治民主化的契機，逐漸照亮原本隱諱的歷史角落，紀念碑與紀念館的相繼落成，充當起縫補歷史傷痕的角色，提供市民認清歷史教訓，達到反省效果。只不過，權力爭奪下的政治本位，使其數度淪為政治攻訐的交易籌碼。據此，本文試圖證明台北新公園確實是一座展現權力的公共場域，象徵著過往與未來的歷史走向。

關鍵字

意識形態 ； 殖民展示 ； 國族打造 ； 權力爭奪 ； 政治空間

並列摘要

This paper takes the research orientation by the Taipei Park space transformation, attempts to explore each dominant time, how the authority relates to penetrate the landscape to unfold the symbol of specific consciousness, reaches the political purpose. In short, the city park as the political center, how concurrently modernity and publicness, to anchor the politics disposition of metropolis. The historic course represent the Taipei politics history and the metropolis centricity profoundly: It starts from the feudal society of China edge, and let it into political domain of colonial extension suddenly in Asia. The connection, Nationalism after postwar is hasty forming and is ready and waiting. To the end of 1980s, the dawn of political democratization revealed the politics cataclysm in historical hidden for a long time, and it uses democratic system to retrieve the passing historical assignment. The series of political ideological shapes are mounted the profound political landscape by the space, it is on the public space in metropolitan city stably, the competition, just likes a political performance urges people to weave into ideology in the textile fiber unconsciously, and is unable clearly to analyze the causes and effects.

The traces of power left behind, like a rewritten parchment, Taipei Park development as politics memorial monuments, the symbol passing loses the matter and the historical inheritance: Tin-Hau temple which likes symbolic feudal dynasty, under the colonial spatial consciousness makes the exhibition rule achievement the transparent display case. It lets the museum as cultural techniques to portray Taiwanese aborigines as the other in the colonial period deliberately. After rebuilding national state takes the body discipline from militarism as a beginning, it creats a illusion of nostalgia that seizes the tradition of the nation. To 1930’s end, the modernized fortress of information circulation during wartime reforms to become a mental station to resist communism in postwar, but the sharp-edged 228 Incident actually let it displays the political tricks, eradicates the boundary, molds its essential status. The turning point of political democratization illuminates the historical corner which avoids mentioning originally. When the monument and the memorial hall are completed, they play a role to suture historical cut. And they provide residents a clearly historical lesson to achieve the introspection effect. However, the authority competes for the political ethnocentrism, caused it to degenerate into the transaction chips several times. According to the above, this article attempts to prove that the Taipei Park is the authority public field truly, and symbolizes passing and future historical trend.

並列關鍵字

Ideology ； colonial exhibitt ； national reconstruction ； scramble of power ； space of politic

參考文獻

簡明山（2007）《日治時期臺灣總督府土木技師濱野彌四郎對臺灣城鄉發展近代化影響之研究》。私立中原大學建築研究所碩士論文。

錢曉珊（2006）《殖民地博物館與「他者」意象的再現—三個日本殖民地博物館的分析比較》。國立臺灣大學人類學研究所碩士論文。

王嵩山（2007）〈揭露的與隱藏的：臺灣博物館展示研究的回顧與展望〉。《博物館學季刊》，21（3），5-38。

李政亮（2006）〈帝國、殖民與展示：以1903年日本勸業博覽會「學術人類館事件」為例〉。《博物館學季刊》，20（2），31-46。

王嵩山（2005）〈展示批判的形式論與實質論〉。《博物館學季刊》，19（1），5-6。