伊格尔顿的身体话语研究

发布时间：2018-05-24 09:50

  本文选题：伊格尔顿 + 身体　； 参考：《扬州大学》2016年博士论文

【摘要】：特里·伊格尔顿(Terry Eagleton,1943-)是当代西方杰出的马克思主义文学理论家和文化批评家,这位与德国的哈贝马斯和美国的詹姆逊并称西方马克思主义理论界三巨头的英国人,对理论体系的关注与建构,都是与人的解放联系在一起的,身体话语理论也不例外。身体话语是贯穿伊格尔顿理论体系的一条重要线索。1960年代末,他开始关注资本主义制度下被压迫、饥饿和劳动的身体。1990年在专著《美学意识形态》一书中,他正式提出以身体为名、重建马克思主义美学的可能性,该书试图以身体美学来阐释身体伦理学,实现其“政治化之爱”。2000年的《文化的观念》一书则着重探究一种自然与文化辩证统一于身体的观念,并分析在共同文化观念下身体被解放的可能。此后出版的《甜蜜的暴力——悲剧的观念》一书又将悲剧中的身体作为研究对象,剖析悲剧的现代性根源。作为坚定的马克思主义者,伊格尔顿关注的是劳动的、饥饿的和革命的身体,坚决抵制后现代色情的、交欢的和娱乐的身体。因此,他的身体话语理论是有关身体异化与反异化的解放理论,是交织着伦理学、美学和政治学的伦理话语。这种身体话语旨在寻求重新建构一种自然与文化辩证统一的身体观念,实现人的解放和自由,达到人的主客观统一、精神与肉体和谐、审美化的生存状态。除了绪论和结语,论文主体部分共分五章。第一章从分析身体话语的嬗变及伊格尔顿对后现代身体话语的批判入手,切入其身体话语理论。论文首先梳理了从古希腊到后现代时期身体从缺席到出场再到主场的哲学嬗变,在此过程中,身体话语完成了由“意识本体论”向“身体本体论”的转换,并开启了后现代语境下身体话语的狂欢序幕和文化转向。对于身体的文化转向,伊格尔顿把原因归结于后现代主义对宏大叙事的回避。他尖锐地批判了后现代主义的“新身体学”:它们或者将身体视为文化建构的对象,或者使身体沦落为当代的犬儒主义。无论哪一种身体观,都是被异化的身体。伊格尔顿肯定后现代主义在反抗意识形态过程中对身体的解放,但后现代主义没能抵挡住商品社会消费主义的侵蚀,自身也被意识形态化,成为“无主体”的物质性存在。这样主体挣脱了身体的限制,成为绝对自由的意志,导致伦理道德体系的崩塌。所以,只有重回马克思主义的宏大叙事,才能挽救后现代主义本质主义的匮乏,实现人的解放和自由。第二章阐述美学意识形态中的身体话语。这一章首先剖析伊格尔顿的意识形态思想;其次分析美学与意识形态的关系;最后论述伊格尔顿如何以劳动的身体重建唯物主义美学。在伊格尔顿看来,鲍姆嘉登开创的美学自诞生起就具有意识形态性,服务于统治阶级的现实需要。但由于美学的自律性,它又常常形成对意识形态的挑战。伊格尔顿试图以美学为中介范畴,把肉体的观念与国家、阶级矛盾和生产方式这样一些更为传统的政治主体联结起来。这样身体作为意识形态的物质载体,就不再是生物学意义上的各个器官的有机体,而是各种权力话语的策源地,有着更深层的指涉。通过对美学史的详尽考察,伊格尔顿进而探讨以劳动的身体为起点重建唯物主义美学的可能性,以此使美学真正回归到人的身体和欲望。他认为,感性主体的恢复实则是劳动实践中人的需要、能力、愉悦、生产力等得以满足和全面展开的进程。所以,自由而无功利的生活就是审美的生活,人的本质力量的实现就是美好生活的开端。第三章论述伊格尔顿文化观念中的身体话语。这一部分首先介绍伊格尔顿对文化的意义和危机的分析,他认为随着资本主义的全球扩散、左派斗争的偃旗息鼓,现实的政治斗争投射到文化领域,出现了“政治化的文化向文化政治转移”的现象,文化成了政治斗争的场域。与此同时,一切都变得与文化有关。文化一方面似乎无所不能,另一方面又因滥用而无足轻重。不管是把文化当作政治的替代物,还是文化自身的庸俗化、娱乐化,都必然导致文化的深层次危机。正是文化理论的迷失,激起伊格尔顿重塑共同文化观念的决心。伊格尔顿认为文化与自然是辩证统一于身体的。文化一方面内置于身体,是身体的有机组成部分,另一方面又拉开了人与自然存在之间的距离,并将人从感性肉身提升到令人愉悦的符号生命。为此,伊格尔顿倡导以身体为基础走向一种共同文化的观念。这种观念是一个共享意义和活动的网络,由所有成员共同参与、共同创造,它是一种平等的、自觉的和无意识的文化观念,从而根本上解决了资本主义文化的危机。与此同时,由于这种共同文化观念强调身体所具有的普遍性的生物性基础,共同人性因此而产生。由于源自于天性、不具有意识形态性,使得人们能够相互同情,彼此关爱,互助互利。这正是伊格尔顿身体话语的伦理基础,是对抗后现代主义病毒的一剂良药。第四章阐述伊格尔顿悲剧观念中的身体话语。这一部分首先分析了伊格尔顿的悲剧观。在他看来,“极端痛苦之价值”是悲剧所拥有的共同基础。悲剧可以指向艺术品、现实生活事件、世界观或情感结构,只要能够让人感觉“极端痛苦之价值”,都可视为悲剧。根据伊格尔顿的观点,邪恶是造成现代性悲剧的主要原因。伊格尔顿区分了邪恶的双重面向,一方面崇尚绝对意志,试图摆脱和超越人类的一切有限和缺憾,另一方面则显示了无价值的空虚和“存在感的匮乏”。与最早探讨两种邪恶的阿伦特不同,伊格尔顿更深层次地将邪恶与绝对自由相联结,从而挖掘出邪恶的现代性根源。人们以追求自由为名,试图挣脱内在、外在的种种束缚,冲击原有的有限性,必然难以控制地走向反面。正是对现代自由的绝对追求导致现代性主体的失落,使其沦为完全的虚空,从而滋养和释放出邪恶。重塑人的主体性,倡导人的道德自觉,是消解后现代本质主义匮乏的根本之道。不过,伊格尔顿也指出,作为悲剧中的“替罪羊”,邪恶的身体也会成为革命的动力和翻转历史的希望,这是他论述悲剧的意义所在。最后,伊格尔顿提出痛苦的身体是悲剧中唯一的身体。他认为苦难不具有意识形态的可塑性,所以痛苦的身体是不具有意识形态性的。通过对怜悯和恐惧两种机制的重新阐述,伊格尔顿总结了悲剧的七种审美快感,并将其归为亚里士多德净化理论的核心内涵。在前面四章的基础上,论文第五部分进而探究隐藏在伊格尔顿身体话语背后的逻辑线条,这一章同时也是对伊格尔顿身体话语理论的总结。本文认为伊格尔顿对身体的论述大体上遵循了“基础-批判-建构”的叙事逻辑。他以马克思劳动的身体、尼采权力的身体、弗洛伊德欲望的身体为基础,在批判了后现代主义的“新身体学”、邪恶的身体和意识形态的身体后,认为应该重新建构一种文化与自然辩证统一于身体的观念。他认为,只有这样一种身体观念,才能实现身体的自由和解放,社会主义的新主体也才能建立,这里鲜明地体现了伊格尔顿坚定的马克思主义观。论文结语部分指出了伊格尔顿身体话语理论的价值及其存在的缺陷。
[Abstract]:Terry Eagleton (Terry Eagleton, 1943-) is an outstanding Marx literary theorist and cultural critic of contemporary western. The British who, with Habermas and Jameson in the United States, and called the three giants of the western Marx theory circle, are linked to the liberation of the theory system. Body discourse is no exception. Body discourse is an important clue that runs through the system of Eagleton's theory at the end of.1960. He began to pay attention to the oppression, hunger and labor under the capitalist system in the book of the monograph < Aesthetic Ideology > in.1990. He formally proposed the possibility of reconstructing Marx's aesthetics in the name of the body. The book tries to interpret body ethics by body aesthetics to realize his "political love", "the concept of culture" in.2000, which focuses on the idea of the dialectical unity of nature and culture and the possibility of the liberation of the body under the common cultural concept. The book also takes the body of the tragedy as the object of study and analyzes the root of the modernity of the tragedy. As a firm Marx, Eagleton pays attention to labor, hunger and revolutionary bodies, resolutely resists postmodern pornography, and entertain and entertain the body. Therefore, his body discourse theory is about body alienation and dissimilation. The theory of emancipation is the ethical discourse interwoven with ethics, aesthetics and politics. This kind of body discourse aims to seek to reconstruct the dialectical unity of nature and culture, to realize the liberation and freedom of human beings, to achieve the unity of the subjective and objective of human beings, the harmony between the spirit and the body, and the living state of the aestheticization, in addition to the introduction and conclusion, the subject of the thesis. The part is divided into five chapters. The first chapter begins with the analysis of the evolution of body discourse and Eagleton's critique of postmodern body discourse. It begins with his body discourse theory. Firstly, the thesis combs the philosophical transmutation from the absence of the ancient Greek to the postmodern period, from the absence of the body to the home. In this process, the body discourse has completed the "consciousness noumenon". The transformation of "body ontology" and the opening of the prelude and cultural turn of body discourse in the post-modern context. For the cultural turn of the body, Eagleton attributed the reason to the avoidance of the grand narrative by postmodernism. He critically criticized the postmodernist "new body science": they or the body as the text. The object of construction or the degenerate cynicism of the modern body. No matter what kind of body view, it is the alienated body. Eagleton affirms the liberation of the body in the process of resisting the ideology, but the postmodernism can not resist the erosion of the consumerism of the commodity society and its own ideology. The material existence of "no subject", so the subject broke free from the body's restriction, became the will of absolute freedom and led to the collapse of the ethical and moral system. So, only by returning to the grand narrative of Marx's doctrine, can we save the lack of postmodernism essentialism and realize human liberation and freedom. The second chapter expounds the aesthetic ideology. This chapter first analyzes Eagleton's ideological thought; secondly, it analyzes the relationship between aesthetics and ideology, and finally discusses how Eagleton reconstructs materialist aesthetics with the body of labor. In Eagleton's view, Baum Garden's creation of aesthetics is ideological and serves the ruling class. But because of the self-discipline of aesthetics, it often forms a challenge to ideology. Eagleton tries to combine the sense of the body with some more traditional political bodies such as state, class contradiction, and production way. So the body is no longer a biological carrier of ideology as a material carrier of ideology. The organism of every organ in the sense, but the origin of various power discourse, has a deeper meaning. Through a thorough investigation of the history of aesthetics, Eagleton further explores the possibility of rebuilding materialist aesthetics with the body of labor as a starting point, so that aesthetics is truly returned to the human body and desire. Recovery is the process of human needs, ability, pleasure and productivity in the labor practice. So, free and unutilitarian life is an aesthetic life, the realization of the essence of human being is the beginning of a beautiful life. The third chapter discusses the body discourse in Eagleton's cultural concept. This part is first introduced. In Eagleton's analysis of the significance and crisis of culture, he believed that with the global spread of capitalism, the struggle of the leftists, the realistic political struggle was projected into the cultural field, the phenomenon of "political culture to cultural and political transfer" appeared, and culture became the field of political struggle. At the same time, everything became cultural. On the one hand, culture seems to be omnipotent, and on the other hand it is insignificant because of abuse. Whether it is culture as a substitute for politics, or the vulgarization of culture itself and entertainment, it will inevitably lead to the deep crisis of culture. It is the loss of cultural theory and the determination of Eagleton to reshape the common cultural concept. Eagleton Culture and nature are dialectical unity. On the one hand, culture is built in the body, is an organic part of the body. On the other hand, it opens the distance between human and nature, and raises people from the emotional body to the pleasing symbolic life. Therefore, Eagleton advocates a common culture based on the body. This concept is a network of shared meaning and activity that is shared by all members and created together. It is an equal, conscious and unconscious cultural concept that fundamentally solves the crisis in the capitalist culture. At the same time, this common cultural concept emphasizes the universality of the body. This is the basis of Eagleton's body discourse and a good medicine against the post modernist virus. The fourth chapter describes the body discourse in Eagleton's tragic concept. Part of the first part analyses Eagleton's view of tragedy. In his view, "the value of extreme pain" is the common basis of tragedy. Tragedies can be directed to works of art, real life events, world outlook or emotional structure, which can be regarded as tragedies as long as they can feel "the value of extreme pain". According to Eagleton's point of view, evil. Evil is the main cause of the tragedy of modernity. Eagleton distinguishes the double face of evil. On the one hand, it advocates absolute will, tries to get rid of and surpass all human limitations and shortcomings. On the other hand, it shows the empty emptiness and the "lack of existence". Unlike the first to explore the two evil Ahrendt, Eagleton is more. In depth, the evil and the absolute freedom are joined together to excavate the root of the evil modernity. In the name of the pursuit of freedom, people try to get rid of the internal and external constraints and impact the original finiteness, which inevitably leads to the reverse. It is the absolute pursuit of modern freedom that leads to the loss of the subject of modernity and makes it complete. The void, thus nourishing and releasing evil, reinventing the subjectivity of human beings and advocating the moral consciousness of human beings, is the fundamental way to dispel the lack of post-modern essentialism. However, Eagleton also points out that as a "scapegoat" in tragedy, the evil body will also become the motive force of revolution and the hope of turning over the history, which is the meaning of his discussion of tragedy. In the end, Eagleton suggests that the body of pain is the only body in tragedy. He thinks that suffering is not ideologically pliable, so the body of pain is not ideological. Through the reexposition of two mechanisms of pity and fear, Eagleton summed up the seven aesthetic pleasures of tragedy and classified it as substandard. On the basis of the first four chapters, the fifth part of the thesis explores the logical lines hidden behind Eagleton's body discourse. This chapter is also a summary of Eagleton's body discourse theory. This article holds that Eagleton's discussion on the body generally follows the "foundation critical construction". On the basis of the body of Marx's labor, the body of Nietzsche power, the body of Freud's desire, he criticized the postmodernist "new body science", the body and the body of the evil body and ideology, and thought that it should be rebuilt by the dialectical unity of the body with the nature of culture and nature. In order to realize the freedom and liberation of the body, the new body of socialism can also be established. This is a clear embodiment of Eagleton's firm Marx view. The conclusion of the thesis points out the value of Eagleton's body discourse theory and the lack of its existence.
【学位授予单位】：扬州大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：I01
，

本文编号：1928613