《微物之神》中的父權、種姓與底層人民反抗

Abstract

本論文以阿蘭達蒂・洛依的《微物之神》為研究對象，探討小說如何在後殖民喀拉拉邦的社會脈絡中，透過父權與種姓所構成的社會秩序，呈現底層者的反抗及其被制度性否定與噤聲的條件。論文主張，小說中的底層人物並非被動或天生失語的受害者，而是持續以行動、欲望與越界實踐對既有規範構成挑戰；然而，這些反抗無法被主流社會、法律或政治制度承認為合法且可理解的言說，因而遭到結構性地拒絕與消解。第一章聚焦家庭與社會層面，分析父權與種姓如何生產不同但彼此交織的底層位置，並同時規範反抗得以被承認的可能性。阿慕因性別、婚姻身分與親屬制度而被排除於法律與社會承認之外，其跨越階級與種姓禁忌的親密關係構成對父權秩序的反抗，卻被判定為不合法且必須受罰。維魯沙身為達利特，其政治參與、技藝勞動與情感選擇皆展現明確的反抗姿態，然而他最終遭受的警察暴力顯示，種姓紀律仍對達利特反抗施加結構性的限制。雙胞胎艾斯沙與瑞海兒則呈現另一種底層身分，其失語、破碎記憶與非線性敘事不僅源自創傷經驗，更根植於父權親屬制度下的私生身分與父系缺席，使其自始即缺乏社會與法律上的可承認性。第二章轉向政治場域，將馬克思主義視為喀拉拉邦歷史中回應種姓壓迫的重要政治語言，並指出其內在的結構性限制。儘管馬克思主義以平等與階級解放為號召，論文指出其最終未能動搖種姓作為基礎性社會組織原理。透過分析維魯沙、皮萊同志與恰克三個人物，本文說明左翼政治如何在實踐中吸納、工具化，甚至犧牲底層者的反抗，以維護政黨利益與政治秩序，從而再製其所聲稱反對的階序不平等。本論文最後指出，《微物之神》不僅描寫底層者的失聲，更透過非線性敘事、時間斷裂與策略性沉默等形式手法，展演底層反抗如何被結構性地拒絕承認。透過凸顯「反抗的存在」與「反抗無法被聽見」之間的張力，本文揭示後殖民印度社會中父權、種姓與政治意識形態如何共同決定誰能被承認為可言說、可被聽見的主體。

This thesis examines how The God of Small Things represents subaltern resistance and its structural foreclosure within patriarchal and caste-based social orders in postcolonial Kerala. It argues that the novel does not portray subaltern figures as passive victims, but as subjects who act, desire, and transgress dominant norms—yet whose resistance is systematically denied recognition, legitimacy, and audibility within prevailing social and juridical frameworks. Chapter One focuses on the domestic and social sphere, analyzing how patriarchy and caste produce distinct yet interconnected forms of subalternity while simultaneously circumscribing the conditions under which resistance can be sustained. Ammu’s exclusion from legal, familial, and social structures exemplifies a gendered form of dispossession in which female desire and transgressive intimacy function as acts of resistance that are rendered illegitimate and punishable. Velutha’s political affiliation, skilled labor, and intimate choice register clear resistance to caste hierarchy, yet his brutal punishment reveals the enduring force of caste discipline and the structural limits placed on Dalit resistance. The twins, Estha and Rahel, represent a further configuration of subalternity grounded in illegitimacy and patriarchal kinship exclusion. Their muteness, fragmented memories, and non-linear narrative presence do not simply register trauma, but signal how resistance and subjectivity are foreclosed when social and juridical recognition is denied from the outset. Chapter Two turns to the political sphere, examining Marxism as a historical and ideological response to caste-based subalternity in Kerala. While Marxism articulates a language of equality that appears to reframe Dalit identity beyond untouchability, the chapter argues that it ultimately fails to dismantle caste as a foundational mode of social organization. Through an analysis of Velutha, Comrade Pillai, and Chacko, the chapter demonstrates how leftist political movements absorb, instrumentalize, or sacrifice subaltern resistance in the name of political expediency, thereby reproducing caste hierarchies even as they claim to challenge class oppression. The thesis ultimately contends that The God of Small Things not only depicts the silencing of subaltern subjects but formally enacts the structural refusal of subaltern resistance through narrative fragmentation, temporal disjunction, and strategic muteness. By foregrounding resistance that cannot be recognized as such, the novel exposes the systemic conditions under which marginalized subjects are prevented not only from speaking, but from being heard.