多層次整體與陰性結構──讀史賓色《仙后》第三與第四卷

Abstract

本論文旨在探討史賓色《仙后》第三與第四卷的特殊結構。主要方向有二：一是釐清詩中傳奇與寓言的辯證關係，二是討論史氏寓言詩學中的陰性結構。第一章處理十六世紀義大利文壇上的一大辯論。主要討論內容包括牽涉在這場辯論中的兩位詩人（阿里歐斯多與塔叟）以及主導文壇的亞里斯多德主義，討論的目的則在說明史賓色與這場辯論的關係。第二章討論史賓色與維及爾和新柏拉圖主義的關係，目的在說明史氏的兼容性以及《仙后》的寓言結構特色。第三章討論《仙后》的特殊結構設計，以說明此詩的文類混成性。主要討論的對象為史氏的詩與傳統亞瑟王傳奇結構之間的關連，目的在說明史氏詩中傳奇與寓言的均勢辯證關係。第四章討論《仙后》的哥德結構與哥德式建築之間的類似性，以說明詩中所存在的哥德空間如何中介、溝通傳奇與寓言以及物質性與精神性。第五章討論史賓色與當代理論之間可能的關連性。所討論的理論家包括德希達、班雅民與拉崗。本章藉著討論詩中主角之一布莉托瑪特的閱讀行動與身體實踐來說明解構主義的侷限性與困境。班雅民與拉崗的理論則用來說明《仙后》第三與第四卷所呈現的唯物陰性寓言結構。

This dissertation aims at explicating the complex structure of Books III and IV of Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene. One of the main objectives is to delineate the dialectical interactions between romance and allegory of the poem; the other is to enquire into the feminine structure of Spenser’s allegorical poetics. Chapter 1 deals with an intense literary debate in the sixteenth-century Italy. Two poets involved in the debate, Ariosto and Tasso, and the sway of Aristotelianism are the central subjects of this chapter. The aim is to illustrate Spenser’s differences from both the two poets and the Aristotelian vein. Chapter 2 deals with Spenser’s eclecticism by exploring his relationships with Virgil and the Virgilian-Landinian exegetical tradition. The aim is to show that The Aeneid and the Neoplatonist tradition contribute to Spenser’s ability to combine a large, complicated allegorical system with an extended narrative. Besides, Spenser’s divergence from Virgil is also discussed. Chapter 3 deals with the peculiar design of The Faerie Queene in order to specify the generic mixture of the poem. Spenser’s continuation and divergence from the Arthurian romance tradition are discussed in order to clarify the dialectical equiponderant relationship between romance and allegory of the poem. Chapter 4 describes the Gothic structure of Spenser’s poem by way of discussing two principles of Gothic architectonics. The purpose is to clarify how the Spenserian Gothic space mediates and joins romance with allegory or sensual materialization with spiritual dematerialization. Chapter 5 constructs a dialogue between Spenser and the (post)modern literary theories of Derrida, Benjamin, and Lacan in order to explore the possible significance of Spenser for our age. Deconstructionists’ politics of the infinite play of language may result into a vicious infinity of antagonistic and evasive politics. Britomart’s engagement with Busirane’s art is discussed in order to show how she de-deconstructively returns to the reality of love and initiates ethical practices. Benjamin’s theory of allegory and Lacan’s theory of the feminine are enlisted to clarify Spenser’s practice, via Britomart, of a materialist, feminine allegory.