「變與不變」──屈原作品中的自我樣貌

Abstract

本文認為，在「屈原作品」的情感結構中，存在著一種對立性，作品中的各式題材，如矛盾之情、進退不得的旅程、香草萎絕的憂傷等，便都以各自的內涵符應著情感結構中無形的對立。賀貽孫曾以「變與不變」為〈離騷〉之主幹，倘若我們能予以引申，將情感結構本身的「變與不變」轉換為一種詮釋觀點或理論，它或許還能成為整體「屈原作品」的連繫基礎。本文遂將〈離騷〉、《九歌》到〈天問〉等題材多樣的作品，連繫於一條由主觀到客觀的發展鍊，視為「自我」在不同階段的各種形態，嘗試藉著此一詮釋框架以及由此衍生的篇章結構，說明「屈原作品」中自我的變化與內在連繫。 在〈離騷〉與《九章》等自傳性詩歌中，自我面臨最初的潰散或客觀化，這種客觀化無論表現為陳世驤、許又方所言的「時間」或「憂患」，還是廖棟樑指出的「身體」，對自我而言都是某種無可理解的東西，並因此造成了最初的自我分裂與意義表達。在具體性迫使自我分裂之際，藉由當代譬喻理論之於人類經驗與譬喻建構的觀點，本文從〈離騷〉與《九章》的「道路」譬喻中，探索了紛然各異的具體情境，以及它們在客觀呈顯的同時，如何連繫於同一個主觀性的自我。 前人對《九歌》可能帶有的表演性早有論及，而這些篇章本身或其涉及的特殊處境，無論是人、神交接或戲劇形式，都使自我直接與某種自身之外的事物接觸、交融，並由此更朝客觀化邁進。在此一階段，自傳性的口吻消逝，取而代之的是神衹扮演、祭儀描寫與主觀詠嘆的紛紜交錯，在繁複多重的層次間，本文將探討自我的進一步分裂、出離或客觀化、如此的轉變何以造就了《九歌》獨特的表達，以及轉變後的自我如何仍與往昔的心緒相連。 在〈天問〉中，自我的客觀化延展至極點。對於「客觀世界」整體的極端求索，使自我遠離其內在性，〈天問〉中一切紛繁閃逝、難以連繫的片斷，便是此種內在性消散的表徵。在極端客觀性的壓迫下，無限擴張的具體宇宙使自我瀕臨極限，〈天問〉中的一切問題，便都處在主體性喪失的極限上。客觀傾向與內在性的崩解，也使〈天問〉中的主體成為了一個感官性的自我，以其不同以往的具體傾向，重新感知了宇宙、神話、歷史乃至一己的命運。 在將「屈原作品」中的「自我」置於一連續性結構，探索其中的變化與不變後，內文的最後一章，可視為對既成觀點的一種發揮。相較於〈離騷〉至〈天問〉的結構，〈遠游〉和〈招魂〉二篇作品在主體性的表達上有著不小的落差，前者藉神仙思想使主體徹底擺脫世界，後者則塑造出一個失落了主體的世界，二種極端情形，都與〈離騷〉至〈天問〉主體的對立糾結有所不同。然而，透過歷代註家對〈遠游〉、〈招魂〉與屈原關係的牽合與詮釋，我們也再次發現，情感結構中的對立性與自我的客觀化，是如何作為前人認知「屈原作品」的關鍵因素。

This thesis argues that there is an antithetical quality in the “structure of feeling” of Qu Yuan’ works, and the multiple subjects in his works, including conflicting emotions, dilemmatic situations and the melancholy of withering away are all symbols of this quality. He Yi-Sun once described the spirit of Li Sao (“Encountering Sorrow”) as “the changed and the unchanged”, and if we could extend its meaning so as to form a theory or interpretation, the same spirit might also has the potential to be the foundation of Qu Yuan’ works as a whole. This thesis thus puts different works like Li Sao, Jiu Ge (“Nine Songs”), Tian Wen (“Heavenly Questions”) in stages which vary from subjectivity to objectivity, regarding them as different patterns of “self” in each stage, so as to illustrate the changes and connections between self-patterns in Qu Yuan’ works. When in autobiographical poems like Li Sao and Jiu Zhang (“Nine Pieces”), the collapse or objectification of self is at its beginning. This objectification of self might appear as “time”, “sorrow” or “body” as they were mentioned by Chen Shi-Xiang, Xu You-Fang or Liao Dong-liang, but no matter how it appears, it is unintelligible to the self, and thus bring about the splitting of the self and the beginning of meaning-making. While the self undergoes its split or objectification, this chapter will then explore the “pathway” metaphors in Li Sao and Jiu Zhang by means of contemporary theory of metaphor, in the attempt to disclose how the diverse metaphorical situations could associate with the same self. The ritualistic or dramatic forms in Jiu Ge force the self to touch upon something beyond itself, and therefore make it become more objective. In this stage, the convergence of personas of gods, ritualistic details and lyrical expressions replace the original autobiographical style of the self. This chapter will explore the further split or objectification of the self, including issues like how these changes create the unique expression of Jiu Ge, and how the self could still connect with its passed pattern after these changes. The objectification of self is at the summit in Tian Wen. The extreme quest toward an objective world as a whole takes the self far away from its own subjectivity, and thus produces all the transient fragments in Tian Wen. Under the pressure of the extreme objectivity and a universe which is ever expanding, the self has to face its limits and becomes more and more perceptual. Until at last, it perceives the universe, the myths, the history and the fate of itself in a manner which is totally different than before. After considering the “self” of Qu Yuan’ works in different stages, exploring the relation between them, this thesis goes on to develop ideas which were already established. Comparing to the structure containing Li Sao, Jiu Zhang, Jiu Ge and Tian Wen, Yuan You (“Far-off Journey”) and Zhao Hun (“Summons of the soul”) both are very different representations of subjectivity. While the former makes the subject escape completely from the world by ideas of Xien (the immortals), the latter forms a world which is completely empty of the subject. Due to their extreme representations of subjectivity, neither of them have the antithetical quality which is the ground of Li Sao, Jiu Zhang, Jiu Ge and Tian Wen. However, through the effort of interpreters who try to establish a link between Qu Yuan and these two works, we will discover again that how the antithetical quality in the “structure of feeling” as well as the objectification of self both serve as key elements when it comes to Qu Yuan’s works.