人在歷史中——郭松棻的歷史書寫與歷史意識

Abstract

郭松棻自1980年代後停止發表政治與哲學撰述，轉向小說寫作，並且屢屢在小說中觸及台灣與中國近代史。然而，他在2005年的訪談卻表明了小說的虛構性，並且否認他所寫作的是歷史小說。對應郭松棻從1960年代開始關於存在主義的撰述，由其中的思想演變軌跡，可知他抗拒歷史小說文類，不僅是出自現代主義小說美學自主性的選擇，也是基於他循著存在主義脈絡，在歷史觀點上的變化。本研究將分析郭松棻早期評價沙特與卡繆的哲學撰述，由此梳理他在轉向小說寫作之前的思考路徑：郭松棻在前期反省西方形而上哲學傳統並主張直接採取政治行動，以此批判沙特與卡繆的思想。然而，更值得注意的是，他在1970年代後半對於共產主義歷史目的論提出嚴厲批判，在未發表的手稿中，留意到沙特對現代社會「叢集體」（series）的觀察。延續著此一脈絡，本研究另將分析郭松棻在1983年之後發表的小說文本，探討其中對於歷史的呈現，如何反應了郭松棻歷史觀點的轉變。透過分析郭松棻的歷史書寫與歷史觀點，本研究也藉此思考，他何以修正了早期行動主義的立場，從保釣運動中撤離，並且再次走向小說創作。

Since the 1980s, Guo Song-fen has stopped publishing political and philosophical writings and turned to fiction writing, in which he has repeatedly touched upon the history of Taiwan and China. However, an interview with him in 2005 revealed the fictional nature of the novels and denied that he was writing historical fiction. Corresponding to Guo's writings on existentialism from the 1960s onwards, the trajectory of his ideological evolution suggests that his resistance to the genre of historical fiction is not only a choice of autonomy in the aesthetics of modernist fiction, but also a change in his historical perspective following the existentialist vein. In this study, we will analyse Guo Songfen's early philosophical writings on Sartre and Camus in order to understand the path of his thinking before he turned to fiction writing: in the early period of his life, Guo Songfen reflected on the Western metaphysical philosophical traditions and advocated for direct political action as a means of criticising Sartre's and Camus's ideas. What is more noteworthy, however, is his severe criticism of the communist theory of the purpose of history in the second half of the 1970s, and his attention to Sartre's observation of 'series' of modern society in Guo’s unpublished manuscripts. Continuing in this vein, this study will also analyse the texts of Guo Songfen's novels published after 1983, and examine how the presentation of history in these novels reflects a change in Guo's view of history. By analysing Guo Songfen's historical writing and viewpoints, this study will also consider how he revised his early activist stance, withdrew from the Diaoyu movement, and turned to fiction again.