為什麼原住民文學？─1984迄今原住民文學對臺灣民族國家建構的回應與展望

Abstract

八十年代當中，臺灣原住民文學扮演了基進的角色，揭露出許多奠基在原漢文化差異，經濟、社會、政治層面上的不公義。在那之後，一名白浪（原住民用來指稱漢人的辭彙，原為閩南語當中的「歹人」）便難以將既有的優勢視為理所當然。但是在政治高壓的情境轉為（至少在表面上）民主政治體制之後，原住民文學如何因應？又如何面對新進釋出的、下一代原住民習以為常的政治空間？ 相對於已被廣泛討論的問題：「什麼是原住民文學？」，本文藉由提出「為什麼原住民文學？」這個問題，將臺灣原住民文學放到臺灣民族國家建構的脈絡當中，關注原住民文學如何回應這樣的進程。本文同時將關於原住民文學的既有論述視為這些回應的代表，尤其是出自瓦歷斯•諾幹、浦忠成（巴蘇亞•博伊哲努）、孫大川的論述。這三位分別提倡三種原住民文學的定義方式：與言論、題材論、身份論。 在討論臺灣原住民文學的既有論述時，本文將上述三位的回應方式區分為兩種路線：前兩者描述了指向特定生活方式、文化傳統的認同；後者則將認同的內容儘可能開放，讓原住民作家用他們的作品來決定原住民文學的面貌何去何從。本文認為該定義方式有助於臺灣原住民文學處理社群內部的承認政治議程，允許多樣個體用自己的方式表達對原住民的認同，因此更能夠處理臺灣原住民文學的當代政治議題。 這並不意味著傳統的議程比方語言權、文化權，不再列入臺灣原住民文學的考量當中。相反地，對關切臺灣原住民處境的人而言，這些仍然是核心關懷。但是，這些議程無法在原住民文學定義的範疇內獲致成果。其次，有其他對原住民文學而言更為力所能及的議程，比方說對原住民社群內部的多樣性進行肯認。值此，針對本文的核心提問：「為什麼原住民文學？」，本文的回答可用下述句子進行總結：「因為我們無法忽視差異而獲致平等的尊嚴」。

Taiwan aboriginal literature played a radical role during 1980s, exposed lots of ecologically, socially, politically injustice based on cultural differences between Yuan(原) and Han(漢). Since then, it became much harder for a pailang(白浪, a term used by aboriginals to reffer to Han ethic people, originally means “bad guy” in Bân-lâm-oē) to take the existing adventage for granted. But how would aboriginal literature response when a political surpressure situation turned into (at least surfacially) democratized social-system? How to deal with the recently released political space which the next generation of aboriginal get used to it? By asking “why aboriginal literature matters?”, instead of a widely disccused question: “what is aboriginal literature?”, this thesis puts Taiwan aboriginal literature into the context of the constraction of Taiwan nation-state, focuses on how aboriginal literature response against such progress. In the mean time, this thesis considers existing discourse about Taiwan aboriginal literature as the representation of such response, especially those from Walis. Norgan(瓦歷斯•諾幹), Jhong-Cheng Pu (浦忠成), Da-Chuan Sun(孫大川), who are known as advocater of following three definition of Taiwan aboriginal literature: defining by language, subject, or writer's identity. While discussing about existing discourse about Taiwan aboriginal literature, this thesis divides these responses into two main streams: former two descript the identification toward particular living style, cultural trandition; while latter one keeps the content of identity as wide as possible, let aboriginal writers decide what should be the appearance of Taiwan aboriginal literature with their texts. This thesis consider such definition is more helpful for Taiwan aboriginal literature to deal the agenda about politics of recognition inside it's community, allows the diverse indivisuals present their identities toward aboriginal in their own ways, therefore is more capable to deal with the contemporary political issue of Taiwan aboriginal literature. It doesn't mean that traditional agendas such as language right, and culture right are no longer considered within Taiwan aboriginal literature. On the contrary, these are still core concern when one care about Taiwan aboriginal's situation. But at first, these agendas can't be achieved within the definition of aboriginal literature. Second, there are other adendas which are more capable for aboriginal literature to deal with, such as the recognization of diversities within aboriginal community. Therefore the anwser to this thesis's core question: “Why aboriginal literature matters?” can be summed by following sentence: “'cause differences are not something we can ignore it and achieve equal dignity.”