「不單作秀亦勸學」：晚清中國英文報刊裡的萬國博覽會

Abstract

本研究由Edward Said的《東方主義》發想，分析晚清中國的英文報刊裡有關1851年萬國博覽會的報導，探討種族、政治、文明的刻板印象如何運作，為晚清時在中國的西方人建立身分、建構議題。本研究以Roz Ivanič 三種書寫面向的概念，處理晚清英文報刊的內容。 分析顯示，晚清英文報刊無論是對於即時性、精準度、讀者認同，都競爭激烈。文獻指出《德臣西報》為官方喉舌；但該報雖鼓勵大眾參與萬博會，卻也詳述政府缺失。《北華捷報》支持參與萬博會的同時，增添了地方色彩，而《香港紀事報》則主張不寄送任何展品至倫敦，可爭取殖民母國的資源，拓展西方人在中國的特權。《華友西報》則以媒體評論之姿，譴責報刊激辯所帶來的後果。《香港紀事報》與《華友西報》更進一步透過其外國版，觸及西方讀者。 面對西方報刊對萬國博覽會上中國參訪者的報導，這些報刊駁斥但也活用西方的刻板印象，建立階序，將中國的西方人的身分，建立於中國人與西方的西方人之上。但這些報刊不定於一協調的身分，而遊於ㄧ系列不同的身分之間，並展現其身分認同的過程。晚清中國的英文報刊對於水晶宮的觀點與名稱，也不盡相同，使得皇家輝煌、個人英雄主義、金錢利益、國家驕傲等不同論述，交會於此一建築物之上。 不同於文獻假設，晚清中國的英文報刊，面對居住在中國或未離開西方的西方讀者，未將自身東方化以聲稱自持中國相關的知識。

Informed by the Orientalism of Edward Said, this research examines the reports on the Great Exhibition of 1851 in the English periodicals in late Qing China to delineate the ways in which stereotypes of race, politics, and civilization were mobilized to construct identities and assert agendas for the Westerners in late Qing China. This research approaches the content of the periodicals with the concept of the three aspects of style proposed by Roz Ivanič. Analyses show keen competition among the periodicals over immediacy, accuracy, and readers’ approval. The China Mail encouraged public participation in the Great Exhibition, but it also detailed the mistakes of the government instead of playing an official mouthpiece as previous studies suggest. The North-China Herald added a touch of localism to its support for the participation in the event, while The Hongkong Register argued for the possibility of acquiring colonial resources to advance the privileges of Westerners in China by sending nothing to London. The Friend of China and Hongkong Gazette criticized the consequences brought by the debates in the periodicals as a media critic. The Hongkong Register and The Friend of China and Hongkong Gazette further reached the audience in the West with their overland editions. Facing the reports on the Chinese visitors to the Great Exhibition in the Western press, these periodicals refuted but also energized Western stereotypes to establish a hierarchy in which the identity of the Westerners in China was situated above both the Chinese and the Westerners in the West. However, these periodicals did not dwell on a coherent identity but roamed in a spectrum of different identities and disclosed their processes of identification. These periodicals also differed in their references to and perspectives of the Crystal Palace, a building on which discourses from imperial grandeur, individual heroism, monetary interests, to national pride converged. Contrary to the assumptions by previous studies, these periodicals did not Orientalize themselves to claim expertise on China in front of an audience of Westerners, both in China and in the West.