Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33330
|
| Title: | 艾特伍 <<秀色可餐>> 之變形記 |
| Authors: | 陳惠雁 |
| Contributors: | 劉建基
陳惠雁 |
| Keywords: | 象徵性食人主義
厭食症
拉崗式精神分析
克理絲蒂娃之厭棄理論 |
| Date: | 2004 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-17 16:17:12 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 論文提要內容:
在瑪格莉特. 艾特伍之<< 秀色可餐>> 中，拉崗式的閱讀揭露了文本中之象徵式食人主義(symbolic cannibalism ) ，鏡像理論乃是拉崗理論架構之雛型，雖然他後續對理論作了潤飾。拉崗式理論之核心在於匱缺(lack)。鏡中的影像乃是個金鐘罩(armour)，其功用在於保護主體，使其遠離支離破碎的身體意象，達到肉身再塑、毫髮無損之意象。換句話說，在拉崗的論述中，此過程既是一種錯生(meconnaissances), 亦是接肢法的(orthopaedic) 功能，目的在於形塑主體心中合而為一與充足飽滿之錯覺。相同地，象徵界(the Symbolic Order) 亦為主體編織一套巧製而成的幻象(fantasy) 來掩飾其背後之匱缺。此目的在於規範與臣服主體，易於收編的過程。
此論文乃欲揭露在<<秀色可餐>>中的幻象。文本中之象徵式食人主義被挪用來建構幻象，將女性框架於由男性建構的女性典範。文本中的女主角看穿了幻象背後所掩飾的匱缺。她的自覺掀起了一連串之自我分離及厭食症。諸如此類
vii
的現象與拉崗式幻真界(the Real)的範疇有異曲同工之妙。女主角能從厭食症復原導因於她對於此不平衡關係的自覺。此關係將她歸類為被消費者及被獵食者。克理絲蒂娃厭棄(abjection) 的理論對於檢視女主角烘焙及吃下蛋糕之舉動提供了具有剖析度的見解。此舉動在於擺脫危害她主體性且擾亂自我與他者區隔之元素。
厭食症長久以來被認為是主體為要迎合消費市場意識型態的策略。如此一來，主體乃保有其經濟價值，並能在經濟市場上流通。透過精神分析式之閱讀，我們體認到厭食症亦可被挪用來抵制那臣服於外在氛圍籠罩下意識型態的自我。以文本中女主角的例子而言，與其說她的厭食症是為了迎合象徵性食人主義的手段，不如說這是個反撲外在氛圍的策略。
Lacanian reading of Margaret Atwood’s The Edible Woman offers a way to lay bare the symbolic cannibalism that lies at the center of this text. Theory of the mirror stage is the prototype of Lacan’s theoretical structure though Lacan gradually embellished his theories as he found necessary. The focal point of Lacanian theory lies in “lack.” The mirror image serves as an armour that protects the subject from realizing a sense of incompleteness and fragmentation in part of the subject. In other words, this process is “orthopaedic” and “meconnaissances” in Lacanian terms, which functions to weave an image of totality and plentitude for the subject. Similarly, the Symbolic Order weaves a fantasy for the subject in order to cover up the lack. Such an act aims to regulate and subjugate the subject for easy manipulation.
This thesis attempts to lay bare the fantasy in The Edible Woman. That is, the symbolic cannibalism is employed as a fantasy to entrap women into a model of femininity, which is constructed by the male idea. The female protagonist in this text sees through the rupture in such a fantasy. Her awareness ushers in a stage of self-laceration and eating disorder, which manifest themselves as working of the Real. Marian’s recovery from anorexia results from her awareness of such an asymmetrical relationship which posits her as the consumed and the hunted. Julia Kristeva’s
ix
theory of abjection is a useful and insightful tool to examine Marian’s gesture of baking and eating a cake for herself. Such a gesture is, in fact, a way to rid herself of what endangers her sense of subjectivity and what disturbs her distinction between self and other.
Anorexia is traditionally conceived as a strategy of the subject to cater to the ideology of the consumer market. In that way, the subject remains a product to be able to circulate in the economy market and maintains its economy value. Through psychoanalytical reading of anorexia nervosa, we understand that such a symptom is employed as a strategy to rebel against part of the self that succumbs to the discursive ideology. In the case of Marian, anorexia is not so much a way to cater to the symbolic cannibalism as a strategy to fight against such a discursive atmosphere. |
| Reference: | Works Cited
Atwood, Margaret. The Edible Woman. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1970.
Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London: Saga, 2000.
Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. Trans. Richard Howard. New York: 1981. 13-4.
Bodskind-Lodaml, Marlene. “Cinderella’s Stepsisters: A Feminist Perspective on Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia.” Signs 2 (1976): 220-34.
Botting, Fred. “Cultural, Subjectivity and the real; or, Psychoanalysis reading Postmodernity.” Theorizing Culture: An Interdisciplinary Critique After Postmodernism. Ed. Barbara Adam and Stuart Allan. London: UCL Press, 1995. 87-99.
Bouson, J. Brooks. “The Edible Woman’s refusal to Consent to Femininity.” Brutal Choreographies: Oppositional Strategies and Narrative Design in the Novels of Margaret Atwood. Amherst: The U of Massachusetts P, 1993. 15-37.
---. “The anxiety of being influenced: Reading and responding to character in Margaret Atwood’s The Edible Woman.” Style 24 (1990): 228-42.
Burgin, Victor. “Geometry and Abjection.” Abjection, Melancholia, and Love: The Work of Julia Kristeva. Ed. John Fletcher and Andrew Benjamin. London & New York: Routledge, 1990. 104-23.
Cameron, Elspeth. “‘Famininity’ or Parody of Autonomy: Anorexia Nervoas and The Edible Woman.” Journal of Canadian Studies. 20(1985): 5.
Caskey, Noelle. “Interpreting Anorexia Nervosa.” The Female Body in Western Culture: Contemporary Perspectives. Ed. Susan Rubin Suleiman. Cambridge: Harvard U P, 1986. 175-89.
Evans, Dylan. An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. London: New York, 1996.
Feldstein, Richard. “The Mirror of Manufactured Cultural Relations.” Reading Seminar I and II. Ed. Richard Feldstein, Bruce Fink, and Maire Jaanus. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.
Fink, Bruce. “The Subject and the Other’s Desire.” Reading Seminar I and II. Ed. Richard Feldstein, Bruce Fink, and Maire Jaanus. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.
Griffith, Margaret. “Verbal Terrain in the Novels of Margaret Atwood.” Critique 21 (1979): 85-94.
Hall, Stuart. “The Question of Cultural Identity.” Modernity and Its Futures. Ed. Stuart Hall et al. Oxford: Backwell, 1992. 273-327.
Harting, Heike. “The Profusion of Meanings and the Female Experience of Colonisation: Inscriptions of the Body as the Site of Difference in Tsitsi Dangarembga’s Nervosa Conditions and Margaret Atwood’s The Edible Woman.” Fusion of Cultures? Ed. Peter O. Strummer and Christopher Balme. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1996. 237-46.
Hepworth, Julie. “Postmodernism, the Body and Therapy: Implications from Practice.” The Social Construction of Anorexia Nervosa. London: SAGE Publication, 1999. 99-130.
Hobgood, Jennifer. “Anti-Edibles: Capitalism and Schizophrenia in Margaret Atwood’s The Edible Woman.” Style 36 (2002): 146-69.
Howells, Coral Ann. “‘Feminine, Female, Feminist’: From The Edible Woman to ‘The Female Body.’“ Margaret Atwood. London: MacMillan Press, 1996. 38-61.
Irigaray, Luce. Speculum: Of The Other Woman. Trans. Gillian Gill. New York: Cornell U P, 1985.
---. This Sex Which is Not One. Trans. Catherine Porter. New York: Cornell U P, 1985.
Irvine, Lorna. “Murder and Mayhem: Margaret Atwood Deconstructs.” Contemporary Literature 29 (1988): 265-77.
Kolodny, Annette. “Some Notes on Defining a ‘Feminist Literary Criticism.’” Critical Inquiry. 2 (1975): 75-92.
Kristeva, Julia. Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia U P, 1941.
Lacan, Jacques. Ecrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock, 1977.
---. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalysis Experience.” Ecrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Tavistock Publications Limited, 1977. 1-7.
---. “The Subject and the Other: Alienation.” The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Norton, 1977. 203-15.
Mycak, Sonia. “The Edible Woman: The Split Subject as Agent of Exogamous Exchange.” In Search of the Split Subject: Psychoanalysis, Phenomenology, and the Novels of Margaret Atwood. Toronto: ECW P, 1996. 47-70.
Nicholson, Mervyn. “Food and Power: Homer, Carroll, Atwood, and Others.” Mosaic 20 (1987): 37-55.
Parker, Emma. “You Are What You Eat: The Politics of Eating in the Novels of Margaret Atwood.” Modern Critical Views: Margaret Atwood. Ed. Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea House P, 2000.
Peel, Ellen. “Subject, Object, and the Alternation of First- and Third-Person Narration in Novels by Alther, Atwood, and Drabble: Toward a Theory of Feminist Aesthetics.” Critique 30 (1989): 107-23.
Phelps, Henry C. “Atwood’s Edible Woman and Surfacing.” Explicator 55 (1997): 112-15.
Probyn, Elspeth. “The Anorexic Body.” Body Invaders: Panic and Sex in America. Ed. Arthur Kroker and Marilouise Kroker. New York: St. Martin’s P, 1987. 201-12.
Quinet, Antonio. “The Gaze as an Object.” Reading Seminar XI: Lacan’s Four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995. 139-47.
Ragland, Ellie. “An Overview of the Real.” Reading Seminar I and II. Ed. Richard Feldstein, Bruce Fink, and Maire Jaanus. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.
Rao, Eleonora. “The ‘Masquerade’ of Femininity: The Edible Woman” Strategies for Identity. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 1993.
Rigney, Barbara Hill. “Alice and the Animals: The Edible Woman and Early Poems.” Woman Writers: Margaret Atwood. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1987. 18-37.
Wilson, Sharon Rose. “Cannibalism and Metamorphosis in The Edible Woman: ‘The Robber Bridegroom.’“ Margaret Atwood’s Fairy-Tale Sexual Politics. Jackson: U P of Mississippi, 1993. 82-96.
Zizek, Slavoj. “‘I Hear You With My Eyes’ or, The Invisible Master.” Gaze and Voice as Love Objects. Ed. Slavoj Zizek and Renata Salecl. Durham: Duke U P, 1996. 90-126.
---. The Sublime Object of Ideology. New York: Verso, 1989.
---. “The Seven Veils of Fantasy.” Key Concepts of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. Ed. Dany Nobus. New York: Other Press, 1999.
---. “From Symptom to Sinthome.” The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso,1989. 55-84. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學研究所
91551003
93 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0091551003 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [英國語文學系] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
