感知配享與生命政治：1911-1929以杜亞泉及《東方雜誌》的論述為例

Abstract

This thesis is not only a move to diagnose, “re-treat”, and “water” the “desert situation”of Taiwan, but also an attempt to “cinematize” thoughts and discourses. It aims at applying the method of discourse analysis to diagnose the situation of Taiwan through the theories of French thinkers Jacques Ranci?re’s “the Distribution of the Sensible ” and Michel Foucault’ s “Biopoltics”; in addition, it will take example of the discourses of Du yaquan and Donfang Magzine from 1911 to 1939 to point out the exit or the “aurora of redemption” for Taiwanese people nowadays. So in chapter 1, through Professor Chen Tsun-shing’s brave cry-out of the “Banality of Evil” and “the desertification of discourse” of Taiwan in his condensed pamphlet Morality Can’ t be Deposed and Chen Kuan-Hsing’ s indication of “de-imperializing subjectivity” in his Towards de-imperialization:Asia as method, basically, what we can discover is a kind of authentic “care of the self” which is the root of “philosophy” and “democracy”, and through this kind of authentic “care of the self”, the “distribution of the Sensible” of this thesis is born. And in chapter 2, what we gonna explore is the background and the career of Du Yaquan as well as its relationships with the thread of the “politics of perception”. Retrospecting Du Yaquan’s whole life, what we can discover is a kind of fracture between “opinion”(doxa)and “knowledge”(episteme); and through this kind of break, this kind of way of seeing, and this kind of “thirsty for knowledge” or “will to knowledge”, the geneaology of the “politics of perception” —which manifested as the inseparable relations between a pre-existed field and a perceiving, reflexive, and speaking subject—from Kant to Ranci?re appeared. Consequently, in chapter 3, we can discover a kind of intention of the “politicization of the technology” or the “technologisation of the politics” —which is an act of giving art/technology a kind of “political mission” or considering “politics” as a kind of “lucid discovery” of “Ideal”—loomed out of the back of Du Yaquan’s articles such as “Introduction to the Yaquan Magzine,” “Introdution to the Magzine of Industry and Art,” “On the limit and the No-limit,” “Introduction to the Taxonomy of Low-Graded Herbs,” “the Evolution of the Material”. In addition, it’s a “hierarchical system of taxonomy” in light of the “visibility,” “technicality,” or “applicability”. Especially, in the double catalysis of the “subjective technology of translation” and “quasi-scientific discourses,” what we can discover are the shaping movement of the “reflexive subject” and homogeneized “productive community” and the preparation of the systems of knowledge he would like to import to China afterward. In other words, it’s a kind of “policed order” which took knowledge and “technology” as its goal. Therefore, in Chapter 4, what we can sense is the ideal of the “regime of amusement” and “society of manner” (Bildungsgesellschaft) in the “big innovation,” the “hematinic”advertisement, the “perceptual mistranslation”of Immanuel Kant’s philosophy, and Du Yaquan’s importation of European notions of “evolution of mind,” experimental psychology, physiology, vitalism, “the union of body and mind” of Maine de Biron and Henri Bergson, the connection of photography and mortality as well as pathology and the idea of the “deviation” or “error”in the discourses of Dongfang Magzine after Du Yaquan assumed the office of the general editor of it. Especially, in light of the moves of promoting nationalism and taking the imagination of the “productive community” of militarism as its reference point, what we can clearly discover is the hierarchical system of the “great chain of being” of Aristotle— which is the “poetic regime of art” Ranci?re mentioned —the “policed order” and its delimitaion of “normal” and “abnormal,” “productive” and “idle,” as well as “healthy” and “unhealthy”. In addition, this “policed order” has produced a kind of reflexive—but also “desirous” and “unrestrained”—subjectivity. As the questioning goes to the chapter 5, we can detect the divined intention of putting chinese people at the position of a detached, objective “biologist”(therefore, in the taste of this barbarous fighting among “animals”, what happened is the “uncanny” overlapping of “animality” and “humanity”), making them feel exciting, venting, and making them sacrifice for the “literary community”—in Du Yaquan, Pin-Yi(平佚), and Chang Jisho(錢智修)’s articles such as “War and Literature” , “The Harmony of the Civilization of East and West after the War”, “Stilled Civilization and Moving Civilization”, “Dazed Modern Mind” and Du Yaquan’s engagement with Chang Dusho(陳獨秀) and Chung Monlin(蔣夢麟) about the “Debate of Culture of East and West” in the period of the First World War. In other words, in light of the different “customs” (ethos) of different ethnic groups, what we can discover is the “ethical regime of image” Ranci?re mentioned—through the process of “fixation” and “conceptualization”—make “East” and “West” two homogeneized, artificial, fictional, ultimate, exclusive, logical(or epistemological)categories. Particularly, in this kind of “policed order” or “ethical regime of image”, we not only can sense the origin of totalitarianism and the violence of “logicality”, metaphysical “world view”(Weltanschauung)—that is to say, the “montage” (le montage)—but also cannot watch the scene of the “emergence” (ph?sis) of singularity or the revelation or the “event” of “philosophical surprise” (thaumazein). Ultimately, facing the “policed order” of the”images” of Dongfang Magzine and Taiwanese situation nowadays, in chapter 6, which is the so-called “conclusion” of this thesis, what we can get a glimpse of”—through Klaus Held’s rediscovery of Heraclitus’ maxim of “Man’s character is his fate”(?thos anthr?po daimon), Emmanuel Levinas’ “intersubjective space” or the “subjectivity of the subject”of the Other(l’ Autre), and Shu Guozhi(舒國治)’s empowerment of the “idle comminity” of those “Wuxia-lovers”(看武俠的), our routine activities such as walking, sleeping as well as all kinds of the “politics of body” accompanied it—is a kind of “aurora of redemption” that we “used to ” confront it with the exclusive “grand narrative” of the logic of “policed order”. Especially, what we can realized is the fact that any concept, image, distribution of the sensible, or the “custom” (?thos) always has two side: the good side and bad side. Yes, the “distribution of the sensible ” may become an exclusive “policed order”; yes, the “habit” or the “custom” maybe the the “opening” of the “uncanny”(unheimlich) as Lacoue-Labarthe wrote, but do the “Wuxia-lovers” Shu Guozhi saw in Schiphol Airport and Township Office, those tea-drinking, card-playing, comic-reading idle people and those countless “ideal afternoon”, countless “good old days”, countless “undisciplined wonderful ages”, countless “travelers”, countless “wanderers”, or countless “purposeless compatriots” in Taiwan not a kind of imagination of “the political” or the “politics” that we used to confront the “community of the policed order” and open the “passage” or “space” we familiar with or we can be “singular plural” in it？In this “space”, “opinion”(doxa)and “knowledge”(episteme), “conscious” and “unconscious”, “sound” and “silence” achieved a kind of surprising harmony, and a kind of true “democracy”, a kind of “aesthetic regime of art” is born…a kind of authentic “there is…” is born…a kind of authentic “care of the self” is born…finally, our destination also comes into being—if we can imagine.