【作者】 周鸿雁；

【导师】 戴元光；

【作者基本信息】 上海大学 ， 传播学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 在诸多关于传播的描述中,最为普通和流行的解释就是,传播是信息的传递。近百年来,传播学研究的路径就一直这样延续下来,主宰了传播学研究的基本框架,时至今日仍然占据主导地位。把传播界定为基本的信息传递的过程,其显见的好处是容易为我们的日常生活经验所感知,同时也容易为所谓的“科学的方法”所使用——越来越庞大的数据模型、专业团队,越来越精密细致的分析技巧——满足和服务于越来越官僚化或市场化的需求。传播学俨然成了自然科学的一个分支。但也有一些“另类”的观点让人耳目一新,凯瑞的仪式传播观就是其中之一。从仪式的角度看,传播就不是至少不仅仅是信息的传递,而是最基本的社会过程,是对社会的维系,是人类文化的生成,是人类文明的构成。这是一种传播学的新视野,传播学研究的新路径。这是一种对人类社会存在本质的终极的追问,凯瑞的人文精神和道德关怀也嵌入其中:如何创造一个更加美好的人类世界?如同环境保护主义者致力于在日益恶劣的生态环境中拯救稀有动物一样,凯瑞想做的是,如何保护我们赖以生存的社会环境免遭像自然环境一样的严重的污染和破坏,从而来拯救我们人类自身?把凯瑞的仪式传播思想进行系统地整理,引进到我国的传播学研究的学术领域,并期望对这一领域的国内的研究有所裨益,是本文的目的所在。然而,最根本的目标不仅如此,我还试图在此基础上,以纵横两条线展开我的研究:纵线是对仪式传播思想的起源进行学术整理,找出这一传播思想的源头;横线是对凯瑞所处时代的各种传播学的思潮进行剖析,找出他提出仪式传播观的时代背景。这显然是一项艰巨而复杂的任务,实际上涉及到对人类传播思想史的再思考。在本文中,我并非有意将道德和价值判断预置于仪式观的研究之上,只是想说明,如果脱离了道德和价值的考量,社会科学的研究也就失去了自身的价值和意义。为了完成这项极具挑战性的任务,在内容的安排上,我把本文除了绪论部分外分为七个大的部分。第一部分是凯瑞的生平和学术历程。了解凯瑞的生活经历和学术历程,便于加深对凯瑞仪式传播思想的含义的理解。根据我掌握的资料,本文把凯瑞的一生划分为四个阶段。第一阶段是“神秘”的街头教育(1934-1948),从凯瑞出生写到他入学,这是凯瑞的少年时代。写这一部分的目的是,通过了解他的家庭背景和少年时代的独特经历来理解凯瑞为什么会提出仪式传播思想。第二阶段是“误入”传播学领域(1948-1963),从就读中学写到博士毕业,这一部分主要是叙述凯瑞接受的教育,目的是通过他的学科背景来理解他的学术思想的逐步形成的过程。第三阶段是执教伊利诺伊(1963-1979),这一阶段是凯瑞学术思想形成的重要时期,在此期间凯瑞完成了他一生的学术转向,提出了两种传播观的划分,成为美国文化研究的代表人物和领军人物。第四阶段是转入哥伦比亚大学(1992-2006),在哥大执教期间,他主导了传播学博士项目,为传播学学科建设做出了贡献。同时,晚年的凯瑞更加关注宏观的问题,也对互联网表示出浓厚的兴趣,通过对他晚年的思想的梳理,便于从多个角度把握他的仪式传播思想。第二部分是对凯瑞仪式传播观概念的全面梳理。在第一节“对传播和仪式概念的考察”中,我力图通过对“仪式”、“传播”两个概念的历史学分析找出二者之间的重叠和交融之处,提出“作为传播的仪式”的命题。第二节“仪式传播观的提出”,以电报为文本,以地图做隐喻,并把对话作为仪式观的开始。第三节“两种传播观的对比”,重点讨论仪式观与传递观的区别,即对二者的不同的源头、不同的关切、不同的作用进行划分,最后得出两种传播观既显著对立又高度统一的结论,回答传播到底是什么的问题:传播既是信息的传递,又是人们“共享信仰的表征”。第三部分是“作为文化的传播”。这部分实际上是第二部分的延续,进一步阐释与仪式观相关的几组概念:文化与传播、技术与传播、新闻与传播。通过对这几组概念的辨析,以加深对凯瑞仪式传播观的理解。第四部分着重对凯瑞的仪式传播观的理论渊源进行探讨。第一节提出了传播的传递观和传播的仪式观的对立早已有之,古希腊的民主自治思想是凯瑞仪式观的源头。第二节是关于凯瑞仪式传播思想与芝加哥学派的关系,重点是杜威、帕克、库利、米德对凯瑞的影响;美国的实用主义思想是凯瑞仪式传播观的直接来源。第三节是关于凯瑞仪式传播观与技术学派的关系,重点是英尼斯和麦克卢汉对凯瑞的影响;第四节是凯瑞仪式观与格尔茨“理解他人的理解”的关系,重点是格尔茨对凯瑞思想的影响;第五节是凯瑞仪式思想与英国文化研究“伯明翰学派”的关系,重点是威廉斯和霍尔对凯瑞的影响。第六节是凯瑞与马克思主义的关系,特别是与英国政治经济学派的交锋,这种交锋对凯瑞的仪式传播思想的影响。第七节是宗教和凯瑞仪式传播思想的关系,主要是美国的宗教土壤、凯瑞自身的宗教信仰以及涂尔干的宗教思想对凯瑞的影响。第五部分是凯瑞仪式传播观的主要贡献。第一节是凯瑞仪式传播观对传播学研究的贡献。在对仪式传播观的价值进行评估时,主要从对美国传播学研究的历史回顾看待凯瑞仪式传播观对传统的、长期占据主导地位的经验主义实证研究提出的挑战,从而开辟了一条传播学研究的新的路径。第二节涉及到凯瑞仪式传播观在实践中的应用和拓展,重点分析了传播学学者在凯瑞仪式传播观的启发下,对日常生活和大众传播中的仪式传播现象和行为的研究,阐明“媒介化的仪式”和“仪式化的媒介”都是普遍存在的现象。第六章是分析仪式传播观的主要缺陷。重点是对凯瑞的传播学思想,尤其是仪式传播观的许多矛盾、断裂处进行逐一分析和评论,指出其存在的缺陷和不足之处。第七章是仪式传播观的借鉴意义。从回顾传播学自上个世纪70年代末登陆中国大陆的30年的历史入手,反思中国传播学研究的问题和不足,在此基础上,研究探讨凯瑞仪式传播观对我国传播学研究的启发和借鉴意义。在“余论”中,对凯瑞的学术思想作了进一步的描述性的总结和概括。凯瑞的学术著作,按照发表的时间顺序,作为附录置于本文之后,供读者参阅。更多还原

【Abstract】 Of many descriptions of communication, the most common and popular interpretation is:“Communication is the transmission of information.”In the past century, this is the track communication studies has followed, it dominates the basic framework for communication research and has played a leading role up to now. Such a definition of communication as a basic process has the obvious advantage, that is, it is easy for us to perceive in our daily life experience, and at the same time, it can be employed by the so-called "scientific method"– an increasingly large data model, a professional team, more precise and meticulous analytical skills - to meet and serve the growing bureaucratic or market demands. Communication seems to have become a branch of natural science. But there are some "alternative" refreshing points of view, and Carey’s ritual view of communication is one of these.From the perspective of rituals, communication is not, or at least not only the transmission of information, but the most basic social process, one that involves the maintenance of social relationships, the formation of human culture and the composition of human civilization. This is a new vision of communication and new path for communication studies. This is a kind of ultimate questioning of the nature of human social existence in which Carey’s human spirit and moral concern are also included: how to create a better human world? As an environmentalist committed to saving rare animals in the deteriorating ecological environment, what Carey wants to do is examine how to protect the social environment upon which our lives rely from serious pollution and damage just like that facing the natural environment, and thus to save human beings themselves?The objective of this paper is to conduct a systematic survey of Carey’ s ritual view of communication, and so introduce it into Chinese academic study with the hope that it will benefit domestic research. However, the most fundamental goal is more than that. An attempt is made, on this basis, to develop the studies both vertically and horizontally. Vertically, an academic survey is made of the ritual view of communication, so as to find its origin; horizontally, an analysis is made of the thought trends of communication in the period when Carey lived to explain the climate in which he proposed the ritual view of communication. This is clearly a difficult and complicated task that in fact involves the rethinking of human communication history. This paper, makes no attempt to place moral and value judgments above the research of ritual view, but merely intends to illustrate that research in social sciences will lose its value and significance if it ignores considerations of morality and values.To accomplish this challenging task, this paper is divided, in the arrangements of contents, into seven parts excluding the preface.ChapterⅠ: Carey’s lifetime and academic course. The understanding of Carey’s life experiences and academic course helps to deepen our understanding of Carey’s ritual view of communication. According to the relevant documents, Carey’s life can be divided into four stages. The first stage is the "mysterious" street education (1934-1948) from Carey’s birth to schooling that is the early youth of Carey. This part is aimed at helping people to comprehend why Carey would put forward the ritual view of communication through the knowledge of his family background and unique experiences in his early youth. The second stage is when he "diverts" to the field of communication (1948-1963), which mainly discusses Carey’s education from the middle school period to his Ph.D. graduation, aiming at understanding the formative process of his academic thought through his academic background. The third stage is his teaching period in Illinois University (1963-1979), which is an important period for the formation of Carey’s academic thought. During this period, Carey completed his academic shift in his life and presented two theoretical notions of communication, becoming the representative and leading figure of American cultural research. The fourth stage is his teaching period in Columbia University (1992-2006). In this period, he led the Ph.D. program on communication and contributed a great deal to the construction of the discipline of communication. However, in his later years Carey was more concerned about the macro issues, and also expressed strong interest in the Internet. By sorting out his thoughts in his later years, we can easily grasp his ritual view of communication from different points of view.ChapterⅡ: Overall arrangement of Carey’s ritual view of communication.In sectionⅠ, the survey of communication and ritual concepts, this paper attempts to find the overlapping and integrating area of "ritual" and "communication" concepts by historic analysis, and puts forward the proposition-"the ritual as communication."In sectionⅡ, this paper puts forward the ritual view of communication, taking telegram as text, map as the metaphor and dialogue as the beginning of ritual view.In sectionⅢ, a "comparison of two communication concepts" is put forward and the discussion is focused on the differences between them, that is, to divide the different origins, concerns and functions and finally come to a universal conclusion: both views of communication are noticeably contrasting and yet highly uniform. It answers the question of what on earth communication is, that is, communication is“the transmission of information”and also“the superficial characteristics of people’s shared beliefs.”ChapterⅢ: Communication as culture. This is actually a continuation of chapterⅡand it further elaborates several groups of concepts related to the ritual view: culture and communication, technology and communication, journalism and communication. Through the analysis of these groups of concepts, the understanding of Carey’s ritual view of communication is deepened.ChapterⅣ: Focusing on exploring the theoretical origins of Carey’s ritual view of communication. SectionⅠis about the opposition of transmission view and ritual view of communication that had existed for a long time, and the democratic self-governing philosophy of the ancient Greeks is the source of Carey’s ritual view of communication. SectionⅡis about the relationship between Carey’s ritual view of communication and the Chicago School of thoughts, emphasizing the influence on Carey of Dewey, Parker, Cooley, and Mead. The ideas of American Pragmatism are the direct source of Carey’s ritual view of communication. SectionⅢis about the relationship between Carey’s ritual view of communication and technological schools of thought, emphasizing the influence of Innis and Marshall McLuhan on Carey. SectionⅣis about the relationship between Carey’s ritual view of communication and Geertz’s "understanding other people’s understanding", focusing on the influence of Geertz’s thoughts on Carey. SectionⅤis about the relationship between Carey’s ritual view of communication and the British cultural research school of thought-the Birmingham School of Philosophy, stressing the influence of Williams and Hall on Carey. SectionⅥis about the relationship between Carey and Marxism, especially about the battle among British political and economic philosophers, which had a great impact on Carey’s ritual view of communication. SectionⅦis about the relationship between religion and Carey’s ritual view of communication, mainly about the religious soil in the United States, the religious beliefs of Carey himself and the religious ideas of Durkheim, which exerted an impact on Carey.ChapterⅤ: Major contributions of Carey’s ritual view of communication. SectionⅠis about the contribution of Carey’s ritual view of communication to studies in communication. When making assessment on the ritual view of communication, this paper mainly, from looking back at the research history of American communication, regards Carey’s ritual view of communication as a challenge to the traditional and predominating studies of empiricism, thus opening up a new path for research on communication. SectionⅡcovers the application and development of Carey’s ritual view of communication and centers on analyzing how, inspired by Carey’s ritual view of communication, scholars of communication have done research on phenomena and behaviors of ritual communication in daily life and mass communication, and illustrates that "media ritual" and "ritual media" are commonly existing phenomena.ChapterⅥ: Analysis of the major drawbacks of Carey’s ritual view of communication. It focuses on analyzing and commenting on, one by one, the contradictions and deficiencies of the ritual view of communication in particular, pointing out its shortcomings and inadequacies.ChapterⅦ: Reference of the ritual view of communication. Reviewing the history of communication of 30 years since the end of 1970s when it was introduced to China’s mainland, this paper examines the problems and shortcomings of Chinese studies on communication. Grounding on this, it studies and discusses the inspiration and reference of Carey’s ritual view of communication towards Chinese studies on communication.In the "epilogue", this paper gives a further descriptive conclusion of Carey’s academic thoughts. Carey’s academic works are placed as an appendix to this paper for readers’ reference in accordance with the time sequence of publication.更多还原