【作者】 张虎；

【导师】 王志耕；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 比较文学与世界文学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 奥尔罕·帕慕克是一位土耳其作家、2006年诺贝尔文学奖获得者。本文在总结前人研究成果的基础上,试正本清源、填补疏漏,以学术争辩的方式展开自己的批评与诠释,对帕慕克做一个综合性的专题研究。首先,针对以帕慕克与土耳其之关系为中心的社会历史学批评的缺席,本文试从凯末尔与世俗主义改革、伊斯兰主义、土耳其妇女、少数族裔四方面展开研究,研究帕慕克对土耳其近百年历史的矛盾态度,对伊斯兰极端主义的同情性认知,对本土妇女生存境遇的关注,对土耳其少数族裔政策的批判。这四方面基本涵盖了现代土耳其发展史上的主要问题。之后,本文将帕慕克批评中文化杂合派与文化冲突派的论争引入这一研究领域,指明学界对“多余”的主人公与“媚俗”的爱情叙事的误读——其实,它们才是帕慕克文化观的核心部分。最后,结合对帕慕克的“故乡”城市伊斯坦布尔的论述,揭示帕慕克小说中“冲突与交织的新象征”——忘怀政治,皈依爱情。其次是对帕慕克的写作文化渊源的探求。帕慕克的写作主要有两个文化源头,一是苏非神秘主义,一是后现代主义。这导致学界对这一问题的研究也分两派,在这两派的论述中,存在诸多论战与困惑。本文试图在这两种观点间寻找契合点,因为在帕慕克的身上二者是融合为一的,并剔除其中的过度诠释,彰显帕氏文本中最鲜明的苏非主义特征和后现代主义特征,即“苏非化的主人公”与“不确定性”。所谓苏非化的主人公,指的是从《白色城堡》到《雪》,帕慕克的主人公皆源自一个人物原型——苏非,这表现在他们的弃世、缄默、痴情、认知自我、追寻真主、爱安拉等言行特征中,而不确定性指的是,帕氏文本的情节、主题、人物皆具有不确定性,这最终根源于土耳其文化与身份的不确定性。缝合苏非派与后现代派的研究是本文的难点之一,本文试从分析《黑书》中的卡利普与帕慕克、博尔赫斯的比较研究入手,希望能呈现出一个在艺术形式上跨越东西方文化的帕慕克形象。再者,实际上目前帕慕克的批评研究已走入一个瓶颈阶段。国内外学界围绕文化杂合、苏非主义、呼愁等问题反复论述,难以论述出什么新意。但是,30多年来,帕慕克的写作在不断地变化,每一部作品都有其相对独立的思想艺术价值。那么,它们是什么?这是现有批评框架无法回答的一个问题。本文选取了《白色城堡》、《黑书》、《新人生》、《我的名字叫红》等七部作品为例,运用弗洛伊德、福柯、德里达、鲍德里亚、唐·库比特、列斐伏尔等人的思想理论,从情节、人物、结构等不同角度展开阐释分析。在这些新理论、新视角的观照下,对一些学术疏漏加以弥补,如对《新人生》与神秘道三段论关系的阐释；对一些被广泛接受的观点提出质疑与论辩,如对《我的名字叫红》中“橄榄”形象的重读；对一些争论不休的问题做出另一种新的解答,如对《黑书》文体定位的讨论；对一些未被发现的亮点与价值加以揭示,如对《伊斯坦布尔——记忆与城市》的空间权力批评和对《纯真博物馆》中“物”的关注。这是帕慕克作品的一只万花筒。它将澄清目前帕慕克研究中的许多具体问题,并为今后的帕慕克评论开拓出一片新天地。最后,本文将解析帕慕克创作中更为核心的几个问题,它们不仅贯穿于帕慕克的一生创作与所有作品中,而且是与本文每一章节的研究关联、互补的。它们是帕慕克写作的自传性、帕慕克的文艺理论、帕慕克与陀思妥耶夫斯基的比较研究、艺术风格或“呼愁”。在这些问题中,有的是新问题,有的是老问题,但皆未能得到清晰有效的诠释。弗洛伊德说,作品是作家装饰过的白日梦。每一部小说在某种意义上都是自传性写作,帕慕克也不例外,他将自己的阅历、思考与性格气质赋予笔下的主人公,将他的父母、祖父母与生活现实搬入小说中。但目前关注这一问题的人非常少。与此相似的是对帕慕克与陀思妥耶夫斯基的比较,本文试以《白色城堡》与《双重人格》的比较为这一领域的进一步展开开疆拓土。2009年,帕慕克在哈佛大学做诺顿演讲后,他的文艺理论成为一个新问题。介于学界尚未展开对它的研究,本文试初探之。最后不得不论述的是帕慕克的写作风格,虽然关于它的论述已经层层叠叠,但要问呼愁转化为帕慕克诗学形态的独特性在哪里,今天我们仍然无法给出一个明晰的答案。本文试从帕慕克的个人气质、诗学表征、文化渊源、历史与时代内涵等方面分析呼愁,回答“呼愁何以成为一种呼愁”这一批评难题。总之,本论文的目标是建立一个更为全面、客观、真实的帕慕克研究体系。它既是对以往帕慕克研究的一个批评性总结,同时,也将为今后的评论与研究提供一个系统、详实的基础。更多还原

【Abstract】 Orhan Pamuk is a Turkish writer and the winner of Nobel Prize for literature in2006. On the basis of summing up the previous studies, this dissertation is trying to reform Pamuk criticism radically, fill up its omissions, and then make a comprehensive study of Pamuk, which interpretation will be carried out in a academic debate way.Firstly, since the social-historical criticism of "Pamuk and Turkey" is absence from current studies. This dissertation will discuss it from four aspects, namely Mustafa Kemal and secularism reforms, Islamism, Turkish woman and minorities. These four aspects basically cover the main problems in the development history of modern Turkey. Its main contents include Pamuk’s contradictory attitude towards the history of Turkey in the last hundred years, his sympathetic recognition of Islam extremism, his close attention to the living conditions of Turkish woman, and his criticism on the policies of minorities in Turkey. Then, I will talk about the debate between cultural hybrid school and cultural clash school in today’s Pamuk studies and the misunderstanding of Pamuk’s "unnecessary" protagonists and "Kitsch" love narratives. For me, they are the core part of Pamuk’s cultural view. Last, by discussing Istanbul, the "native" city of Pamuk, the "new symbols of clash and interlacing" will be revealed in this dissertation, i.e., put aside politics and pursue love.Secondly, this dissertation is on a quest for the cultural origins of Pamuk’s writing. Pamuk’s works has two cultural origins, namely the Sufi mysticism and the postmodernism. The problem is that there are also two schools in the studies of such origins. And what’s more, there are too many debates and puzzles between them. This dissertation is trying to stitch these two schools, eliminate the excessive interpretations, and unfold the most outstanding Sufism feature and postmodernism feature—"the protagonists of sufi" and "uncertainty", because they are one thing for Pamuk. The former means that all of Pamuk’s protagonists are derived from one character prototype. His name is Sufi. From The White Castle to Snow, the protagonists’ manner and speech clearly embodies the external features of the Sufi believers, i.e., unworldliness, silence, spoony, self-recognition, pursuit and love of Allah, etc. The latter means that a kind of uncertainty always existed in Pamuk’s plots, characters and themes. Its root is the uncertain culture and identity of Turkey. It’s an uneasy task that stitching the sufism school and postmodernism school. This dissertation will begin such work with an analysis of the Galip in The Black Book and a comparison of Pamuk and Borges. I hope this section can show a new Pamuk who across the Eastern and Western culture on the level of artistic forms.Moreover, as a matter of fact, the study of Pamuk has already walked into a bottlenecking stage. Many problems were been talked about again and again without any new ideas both at home and abroad, such as cultural hybrid, Sufism, and huzun. But the writing of Pamuk was constantly changing during the past30years, which shows that each of his books has its own relative independent thought and artistic values. What are they? This is a problem that present criticism couldn’t answer. This dissertation is going to read and interpret Pamuk’s seven novels, e.g., The White Castle, The Black Book, The New Life, My Name Is Red, from different aspects as plots, characters, and structures, by using the theories of Freud, Foucault, Derrida, Baudrillard, Don Cupitt, Lefebvre, etc. In the view of these new theories and perspectives, some omission can be filled up as the interpretation of The New Life and the syllogism of mysterious way, some widely accepted opinions can be challenged as the rereading of "Olive" in My Name Is Red, some controversial issues may acquire a new answer as the discussion of the style of The Black Book, some unknown bright spots and values can be rediscovered as the space power criticism of Istanbul:Memories and the City and the analysis of the "object" in The Museum of Innocence. This is a kaleidoscope of Pamuk’s works, which may opens up new worlds for modern Pamuk criticism.Last, I’m going to discuss several more important issues about the writing of Pamuk, which mainly include the autobiographical writing, the literary and artistic theories, the comparative study of Pamuk and Dostoevsky, and the artistic style or "huzun". These problems are not only repeated throughout the lifetime of Pamuk and all his books, but connected to every part of this dissertation. Some of them are new, some are old. However, no one has been analyzed clearly and intensely up to now. Freud had said that writings are the decorated daydreams of the writers. In a sense, every novel is a kind of autobiographical writing. Pamuk is no exception. He has planted his own experiences, ideas, characters in the protagonists, and take his parents, grandparents and other real life into the novels. But very few scholars pay attention to it. The situation of the comparative studies of Pamuk and Dostoevsky is the same. In order to open up this new academic horizon, I’m trying to compare The White Castle and Double in this section. Furthermore, Pamuk has delivered his Norton Lecture at Harvard University in2009. Then, his literary and artistic theories became a new issue. Since no one has studied it till now, I’m going to explore it firstly. The last issue have to talk about is the writing style of Pamuk. Althrough this issue has been discussed many times by many critics, if we asked ourselves what’s the uniqueness of huzun in Pamuk’s texts, we couldn’t give it a clear answer. This dissertation will analyzed it from plenty of levels as Pamuk’s own temperament, the poetics features, the cultural origins, the connotation of history, etc., and then to answer the difficult question:how does huzun become a kind of huzun?In a word, the goal of my writing this dissertation is to construct a more comprehensive, objective, and real study system of Pamuk. It is not only a critical summary of the previous studies, but also a systematic and detailed basis for the future criticism.更多还原