传媒、现代性与工人阶级主体性

【作者】 吴畅畅；

【导师】 吕新雨；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 广播电视， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 本文通过对以《工人日报》、《中国工人》为代表的工人媒介进行跨度为近40年的话语分析,力求对大众传媒再现的工人阶级主体性作一传播政治经济学分析,以此探查新中国建国以来“官方”媒介公共性发展的可能,以及“复线”写作计划在中国情境运用的适用性问题,由此纠正西方学术界对新中国工人阶级研究所含藏的冷战思维与预设的奇观视角。第一章《报刊与主体性的共识:革命的火炬》描述了十七年时期的工人报刊如何在国家、工会以及工人阶级之间平衡力量,并持续将国家意识形态对工人一体双面任务的召唤持续注入工人主体性的锻造之中。在《传媒与政治表达:主体性四重奏》里,中国的大众传媒进入了一个特殊的新闻产制时期,毛泽东时代的大众传媒一直维持着一种奇妙的延续性,这种延续性代表了共产党政权的政策在现代性的历史叙事中的空前一致,并由此证实了证实了大众传媒新闻实践的悖论与中国现代性内在的历史矛盾的贴合,并构建了在革命造反之外的,超越后毛时代企图赋予“文革”以“闭合的记忆政治”的代群文化。1980年代以来,新的现代性发展计划与毛泽东时期产生明显的断裂,而个人追求财富的渴望得到来自官方的肯定与鼓励后,毛泽东时期的“政治性光荣”逐渐淡去而被新的社会价值观念所取代,以《工人日报》为代表的官方媒介(而不是民间媒介)从延续性与社会性别两个方面对新闻产制做了巧妙的修正,以维系一个同质性的媒介工人图景。这是第三章《大众传媒的分野——被延迟的渴望》中主要探讨的内容。虽然90年代以后并不是本文分析的重点,却想由此带出前三章分析媒介逻辑的一条线索,即媒介产制、现代性与工人主体性的锻造三者之间的链接,由此能清晰的看到,工人主体性在官方媒介的新闻及其他产品的起落沉浮,而媒介的公共性也在工人主体性的得失之间悄然转换了具体内容。而民间媒介的介入,反而成就了毛泽东时代的政治主体——工人阶级在新的现代性项目中的发声权利,以及参与、影响政治生活的可能性。本文志不在铸就一本新中国以来工人阶级的发展史,却想透过大众传媒,探查出曾经一度辉煌的工人阶级主体性的形成及其必然性是如何再现于工人报刊为首的官方传媒之中,不论是“革命的火炬”还是“红色运动”,工人阶级的主体性透过媒介“公共性”平台,帮助完成了内在于新兴的民族国家的(重)工业化与扩张的任务,这段历史成为了挥之不去也无法回避的意识形态的宝贵遗产,后毛时代的国家政权与“下属”工人阶级都从中吸取资源作为各自历史叙事与代群记忆的思想贮存库。当上世纪90年代以来的官方传媒中不再一如既往凸显他们的身影时,民间媒介的“另类”叙事作为“复线历史”的珍贵材料却成就了工人们矢志不渝的历史记忆,以及对国家政权的依旧拥护!更多还原

【Abstract】 This article,by means of a discursive analysis of the workers’ media such as Workers Daily and The Chinese Workers within 40 years,aims at a deep insight into the representation of subjectivity of the Chinese working class in the mass media since 1949 in a perspective of the political economy of communication,therefore the general estimation of the Chinese media publicity since the foundation of the PRC China and the discussion on the application of the bifurcated ways of writing in China will not be in the air.In Chapter 1,The Press and The Consensus on Subjectivity,I have described how the workers’ press balanced the relationship among the state,the trade union and workers and helped to forge a homogeneous subject of the Chinese working class with one-body-two-side tasks from the state ideology.Chapter Media and the Political Expression wants to inform us of a gorgeous practice of consistency in the mass media of the Maoist Era,which represented the consistency of the CCP policies in the different projects of modernity,hence the proof of the concord of the paradoxical practices of reproduction with the internal historical paradox in the Chinese modernity,and the construction of the unique memory of cohort of the cultural revolution.Since the 1980s when the personal desire of pursuit of fortune has got the official permission,which meanwhile shows the varnishing of the political glory in Maoist era,Workers’ Daily then began to modify the cleavage within the Chinese working class,using tactics of gender and consistency rhetorically and discursively,attempting to maintain a media scenery of the united Chinese working class without any contradictions and fighting! that’s what has been discussed in Chapter 3 The Divergence of the State-Owned Media and the Documentary Media.The 1990s is not my focus of attention,but a clue has subsequently been found out that the connection of media reproduction,modernity and the forging of the Chinese working class from where we can see the ups and downs of subjectivity of the working class in the news or other products in the state-owned media,and even the publicity of those media.Undoubtedly,the once-glorious-in-the-Maoist-era working class has made their voices through the documentary media.This Article is not to write a history of the Chinese working class since 1949,but to probe how the subject and subjectivity of the working class that have become a valuable legacy of history and ideology not only to the state but to the cohort of workers in the Maoist era,who have no longer appeared in the mass media but have preserved their memory of cohort and expressed their loyalty to the state and the party through the documentary media,were and are represented in the mass media in the three successive historical period.更多还原