【作者】 周海玲；

【导师】 王杰；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 文艺学（专业学位）， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 托尼·本尼特是继威廉斯、霍尔之后的英国文化研究重要领军人物,在1980年代,他帮助定义了大众文化研究领域并促进了“转向葛兰西”的学术范式转向。同时他是1990年代兴起的澳大利亚文化研究的核心人物,他引领的文化政策研究成为文化研究多元格局中重要的一翼。托尼的文化研究始终与英国文化研究的兴起、发展、转向等兴衰变迁紧密联系在一起,托尼·本尼特的个人专案研究,对于厘清文化研究在1980年代之后发展演变的内在机理,以及文化研究的一些基本问题、重要概念,推进国内文化研究的深度和广度具有重要意义。本文采用历史与逻辑本互演进的方法,以文化研究的发展变化的历史顺序,贯穿文化研究发展转向中面临的问题和争议,比较托尼与同期文化研究学者的理论应对,分析托尼从马克思主义文学理论向文化研究、大众文化研究再到文化治理性研究的几个关键点理论转轨的内在逻辑。论文分为绪论、上编、下编和结语四个部分。绪论部分介绍托尼的学术轨迹、研究领域、理论贡献、研究现状、研究价值,以大量的资料和事实论证托尼的研究意义。上编“文本、读者与阅读构形”论述托尼从1975年至1980年代末期的大众文化研究。托尼是把英国文化研究从“文化”拓展到“大众文化”的重要推动者,威廉斯、霍加特等人的早期文化研究并未与利维斯主义形成完全的决裂,这留给霍尔、托尼等后继文化马克思主义者的任务是如何为大众文化的学理性做出解释。托尼用马克思主义语言学的方法确立了大众文化的文本学研究价值,围绕着大众文化、文本、读者的关系,提出了“历史中的文本”、“阅读构形”、“转向葛兰西”、“受限的积极读者”等理论观点。第一章《尚未完成的决裂》分析托尼的学术研究起点,即文化研究面临着从文学理论中决裂进而向大众文化研究理论转轨的使命；第二章《大众文化作为文本研究的发生学分析》闸述托尼接受巴赫金的马克思主义语方学理论,解构利维斯主义、西方马克思主义、英美新批评派等具有形式主义美学倾向文论的文本形而上学逻辑。第三章《历史中的文本》研究托尼建构的马克思主义大众文化文本理论。托尼提出“阅读构形”(reading formation)概念说明文本与文本、文本与读者(大众)、文本与社会结构之间存在着动态性相互生产的构形关系,文本是处于构形中的“历史中的文本”；第四章《转向葛兰西与大众文化文本研究的限度》阐述阅读构形中的文本是葛兰西的文化领导权发生卷入、争夺、赢取、丧失、协商、谈判的斗争场域,并分析在转向葛兰西之后大众文化文本研究的泛化和去政治化倾向,这引发了托尼对大众文化文本研究限度的思考；第五章《阅读构形中的读者与受限的积极读者》研究了托尼的阅读构形中的读者理论,托尼认为读者是在话语实践的物质性机制和机构的组织和调节下进行的阅读,因而是受限的积极读者。托尼在阅读构形研究中发现了物质性要素(文化机构和话语制度)对文本和读者的限定性生产作用,预示着托尼的理论框架从葛兰西向福柯的延伸趋向。下编“文化治理性：塑造审美主体的文化技术”论述托尼从1990年代初到当下的文化治理性研究。福柯关于自由主义政府、审美与主体之间关系的政府治理性理论(Governmentality)特别符合阐释1980年代以来的社会变迁。托尼将福柯的这个政治哲学概念拓展为文化美学概念,文化治理性是自由主义政府利用文化机构和文化政策运作审美知识去塑造公民主体的一种文化技术。托尼从治理性实践(practices of governance)的角度来研究文化以及美学的实践作用,将治理性延伸到文化体制(博物馆和其他收藏机构)、文化政策、知识分子研究中。第一章《转向福柯：文化治理的发生学研究》探讨托尼从葛兰西转向福柯理论框架的现实需要和理论必然。第二章《从政府治理性到文化治理性》,从福柯的政府治理性出发,说明托尼文化治理性对福柯治理性理论的发展,探讨托尼文化治理性的内涵。第三章《文化治理性与审美历史化》将托尼的文化治理性研究放在英国文化批评传统和英国马克思主义的审美意识形态理论两条链条上比较和审视,说明托尼的文化治理性研究的理论贡献。第四章《博物馆与文化治理》探讨了文化治理性如何实现的问题,公共博物馆作为知识生产和主体塑造的表征空间,实践着自由主义政府的治理功能。结语部分对托尼的文化研究进行评价和反思。评价托尼的文化研究在英国马克思主义谱系中的位置和贡献,反思托尼文化治理性研究的得失。附录部分《群体记忆、审美仪式与治理性——以侵华日军南京大屠杀遇难同胞纪念馆和渡江战役纪念馆新馆为例》,以现代战争纪念馆的审美观感来说明托尼的文化治理性理论的现实意义。更多还原

【Abstract】 As an important leader after Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall on Cultural Studies, in1980’s, Tony Bennett helps to definite Popular Culture and promotes the academic paradigm of Turn to Gramsci. In1990’s, Tony Bennett is a key figure in emerging Australian Cultural Studies, whose Cultural Policy studies which he initiates has become an considerable part in diversified Cultural Studies. The cultural studies of Tony Bennett have always integrated with rise, development, change and decadency in British Cultural Studies. For the above reasons, this paper studies on Tony Bennett’s cultural studies and through which clarifies the evolutionary mechanism of Cultural Studies after1980’s, and discriminates some primary problems and key conceptions, so as to develop the range and quality of Cultural Studies in China.According to the historical order of Cultural Studies, combining historical and logical methods, relating with the problems and debates in the development of Cultural Studies, and comparing the theory response with other scholars in the same period, this paper analyzes the logic of important theory transitions:the reason Tony Bennett’s cultural studies turn from Marxism theory of literature to Cultural Studies, and then to Popular Cultural studies, and in the end turn to cultural govemmentality.This dissertation is divided into four major parts including introduction, part I, part Ⅱ and conclusion. The introduction traces the academic career of Tony Bennett, then outlines the study field and achievement, and elaborates present research and research value. On the base of a large amount of information, the introduction demonstrates the research significance of Tony.Part Ⅰ consists of five chapters. With the title of ’Text, Reader and Reading Formation’, this part discusses Tony Bennett’s popular cultural study from1975to late1980s. Tony has improved Cultural Studies form ’culture’ to ’popular culture’ Because early cultural Marxist such as Raymond Williams and Richard Haggard hadn’t been absolutely severed to leavisism, the task left to subsequent cultural Marxist such as Stuart Hall and Tony Bennett is to explain the reason for the study of popular culture. By the means of linguistics, Tony establishes the value of popular culture as text. Around the relationship of popular culture, text and reader, Tony present some important opinions like ’text in history’,’reading formation’,’turn to Gramsci’, and ’determined active reader’.Chapter one, An Incomplete Severability, analyzes what is the starting point of Tony’s research, the transition of Cultural Studies from theory of literature to cultural studies, then to popular cultural studies. Chapter two, An Analysis of Occurrence with Popular Cultural Studies expounds how Tony accepts Bakhtin’s linguistic theory of Marxism and deconstructs metaphysic text, which is the underlying logic of Formalism Aesthetics, for instance, Leavisism, Western Marxism literary theory and Anglo-American New Criticism. Chapter three, Text in History, sets forth the Marxism popular cultural text Tony constructs. Advancing’reading formation’, Tony illuminates the dynamic and inter-productive relationship of formation between one text and another, text and reader/the popular, text and social structure. As text is always in reading formation, text is in history. Chapter four, Turn to Gramsci and the limit of Popular Cultural Text, explains that text in reading formation is the struggling field where cultural hegemony takes place, where power is to involve, fight, win, lose, negotiate, consult. As the studies of popular culture spread unchecked and have the tendency of depoliticization, Tony probes the limit of popular culture. Chapter five, Reader in Reading Formation and Determined Active Reader, research the reader theory in reading formation. Tony states that reading is arranged and regulated by material mechanism and institution in discourse practice, so there is determined active reader. Tony discovers that restrictive factor-cultural institution and discourse system-determinedly influences the text and reader. All these indicate that the theoretical framework of an extension from Gramsci to Foucault.Part Ⅱ consists of four chapters, titled by Cultural Governmentality-Cultural Technique to Shape of the Aesthetic Subject. This part discusses cultural governmentality of Tony’s study from the early1990s to the present. Governmentality, which Foucault advanced on relationship of liberal government, aesthetics and subject, specially designed to meet the explanation of the social changes since the1980s. Tony expands the political philosophy of Foucault’s to the concept of cultural aesthetics. As a cultural technique, in order to shape the public, cultural governmentality explains that liberal government use cultural institutions and cultural policies to operate aesthetic knowledge. From the angle of practices of governance, Tony studies the role of cultural and aesthetic practice, and extends governmentality to the research for the cultural system (museums and other collections), cultural policy and intellectual.Chapter one, Turn to Foucault-a Genetic Research for Cultural Governmentality, inquires into the reality and theory reason why Tony shifted from Gramsci’s theoretical framework to Foucault’s. Chapter two, from Governmentality to Cultural Governmentality-the Development Which Tony Do for Foucault’s Research for Governmentality, elucidates the connotations of Tony’s theory of cultural governmentality. Chapter three, Aesthetic Historicization and Cultural Governmentality, compares Tony’s research of cultural governmentality with the British tradition of cultural criticism and the British Marxist Aesthetic theory of ideology, and shows Tony’s contribution to cultural governmentality. Chapter four, Museum and Cultural Governmentality, explores the manipulation of culture governmentality. Public museums are space to function the governance of liberal government to product knowledge and shape subject.Conclusion reflects and criticizes the cultural studies of Tony, evaluates Tony’s position and contribution in the British Marxist pedigree, and reflects on Tony’s research for cultural governmentality.Appendix is an illustration of cultural governmentality. This essay,with the title of Collective Memory, Aesthetic Ritual and Governmentality:An Analysis of The Memorial Hall of The Victims in Nanjing Massacre by Japanese Invaders And The Crossing the Yangzi River Campaign New Memorial Hall, illustrates practical significance of cultural governmentality theory with the aesthetic experience in modern war memorial hall.更多还原