仿像

【作者】 许宏香；

【导师】 王纪人；

【作者基本信息】 上海师范大学 ， 文艺学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 每个问题的提出都包含潜在的问题域,本文的问题指向仿像作为一个文化批评和文化研究领域的关键概念,其发生、确立和发展的过程如何?本文的潜在问题域包括:什么是仿像?仿像研究的价值何在?仿像如何体现自反性(reflexive)?即仿像的自我历史考古、自我概念辩难、自我研究方法推进等诸方面的自我反思。本文结合问题和潜在问题域,将自反性的追问具化为仿像本身的“理论化”研究,目的在于展现并开掘仿像理论话语的生长空间。全文由学术史述评、引言、正文、余论四大部分组成。学术史述评分析了国内外仿像研究的现状和主要观点以及存在的问题,指出国内的仿像研究以波德里亚为主,仿像的理解受限于波德里亚的现有成果。国外突破了波德里亚的限制,但将相关的仿像论述纵观并举、互文阐发,在文化批评的维度上将仿像理论化尚待深入。引言介绍仿像的词源和翻译之后,结合波德里亚仿像论的言说语境,从如何理解“理论”这一范畴的前视野出发,确立仿像作为一种理论建构的特点,奠定仿像研究的基本思路和主要方法。正文分五章,一至四章主要阐明仿像理论的源起、演变和确立过程,这一过程论述的线索包括1、主导论述为仿像和现实的关系;2、此关系之外仿像有无本源或原作;3、此关系之内人或主体位置的厘定;4、仿像自身的生成。除了线索的贯穿,为勾画四位仿像论者的内在关联,论文分别在第三章和第四章结尾做了相对全面的比照和分析,甄别四位人物的不同路径,标出仿像理论的关键转换点,发现各观念之间的共见或分歧,展现仿像潜在的丰富性。第一章主要论述柏拉图的仿像论,其实质为共相与殊相或者“一”与“多”的问题。论文首先分析什么是第三秩序的仿像,在此基础上通过仿像与理念、模仿之间关系的论述表明第三秩序的松动性,进而重新解读洞穴隐喻,展现仿像的制作、仿像的性质、仿像与人的关系、仿像的认识功能等,划定了仿像探讨的基本论域。第二章主要论述尼采的仿像论,其实质是通过权力意志和永恒轮回将形而上学仿像化的反柏拉图主义问题,他沿袭柏拉图“真实存在——去真实存在”的思维模式,在永恒轮回这一前提的设立下,推动认识、宗教、道德和“真正的世界”的仿像化进程,最终颠倒柏拉图的仿像秩序,现实不是理念的摹本,现实就是真实的,这构成仿像理论发展的一个转折,自尼采之后,仿像的唯一参照物就变为现实,现实之上的理念被舍弃。第三章主要论述仿像理论的确立,波德里亚将此表述为表征危机的升级和颠覆问题,这位“强大的仿像主义者”在方法上试图摆脱索绪尔的符号学和马克思的生产理论,通过仿像历史秩序的构建和仿像逻辑的确立,以及这种逻辑在美国社会的实际操演,将柏拉图的第三秩序仿像提升到本体化的高度,成为仿像理论最著名的代表人物。他重写了仿像与现实的关系,梳理出当代生活世界主体与客体的构成和交往形态,“地图先行”的仿像逻辑使仿像与现实不再发生关联,而只根据仿真和模型进行自我复制和自我生产。比逼真复制现实更突出的是仿像能改写真实并创造“超真实”,现实与仿像内爆使现实消失在符号的封闭循环之中。论文一方面肯定了波德里亚仿像理论的价值,同时也通过理论形态的分析建议对其结论保持清醒。第四章主要论述德勒兹的仿像观,他对仿像的审视在根本上与他消除本源和同一性的差异哲学有关。他在尼采肯定感性和现实的基础上,通过块茎式思维重新检视柏拉图的仿像观,认为仿像是差异的征兆,不是原本的摹本或关于原本的模仿,而是事物与事物之间被内在的差异所阻碍或者断裂中贯穿着的记号,它表达了经验条件中的非同一性,仿像因此获得了积极意义。第五章主要论述仿像理论的发展,杰姆逊认为仿像蕴藏着“后现代文化最核心的道德、心理和政治批判力量”,与后现代主义文化批评的阐释问题密切相关,它的吸引力在于实现一种意识形态功能的同时,又是一种具有乌托邦肯定阐释学的载体。他将波德里亚的仿像范围从整个社会缩小到文化层面,在方法论和价值判断、仿像文本分析以及仿像感知基础的锚定上大大推进了仿像研究。余论部分从两方面做了展望,一方面将仿像置于视觉文化的语境,从视觉性、跨学科和视觉教养三个角度寻求拓展仿像理论的可行方法;另一方面在技术的祛魅、仿像的另一种逻辑和人的仿像三个角度对仿像逻辑的重建和仿像研究的未来可能性上进行了“理论想象”。本文不仅剖析波德里亚的仿像,更试图在一个“理论”的水准线上建构仿像,——一个历史/当代、哲学/文化、技术/视觉、形而上学/日常生活等多向度的流动存在——展现它的历史形态、建立内在的关联模式、发现言说的方法理路、寻求阐释的未来可能。论文的新意大致有:第一,仿像理论的整体建构格局富有新意,突破一般仿像研究的单一模式,首次以外在的宏观视野和内在的逻辑关联构造仿像的言说空间,具备明确的问题意识,关注理论的现实意义,深化了仿像研究的历史观照和文化批评价值,有利于学界在新的起点上把握仿像的丰富性和复杂性。第二,针对国内波德里亚的仿像研究现状,在其理论源起、历史秩序和内在逻辑方面进行了更明晰的梳理和概括,突出了修辞对于理解波德里亚仿像运作的重要意义,在研究方法和研究深度上有所拓展。第三,与一般的柏拉图仿像研究不同,本文从文本细读和概念的相关性出发,通过分析仿像与理念、模仿的微妙关系,以及仿像的生成、视觉隐喻和仿像场域的越界等三方面展开的洞穴隐喻解读,展示了柏拉图仿像的多重含义,这种论述方式和理论立场比较新颖。更多还原

【Abstract】 Every question involves an implicit field of questions. The question of this dissertation points to simulacra as a key concept in the field of cultural criticism and cultural studies, and its emergence, establishment and development. The field of questions of my dissertation includes: what is a simulacrum? What is the value of studying it? How it embodies reflexivity, that is, the self-reflection on its own genealogy, concept, and methodology. Combining both question and its implicit field of questions, I attempt to crystallize reflexive interrogations into a research on the "theorization" of simulacrum in order to demonstrate and open up a discursive space for a theory of simulacra.This dissertation is composed of four parts: literature review, introduction, main text and conclusion.In Literature Review I analyze domestic and overseas contemporary research on simulacra, along with their main arguments and existing problems. I suggest that domestic research has mainly focused on Baudrillard, and the understanding of the concept has therefore been restricted to his works. Overseas research in this area, however, has transcended the limits of Baudrillard, though further intertextual explication and expansion of the concept has yet to be developed in cultural studies. In Introduction I first present an outline of the etymology and translation of the word "simulacrum". I then identify the features of simulacra as a theory in relation to the context of Baudrillard’s concept by discussing how to understand the category of "theory", thus establishing the basic ideas and methods of my research on simulacra.Main Text consists of five chapters. In the first four chapters I elucidate the origin, evolvement and establishment of the theory of simulacra. Issues primarily discussed in those chapters are: 1) the relationship between simulacra and reality; 2)the existence of any original outside this relationship; 3)the definition of humans or subject positions within this relationship; 4)the generation of simulacra. In addition to this line of inquiry, I also compare and contrast the approaches of four theorists of simulacra at the end of Chapter 3 and Chapter 4, revealing their similarities and differences, in order to illustrate the internal links among them, to mark out crucial transitions in the development of the theory of simulacra, and to demonstrate the potential richness of the theory.Chapter 1 addresses Plato’s theory of simulacra and summarizes it as problem of generality vs. particularity, or "one" vs. "many". I first analyze what is simulacra of the third order, and then indicates the laxity of the third order through a discussion of the relationship among simulacra, idea and mimesis. Based on a reinterpretation of the metaphor of cave, I demonstrate the generation and nature of simulacra, their relationship with humans and cognitive functions, thus defining a basic theoretical field for the discussion of simulacra.Chapter 2 is concerned with Nietzsche’s theory of simulacra. I argue that Nietzsche seeks to subvert Plato’s theory through simulacrumizing metaphysics with the concepts of will to power and eternal reoccurrence. Following Plato’s model of "real being-anti real being", Nietzsche promotes a simulacrumizing process of epistemology, religion, ethics and the "real world" predicated on eternal reoccurrence, with the aim to eventually subvert Plato’s order of simulacra. Nietzsche’s view that reality is not a copy of idea but the real itself constitutes a key transition in the development of the theory of simulacra. After Nietzsche reality has become the only reference of simulacra, and the notion of an idea above reality has been abandoned.Chapter 3 explores the establishment of the theory of simulacra, which is formulated by Baudrillard as an escalation and subversion of the crisis of representation. As a strong proponent of simulacra, Baudrillard attempts to escape Saussure’s semiotics and Marx’s production theory in methodology. Through his construction of a historical order for simulacra, the establishment of its logic and the play out of this logic in American society, Baudrillard raises Plato’s third order of simulacra to the height of ontology and becomes the most well-known theorist of simulacra. He both rewrites the relationship between simulacra and reality, and delineates the constitution of subject and object and their interactions in contemporary world. The logic of "Map First" results in a disconnection between simulacra and reality; from now on simulacra will self-copy and self-generate based on only model. More importantly, simulacra not only can vividly copy reality but rewrite reality and produce "hyperreality". The implosion of reality and simulacra leads to a disappearance of reality in a closed semiotic circle. While confirming the merits of Baudrillard’s theory, I also suggest that we should keep a critical distance with it.Chapter 4 discusses Deleuze’s view of simulacra and its fundamental link to his philosophy of difference which erases the original and identity. Drawing on Nietzsche’s affirmation of sense and reality, Deleuze re-examines Plato’s notion of simulacrum through rhizome thinking and argues that simulacrum is a symptom of the difference. Rather than a copy or imitation of the original, simulacrum marks the obstacle or rupture produced by the inherent differences among things and signifies a non-identity in empirical conditions. As such, Deleuze helps to invest a positive meaning in the concept of simulacra.Chapter 5 examines the development of the theory of simulacra. Jameson argues that the concept of simulacra contains the most central critical power of postmodern cultures in terms of ethics, psychology and politics, and is closely related to the interpretation of postmodern cultural criticism. The appeal of the concept lies in the fact that while realizing a function of ideology, it is also a vehicle of Utopian affirmative hermeneutics. By reducing Baudrillard’s concept of simulacra to the dimension of culture and redefining its methodology, value judgment, textual analysis and sensory basis, Jameson has greatly furthered the studies of simulacra.The Conclusion offers a future outlook on the theory of simulacra from two perspectives. One locates simulacra in the context of visual cultural and explores viable expansions of the theory in terms of visuality, cross-disciplinarity and visual literacy. The other offers a "theoretical imagination" on the reconstruction of the logic of simulacra and its research future from the angels of the disenchantment of technology, the alternative logic of simulacra and the simulacra of humans.My project not only analyzes Baudrillard’s theory of simulacra, but attempts to construct simulacra, a multi-dimensional fluid existence in terms of past/present, philosophy/culture, technology/visual, and metaphysics/daily life, on a "theoretical" baseline, establishing its internal relational model and exploring new approaches and possibilities. Innovations in my project are as follows:First, I break away from traditional research models and provide a new overall structure for the theory of simulacra. For the first time, the discursive space of simulacra is constructed by an external macro perspective and internal logical connections. My project is characterized by a clear awareness of problems and a concern for the contemporary relevance of the theory, both of which helps to deepen the historical understanding of simulacra and its value in cultural criticism, and paves way for further grasp of the richness and complexity of the concept.Second, in view of the current state of domestic research on Baudrillard, my project provides a clearer outline of the origins, historical order and internal logic of his theory of simulacra. I particularly emphasize the significance of rhetoric in understanding the operation of simulacra in his theory, which obviously adds more depth to my research methodology.Third, contrary to the general approach to Plato’s concept simulacra, I proceed from close reading and relationships between concepts, and demonstrate the multiple meanings of Plato’s concept through an analysis of the nuanced relationship among simulacra, idea, and mimesis, as well as a reading of the cave metaphor based on the generation of simulacra, the visual metaphor and the transgression of the site of simulacra. This line of argument and theoretical position are both quite innovative.更多还原