研究論文國家博物館與文化公民資格：杜正勝故宮改革中的多元文化與原住民

National Museum, Cultural Citizenship and Indigenous Peoples: National Palace Museum Reforms under Tu Cheng-sheng

本文研究範圍為杜正勝任故宮博物院院長時期（2000/05-2004/05）的故宮改革。探討杜正勝剛上任時，故宮的轉型定位為什麼是「多元文化國家博物館」？杜正勝如何以多元文化修正中華國族主義，以及如何論述與實踐「南島民族」是為國家公民成員？然而，杜正勝主張的「多元文化國家博物館」至2002年轉向「世界主義博物館」（含亞洲博物館）定位，此轉變又如何牽動中華國族主義的修正方式，以及原住民的文化公民資格？本文提出，原住民需要被肯認的不只是特殊的身分，還有普遍的文化公民。從文化再現與文化生產分析原住民同等參與國家文化再現的條件與困難，前者著重我群與他者的「共存」，後者著重博物館分類與行政階序等生產制度。結論指出，此時期的故宮改革，處於去國族、去中國與去政治的糾葛中，致未能聚焦於原住民如何同等參與國家文化再現；在「臺灣文化」與「中華文化」的二元對立下，「南島民族」受到重視的主要原因為「史前」祖源及「海洋」地理的建構；原／漢的共存關係—原住民的現代性、殖民相遇等共存經驗，未能受到反省。

The focus of this study is on the reforms of the National Palace Museum during the time that Tu Cheng-sheng served as its director (2000-2004), including a deep exploration of why the museum transitioned to a multicultural national museum. How did Tu use multicultural identity to amend Chinese nationalism, as well as initiate discussions on and implement the objective of “Austronesian peoples” as members of the national citizenry? In 2003, Tu's views on multicultural national museum changed direction toward that of Universal Museum (including Asian museum). How did this transformation influence the Chinese nationalism revision methods and the citizenship status of the indigenous peoples? Indigenous peoples need to be recognized, not just for their unique identity, but also as general cultural citizens. The author analyses both cultural representation and cultural production, with particular focus on the making of “ourselves /coexistence”, museum classification and hierarchy. These were used to analyze the conditions for and the difficulties of indigenous peoples participating as peers in national cultural representation. In conclusion, the reforms of the National Palace Museum at the time were entangled in denationalization, deChinalization and depoliticization. This led to failure to concentrate indigenous peoples' participation as peers. Under the opposing duality of “Taiwanese culture” and “Chinese culture”, the main reasons why importance was placed on the Austronesian peoples were their “prehistoric” ancestry and “marine” geographical construct. Coexisting experiences, indigenous /Han Chinese relationship--the modernity of indigenous peoples, and the colonial encounter failed to be subjected to introspection.