亞洲之間思想遭遇的負面性轉移：瞿秋白與泰戈爾，1924

The Negative Transference in Inter-Asian Encounters: Qu Qiubai and Tagore, 1924.

這篇文章從陳光興在《去帝國》一書中關於參照對象向亞洲「轉移」的概念出發，閱讀在亞洲之間思想遭遇或是「糟」遇的歷史中的一個「負面性轉移」案例，也就是瞿秋白與泰戈爾在1924年的相遇。事後來說，這個短暫相遇中的負面性轉移卻有著長久的效果，彷彿瞿秋白當時激烈批評泰戈爾的小說《家庭與世界》卻成了他自身在歷史中悲劇命運的預言——「過去的人」在歷史必然中走向毀壞的不可免命運。而我想回頭閱讀竹內好思考「作為方法的亞洲」時亞洲如何作為中介的負向客體來思考這樣轉移的時刻，並由此回頭梳理閱讀亞際文化研究從「亞洲作為方法」（陳光興）到「亞洲之間的方法論」（寧蒂珠）的論述轉移，以及這兩個歷史瞬間的文化政治情感挫傷與化為行動的絕望。藉此，我希望賦予亞洲之間思想遭遇中的負面性時刻新的價值，因為「轉移」從來不只是樹立替代性的認識框架，而更是那開展了有情工作的時間。

This essay takes its cue from Kuan-hsing Chen’s Asia as Method to look at an instance of “negative transference” in the history of inter-Asian encounters, or mis-encounters: the Marxist critic Qu Qiu-bai’s encounter with Rabindranath Tagore in 1924. In hindsight, this negative transference seems to have a lasting effect. It is as if the protagonist of Tagore’s novel The Home and the World that Qu had trenchantly criticized then was prefiguring what Qu’s fate would later unfold in history—the unavoidable tragedy of “man of the past” destroyed inwardly and outwardly under the force of history. I then return to read Takeuchi Yoshimi’s thought of Asia as a negative mediating object to understand the moment of transference. Finally, the essay tracks the discursive “shift/transference” from “Asia as method” (Kuan-hsing Chen) to “Inter-Asia methodology” (Tejaswini Niranjana) and how the two historical moments of impasse that wounded cultural politics gave rise to some acts that embodied despair. By doing so, I wish to assign a new value to the negative moments in inter-Asian encounters, for transference/shift is not only an act of erecting alternative intellectual frameworks, but also the time that unfolds the passionate work.