再論後遺民

A Rereading of the Postloyal

王德威先生的〈後遺民寫作〉重點勾勒了一個自南明以來的移民／遺民與其後代的寫作系譜，並討論了臺灣文學中的國族想像與身份認同，對相關研究多有刺激。論者對後遺民的理解或許不盡相同，但是不論誤讀與否，贊同與反對的意見都代表了後遺民概念的傳播與接受。本文反覆探究的是兩個〈後遺民寫作〉觸及但沒有深入開發的理論議題。一、前置詞「後」所代表的閱讀與批評策略；二、「遺」的同音衍異所牽涉到的身份政治。本文首先簡短梳理傳統的現代意義並討論「遺民」這個概念在歷史中的演化。掌握遺民傳統變化之後將可以更為清楚地理解後遺民的理論能量以及閱讀策略所具備的學術前導性。

“Postloyalist Writing” by David Der-wei Wang casts a new light on the studies of Taiwan literature with regards to national imagination and identity politics. Taking cue from Wang’s critical discussion, this essay further develops two theoretical issues that concern: first, a nuanced way of critical analysis that the prefix “post” highlights; and second, the différance of loyalist and related identity politics. The essay first provides a brief discussion of the meanings of “tradition” in modern and premodern times while tracing the semantic variation of the term “loyalist” throughout Chinese history. In the end, the essay elucidates the theoretical vision and capacity of the postloyal discourse.issues that concern: first, a nuanced way of critical analysis that the prefix “post” highlights; and second, the différance of loyalist and related identity politics. The essay first provides a brief discussion of the meanings of “tradition” in modern and premodern times while tracing the semantic variation of the term “loyalist” throughout Chinese history. In the end, the essay elucidates the theoretical vision and capacity of the postloyal discourse.rarely discuss whether stylized application or assemblage of western theories has formed a family or genealogy of theories, and whether the latter has become visible in the international academic scene. This article argues that, in addition to Chen’s concern, we should also pay attention to how theories are translated, appropriated, and reproduced, how they are grafted onto existing discourses (also a kind of theories) in Taiwan, and whether there is wrong use, abuse, or inadequacy of application in the process of knowledge production. Around the time of the lifting of the martial law, theories were often accepted because of their progressiveness in challenging the institutions, offering possibilities of reinterpreting the past, and opening up a new future. Nevertheless, we still need to look into the appropriateness of applying theories, given the differences in historical context and socio-political and economic conditions. Using Taiwan’s postcolonial and queer discourses in the1990s as a case study, this article examines Taiwan theory and knowledge production. By probing into the internal debates and development of each discourse as well as the tension between these discourses, I will dwell on the appropriateness of applying postcolonial and queer theories within Taiwan’s context on the one hand, and discuss Taiwan families of postcolonial and queer theories that have emerged on the other.