哈林文藝復興時期的美非都會現代性：童妮‧摩里森「爵士樂」中都會個人疏離與社群連帶的辯證關係

Black Urban Modernity of the Harlem Renaissance: A Dialectical Negotiation between Urban Individuality and Community in Toni Morrison's Jazz

童妮．摩里森的第六本小說、同時也是愛的三部曲中的第二部《爵士樂》的創作源起自一張拍攝於一九二六年的照片。此照片呈現一位躺在裝飾過的棺材中供人瞻仰的黑人女孩。摩里森受到這張照片的啟發而嘗試重新書寫哈林文藝復興時期（一般也稱作爵士樂時代）的黑人移民歷史。然而，《爵士樂》一書中幾乎完全未提及哈林文藝復興時期黑人在藝術、文化、經濟和政治等方面的成就和發展，反而著眼於來自美國南方的黑人移民的歷史經驗和創傷。但《爵士樂》一書中所重新書寫的哈林文藝復興時期的歷史有何特出之處呢？這本小說又呈現出落腳於哈林區的黑人移民哪些鮮為人知的都會經驗呢？移民至北方都會的南方黑人移民與仍居於南方的黑人同胞在社會生活上有何相似和不同之處？而這些黑人移民的都會經驗又如何挑戰和顛覆某些白人中產階級男性理論家所觀察和論述的都會經驗呢？簡單來說，摩里森從一九二零年代哈林區移民黑人的生活中考掘出甚麼樣獨樹一格的都會現代性？藉由珍妮佛·羅賓森在其書《一般城市：在現代與發展之間》所揭櫫的「一般城市」概念，本文嘗試論證摩里森在《爵士樂》一書中所呈現的一九二零年代哈林區移民黑人的城市現代性如何與白人中產男性理論家，如喬治．西默與其後繼者羅伯．帕克和路易斯．沃夫所認知與論述的城市現代性有所出入。羅賓森的「一般城市」概念挑戰城市現代性總與某些西方大都會劃上等號的預設。將某些西方大都會的現象和發展視為所謂都會現代性的濫觴和依歸無法真正理解與體會不同社會脈絡下不同社群的都會經驗和現象，反而會發展出一套以西方為中心來評價城市發展的階層化概念。「一般城市」概念並無全盤否定西方白人男性理論家既有的觀察和論述，而是企圖藉由打破現代性與西方被視為理所當然的連結來探索不同城市中所發展出的各樣都會現代性。除了呈現與探索二十世紀初期在都會環境中所發展出的獨特個人疏離經驗外，摩里森在《爵士樂》一書中更進一步體現美國黑人作為白人主流社會中的種族弱勢如何在哈林都會區協商辯證出一種在個人疏離與社群連帶間游移的美非都會現代性。這種特殊的都會經驗在《爵士樂》一書中不僅表現在小說敘事者對於哈林都會區多樣且善變的全知觀察中，也展現在書中兩位男女主角協商南方的幼時種族創傷、都會疏離經驗與黑人社群連帶關係的過程中。

Inspired by a photograph taken by James Van Der Zee in1926 of a dead black girl lying in a decorated coffin, Morrison sets out to write a revisionist history of the Harlem Renaissance,or the Jazz Age, in the 1920s in her sixth novel and the second of her love trilogy, Jazz （1992）. And, without mentioning, letalone celebrating, the cultural, artistic, social, and even political events and accomplishments of the Harlem Renaissance, Morrison offers her own revisionist history of Harlem bydepicting the experiences and traumas of migrant blacks fromthe South. But what is so unique about Morrison’s literary historiography of the life of Harlem in Jazz? What are the unspoken aspects of the urban experiences of African Americans in Harlem? What are the similarities and differences between the social life of the blacks of the rural South and that of migrant blacks from the South in the urban North? How do the urban experiences of the migrant blacks contest and destabilize the popular formulations of urban experiencesobserved and developed by certain white, male theorists? Inother words, how does Morrison represent and conceptualize adistinctive form of urban modernity in the region of Harlem ofNew York in the context of the Northern Migration and HarlemRenaissance? In light of Jennifer Robinson’s “ordinary-city” approach to urban studies elaborated in her Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development （2006）, I argue that Morrison’s vision of urban modernity, derived from her observations of theblack migrants of Harlem in the 1920s, differs partially from the understandings of urban modernity of white, middle-class, maletheorists, such as Georg Simmel and his followers Robert Park and Louis Wirth. Robinson’s “ordinary city” approach seeks todislocate understandings of urban modernity from certain western theorizations on such metropolises as Berlin and Paris.Privileging certain western metropolises as the origins and of what constitutes the urban modern leads to a hierarchsourcesical, ethnocentric evaluation of cities without being able to appreciate and understand the urban phenomena and experiences of diverse social groups in different histories and geographies. The “ordinary city” approach does not dismiss theimportance of the observations of the established western, maletheorists, but aims to explore the particular form of urban modernity of every city by dislodging the privileged relationshipbetween the West and modernity. Specifically, instead of focusing only on the possibility and development of a uniqueform of individuality in the urban milieu in the early twentieth century, Morrison in Jazz seeks to demonstrate that, as a racial minority in a white supremacist society, African Americans in Harlem develop a black urban modernity, a dialectical negotiation between individuality and community, which is represented through the narrator’s diverse and contradictoryobservations of the urban experiences of the blacks and also through the struggles of the protagonists, Violet and Joe, who negotiate not only with the traumatic loss of their own mothersand families in their childhood in the South, but also with the unique kind of urban loneliness as well as their gradualdetachment from the black communities both in the South and the City during their urban life in Harlem.