哪吒不怪胎：《封神演義》與中國父系親屬制度

Queer Nezha or Not: The Investiture of the Gods and the Chinese Patrilineal Kinship System

本文以哪吒可否被視為中國「伊底帕斯神」的提問為開場，嘗試排比伊底帕斯神話與哪吒神話的差別：前者以「弒父娶母」為「亂倫禁忌」，後者則是以「忤逆不孝」為「亂倫禁忌」。接著便以女性主義怪胎理論的角度，重新閱讀明代《封神演義》，將書中的哪吒視為「親屬麻煩」，看其如何以最簡單的故事情節與人物角色，演義出中國父系親屬制度本身最複雜、最弔詭的怪胎性。哪吒不是偏離、逸出、逃竄在父系親屬制度之「外」的怪胎小兒，而是凸顯了父系親屬制度「正統性」本身的「怪胎性」，一種能在血緣／非血緣、魂魄／無魂魄、祖姓／無祖姓、弒父／侍父、弒君／侍君的各種弔詭之中，建立並延續父系親屬制度作為「象徵」體系的強大功能。

Can the mythic figure Nezha be regarded as the Chinese“Oedipal God”? This paper takes the above question as a point of departure to map out the difference between Oedipus and Nezha: the former helps to define“the incest taboo”as“killing the father and marrying the mother,”while the latter foregrounds“the disorder taboo”as“disobedience to the parents and the elders.”It then proceeds to re-read The Investiture of the Gods, a Chinese classic novel of the Ming Dynasty, from the perspective of feminist queer theory. By taking Nezha as the“kinship trouble”in the novel, it attempts to demonstrate how we can explore the most complicated and paradoxical“queerness”of the Chinese patrilineal kinship system through the simplest plot and characterization of the Nezha myth. It argues that Nezha is not a queer child escaping from the patrilineal kinship system; instead, his story helps to expose the“queerness”as exactly the“normativity”of the system itself. It thus reads the Chinese patrilineal kinship system as a“symbolic”one with powerful functions that can establish and continue itself through various paradoxes of blood/non-blood relation, soul/non-soul, ancestral surname/non-ancestral surname, patricide/filial piety, regicide/feudal loyalty, and so on.