解開愛瑞兒在「暴風雨」中的「隱身」之謎：以後殖民觀點論述愛瑞兒消失的身份

Perceiving Ariel's 'Invisibility' in The Tempest: A Post-Colonial Dialectic of Ariel's Vanishing Identity

In Shakespeare's The Tempest, Ariel is a relatively insignificant, 'invisible' character. This paper aims at perceiving its invisibility from postcolonial perspectives. First, Ariel blurs Said's dominator/dominated distinction. As the conflict between them intensifies, Ariel naturally becomes invisible in the hegemony, which is represented by Prospero. Furthermore, an allegoric reading will identify Ariel as 'the dominated intelligentsia,' which Spivak believes tends to forge a cooperatively subsidiary relationship with the dominator. This relationship indicates not only their upward movement in the chain of command but also their obedience and silencedness. All these synonymously contribute to Ariel's invisibility. Besides, Bhabha posits mimicry of the colonialized. In the case of Ariel, it refers to its vanishing identity under the camouflage of Prospero. Bhabha also regards mimicry as a strategy of compromise. Thus, Ariel's subjection to Prospero results in its invisibility. And behind its subjection/invisibility is in fact a reciprocity, in exchange for its eventual liberty.莎劇「暴風雨」（The Tempest）中的精靈「愛瑞兒」（Ariel），是個隱身，較不受重視的角色。本文的重點，便是以各種後殖民觀點令其現身。首先，愛瑞兒模糊了薩伊德（Said）的統治/被統治之二元界線。當兩者對立加劇時，愛瑞兒自然隱身於以普洛士普羅（Prospero）為代表的霸權中。再者，以寓言式讀法，愛瑞兒當屬「被統治者中的知識份子」，史碧娃克（Spivak）認為這類人容易和統治者形成合作式的從屬關係，這樣的關係不但意味著在「統治鍊」（chain of command）上位置的向上移動，也代表著一種服從與消音。這些促成因素都和愛瑞兒的隱身劃上等號。另外，芭芭（Bhabha）提出被殖民者容易產生「模仿」（mimicry）現象。以愛瑞兒而言，便是指披著普洛士普羅的外衣而終於消失身份。芭芭也認為模仿現象可視為一種妥協性策略。由此可知：愛瑞兒對普洛士普羅臣服，終致隱身。而其臣服／隱身的背後，其實是一種互惠，以換取其最終的自由。