傳統與現代──原住民作家夏曼．藍波安的地誌書寫與對話

Tradition and modernity: Siaman Rampogan’ topographic writing and dialogize

相對於全球化、空間（space），地方通常被賦予負面意義，一種滯止、固著的狀態，基因於全球化強調的空間關係是開放的、流動的，加以空間理論的興起基礎乃在於對時間流動性的反動，因此，地方便易於被擺置在前進性話語的反面。Arif Dirilk在其〈Place-based Imagination：Globalism and the politics ofplace〉除指陳出把全球與地方作為相反論述的危險與遮蔽性外，更啟示出全球與本土並非對立，而是一種互動的狀態。本文擬以書寫蘭嶼之夏曼．藍波安作為探討對象。筆者認為身為一個返鄉的原住民知識份子，夏曼透過祭典的參與、歷史傳統的追溯、部落勞動生活的體驗，以及族群神話傳說的採錄、再創作並進而加深自己的族群意識。在建構原住民的文化空間的同時，夏曼不僅只單憑個人旺盛的創造活力，更在某種程度上與自己民族的文化傳統銜接、交談；這種關係乃是辯證的，是一種既「返本」又「開新」的實踐歷程。當外來的現代性不斷地植入蘭嶼，夏曼如何挪用「在地」資源進而與一個更為龐大全球化論述對話？其視角究竟呈顯出怎樣的符號景觀？筆者認為夏曼並非全然地排斥現代文明的進步之處，亦非固著地方、強調異質，他的書寫中，更多的是一種在吸納沉澱後，所給出的一種混雜（hybridity）以及在地增能（empowerment）。

“Place” is the basic concern in this paper. Opposed to theconcept of globalization and space, place is usually endowedwith negative indication and regarded as a dead sticking state.The spatial relationship emphasized in globalization is openand fluid; moreover, the arising of spatial theory lays on thecounteraction toward the fluidity of time. As a result, place tendsto be located on the reverse against progressive discourse. In“Place-based Imagination: Globalism and the Politics of Place,”Arif Dirilk points out the threat and impediment to judge the globaland local as antithetic discourse. In addition, he proclaims theinterrelationship, instead of antagonism, between the global andthe regional.This thesis focuses on Siaman Rampogan, who contributesto the literary expression about Orchid Island. As a homingindigenous intellectual, Siaman, through the practice of ritualparticipation, historical trace, tribal labor experience andtraditional tales collection, recreates and deepens the tribalidentity of his people. While establishing the indigenous culturalspace, Siaman, not only counting on his fertile creativity, inheritsand communicates with his tribal cultural tradition. The relationshipwithin is dialectic, a both retrospective and prospective journey inpractice. How does Siaman manipulate the local resources to makethe dialogue with the larger-scale globalization discourse as theexternal modernity invades Orchid Island? What kind of signallandscape does his perspective offer? In my opinion, Siaman doesnot reject exclusively the progression under modern civilization,nor does he blindly adhere to the sense of place or stress on theheterogeneous. In his writing, he draws more attention to theoccurrence, after assimilating and sediment, of hybridity andlocal empowerment.