英文摘要 |
Beginning with a rethinking of Liu Chi-hui’s “negative writing” study, and focusingon the representation of modernism in literature history in prewar Taiwan, thearticle proposes three questions. First, are “avant-garde” and “nativeness” mutually exclusive?Second, besides the “rejection” to “avant-garde”, does “traction” also exist inTaiwan literature field? Third, what is the relation among the “nativeness”, “avant-garde/modernism” and the history of Taiwan literature? The article concludes that the “avantgarde/modernism” is not inevitably excluded from the construction of Taiwan literaturehistory, but is pursued instead, as we see the canonization of “avant-garde/ modernism”pedigree in prewar Taiwan; however, the course is not found due to the lack of unearthedhistorical materials.“Li Poetry Magazine”, which was started in1964 by native poets born in prewarperiod, devoted itself to construct the pedigree started from the poetry magazine “Si-To-Siron (poetry and poetics)” (prewar period), “Yin-Lin Association” (across prewarand postwar period) to “Li Poetry Magazine” (postwar period). In spite of the fractureof languages, intellectuals, and opinion space, the “nativeness” and “avant-garde” jointlyestablished the continuation of the literature tradition from the Japanese colonial periodto present Taiwan. In the meantime, “Li Poetry Society” also restored native poets’participation in the literature circle by the practice, translation and introduction ofmodernism literature. However, because of the limited historical materials, the practice of modernism in the prewar period of Taiwan turned into an “empty canon”. The emptycanon was not filled until the unearthed poetry of Yang Chih-Chang and other membersof “Le Moulin Poetry Society.” Since then the canonization process of modernismliterature carried out in a high speed. |