書寫社群知識的方法與實踐：談白鷺部落製作歷史的微政治

Methods for and Practices of Writing Community Knowledge: A Discussion of the Micropolitics of Producing a Written History of the Payljus Indigenous Community

2009年，白鷺部落（Payljus）傾五大家族之力，與國立臺灣史前文化博物館研究人員及熱心志工合作，經歷了調查、書寫及出版部落文史之工程。此一實踐歷程可從法國史學家德塞杜（Michel de Certeau）書寫歷史的相關論述，探討今日原住民族人書寫社群知識的方法與實踐及當中的微政治議題。德塞杜視歷史書寫為勞動的形式，也作為一種「了解」祖先的方式。從該觀點看待原住民社群書寫自身歷史所達致與祖先連結的意義，就有了重要意涵。五大家族在此一透過書寫與家族祖先連結的過程中，當家族之間意見立場互異時，如何調和？面對家族內部意見相左時，如何尋得書寫歷史之解決？而當部落與部落之間看法分歧時，如何拿捏？並非具有管理家族之身分者或屬於分支小家族之成員，又如何看待五大家族對於官方家族史之解釋？如何處理這些爭議與衝突，就充分顯現德塞杜所提「一種立場」當中有關政治權力的問題。本文欲以白鷺部落之實踐探討以下四個子題：1.史家是製造歷史的操作技術人員、2.經過篩選的細微表現資料始成正史、3.被書寫的真實、4.歷史的鏡子。並就公部門委託案模式以及族人書寫所呈現歷史製作之差異，探討作者源頭與書寫行動、不同群體介入當地權力互動、智慧財產權歸屬等差異。 In 2009, five main clans of the Payljus community of the Paiwan nation participated in a project to produce and publish cultural and historical writings in cooperation with researcher of the National Museum of Prehistory and volunteers. In this paper, a discussion of the implementation of this project is based on the relevant discourse on historical writings of French historian Michel de Certeau. Michel de Certeau views historical writings as a form of labor and as a method for ＂understanding＂ one's ancestors. From this viewpoint, this study investigates the important implications of a tribal community that writes its own history and the connections that are formed with the ancestors through this process. When there were differences in opinion or position among the five main clans that make up the Payljus community, how were these differences reconciled? When there were differences in opinion within a clan, how were these differences resolved? Moreover, when there were differences in views among different communities, how were these differences addressed? How did those who were not in a position of authority in one of these clans or who belonged to a branch of a small clan view the interpretation of official clan history produced by the five main clans? How to handle these types of disputes and conflicts is the greatest difficulty in writing history. Michel de Certeau notes that one's ＂position＂ on history is related to the issue of political authority. The present study explores the following four issues based on the experience of the Payljus community: 1) Historians are the operations and technical personnel in the production of written history. 2) The filtering of micro-performance data is the beginning of official history. 3) What is written is the true history. 4) History is a mirror. In addition, the variation in production of written history by indigenous peoples and via government agency-commissioned model is used to deeply discuss the source of authors and the actual writing process, as well as the interactions by different groups intervening in local authority and intellectual property ownership.

In 2009, five main clans of the Payljus community of the Paiwan nation participated in a project to produce and publish cultural and historical writings in cooperation with researcher of the National Museum of Prehistory and volunteers. In this paper, a discussion of the implementation of this project is based on the relevant discourse on historical writings of French historian Michel de Certeau. Michel de Certeau views historical writings as a form of labor and as a method for ＂understanding＂ one's ancestors. From this viewpoint, this study investigates the important implications of a tribal community that writes its own history and the connections that are formed with the ancestors through this process. When there were differences in opinion or position among the five main clans that make up the Payljus community, how were these differences reconciled? When there were differences in opinion within a clan, how were these differences resolved? Moreover, when there were differences in views among different communities, how were these differences addressed? How did those who were not in a position of authority in one of these clans or who belonged to a branch of a small clan view the interpretation of official clan history produced by the five main clans? How to handle these types of disputes and conflicts is the greatest difficulty in writing history. Michel de Certeau notes that one's ＂position＂ on history is related to the issue of political authority. The present study explores the following four issues based on the experience of the Payljus community: 1) Historians are the operations and technical personnel in the production of written history. 2) The filtering of micro-performance data is the beginning of official history. 3) What is written is the true history. 4) History is a mirror. In addition, the variation in production of written history by indigenous peoples and via government agency-commissioned model is used to deeply discuss the source of authors and the actual writing process, as well as the interactions by different groups intervening in local authority and intellectual property ownership.