跨越邊界的社會對話：臺灣東南亞移工自我敘事影片之觀眾解讀分析

Social Dialogue across Borders: Audience Interpretation of Self-Narrative Films by Southeast Asian Migrant Workers in Taiwan

本研究透過多元文化理論及文化研究觀點，以一位參加影像培力工作坊的印尼籍移工第一人稱自我敘事影片《6354天的等待》為主體，探究非主流族群產製的影音文本如何與主流社會進行協商與對話，及其做為跨越邊界的社會實踐的可能性與限制。本研究採焦點團體訪談及深度訪談法，研究對象包括友善、中立以及利害關係社群民眾共20人。
研究發現，首先，第一人稱自我敘事影片帶給觀者真實感與代入感，基於人類生命經驗與感知的普同性，一般民眾對於「他／她者」影音文本的理解與認知，不因族群及身分差異而產生差別心態。第二，友善社群成員大多具有先備理解／前理解（pre-understanding），加深其對於非主流族群的認同感，呈現優勢解讀的型態。第三，中立社群及利害關係社群的意念與喜好傾向多元，身分背景及所處位置不同，觀照面向自有差異，對於移工自我敘事影片或採優勢解讀或採協商解讀，呼應「詮釋社群觀點無法單一解釋詮釋類型」的論點。第四，以生命境遇為基底訴諸情感所呈現的非主流觀點，因「共情」效應較能獲得理解並減輕敵對與抗拒心理，有利開展族群對話並鬆動舊有的觀念與認知，降低歧視與偏見態度。

Under the wave of globalization, Taiwan officially began importing Southeast Asian migrant workers in 1991 as a supplementary labor force. Due to social developments caused by declining birth rates, an aging population, and changing lifestyles, the nation’s labor shortage has become increasingly severe. As of the end of July 2025, the number of Southeast Asian migrant workers in Taiwan approached 850,000 under rapid growth and has long surpassed the indigenous population. Despite being part of society for over 30 years, some Taiwanese still hold prejudices or discriminate against migrant workers, because of differences in nationality, culture, and economic status.
To help marginalized Southeast Asian migrant workers present their voice and speak out, I organized and hosted a Southeast Asian Migrant Workers Video Workshop, teaching them how to make self-narrative documentary films that express their thoughts and life experiences. The learning community, including teacher, migrant workers, professional video assistants, and translator, collaborated over the course of a year through pre-production, production, and post-production. This effort resulted in the documentary“Waiting for the Dawn,”which is based on the story of Rahayu–an Indonesian migrant worker who suffered more than a decade-long unconscionable treatment and stayed in a shelter waiting the result of a labor dispute lawsuit after being rescued. Under the ethical considerations, the film was completed and publicly screened in 2020 after the protagonist returned to her hometown and reunioned with her family members in Indonesia. The aim of the screening is to foster social dialogue with the mainstream community through this collective film.
During the after-screening discussion, I found that the audience from diverse backgrounds had different interpretations of the documentary, reflecting the cognitions and attitudes of various sectors of society towards this self-narrative film of a migrant worker, which in turn aroused my curiosity and reflexivity: What are the real reactions and thoughts of mainstream people in Taiwanese society on a self-narrative documentary made by non-mainstream groups? Does a self-narrative film of non-mainstream groups enable people of different ethnics to transcend differences and understand each other? In addition to being a method of empowerment, what kind of cross-national dialogue practice can arise through self-narrative films of disadvantaged (non-mainstream) groups? When the text (documentary) interpreted by the mainstream audience comes from“the other”, how do differences in ethnicity, class, culture, life experience, values, personal interests, social networks, etc. affect the audience's cognition and interpretation? This research uses the self-representation documentary cooperated by me and the migrant worker Rahayu as the subject to self-examine and self-reflect on the substantive meaning of this social action.
I thus adopt the perspective of“the politics of difference”of multiculturalism and the theory of audience interpretation and interpretive community in a cultural study to explore how the image, subjectivity, and narrative perspective of migrant workers represented in first-person documentary films are interpreted by mainstream audiences. The research utilizes a purposive sampling method with small groups of less than 10 people as units. The audiences come from three types of Taiwanese groups: 1) a community college for adult citizens; 2) a volunteer society of university that serves Indonesian migrant workers; 3) a migrant worker agency and a distant-water fishing vessel company that employs migrant workers. Together, they represent neutral, friendly, and stakeholder communities. There are 20 participants reported in the article.
The members of each group watched“Waiting for the Dawn”together. Focus group interviews and in-depth interviews were conducted after the screening to understand what kind of cultural imagination and dialogue space can be stimulated when a first-person self-narrative documentary from a non-mainstream community meets people of a mainstream community. The study examines the possibilities and limitations of migrant workers’self-produced documentary as a cross-border social practice on the issues of diverse and intertwined ethnicity, gender, class differences, and identity.
My research findings are the following. First, first-person self-narrative video works are more realistic and have a sense of déjàvu for the audience. Coupled with the universality of human perception and life experience, even if the narrator (migrant worker) is situated on the margins of society, the audience will not have a different attitude toward the narrator’s non-mainstream viewpoints and identity, or even affect the audience’s attitude towards receiving and interpreting the video (documentary) text.
Second, members of the friendly community usually have a preconceived pre-understanding of the migrant worker community. Their sense of identity after watching the film produces a superimposed effect, presenting a dominant interpretation pattern and echoing the interpretation of the community’s viewpoint. Their personal cognitive attitude reflects the preferred meaning of the community to which they belong. However, the neutral community and stakeholder community do not necessarily completely reject nor deny the narrative perspective of migrant workers, because of their neutral position or interests with such workers. Overall, they present either a dominant interpretation or a negotiated interpretation pattern toward a migrant worker self-narrative film.
Third, the collective beliefs and preferences within the interpretive community certainly affect the views and cognition of its members. However, the personal growth background, life experience, and values of its members may also impact their cognition and attitude towards things. In short,“the views of the interpretive community cannot be explained by a single type of interpretation”, which implies that the beliefs and preferences of members within the stakeholder community are quite diverse and should not be oversimplified.
Fourth, first-person self-narrative documentary films from non-mainstream groups serve as“another voice.”When the work is based on a migrant worker’s personal situation and elicits an inner feeling of“touch people’s hearts,”it can gain greater recognition and acceptance from the public, reduce hostility and resistance, and facilitate exchanges of views among different groups. It also can overcome stereotypes and original cognitions by the public and reduce discrimination and prejudice.
This research adopts the documentary film produced by migrant workers and myself to explore how interethnic dialogue may expand, by not only hoping that“the other”with gender, class, and ethnic differences demonstrate agency, but also by providing an opportunity for the authors (migrant workers and myself) and the audience to reflect on each other. It combines theory and practice. Although it is a small-scale preliminary study, through feedback from different ethnic audiences on the self-narrative documentary film of migrant workers, it helps me to self-examine how to use a non-mainstream ethnic documentary film to foster social dialogue and communication under the reality of“difference,”promote mutual understanding and respect among different ethnic groups, and find feasible ways to loosen institutional oppression.