「動物在哪裡？」論西方動物史學發展中的一場取徑之辯

“Where Are the Animals?”Debating Approaches in the Making of Western Animal Historiography

動物史學發展迄今已近半世紀，其研究關懷與方法取徑隨時代演變而呈現階段性差異。本文聚焦於二十世紀與二十一世紀之交動物史領域的一場關鍵轉向，探討「動物在哪裡」之批判聲浪及其所引發的研究新趨勢。諸多修正派動物史家批判第一代動物史學的核心傾向——側重對於人類思維與作為的探討，以及將動物化約為映照人類社會的象徵符號，相對於此，主張應正視動物的本體實存、真實經驗與歷史能動性。本文追溯此爭議的起源、內涵與影響。首先分析二十世紀第一波動物史的兩大主流取徑——底層史及語言轉向下的動物文化史；接續論述二十一世紀人類世危機與後人類主義衝擊下所帶動的不同關切與倡議，及催生的取徑差異。最後，文章指出，這新舊動物史學交鋒所帶來的並非替代關係，而是相輔相成，互為補充。經歷此波反思，動物史學於理論基礎、研究關懷及取徑上皆更加多元，展現出時代與學術思潮與動物史學界間的緊密互動及領域的良性發展。

Animal history has developed over nearly half a century, with its research concerns and methodological approaches evolving over time and exhibiting distinct phase-specific variations. This article focuses on a pivotal shift at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, examining the“Where are the animals?”debate and the new research directions it has inspired. This controversy directly critiques the core tendencies of the first wave of animal history—its emphasis on human thought and actions and its reduction of animals to symbolic representations of human society. In response, revisionist scholars argue for a serious engagement with animals’ontological reality, lived experiences, and historical agency. This paper traces the origins, contours, and impact of this debate. First, it analyzes the two dominant approaches in 20th-century animal history—subaltern studies and animal cultural history under the linguistic turn. It then discusses how the Anthropocene crisis and posthumanist critiques in the 21st century have spurred new research directions, ultimately giving rise to the“Where are the animals?”inquiry and ensuing controversy. The article further contends that the dialogue between the two waves of animal history does not signify replacement but rather mutual enrichment and expansion. Through this reflexive turn, animal history has become more diverse in its theoretical foundations, research concerns, and methodological approaches, demonstrating a dynamic interplay between contemporary intellectual currents and scholarly practice—a testament to the field’s robust development.