Abstract
敍事學家浦安迪(Andrew H. Plaks)比較研究中西神話的原型時指出,中國神話是非敍事型的;與敍事型的希臘神話相比,中國神話著重靜態的空間描繪,忽略動態的時間敘述。這一非敍事性與敍事性、空間與時間、靜態與動態的中西二分法至今沒有得到認真的討論。浦安迪依照西方的觀點來評定什麽是敍事性,什麽不是敍事性,因此在評判中國神話敍事的特點時,不自覺地表現出他的“西方偏見”。他提出的中西二分法其實不能反映易經的敍事原則,後者是中國敍事傳統的一個重要源頭。本文仔細分析了易經敘事中的時間和空間觀念。從易經敍事的角度看,中國的敘事傳統並非只重空間,不重時間。如果說兩個文化的敍事模式有明顯的分岐,那麼一個重要原因是它們處理時間和空間的手法是不同的。
Based on his comparative study of the archetypes of Chinese and Greek mythologies, Professor Andrew Plaks (1976, 1977, 1996) states that the Chinese pattern is basically “non-narrative” as it stresses static description of spatialized relations, as opposed to the narrative pattern of the West emphasizing dynamic presentation of temporal sequence of actions. Such an important classification between the narrative, temporal, and dynamic Western model and the non-narrative, spatial, and static Chinese model, however, has yet been seriously discussed and questioned. For the author of this essay, this Chinese-Western dichotomy expresses Plaks’ bias toward a Western view of narrativity. In fact, his identification of the Chinese models does not conform to the narrative principles of Yijing, which is a key source of Chinese narrative tradition. By a close examination of the temporal and spatial qualities of Yijing narratives, the author argues that the narratives have much concern with time as well. The seemingly radical divergences between Chinese and Western narratives, it is argued, indicate nothing more than different cultural approaches to coping with time and space.
Based on his comparative study of the archetypes of Chinese and Greek mythologies, Professor Andrew Plaks (1976, 1977, 1996) states that the Chinese pattern is basically “non-narrative” as it stresses static description of spatialized relations, as opposed to the narrative pattern of the West emphasizing dynamic presentation of temporal sequence of actions. Such an important classification between the narrative, temporal, and dynamic Western model and the non-narrative, spatial, and static Chinese model, however, has yet been seriously discussed and questioned. For the author of this essay, this Chinese-Western dichotomy expresses Plaks’ bias toward a Western view of narrativity. In fact, his identification of the Chinese models does not conform to the narrative principles of Yijing, which is a key source of Chinese narrative tradition. By a close examination of the temporal and spatial qualities of Yijing narratives, the author argues that the narratives have much concern with time as well. The seemingly radical divergences between Chinese and Western narratives, it is argued, indicate nothing more than different cultural approaches to coping with time and space.
Translated title of the contribution | Time and space in Yijing narratives: A critique of Plaks' Chinese-Western dichotomy |
---|---|
Original language | Chinese (Traditional) |
Number of pages | 15 |
Publication status | Published - 13 Jul 2013 |
Event | 中華傳播學會年會2013: 環境變遷下傳媒「公共性」的反思與挑戰 = Chinese Communication Society Annual Conference 2013 - New Taipei, Taiwan, Province of China Duration: 12 Jul 2013 → 14 Jul 2013 http://ccstaiwan.org/historyPaper.asp?PC_ID=24 |
Conference
Conference | 中華傳播學會年會2013: 環境變遷下傳媒「公共性」的反思與挑戰 = Chinese Communication Society Annual Conference 2013 |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | CCS 2013 |
Country/Territory | Taiwan, Province of China |
City | New Taipei |
Period | 12/07/13 → 14/07/13 |
Internet address |
User-Defined Keywords
- 中國敘事學
- 神話敘事
- 時空觀念
- 中西二分法
- 易經
- Chinese Narrative
- Myth Narrative
- The Concept of Time and Space
- China-West Dichotomy
- Yijing