近代中國日常生活國族意識的建構、消費與挪用

Abstract

近代中國國族論述的 一項特色乃是 ：就國 家內部而言，「國權 」始終處於高 於「民權」的情況；就國際關係而 言，始 終帶有 強烈的我族中 心主義世界觀。這 樣的國族論述所形塑 的國族意識，如同 韓國 學者 白永瑞提出的「在中 國有『亞洲』 嗎？」之質問所顯現，可謂對 於近代中國人 的知識架構和價值取 向有相當深遠 的 影響。究竟是哪些 歷史因素造 成上述特色的 形成？是哪些國族論 述所建 構的國 族 認同合理化了上述的 國族意識？簡 言之，是 哪些國族共同體的論述想像和文化 實 踐，一再合 理化強大國家 政府的 必要性，同 時又不斷強調全民一 體的 我族中心 觀 之神聖性／光榮性。 本研究計畫的主旨，在反省上述歷史現象和檢討相關研究的討論之問題意識基礎 上，並且依據 M. Billing 對於日常生活國族 意識的分析洞見，以和「國恥」相關主 題(如圓明園廢墟、不平等條約)為研究焦點，將和它們相關的論述和文化實踐放置於近 代中國歷史發展的脈絡上，探討它們如何在旦常生活中形塑集體榮辱意識，從而成為近 代中國國族認同(national identity)的核心意識，以及集體記憶中的主要的認知框架。另一 方面，借鏡 Koselleck 關於概念史(conceptual history)的研究觀點，以及 Peter Burke, Maurice Halbwachs, Peter Novick 關於集體記憶的研究洞見，並透過歷史化(historicize)研 究取徑，本研究也將深入探討在不同的時期，各種不同的政治社會力量，藉由各種論述 和文化實踐（例如國恥紀念日的制定和相關動員），如何操弄、挪用、界定有關所謂「國 恥」的記憶和確切意涵。

One major characteristic of modern Chinese national discourse is: domestically, state sovereignty always dominates popu lar sovereignty and, internationally, a strong ethnocentric worldview often figures prominently. The national consciousness shaped by this kind of discourse, as the Korean scholar Baik Youngseo’s rhetoric question (is there an “Asia” in China?) reveals, ha s profound impact on the modern Chinese intellectual framework and value orientations. What on earth are the historical factors, which give rise to the aforementioned characteristic? What kind of national identity constituted by national discourses, comes to justify the aforementioned national consciousness? In short, what are those national discourses/imaginations and cultural practices, that repeatedly legitimates the authority and necessity of nation-state; and keeps glorifying the ethnocentric worldview based on the idea of the people as a whole. In light of the problematic resulting from reexamination of the aforementioned historical phenomenon and review of relevant scholarship, and inspired by M Billing’s insight regarding banal nationalism, this project will focus on the discourses of “national humiliation” (such as Yuangmingyuan ruins and the unequal treaties), and its related cultural practices in the daily life experiences in modern China. I will contextualize the relevant discourses and cultural practices within the modern Chinese history in order to investigate how they construct collective pride and humiliation, and how they become the centre of the modern Chinese national identity, as well as the framework of the collective memory. On the other hand, in light of Koselleck’s theory regarding conceptual history, as well as insights from Peter Burke, Maurice Halbawachs, Peter Novick concerning collective memory, and by means of “historicizing” approach, this study will also explore how different social-political powers on different occasions and in different times, in terms of various discourses and cultural practices(such as the mandate of National Humiliation Memorial Day and mass mobilization ), manipulate/appropriate/re-define the memory and meaning of “national humiliation.”