1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 迂迴，延宕與延異：《明信片》的書信特質
Detour, Deferral, and Différance: Epistolarity in The Post Card
作者 黃惠瑜
Huang , Hui-yu
貢獻者 胡錦媛
Hu , Chin-yuan
黃惠瑜
Huang , Hui-yu
關鍵詞 明信片
書信文類
迂迴
延宕
延異
The Post Card
epistolary genre
object of desire
the supplement
fort da
intellectual inheritance
différance
日期 2003
上傳時間 17-Sep-2009 16:14:54 (UTC+8)
摘要 在德希達的《明信片：從蘇格拉底到佛洛伊徳之外》(1987)一書中，〈郵寄〉這個文本由許多交換傳遞的明信片所組成。這些收錄於同一文本中的明信片令我們聯想到書信小說中編纂成冊的信件。許多十七、十八世紀的英國與法國書信經典名著構成了書信文類的主要架構，如吉樂哈格的《葡萄牙修女的情書》(1669)、理查生的《潘蜜拉》(1740)與《克萊麗莎》(1747-1748)、葛芬妮的《祕魯公主的情書》(1747)、盧梭的《茱莉，或新伊珞絲》(1761)以及德拉克勞斯的《危險關係》(1782)。面對這些書信文類的前導者，且處於二十世紀傳統書信寫作式微的時代中，是什麼因素促使德希達創作〈郵寄〉這部書信文本呢？〈郵寄〉的書信文本又與傳統書信小說有何不同呢？

關於這個議題，我所提出的論點是，德希達的〈郵寄〉企圖解構書信文類。〈郵寄〉一方面強化了書信文類特有的書信特質，另一方面又以明信片的郵件傳遞效果取代替換傳統書信小說的書信文類特質。明信片的郵件傳遞效果主要呈現出「傳送終點」與「預期的收信者」這兩種特定規範的不可能性。明信片總是暗示信件傳送過程中「被攔截」與「多元收信者」的可能性。這樣的特質使明信片得以打破囿於最初起點與最後終點做為邊界的直線軌道。如此的突破有助於德希達解構西方知識體系的架構。明信片的郵件傳遞效果動搖了源自蘇格拉底的知識遺產直線傳承，顯示出知識遺產是經由多元讀者所傳遞的，且容許眾多不同的詮釋方法參與其中。多樣性的想法損毀了「原作與衍生」，「在場與缺席」以及「公開與隱私」之間的二元對立邏輯。明信片「半私密，半公開」(《明信片》62)的形式在多樣化所隱含的不確定性之間來回擺盪，游移不定。這種不確定性正是德希達藉由〈郵寄〉這個文本所要強調的。因此，即使身處電信通訊網絡遍佈的時代，德希達依然期望引發「不受拘束的明信片化帝國」(《明信片》104)的可能性。明信片化的意義並非加速書信寫作的「衰微」(《明信片》104)，而是希望能夠不斷地散佈差異產生的可能性。

在本論文中，我從迂迴、延宕與延異這三項特性來闡述明信片的書信特質。這三項特性同時交織於我對〈郵寄〉這個書信文本的討論中。在第一章〈書信文類：強化與替代〉裡，我提出了〈郵寄〉所呈現的似非而是的矛盾，既強化又替代書信文類的特質。書信文類因此被置於差異的迂迴內，而延遲了其文類身份認同的最後裁定。在第二章〈書信他/她者：欲望投射〉裡，我援引拉岡「小寫他/她者」的概念來闡釋書信寫作行為中的自我建構過程。由於寄信者需要缺席收信者的存在以召喚差異的產生，因此寄信者的自我認同總是不斷地在迂迴的信件傳遞空間中被延宕。第三章〈書信寫作：添補的矛盾〉裡，我將德希達對「添補」的概念與書信寫作中添加與替代的效果作了連結。書信寫作彌補了距離造成的溝通差距，同時也以距離替代了最後與缺席收信者真實相遇的那一刻。第四章〈書信交換：Fort Da消失與返轉的遊戲〉中，我比較了佛洛伊德、拉岡與德希達對於fort da遊戲不同的觀察角度。在書信交換的過程裡，當多元讀者的可能性被納入考量時，書信的傳送與接收便會持續地滯留迂迴於讀者的多元閱讀與詮釋，而延遲了到達預定目的地的時間。在第五章〈書信傳承：知識遺產的明信片〉裡，我探討了德希達對於〈郵寄〉中明信片上蘇格拉底與柏拉圖位置返轉圖所做的種種推敲。這些推測暗示了脫離知識體系直線傳承，迂迴而行的可能性。為了再現知識的意涵而創造出的多元詮釋角度會不斷地延宕知識傳承的最終意義。
In Jacques Derrida’s The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond (1987), the part of “Envois” is composed of many exchanged post cards. This collection of post cards reminds us of the letters compiled in epistolary novels. There is a lot of prestige attached to many seventeenth- and eighteenth-century English and French epistolary novels, such as Gabriel de Guilleragues’ The Portuguese Letters (1669), Samuel Richardson’s Pamela (1740) and Clarissa (1747-1748), Françoise de Graffigny’s Letters from a Peruvian Woman (1747), Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Julie, ou la nouvelle Héloïse (1761), and Choderlos de Laclos’ Les Liaisons dangereuses (1782). These epistolary novels constitute the main frame of the epistolary genre. Then, confronted with the epistolary predecessors, what prompts Derrida to write the epistolary text of “Envois” in the twentieth century, in which the telecommunications networks appear to overpower the importance of writing letters or post cards? What is the difference between “Envois” and the previous epistolary novels?

On this issue, I want to argue in my thesis that Derrida’s “Envois” is intended to deconstruct the epistolary genre by paradoxically valorizing and substituting the postal effects of the post card for the generic identities of epistolary novels. The postal effects of the post card primarily invoke the impossibility of the predestined destination and intended receiver. The post card always implies the possibilities of interception and multiple receivers in the process of transmission. In this way, the post card disrupts the linear path confined in the hierarchical opposites between the original departure point and the final destination. This disruption facilitates Derrida’s attempt to deconstruct the construction of knowledge in the Western intellectual genealogy. The postal effects are applied to destabilize the linear succession of intellectual inheritance originated since Socrates. The inheritance is transmitted by multiple readers and hence susceptible to a myriad of interpretations. The binary logic between the original and the derivative, the present and the absent, and the public and the private is undermined in the multiplicity. The form of the post card, which is “half-private half public” (Post Card 62), oscillates in the indeterminacy of multiplicity. The postal effects of indeterminacy aroused in the post card are what Derrida emphasizes in “Envois.” As a result, even in the age replete with the telecommunications networks, Derrida still proposes the possibility of “the unlimited empire of a postcardization” (104). The postcardization does not mean to precipitate the “decadence” (104) of epistolary writing, but it aims to disseminate and recurrently stimulate the possibility of difference.

In my thesis, I propose three perspectives to illuminate the epistolarity of the post card: detour, deferral, and différance. They are interwoven in my discussion of Derrida’s “Envois.” In chapter one “Epistolary Genre: Valorization and Substitution,” I propound a paradox that “Envois” simultaneously valorizes and substitutes for the epistolary genre. “Envois” therefore puts the epistolary genre in a detour of difference and defers its determination of identity. In chapter two “Epistolary Otherness: The Object of Desire,” I apply Jacques Lacan’s concept of the object of desire to elucidate the self-construction in the act of writing post cards. The sender’s self-identity is continually deferred in a detour, because s/he requires the absent receiver to evoke his/her difference. In chapter three “Epistolary Writing: Paradox of the Supplement,” I relate Derrida’s concept of the supplement to the paradoxical effects of addition and substitution in epistolary writing. Writing post cards adds to a compensation of the distance, but it also simultaneously substitutes the distance for the final encounter with the absent receiver. In chapter four “Epistolary Exchange: Play of the Fort Da,” I compare Sigmund Freud’s, Lacan’s, and Derrida’s different observations on the fort da game. The fort da movements of epistolary exchanges are interminably deferred in a detour, when multiple readers in the process of transmission are taken into consideration. The multiple readers replenish possibilities of differences with a variety of interpretations. In chapter five “Epistolary Inheritance: Post Card of Intellectual Legacy,” I explore Derrida’s speculations on the scene of reversal copied on the post cards collected in “Envois.” The scene of reversal between Socrates and Plato is speculated to imply possible detours away from the linear succession of genealogy. Different representations of knowledge persistently defer the final determinate meaning of the intellectual inheritance.
參考文獻 Altman, Janet Gurkin. Epistolarity: Approaches to a Form. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1982.
Bakhtin, Mikhail. “Discourse in Dostoevsky.” Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. and Trans. Caryl Emerson. 1984. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota P, 1994. 181-269.
Bass, Alan. Glossary. The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond. By Jacques Derrida. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. xiii-xxix.
Benstock, Shari. “From Letters to Literature: La Carte Postale in the Epistolary Genre.” Genre 18 (1985): 257-295.
---. “Letters: The Post Card in the Epistolary Genre.” Textualizing the Feminine: On the Limits of Genre. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 86-122.
---. “The Law of the Phallus (as) The Law of Genre.” Textualizing the Feminine: On the Limits of Genre. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 3-22.
Berg, Temma F. “La Carte Postale: Reading (Derrida) Reading.” Criticism 28.3 (1986): 323-340.
Brooks, Peter. “Freud’s Masterplot: A Model for Narrative.” Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984. 90-112.
Cornell, Drucilla. “Where Love Begins: Sexual Difference and the Limit of the Masculine Symbolic.” Derrida and Feminism: Recasting the Question of Woman. Ed. Ellen K. Feder, Mary C. Rawlinson, and Emily Zakin. New York: Routledge, 1997. 161-206.
De Graffigny, Françoise. Letters from a Peruvian Woman. 1747. Trans. David Kornacker. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1993.
De Laclos, Choderlos. Les liaisons dangereuses. 1782. Trans. P. W. K. Stone. London: Penguin Books, 1961.
Deleuze, Gilles. Masochism: Coldness and Cruelty. New York: Zone Books, 1989.
Derrida, Jacques. “… That Dangerous Supplement ….” Of Grammatology. Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976. 141-164.
---. “Différance.” Margins of Philosophy. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982. 1-27.
---. “From Spurs: Nietzsche’s Styles.” 1978. Trans. & Ed. Peggy Kamuf. A Derrida Reader: Between the Blinds. Ed. Peggy Kamuf. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991. 353-377.
---. “Psyche: Inventions of the Other.” Trans. Catherine Porter. Reading de Man Reading. Ed. Lindsay Waters and Wlad Godzich. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989. 25-65.
---. “The Law of Genre.” Trans. Avital Ronell. Acts of Literature. Ed. Derek Attridge. New York: Routledge, 1992. 221-252.
---. The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Evans, Dylan. An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 1996.
Freud, Sigmund. “Beyond the Pleasure Principle.” 1920. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Ed. James Strachey. Vol. 18. London: Hogarth Press, 1981. 3-64.
Gilroy, Amanda, and W. M. Verhoeven, eds. Epistolary Histories: Letters, Fiction, Culture. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000.
Guilleragues, de Gabriel-Joseph de Laverge. The Portuguese Letters: Love Letters of Mariana to the Marquis de Chamilly. 1669. Trans. Donald E. Ericson. as an appendix to The Three Marias: New Portuguese Letters. by Maria Isabel Barreno, Maria Teresa Horta, and Maria Velho da Costa. Trans. Helen R. Lane. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1975. 403-429.
Heidegger, Martin. “Time and Being.” On Time and Being. Trans. Joan Stambaugh. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1972. 1-24.
Hogarth, Claire Milne. Epistolary Constructions of Identity in Derrida’s “Envois” and Coetzee’s Age of Iron. Diss. Montreal: McGill University, 2001.
Hu, Chin-yuan. “Private Letters, Public Reading: Pamela.” National Chengchi University Scholarly Journal [國立政治大學學報] 72.1 (1996): 321-351.
Hutcheon, Linda. The Canadian Postmodern: A Study of Contemporary English-Canadian Fiction. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Irigaray, Luce. “Belief Itself.” Sexes and Genealogies. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. 23-53.
---. “The Gesture in Psychoanalysis.” Trans. Elizabeth Guild. Between Feminism and Psychoanalysis. Ed. Teresa Brennan. London: Routledge, 1990. 127-138.
Johnson, Barbara. “The Frame of Reference: Poe, Lacan, Derrida.” 1977. The Purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida & Psychoanalytical Reading. Ed. John P. Muller and William J. Richardson. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. 213-251.
---. “Writing.” Critical Terms for Literary Study. Ed. Frank Lentricchia and Thomas McLaughlin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. 39-49.
Kauffman, Linda S. "Dangerous Liaisons: Roland Barthes`s A Lover`s Discourse and Jacques Derrida`s The Post Card.” Special Delivery: Epistolary Modes in Modern Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. 81-130.
---. Discourses of Desire: Gender, Genre, and Epistolary Fictions. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986.
Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. Leon S. Roudiez. Trans. Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
Lacan, Jacques. “Introduction of the big Other.” 1955. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis 1954-1955. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988. 235-247.
---. “Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter.’” 1972. Trans. Jeffrey Mehlman. The Purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida & Psychoanalytical Reading. Ed. John P. Muller and William J. Richardson. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. 28-54.
---. “Tuché and Automaton.” 1964. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1981. 53-64.
---. Écrits: A Selection. 1977. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Routledge, 2003.
---. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1981.
Leitch, Vincent B. “Marking the Supplement.” Deconstructive Criticism: An Advanced Introduction. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. 169-178.
Liang, Sun-Chieh. “Freud’s Fort/Da Game and Chaucer’s Retraction.” Studies in English Literature and Linguistics 26 (2000): 77-95.
Loselle, Andrea. “Freud/Derrida As Fort/Da and the Repetitive Eponym.” Modern Language Notes 97 (1982): 1180-1185.
McWhirter, David Bruce. Desire and Love in Henry James: A Study of the Late Novels. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Naas, Michael. “The Time of a Detour: Jacques Derrida and the Question of the Gift.” Oxford Literary Review 18 (1996): 67-86.
Perry, Ruth. “The Social Context of Letters.” Women, Letters, and the Novel. New York: AMS Press, 1980. 63-91.
Peters, John Durham. Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Richardson, Samuel. Clarissa, or the History of a Young Lady. 1747-1748. Ed. Angus Ross. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.
Rosbottom, Ronald C. “The Novel and Gender Difference.” A New History of French Literature. Ed. Denis Hollier. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989. 481-487.
Salecl, Renata. “I Can’t Love You Unless I Give You up.” Gaze and Voice as Love Objects. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996. 179-207.
Sarup, Madan. Jacques Lacan. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.
Schuerewegen, Franc. “A Telephone Conversation: Fragments.” Trans. Marvin N. Richards. Diacritics 24.4 (1994): 30-40.
Schwenger, Peter. “Postnuclear Post Card.” Papers on Language and Literature 26.1 (1990): 164-181.
Siegert, Bernhard. Relays: Literature as an Epoch of the Postal System. Trans. Kevin Repp. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Love Me, Love My Ombre, Elle." Diacritics 14.4 (1984): 19-36.
Ulmer, Gregory L. "The Post-Age." Diacritics 11 (1981): 39-56.
West, William N. “Nothing as Given: Economies of the Gift in Derrida and Shakespeare.” Comparative Literature 48.1 (1996): 1-18.
Wills, David. “Post/Card/Match/Book/Envois/Derrida.” SubStance 43 (1984): 19-38.
Žižek, Slavoj. “Why Does A Letter Always Arrive at Its Destination?” Enjoy Your Symptom: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and out. Rev. ed. New York: Routledge, 2001. 1-28.
胡錦媛 [Hu, Chin-yuan]。〈母親，妳在何方?──被虐狂、女性主體與閱讀〉[“Mother, Where Are You?─Masochist, Female Subjectivity, and Reading”]。《閱讀張愛玲：張愛玲國際研討會論文集》[Reading Ai-ling Zhang: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ai-ling Zhang]。Ed. 楊澤 [Yang Ze]。Taipei：Mai-Tian [麥田出版]，1999。235-255。
---.〈似近還遠：作家與書信〉[“Distance in Proximity: Writers and Letters”]。《中國時報》[China Times] 31 Aug. 2003：B3。
---.〈書寫自我：《譚郎的書信》中的書信形式〉[“Writing the Self: The Epistolary Form in Letters of Tian-Lang”]。《性/別研究讀本》[Research on Gender Difference]。Taipei：Mai-Tian [麥田出版]，1998。61-94。
---.〈戀人對語，女人獨語：《葡萄牙修女的情書》中的書信形式〉[“Lovers’ Dialogue, Woman’s Monologue: Epistolary Form in Lettres portugaises”]。《中外文學》[Chung-Wai Literary] 28.12 (2000)：156-181。
張上冠 [Chang, Christopher S.]。〈『背信者』：論譯者的抉擇〉[“Postman: The Choice of the Translator”]。《文山評論》[Wen Shan Review] 1.3 (2000)：1-21。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學研究所
89551004
92
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0089551004
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 胡錦媛zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Hu , Chin-yuanen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 黃惠瑜zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Huang , Hui-yuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 黃惠瑜zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Huang , Hui-yuen_US
dc.date (日期) 2003en_US
dc.date.accessioned 17-Sep-2009 16:14:54 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 17-Sep-2009 16:14:54 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 17-Sep-2009 16:14:54 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0089551004en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33321-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 英國語文學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 89551004zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 92zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在德希達的《明信片：從蘇格拉底到佛洛伊徳之外》(1987)一書中，〈郵寄〉這個文本由許多交換傳遞的明信片所組成。這些收錄於同一文本中的明信片令我們聯想到書信小說中編纂成冊的信件。許多十七、十八世紀的英國與法國書信經典名著構成了書信文類的主要架構，如吉樂哈格的《葡萄牙修女的情書》(1669)、理查生的《潘蜜拉》(1740)與《克萊麗莎》(1747-1748)、葛芬妮的《祕魯公主的情書》(1747)、盧梭的《茱莉，或新伊珞絲》(1761)以及德拉克勞斯的《危險關係》(1782)。面對這些書信文類的前導者，且處於二十世紀傳統書信寫作式微的時代中，是什麼因素促使德希達創作〈郵寄〉這部書信文本呢？〈郵寄〉的書信文本又與傳統書信小說有何不同呢？

關於這個議題，我所提出的論點是，德希達的〈郵寄〉企圖解構書信文類。〈郵寄〉一方面強化了書信文類特有的書信特質，另一方面又以明信片的郵件傳遞效果取代替換傳統書信小說的書信文類特質。明信片的郵件傳遞效果主要呈現出「傳送終點」與「預期的收信者」這兩種特定規範的不可能性。明信片總是暗示信件傳送過程中「被攔截」與「多元收信者」的可能性。這樣的特質使明信片得以打破囿於最初起點與最後終點做為邊界的直線軌道。如此的突破有助於德希達解構西方知識體系的架構。明信片的郵件傳遞效果動搖了源自蘇格拉底的知識遺產直線傳承，顯示出知識遺產是經由多元讀者所傳遞的，且容許眾多不同的詮釋方法參與其中。多樣性的想法損毀了「原作與衍生」，「在場與缺席」以及「公開與隱私」之間的二元對立邏輯。明信片「半私密，半公開」(《明信片》62)的形式在多樣化所隱含的不確定性之間來回擺盪，游移不定。這種不確定性正是德希達藉由〈郵寄〉這個文本所要強調的。因此，即使身處電信通訊網絡遍佈的時代，德希達依然期望引發「不受拘束的明信片化帝國」(《明信片》104)的可能性。明信片化的意義並非加速書信寫作的「衰微」(《明信片》104)，而是希望能夠不斷地散佈差異產生的可能性。

在本論文中，我從迂迴、延宕與延異這三項特性來闡述明信片的書信特質。這三項特性同時交織於我對〈郵寄〉這個書信文本的討論中。在第一章〈書信文類：強化與替代〉裡，我提出了〈郵寄〉所呈現的似非而是的矛盾，既強化又替代書信文類的特質。書信文類因此被置於差異的迂迴內，而延遲了其文類身份認同的最後裁定。在第二章〈書信他/她者：欲望投射〉裡，我援引拉岡「小寫他/她者」的概念來闡釋書信寫作行為中的自我建構過程。由於寄信者需要缺席收信者的存在以召喚差異的產生，因此寄信者的自我認同總是不斷地在迂迴的信件傳遞空間中被延宕。第三章〈書信寫作：添補的矛盾〉裡，我將德希達對「添補」的概念與書信寫作中添加與替代的效果作了連結。書信寫作彌補了距離造成的溝通差距，同時也以距離替代了最後與缺席收信者真實相遇的那一刻。第四章〈書信交換：Fort Da消失與返轉的遊戲〉中，我比較了佛洛伊德、拉岡與德希達對於fort da遊戲不同的觀察角度。在書信交換的過程裡，當多元讀者的可能性被納入考量時，書信的傳送與接收便會持續地滯留迂迴於讀者的多元閱讀與詮釋，而延遲了到達預定目的地的時間。在第五章〈書信傳承：知識遺產的明信片〉裡，我探討了德希達對於〈郵寄〉中明信片上蘇格拉底與柏拉圖位置返轉圖所做的種種推敲。這些推測暗示了脫離知識體系直線傳承，迂迴而行的可能性。為了再現知識的意涵而創造出的多元詮釋角度會不斷地延宕知識傳承的最終意義。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In Jacques Derrida’s The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond (1987), the part of “Envois” is composed of many exchanged post cards. This collection of post cards reminds us of the letters compiled in epistolary novels. There is a lot of prestige attached to many seventeenth- and eighteenth-century English and French epistolary novels, such as Gabriel de Guilleragues’ The Portuguese Letters (1669), Samuel Richardson’s Pamela (1740) and Clarissa (1747-1748), Françoise de Graffigny’s Letters from a Peruvian Woman (1747), Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Julie, ou la nouvelle Héloïse (1761), and Choderlos de Laclos’ Les Liaisons dangereuses (1782). These epistolary novels constitute the main frame of the epistolary genre. Then, confronted with the epistolary predecessors, what prompts Derrida to write the epistolary text of “Envois” in the twentieth century, in which the telecommunications networks appear to overpower the importance of writing letters or post cards? What is the difference between “Envois” and the previous epistolary novels?

On this issue, I want to argue in my thesis that Derrida’s “Envois” is intended to deconstruct the epistolary genre by paradoxically valorizing and substituting the postal effects of the post card for the generic identities of epistolary novels. The postal effects of the post card primarily invoke the impossibility of the predestined destination and intended receiver. The post card always implies the possibilities of interception and multiple receivers in the process of transmission. In this way, the post card disrupts the linear path confined in the hierarchical opposites between the original departure point and the final destination. This disruption facilitates Derrida’s attempt to deconstruct the construction of knowledge in the Western intellectual genealogy. The postal effects are applied to destabilize the linear succession of intellectual inheritance originated since Socrates. The inheritance is transmitted by multiple readers and hence susceptible to a myriad of interpretations. The binary logic between the original and the derivative, the present and the absent, and the public and the private is undermined in the multiplicity. The form of the post card, which is “half-private half public” (Post Card 62), oscillates in the indeterminacy of multiplicity. The postal effects of indeterminacy aroused in the post card are what Derrida emphasizes in “Envois.” As a result, even in the age replete with the telecommunications networks, Derrida still proposes the possibility of “the unlimited empire of a postcardization” (104). The postcardization does not mean to precipitate the “decadence” (104) of epistolary writing, but it aims to disseminate and recurrently stimulate the possibility of difference.

In my thesis, I propose three perspectives to illuminate the epistolarity of the post card: detour, deferral, and différance. They are interwoven in my discussion of Derrida’s “Envois.” In chapter one “Epistolary Genre: Valorization and Substitution,” I propound a paradox that “Envois” simultaneously valorizes and substitutes for the epistolary genre. “Envois” therefore puts the epistolary genre in a detour of difference and defers its determination of identity. In chapter two “Epistolary Otherness: The Object of Desire,” I apply Jacques Lacan’s concept of the object of desire to elucidate the self-construction in the act of writing post cards. The sender’s self-identity is continually deferred in a detour, because s/he requires the absent receiver to evoke his/her difference. In chapter three “Epistolary Writing: Paradox of the Supplement,” I relate Derrida’s concept of the supplement to the paradoxical effects of addition and substitution in epistolary writing. Writing post cards adds to a compensation of the distance, but it also simultaneously substitutes the distance for the final encounter with the absent receiver. In chapter four “Epistolary Exchange: Play of the Fort Da,” I compare Sigmund Freud’s, Lacan’s, and Derrida’s different observations on the fort da game. The fort da movements of epistolary exchanges are interminably deferred in a detour, when multiple readers in the process of transmission are taken into consideration. The multiple readers replenish possibilities of differences with a variety of interpretations. In chapter five “Epistolary Inheritance: Post Card of Intellectual Legacy,” I explore Derrida’s speculations on the scene of reversal copied on the post cards collected in “Envois.” The scene of reversal between Socrates and Plato is speculated to imply possible detours away from the linear succession of genealogy. Different representations of knowledge persistently defer the final determinate meaning of the intellectual inheritance.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgements………………………………………………………. iii

Chinese Abstract………………………………………………………… v

English Abstract………………………………………………………… vii

Chapter

I. Introduction
Epistolary Genre: Valorization and Substitution.……………… 01

II. Epistolary Otherness: The Object of Desire………………… 27

III. Epistolary Writing: Paradox of the Supplement…………… 58

IV. Epistolary Exchange: Play of the Fort Da…………………… 100

V. Conclusion
Epistolary Inheritance: Post Card of Intellectual Legacy…… 137

Works Cited………………………………………………………………. 153		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 17320 bytes-
dc.format.extent 18139 bytes-
dc.format.extent 17134 bytes-
dc.format.extent 15595 bytes-
dc.format.extent 103646 bytes-
dc.format.extent 23335 bytes-
dc.format.extent 158844 bytes-
dc.format.extent 134566 bytes-
dc.format.extent 209003 bytes-
dc.format.extent 172065 bytes-
dc.format.extent 121196 bytes-
dc.format.extent 96687 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0089551004en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 明信片zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 書信文類zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 迂迴zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 延宕zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 延異zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) The Post Carden_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) epistolary genreen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) object of desireen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) the supplementen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) fort daen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) intellectual inheritanceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) différanceen_US
dc.title (題名) 迂迴，延宕與延異：《明信片》的書信特質zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Detour, Deferral, and Différance: Epistolarity in The Post Carden_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Altman, Janet Gurkin. Epistolarity: Approaches to a Form. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1982.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bakhtin, Mikhail. “Discourse in Dostoevsky.” Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. and Trans. Caryl Emerson. 1984. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota P, 1994. 181-269.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bass, Alan. Glossary. The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond. By Jacques Derrida. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. xiii-xxix.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Benstock, Shari. “From Letters to Literature: La Carte Postale in the Epistolary Genre.” Genre 18 (1985): 257-295.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Letters: The Post Card in the Epistolary Genre.” Textualizing the Feminine: On the Limits of Genre. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 86-122.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “The Law of the Phallus (as) The Law of Genre.” Textualizing the Feminine: On the Limits of Genre. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. 3-22.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Berg, Temma F. “La Carte Postale: Reading (Derrida) Reading.” Criticism 28.3 (1986): 323-340.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brooks, Peter. “Freud’s Masterplot: A Model for Narrative.” Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984. 90-112.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cornell, Drucilla. “Where Love Begins: Sexual Difference and the Limit of the Masculine Symbolic.” Derrida and Feminism: Recasting the Question of Woman. Ed. Ellen K. Feder, Mary C. Rawlinson, and Emily Zakin. New York: Routledge, 1997. 161-206.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) De Graffigny, Françoise. Letters from a Peruvian Woman. 1747. Trans. David Kornacker. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1993.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) De Laclos, Choderlos. Les liaisons dangereuses. 1782. Trans. P. W. K. Stone. London: Penguin Books, 1961.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Deleuze, Gilles. Masochism: Coldness and Cruelty. New York: Zone Books, 1989.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Derrida, Jacques. “… That Dangerous Supplement ….” Of Grammatology. Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976. 141-164.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Différance.” Margins of Philosophy. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982. 1-27.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “From Spurs: Nietzsche’s Styles.” 1978. Trans. & Ed. Peggy Kamuf. A Derrida Reader: Between the Blinds. Ed. Peggy Kamuf. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991. 353-377.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Psyche: Inventions of the Other.” Trans. Catherine Porter. Reading de Man Reading. Ed. Lindsay Waters and Wlad Godzich. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989. 25-65.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “The Law of Genre.” Trans. Avital Ronell. Acts of Literature. Ed. Derek Attridge. New York: Routledge, 1992. 221-252.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Evans, Dylan. An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge, 1996.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Freud, Sigmund. “Beyond the Pleasure Principle.” 1920. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Ed. James Strachey. Vol. 18. London: Hogarth Press, 1981. 3-64.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gilroy, Amanda, and W. M. Verhoeven, eds. Epistolary Histories: Letters, Fiction, Culture. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Guilleragues, de Gabriel-Joseph de Laverge. The Portuguese Letters: Love Letters of Mariana to the Marquis de Chamilly. 1669. Trans. Donald E. Ericson. as an appendix to The Three Marias: New Portuguese Letters. by Maria Isabel Barreno, Maria Teresa Horta, and Maria Velho da Costa. Trans. Helen R. Lane. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1975. 403-429.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Heidegger, Martin. “Time and Being.” On Time and Being. Trans. Joan Stambaugh. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1972. 1-24.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hogarth, Claire Milne. Epistolary Constructions of Identity in Derrida’s “Envois” and Coetzee’s Age of Iron. Diss. Montreal: McGill University, 2001.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hu, Chin-yuan. “Private Letters, Public Reading: Pamela.” National Chengchi University Scholarly Journal [國立政治大學學報] 72.1 (1996): 321-351.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hutcheon, Linda. The Canadian Postmodern: A Study of Contemporary English-Canadian Fiction. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Irigaray, Luce. “Belief Itself.” Sexes and Genealogies. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. 23-53.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “The Gesture in Psychoanalysis.” Trans. Elizabeth Guild. Between Feminism and Psychoanalysis. Ed. Teresa Brennan. London: Routledge, 1990. 127-138.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Johnson, Barbara. “The Frame of Reference: Poe, Lacan, Derrida.” 1977. The Purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida & Psychoanalytical Reading. Ed. John P. Muller and William J. Richardson. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. 213-251.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Writing.” Critical Terms for Literary Study. Ed. Frank Lentricchia and Thomas McLaughlin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. 39-49.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kauffman, Linda S. "Dangerous Liaisons: Roland Barthes`s A Lover`s Discourse and Jacques Derrida`s The Post Card.” Special Delivery: Epistolary Modes in Modern Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. 81-130.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. Discourses of Desire: Gender, Genre, and Epistolary Fictions. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. Leon S. Roudiez. Trans. Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lacan, Jacques. “Introduction of the big Other.” 1955. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis 1954-1955. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988. 235-247.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter.’” 1972. Trans. Jeffrey Mehlman. The Purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida & Psychoanalytical Reading. Ed. John P. Muller and William J. Richardson. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. 28-54.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. “Tuché and Automaton.” 1964. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1981. 53-64.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. Écrits: A Selection. 1977. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Routledge, 2003.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Leitch, Vincent B. “Marking the Supplement.” Deconstructive Criticism: An Advanced Introduction. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. 169-178.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Liang, Sun-Chieh. “Freud’s Fort/Da Game and Chaucer’s Retraction.” Studies in English Literature and Linguistics 26 (2000): 77-95.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Loselle, Andrea. “Freud/Derrida As Fort/Da and the Repetitive Eponym.” Modern Language Notes 97 (1982): 1180-1185.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McWhirter, David Bruce. Desire and Love in Henry James: A Study of the Late Novels. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Naas, Michael. “The Time of a Detour: Jacques Derrida and the Question of the Gift.” Oxford Literary Review 18 (1996): 67-86.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Perry, Ruth. “The Social Context of Letters.” Women, Letters, and the Novel. New York: AMS Press, 1980. 63-91.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Peters, John Durham. Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Richardson, Samuel. Clarissa, or the History of a Young Lady. 1747-1748. Ed. Angus Ross. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rosbottom, Ronald C. “The Novel and Gender Difference.” A New History of French Literature. Ed. Denis Hollier. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989. 481-487.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Salecl, Renata. “I Can’t Love You Unless I Give You up.” Gaze and Voice as Love Objects. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996. 179-207.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sarup, Madan. Jacques Lacan. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schuerewegen, Franc. “A Telephone Conversation: Fragments.” Trans. Marvin N. Richards. Diacritics 24.4 (1994): 30-40.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schwenger, Peter. “Postnuclear Post Card.” Papers on Language and Literature 26.1 (1990): 164-181.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Siegert, Bernhard. Relays: Literature as an Epoch of the Postal System. Trans. Kevin Repp. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Love Me, Love My Ombre, Elle." Diacritics 14.4 (1984): 19-36.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ulmer, Gregory L. "The Post-Age." Diacritics 11 (1981): 39-56.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) West, William N. “Nothing as Given: Economies of the Gift in Derrida and Shakespeare.” Comparative Literature 48.1 (1996): 1-18.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wills, David. “Post/Card/Match/Book/Envois/Derrida.” SubStance 43 (1984): 19-38.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Žižek, Slavoj. “Why Does A Letter Always Arrive at Its Destination?” Enjoy Your Symptom: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and out. Rev. ed. New York: Routledge, 2001. 1-28.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 胡錦媛 [Hu, Chin-yuan]。〈母親，妳在何方?──被虐狂、女性主體與閱讀〉[“Mother, Where Are You?─Masochist, Female Subjectivity, and Reading”]。《閱讀張愛玲：張愛玲國際研討會論文集》[Reading Ai-ling Zhang: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ai-ling Zhang]。Ed. 楊澤 [Yang Ze]。Taipei：Mai-Tian [麥田出版]，1999。235-255。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---.〈似近還遠：作家與書信〉[“Distance in Proximity: Writers and Letters”]。《中國時報》[China Times] 31 Aug. 2003：B3。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---.〈書寫自我：《譚郎的書信》中的書信形式〉[“Writing the Self: The Epistolary Form in Letters of Tian-Lang”]。《性/別研究讀本》[Research on Gender Difference]。Taipei：Mai-Tian [麥田出版]，1998。61-94。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ---.〈戀人對語，女人獨語：《葡萄牙修女的情書》中的書信形式〉[“Lovers’ Dialogue, Woman’s Monologue: Epistolary Form in Lettres portugaises”]。《中外文學》[Chung-Wai Literary] 28.12 (2000)：156-181。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 張上冠 [Chang, Christopher S.]。〈『背信者』：論譯者的抉擇〉[“Postman: The Choice of the Translator”]。《文山評論》[Wen Shan Review] 1.3 (2000)：1-21。zh_TW