倫理與恐怖: 寰宇小說與九一一

Abstract

九一一恐怖攻擊是二十一世紀的前十年中最獨特和具標誌性的事件，因為此事件為人類最深層的恐懼定調。九月十一日這個日期無疑地標誌了我們在認知層面深陷於恐懼和安全，危機和秩序，敵人與朋友等概念的戀物般地崇拜。隨著九一一事件，一個「我們／他們」，「朋友／敵人」的分際不斷地被用以構築公共情感、國際結盟和認同的座標。我們能瞭解九一一事件對全球人類帶來的創傷，但我們也必須警覺到這個創傷被挪用為合法化美國為鞏固其全球霸權而發動的反恐戰爭的理想托辭。 本論文以九一一恐怖攻擊事件為出發點，欲探討是否仍有別於主流「我們／他們」論述的其他可能。本文的關懷在於討論這個對於九一一事件的非主流的回應如何自寰宇論述、生命政治論述、全球化理論、邊界與移動的論述以及性別與種族論述的重重對話中產生。本論文據此試圖爬梳出一個能跨越國家邊界且能涵蓋當代人類經驗的回應。我認為寰宇論述內在的政治承諾與倫理責任的深刻意涵能夠使我們抽離受限於國家邊界的個別經驗而以全人類作為理解九一一事件的參照點，生產出我們對九一一事件的非主流回應，免於被收編於一個霸權式的大論述中而抹除了個體的獨特單一性的微觀論述。藉由寰宇論述及其倫理意涵的批判視角作為方法論，本文認為Ian McEwan的 《星期六（Saturday）》，Joseph O’Neill的 《荷蘭 （Netherland）》 與Mohsin Hamid的《拉合爾茶館的陌生人（The Reluctant Fundamentalist）》不能因其書寫者之國籍簡約歸類為當代英國小說，美國小說或南亞裔小說，也不能因其書寫內容關乎九一一恐怖攻擊此一「全球」事件而將之歸類為世界文學。本文認為這些小說作家自身及筆下人物背景呈現的多國連結的複雜性及對九一一事件之回應揉合了他者的再現與批判應被定義為寰宇小說。本文先就寰宇小說之關懷對象與再現策略定調，進而藉由重思德希達的aporetic hospitality和對他者的責任的概念與全球危機和美國霸權間的對話以分析小說中所再現九一一事件中被妖魔化的他者來討論寰宇論述與實踐如何真正公平對待全球危機與恐怖威脅下的真正「受害者」。

For the first decade of the twenty-first century, 9/11 is so specific and iconized that it defines the darkest fear of human beings. The date of September 11 has undoubtedly marked a cognitive fetish of terror and security, risk and order, enemy and friend. In the wake of 9/11 terrorist attacks, an “us/them,” “friend/enemy” divide is repeatedly singled out as the primary response that structures public sentiment, alliance, and identification. It can be agreed that a majority of people traumatized by the attacks of 9/11, but we should be cautious about whether this trauma becomes an ideal pretext to legitimate the US-led War on Terror to secure its global hegemony. Taking the event of September 11 terrorist attacks as the point of departure, this thesis aims to explore an alternative to the mainstream “us/them” discourse. My concern is to explore how the alternative response to 9/11 can be made possible by bringing into dialogue the cosmopolitan theories, biopolitical discourse, globalization theories, border and mobility discourses, gender and race discourses. Accordingly, the task of my thesis is to search for a response, which ventures beyond our nationally demarcated visions into the world at large and accommodates contemporary human circumstance and experience. Cosmopolitan presentation, in my view, connotes political commitment and ethical responsibility, by which we can expect to abstain from any particular discourse for humanity as our reference point to understand the 9/11 tragedy. As such, our responses to 9/11 will not be engulfed in the formation of a grand, hegemonic narrative inclined to reframe the globe and erase the singularity of the individual. In light of the ethical connotation and critique inherent in cosmopolitan theories, the thesis argues that novels like Ian McEwan’s Saturday, Joseph O’Neill’s Netherland, and Mohsin Hamid’s The Reluctant Fundamentalist cannot be categorized as contemporary British novel, American novel or South Asian novel simply because of the authors’ nationalities. Nor can these novels be labeled as world literature merely due to the reason that they concern the global event of September 11 terrorist attacks. The thesis begins with arguing that these novels should be defined as cosmopolitan novels, and continues to explore how cosmopolitan discourse and practice represented in these novels can be produced to do justice to the real “victims” of global risks, terrorist threats and American hegemony through rethinking Derrida’s aporetic hospitality and responsibility to the demonized other in our age of global risk.