拼裝都市論與都市政治經濟學之辯

Abstract

本文評述晚近都市研究領域中，拼裝都市論者的主張，以及他們與政治經濟學陣營之間的爭論。聚焦於《都市拼裝體》和《城市》期刊的專輯論文，作者整理了兩方論點，梳理出雙方各取所長、交流合作，或是以拼裝都市論代替政治經濟學這兩種基本主張。爭議各方的共識是，拼裝分析乃有助於延伸經驗分析至過去遭忽視課題的方法論補充，但可能缺乏或不關注理論性和結構性的解釋。相對的，爭執焦點則在於兩方的存有論、認識論和政治立場，有著根本差異而難以調和。本文則主張，除了以政治經濟學為分析架構來納編拼裝分析的路線，拼裝分析若要建立獨特的理論模型或典範，而非僅止於方法論地位，就必須針對歷史發展的經驗，提出令人信服的解釋，以及能夠對應當前都市難題的行動方針。

This article comments on the recent assertion of assemblage urbanism in the filed of urban studies, as well as its debate with the asserters of political economy. Focusing on the Urban Assemblages and the journal of City, the author compiles the arguments of both sides and concludes with mainly two types: one argues to learn merits from each other while the other claims that assemblage urbanism should replace political economy. The consensus from different parties however, is that while assemblage urbanism could assist in extending the empirical analysis and complements the methodology regarding the once overlooked issues, it nevertheless lacks or neglects theoretical and structural explanation. There are also disputes that cannot be reconciled, which center mainly on the ontological, epistemological, and political grounds. This article argues that besides taking political economy to frame up the analysis of assemblage, one should also offer persuasive explanation via the probing of historical experiences and a stance for the current urban challenges if he or she wants to make assemblage a distinctive theory or paradigm rather than mere methodology.