戴維揚薛名雁2019-09-032004-6-172019-09-032004http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22N2004000061%22.&%22.id.&http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/97920摘要 本論文主要採用Elizabeth Sakellaridou所著 Pinter’s Female Portraits及Victor L. Cahn的 Gender and Power in the Plays of Harold Pinter其間對Harold Pinter劇本中兩性互動關係的論述觀點，試圖以另一類角度探討Pinter劇本中兩性為了生存的權力所激盪的互鬥模式。序言及結論以外，本論文共分為三個章節：沉默、暴力、偽裝，剖析前述三類男女競爭歷程。 序言旨在本論文的探討理論基礎以及Pinter劇本中特殊的語言遊戲，並以此為基準所產生思考建構機制，構成論文的主旨。第二章著重在女性角色如何對語言巧妙運用以及其中角色態度的轉換及成長。女性的沉默往往代表著更多元、更深沉的語言所不能表達的意義和力量，Pinter筆下所塑造的女性往往相當技巧地將男性的權力佔為己有。第三章討論男性在兩性權力鬥爭中所使用的諸多暴力形式及其多向的轉變。在這場拉鋸戰中暴力與其說是致命性行為，倒不如視為是種要求立即服從的當下馬威。這類的威嚇一方面可以解讀為被急凍抑制而未完全發洩的怒氣，另一方面它遠比單純的暴力行為增添諸多複雜的計謀和盤算。本論文引用Michel Foucault的「圓形監獄」理論(Panopticon theory) ，檢視Pinter劇中兩性在各類意識形態所產生的暴力，及詮釋女性在無形暴力陰影之下所承受的壓力。第四章探討Pinter劇本中男女角色的互動、衝突以及各角色面對各種威脅所採取的應對因應策略與方法。在互動方面，主角們避免了正面肢體衝突，而採取心理以及語言的雙重、甚至多重的偽裝戰略。因此，儘管對於權力的爭奪持續進行著，表面上主角們呈現的仍然是種和諧的關係。 最後，本論文的結語提供另類觀點重新思考Harold Pinter劇中呈現的「人性」，但不置可否，Harold Pinter的創作呈現多面性、多層次的兩性遊戲/競鬥複雜關係。Abstract This thesis aims at exploring the power struggle and survival between genders in the plays of Harold Pinter. By the approaches of Elizabeth Sakellaridou’s definition of Pinter as a writer yielding three-staged attitudes and Victor L. Cahn’s view in analysing sexual relationships in Pinter, I attempt to look further into this issue in a new light, and wishfully attain more optimistic values on the “Pinteresque humanity.” Introduction and Conclusion apart, the main body of this thesis includes three chapters: silence, violence, and pretence. In the Introduction, I prelude with the general criticism on the unique Pinteresque language, and the books of Elizabeth Sakellaridou and Victor L. Cahn, proffering sketches of my founding standpoints, since these are highly relevant to my discussion in the following chapters. In regard to language games most of the variances of struggles in Pinter’s works, violence or pretence, derive from the diverse manipulation of language skills, among which repetition, invented memory, and silence are applied ubiquitously within. Silence, the most distinctive element in Pinter’s language, signifies a lot of suffocating and embarrassing feelings among the protagonists. It can allude to suppression of emotions, an expression of indifference, an effective camouflage of belligerence, or, the emptiness of minds. While words might act as barriers between people and furthermore breed misunderstanding, Pinter’s characters “communicate too well in silence” (Naismith 12). Chapter Two focus on the strategies of language and appropriation of power in the female part, analyzing the characteristics and changes of Pinter women. Physically weaker, they have to involve psywar—which is best exemplified in language— in order to survive. Among the variety of language skills, the usage of silence and pauses is the key. August Strindberg states, “Silence cannot hide anything—which is more than you can say for words” (Knowles 79). Firstly, I will study the female characters in Pinter’s early plays as a comparison to those of later works. Little self-development and oppressed desires are their common traits. With different stages of writing, Pinter’s female protagonists make gradual progress with the chronological order of the plays. On the sprout of female awareness, Pinteresque heroines make use of language, such as silence and repetition, to resist masculine threats. Later female roles shy away from querulous talking and speak less. Discreet use of language also enables women to keep their thinking lucid and to see the situation more clearly. In addition, women choose not to confront men face to face. Instead of shouting, fighting or declaiming their rights outrageously, they take a compliant stance, follow what the male characters wish, and seize the chance to take reins. In other words, Pinter’s female roles tactically appropriate the power of men and make it hers. Chapter Three tackles the issue of male violence as well as the transformation of it in Pinter’s plays. Violence in the sexual tug of war is more an intimidation to demand obedience than a deadly action. For one part, it is a muffled vent of rage instead of a killer’s way of working. For the other part, unlike plays of brutality that is all violence and entails little sentiments, physical violence in sexual dispute is simply one of the strategies to force yielding. About collective ideology of violence, I bring in Michel Foucault’s theory in Discipline and Punish as the backbone of my discussion. Pinteresque appropriation of such Panopticon theory is that they draw the whole fights under a pervasive social collective ideology, which chauvinist concepts dominate, and of which the males have long held control by their “strength” and power. Under the gaze of possible violence of male ideology, Pinter’s females are haunted by an ever-suspended threat of terror because the time when the violence is going to initiate ambush is unknown. Chapter Four probes the interaction and confrontation of Pinter couples as well as the measures they take to deal with each other. The struggles rely heavily on the manipulation of mental war and language. Rather than hot fights, they manage to look indifferent in each round of their battles. In other words, while both sides of them are beating their brains to defeat the other in the competition, they feign that their attention is on other subjects like chewing bread or reading newspaper. Hence the battleground does not smell bloody at all. The cruelty is occasionally shown only in some exchanges of acrimonious words. The competition for survival has led to animosity between Pinter’s male and female characters. Yet meanwhile, they have to depend on each other to provide a sense of security. As a result, the protagonists hide mutual hostility, fake harmonious relationships, maintain a peaceful appearance and stay together. The contention thus goes under the table. It is a game of a “double” fake. Both sides of sex play faking games. Conclusion for this thesis is to rethink the Pinteresque humanity and leaves an open space as to whether Pinter draws a barbarian world or not. Representing his plays on a fixed authorial intention or any established models would be a mission impossible since Pinter has created so many layers of meaning for them.哈洛品特權力鬥爭Pinter