艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯

(1)

科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告

期末報告

艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯(第3年)

計畫類別：個別型計畫計畫編號： NSC 102-2410-H-004-177-MY3 執行期間： 104年08月01日至105年07月31日執行單位：國立政治大學英國語文學系計畫主持人：楊麗敏報告附件：移地研究心得報告出席國際學術會議心得報告

中　華　民　國　105　年　10　月　31　日

(2)

中文摘要：本專題研究計畫為期三年，旨在探討艾略特如何透過文化位移、文化遭逢、文化迻譯等觀念，重塑其文化歐洲。本人以為，艾略特藉由越界異鄉人與其隨之而來的文化迻譯變成他者的雙重媒介運作，闡揚他理想中之虛擬歐洲。第一年之研究，主要側重於艾略特的早期詩作，例如他在1910-1920期間所寫之法文詩與其他英文詩（例如 1918-1919所寫就之〈帶著旅遊指南的波爾班克與帶著雪茄布雷斯頓〉）（“Burbank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar”）。舉凡旅行/居留、書寫/迻譯、身份認同/居間性等糾纏牽惹之議題，皆載浮載沈於詩文行間，不若艾略特後期作品之沈澱潛藏。但見不同之旅人，如流亡者、離散者、探索者、旅行者、或觀光客，離家動身，行旅往來於歐洲、東方、非洲、義大利、以及各個不同之他鄉異邦；他們各自在其虛擬之歐洲境遇中，書寫著旅行之軌跡、遭逢、迻譯、以及身份認同之權術策略。第二年之研究以艾略特之現代/後現代力作《荒原》與《四首四重奏》為主，旨在彰顯其作品中之居間性、混雜性、超文本漫遊性、與轉造性。第三年之研究將以艾略特的兩部詩劇為主軸：《家庭團聚》與《政治元老》將以「流亡者歸來」與艾略特式之「彷彿哲學」模式來探討之，舉凡國族的、社群的、甚至文本之境內/境外的遭逢與迻譯，都在艾略特的文化歐洲之繪製行旅圖中，見證了其虛擬生成本質。中文關鍵詞：艾略特、文化位移、文化遭逢、文化迻譯、《荒原》、《四首四重奏》、《家庭團聚》、《政治元老》、虛擬歐洲

英文摘要： This is a three-year project which aims to explore T. S. Eliot’s reconceptualization of a cultural Europe via the concepts of cultural movement, displacement, and

translation. I propose that Eliot expounds his ideal of a virtual Europe via a dual intermediating concern with a cross-cultural stranger and the subsequent cultural translation of becoming other. In the first year, I will choose to focus on Eliot’s early poetry because the intertwined issues of traveling/dwelling,

writing/translation, identity/between-ness are closer to the surface and less resolved there than in his later work. Different voyagers such as exiles, diaspora, explorers, travelers, and tourists set out on the road and make their journeys to Europe, the Orient, Africa, Italy, everywhere, elsewhere, and nowhere to write on and about traveling, trajectory, encounter, and translation, as well as to write with and within the identity politics of the contested domain of virtual Europe. In the second year, this study will investigate The Waste Land (1922) and Four Quartets (1935-1942), which are taken by critics as the chef

d’oeuvre of (post)modernism, the supreme (post)modernist icon. The third year will deal with Eliot’s two plays: The Family Reunion (1939) will offer a study on “exile’s return,” while Eliot’s last play The Elder Statesman (1958) completes the literary odyssey of his expatriates

(3)

that started two decades ago in The Family Reunion via a critical conflation of exile, expatriation, traveling, dwelling, displacement, and translation. I maintain a virtual representation of Europe in Eliot’s works, in which travelers or nomads carry with them hybrid and syncretic cultures in their intercultural fluency and dislocations, so as to highlight the contemporary concern with the “routes/roots” remapping of diaspora and

cultural translation. A new localization, such as

“border” and “between-ness,” is rendered possible where the national, ethnic, communal, or textual “insides” and “outsides” are encountered, negotiated, and translated. 英文關鍵詞： T. S. Eliot, The Waste Land, Four Quartets, The Family

Reunion, The Elder Statesman, travel, cultural encounter, displacement, and translation.

(4)

科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告

（□期中進度報告/■期末報告）

艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯

計畫類別：■個別型計畫 □整合型計畫

計畫編號：

MOST102-2410-H-004-177-MY3

執行期間：102 年 8 月 1 日至 105 年 7 月 31 日

執行機構及系所：國立政治大學英國語文學系

計畫主持人：楊麗敏

共同主持人：

計畫參與人員：

碩士班研究生兼任研究助理兩名

本計畫除繳交成果報告外，另含下列出國報告，共 _2__ 份：

■執行國際合作與移地研究心得報告

■出席國際學術會議心得報告

□出國參訪及考察心得報告

中華民國 105 年 10 月 31 日

(5)

科科技技部部專專題題研研究究計計畫畫期期末末成成果果報報告告艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯 MOST102-2410-H-004-177-MY3 計畫主持人：楊麗敏 一、中文摘要及關鍵詞 本專題研究計畫為期三年，旨在探討艾略特如何透過文化位移、文化遭逢、文化迻譯等觀念，重塑其文化歐洲。本人以為，艾略特藉由越界異鄉人與其隨之而來的文化迻譯變成他者的雙重媒介運作，闡揚他理想中之虛擬歐洲。第一年之研究，主要側重於艾略特的早期詩作，例如他在 1910-1920 期間所寫之法文詩與其他英文詩（例如 1918-1919 所寫就之〈帶著旅遊指南的波爾班克與帶著雪茄布雷斯頓〉）（“Burbank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar”）。舉凡旅行/居留、書寫/迻譯、身份認同/居間性等糾纏牽惹之議題，皆載浮載沈於詩文行間，不若艾略特後期作品之沈澱潛藏。但見不同之旅人，如流亡者、離散者、探索者、旅行者、或觀光客，離家動身，行旅往來於歐洲、東方、非洲、義大利、以及各個不同之他鄉異邦；他們各自在其虛擬之歐洲境遇中，書寫著旅行之軌跡、遭逢、迻譯、以及身份認同之權術策略。第二年之研究以艾略特之現代/後現代力作《荒原》與《四首四重奏》為主，旨在彰顯其作品中之居間性、混雜性、超文本漫遊性、與轉造性。第三年之研究將以艾略特的兩部詩劇為主軸：《家庭團聚》與《政治元老》將以「流亡者歸來」與艾略特式之「彷彿哲學」模式來探討之，舉凡國族的、社群的、甚至文本之境內/境外的遭逢與迻譯，都在艾略特的文化歐洲之繪製行旅圖中，見證了其虛擬生成本質。關鍵詞：艾略特、文化位移、文化遭逢、文化迻譯、《荒原》、《四首四重奏》、《家庭團聚》、《政治元老》、虛擬歐洲 二、英文摘要及關鍵詞

This is a three-year project which aims to explore T. S. Eliot’s reconceptualization of a cultural Europe via the concepts of cultural movement, displacement, and translation. I propose that Eliot expounds his ideal of a virtual Europe via a dual intermediating concern with a cross-cultural stranger and the subsequent cultural translation of becoming other. In the first year, I will choose to focus on Eliot’s early poetry because the intertwined issues of traveling/dwelling, writing/translation, identity/between-ness are closer to the surface and less resolved there than in his later work. Different voyagers such as exiles, diaspora, explorers, travelers, and tourists set out on the road and make their journeys to Europe, the Orient, Africa, Italy, everywhere, elsewhere, and nowhere to write on and about traveling, trajectory, encounter, and translation, as well as to write with and within the identity politics of the contested domain of virtual Europe. In the second year, this study will investigate The Waste Land (1922) and Four Quartets (1935-1942), which are taken by critics as the chef d’oeuvre of (post)modernism, the supreme (post)modernist icon. The third year will deal with Eliot’s two plays: The Family Reunion (1939) will offer a study on “exile’s return,” while Eliot’s last play The Elder Statesman (1958) completes the literary odyssey of his expatriates that started two decades ago in The Family Reunion via a critical conflation of exile, expatriation, traveling, dwelling,

(6)

travelers or nomads carry with them hybrid and syncretic cultures in their intercultural fluency and

dislocations, so as to highlight the contemporary concern with the “routes/roots” remapping of diaspora and cultural translation. A new localization, such as “border” and “between-ness,” is rendered possible where the national, ethnic, communal, or textual “insides” and “outsides” are encountered, negotiated, and translated.

Keywords: T. S. Eliot, The Waste Land, Four Quartets, The Family Reunion, The Elder Statesman, travel, cultural encounter, displacement, and translation.

三、報告內容 Background:

T. S. Eliot repeatedly shifted from one urban culture to another: from St. Louis to Boston, from Harvard to the Sorbonne, from Paris to London, and from Marburg to Oxford. The trajectory of Eliot’s cultural detour finally settled down in London, and his choice to live there echoed contemporary articulation of the

routes/roots and negotiation of cultural displacement and translation, of homogeneity and heterogeneity, and of homeland and borderland. A recurrent concern with Eliot as man and poet is people on the move—those voyagers who carry with them their own lives and histories as they move towards different experiences and discoveries, in order to cross changing times, roving geographies, and diverse cultures: “Fare forward. / O voyagers, O seamen … Not fare well, / But fare forward, voyagers” (“The Dry Salvages” III. 39-40, 46-47). Yet, Eliot’s passionate voyager is also an avowed collector who, traveling in time and space, in histories and cultures, abandons nothing en route, be it Shakespeare, Homer, or the rock drawing of the Magdalenian draughtsmen (“Tradition and the Individual Talent” 16). For Eliot, travel is, what James Clifford claims, a figure for different modes of dwelling and displacement, for trajectories and identities, for storytelling and theorizing the (post)modernist life experiences of cultural diaspora and encounter (“Notes on Travel and Theory” n. pag.). Every location, therefore, bespeaks an itinerary of a series of encounters and translations, of dislocations and dislocutions. Every location, instead of being a bounded site of origin, centrality, and singularity, entails more movements and displacements. For the (post)modernist traveler like Eliot, the so-called community, the polis, or the country loses its centrality as a “home” base where one can go out and return, for every center or home is always a site of noplace and everyplace on the ill-defined, contested domain of identity politics.

As John G. Cawelti points out, exile is both a central theme and a characteristic biographical pattern of artistic modernism (38). With Eliot, exile was both voluntary and involuntary: it began before he was born, it was repeated early in his life, and then it became his own chosen way of life. Around 1668-1669, Eliot’s forefather, Andrew Eliott, emigrated from East Coker, Somerset, England, to Bay Colony, Massachusetts, New England, America. In 1834, Eliot’s grandfather, William Greenleaf Eliot, left New England for St. Louis, where he established a Unitarian Church and founded Washington University. Eliot’s father and mother brought the family back to the North Shore every summer, and in 1896 they built a substantial house at Eastern Point, Gloucester, Massachusetts. In retrospect, Eliot is heard confessing a sense of alienation and displacement caused by such a complicated familial background: “I perceived that I myself had always been a New Englander in the South West, and a South Westerner in New England” (Preface, This American World xiii). In 1906, Eliot entered Harvard and remained there until he took his B.A. in 1909 and his M.A. in1910. Peter Ackroyd presumes that Eliot must have felt that he was not perfectly educated at Harvard, and he may have recognized—as most Bostonians did—“the narrowness of the horizon” (39), for he eventually persuaded

(7)

his father to subsidize his first trip to Europe in October 1910. He stayed mainly in Paris until July 1911, attended lectures at the Sorbonne University, and visited Italy and England briefly. Having been given a Sheldon Travelling Fellowship by Harvard, which enabled him to return to Europe in 1914, Eliot arrived in London by mischance in August 1914. The First World War prevented him from beginning his studies at the University of Marburg. He stayed in London until the Michaelmas term at Oxford began in October, and then he took refuge in Merton College to begin work under Harold Joachim.

Eliot took the first step of self-imposed exile in June 1915 when he married Vivienne Haigh-Wood on impulse at the Hampstead Registry Office, which shocked and agitated his parents. In terms of Eliot’s

reminiscences, which were not without lament or regret, about his sudden marriage to Vivienne Haigh-Wood, he persuaded himself that he was in love with her because he “wanted to burn [his] boats and commit

[himself] to staying in England” (Valerie Eliot, “Introduction,” xvii). Furthermore, he claimed that Haigh-Wood persuaded herself to marry him, perhaps under the influence of Ezra Pound, because she believed that “she would save the poet by keeping him in England” (xvii). Eliot stayed on in England and returned to America only for visits. He abandoned a career in philosophy at Harvard for a literary career in London. 1927 was the year which marked the radical alteration of his public personality and private

existence: Eliot was baptized and received into the Church of England at Finstock Church in the Cotswolds in June, and he chose to give up his American citizenship in November. He transformed himself, in terms of Eliot’s “old chum” Brand Blanshard, from “a midwestern American” (Blanshard 36) to the high priest, the abbot of English letters, “a classicist in literature, royalist in politics, and anglo-catholic in religion” (Eliot, Preface, For Lancelot Andrewes vii). From this point on, Eliot was ready to face the now open hostility from across the Atlantic which scathingly paired him with Henry James as another “failed American” (Hay 15). Eliot was also obliged to recognize himself as the diasporic cosmopolitan, a cross-cultural stranger, or a foreigner of “between-ness,” who sought to negotiate the issues of alternative identities via cultivated heterogeneity—be it linguistic, personal, national, or cultural.

Eliot’s propensity for foreignness and his diasporic attitude towards place, nationality, and identity fascinate yet misguide his acquaintances, critics, and readers. Eliot was reported as having confessed to Herbert Read in a 1928 letter that he always felt rootless and displaced no matter where he resided. He was never anything anywhere, and he felt himself to be more a Frenchman than an American, or more an Englishman than a Frenchman” (Read 20). Conrad Aiken refers to “hybrid difficulties” when he discusses Eliot’s 1921 breakdown: “Tom Eliot has had some sort of nervous breakdown and is at present in Lausanne: hybrid difficulties, I suppose, or else the severe strain of being an Englishmen” (“To Robert N. Linscott,” 3 December 1921, 65). In his letters, Ezra Pound refers to the problem of being an American as a “virus, the bacillus of the land in [one’s] blood” (“To William Carlos Williams,” 10 November 1917, 124), and he maintains that “Eliot has it perhaps worse than I have—poor devil” (“To William Carols Williams,” 11 September 1920, 158; qtd. in Badenhausen 35). In his thorough study of Eliot’s art of collaboration, Richard Badenhausen notices Eliot’s proclivity for erasing identity. Apart from the employment of an assortment of appellations, such as T. S. Eliot, T. Stearns Eliot, T. S. E., T. S. Apteryx, there are pseudonyms used by Eliot, such as Crites, Possum (“de Possum” or Old Possum), Tar Baby, Gus Krutzsch, Charles James Grimble, Helen B. Trundlett, and Metoikos (North 8, 77; Badenhausen 29). “Metoikos” literally translates as “resident alien” and it remains the most cunning of Eliot’s pseudonyms. This phrase can be interpreted as representing Eliot’s “severe strain” of ultimate exclusion by his “adopted homeland,” England, or his sense of

(8)

maintain that the term “Metoikos” puts Eliot in his favorite position; one that recognizes the increasing tendency of nomadism, migrancy, border-crossings, living on the borders, hybridity, and identity fluidity of contemporary (post/modern) life experience, in contrast to the perceived rigidity and inflexibility of

totalizing epistemology.

Methodology and Issues The First Year:

In this first year’s research, I enquire into notions of home and abroad, movement and displacement, location and dislocation, reading and writing, traveling and theory, asking how such notions come to play a role in Eliot’s literary and cultural Europe.

1. I borrow the homonymic analytic shorthand “routes/roots” from James Clifford’s groundbreaking study Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century. Clifford rejects the dichotomy between home/away, introduces such concepts as “traveling-in-dwelling,” “dwelling-in-traveling,” and synthesizes the definition of “travel” in close relation with “translation.” For similar theories on “culture-as-travel relations,” see also Michel Butor, “Travel and Writing,” and Paul Fussell, Abroad. I will draw on such concepts to employ the terms such as “travel,” “diaspora,” “tourism,” “exile,” “nomadism,” “borderland,” “traveling-in-dwelling,” and “dwelling-in-traveling” in my discussion of cultural encounters, cultural translation, and floating identities.

2. I will employ the term “dislocution” from Fritz Senn’s Joyce’s Dislocutions to pair with “dislocation” to work with the routes/roots concept to emphasize the entangled processes of displacement and deviation, translation and transcreation, which are intrinsic to the (post)modernist discourse of travel and

translation—be it spatial, physical, cultural, lingual, or textual. According to Senn, dislocution not only suggests “a spatial metaphor for all manner of metamorphoses, switches, transfers, displacements,” but also acknowledges an overall intrinsic tendency of waywardness, disruptiveness, and deviation in speech and writing (202). For Senn, dislocution refers to a blurring trope that teems with substitution,

transformation, and translation (xxi).

3. As I have argued elsewhere, Eliot’s writings belong to the literature of flânerie, which is characterized by an ensemble of observing, reading, deciphering, recording, and reconstituting the social scenes of the (post)modernist life experience (Yang, “Revisiting the Flâneur in T.S. Eliot’s ‘Eeldrop and

Appleplex—I’,” 91, 111, n.3). Eliot has continued to evolve his flâneur from “the man of the crowd,” to “the man at the window,” then to the producer of literary texts, and finally to the collector of the city archive. To use Walter Benjamin’s terms, the text is constructed like a city with “a thousand gateways” (qtd. in Frisby 100), with its eschewal of conventional narrative structure by an author who acts as an archive research- flâneur strolling through the textual architecture of the Unreal City. When Walter Benjamin describes flânerie as going “botanizing on the asphalt” (Charles Baudelaire 36), he suggests at least three visions which are related to each other. First, the poet/the flâneur as the marginal figure evolves a language and an imagery to record the fleeting, multiple, mundane everyday experience. Second, it is from such fragments and overlooked bits that the poet/the flâneur reads the world, and thus the collected detritus is the true museum. Third, by doing so, the poet/the flâneur develops his consciousness to be able to register events, moods, and impressions instantaneously via the “snapshot techniques” similar to the camera: “A touch of the finger now sufficed to fix an event for an unlimited period of time. The camera gave the moment a posthumous shock, as it were” (132; qtd. in Collier 26-7). Such snapshot techniques of

(9)

literary text register not so much a sense of photographic realism as a problematic of phantasmagoric surrealism, so as to highlight the concept of hypertext and literary montage. By definition, hypertext facilitates multiple entry points and non-linear associational, cross-referenced jumps across material; and literary montage permits a fuller range of pictures, images, sounds, and voices to be accessed or allowed to run concurrently with the text (Featherstone, “Archiving Culture” 173; Yang, “The Waste Land and the Virtual City” 199).

The Second Year:

The second year research will respond to burgeoning critical interest in the religious and cultural studies within literary (post)modernism. Eliot’s (post)modernist poetics are inseparable from his cultural sensibility, and his Anglo-Catholic belief is shaped by other discursive cultural influences. I enquire into such notions as (post)modernist text/textile, the between-ness, heterology (the poetics of the Other), multiplicity, hybridization, and transcreation in Eliot’s poetry.

1. In Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, Fredric Jameson concludes his account of the postmodernist city space with an analysis of the new “hyperspace” of the Bonaventure Hotel in LA’s city centre. For Jameson, this postmodern hyperspace is the mutation in space which, different from the space of high modernism, characterizes “a practice of the randomly heterogeneous and fragmentary and the aleatory” (25). After such a schizophrenic experience, the human subject undergoes the loss of the capacity for orientation and cognitive mapping (39, 45). However, as Mike Gane points out, Jameson’s description of the hyperspace of the Bonaventure Hotel is influenced by Jean Baudrillard’s ferocious critique of the high-modernist Pompidou Centre in Paris, the “Beauborg” (Gane 143). Jameson’s

viewpoint has been criticized for confusing high modernism with postmodernism in architecture. Critics claim that the space in the Bonaventure does not represent something new, as it is just another form of massified modernism, “a claustrophobic space colony attempting to miniature nature within itself,” with its “systematic segregation from the great Hispanic-Asian city outside” (Gane 150-152, see also

Shumway, Cooke, Davis, Jacoby). Baudrillard, who is labelled a postmodernist (or even “the high priest of postmodernism”), holds such a title in contempt and insists that he has “nothing to do with

postmodernism” (Gane 158). According to Baudrillard, postmodernity is “the simultaneity of the

destruction of earlier values and their reconstruction;” it is “renovation within ruination,” and everything is “retroactive” and “including” (Cool Memories 171; qtd. Gane 159-160). Using a profoundly

aniti-modernist and anti-poetmodernist stance, Baudrillard offers his account of the revolving cocktail bar at the top of the Bonaventure Hotel in his America (59-60). A detailed comparison of Jameson’s description of the Bonaventure Hotel and Baudrillard’s essay on the Pompidou Centre and the Bonaventure Hotel is provided in Gane’s Baudrillard’s Bestiary (143-156). I argue that Eliot’s work interrogates the problems of the reality principle, the fiction principle, and the simulation principle in its use of the undecidably real and unreal, visible and invisible.

2. I borrow the term “between-ness” from Michael North’s The Dialect of Modernism (86) and Christopher Ricks’s T. S. Eliot’s Prejudice (209-215) to serve my own purpose. Ricks notices that “between” as a preposition as used by Eliot is characterized by two features: first, as incarnating the trinity of Time, Space and Relation; second, as indicating the antithetical nature of primal words. North employs the term in his exploration of Eliot’s anxiety about race, language, and the loss of an identity. Instead, I propose a reading of the concept of between-ness in terms of modernist/postmodernist cultivated heterogeneity, floating identity, border-crossings, living on the borders (unhousedness/dislocation), as well as

(10)

disseminated pliability and epistemological undecidability.

3. I borrow the term “transcreation” from P. Lal. When translating ancient Sanskrit drama into English, Lal uses transreation to remap the translatorial trajectory that moves texts and genres of performance and cultural/historical conventions (Lal 5). I will use the concept to examine the textual/cultural

dissemination in Eliot’s works.

The Third Year:

In the third year’s research, I will consider a virtual representation of Europe in Eliot’s works, in which travelers or nomads carry with them hybrid and syncretic cultures in their intercultural fluency and

dislocations, so as to highlight the contemporary concern with the “routes/roots” remapping of diaspora and cultural translation. A new localization, such as “border” and “between-ness,” is rendered possible where the national, ethnic, communal, or textual “insides” and “outsides” are encountered, negotiated, and translated. Eliot’s passage to his textual City in a virtual Europe begins early in his career and continues on all the way through his later works.

1. The increasing valuation of travel as experience can be found in the educational agenda of the Grand Tour in the Western tradition since the eighteenth century; it is the educative self-formative project (Bildungsprozesse) for the aristocratic or bourgeois gentleman, and is closely related to the literary genre of Bildungsroman. However, the notion of travel as experience, the linkage between mobility and the regenerative/self-formative power of travel can be traced back as far as the fourth century. It is believed that between the fourth and the fifteenth centuries, three kinds of travelers—the scholar, the crusader, and the pilgrim—traversed the vast and unfamiliar landscape of Europe and helped create the imagined community of Christians. The Renaissance voyages which took place since the sixteenth century enabled Europeans to encounter people of different ethnicities and to make comparisons between themselves and others. The increasing contact during modern or post-Renaissance travels helped generate the production and exchange of differences (Featherstone Undoing Culture 127, 152-153). Generally speaking,

Bildungsroman tends to join missionary, mercantile, colonial, and sentimental narratives in reproducing the identity of the European and Euro-American at home and abroad (Sidonie Smith 8). It represents the desire (or anxiety) to read and make human sense out of an immense, intangible, and increasingly alienating geography.

I suggest that Eliot envisions his travelers in his works as caught in a matrix of “between-ness” full of multilinguistic and heterocultural passages. The plays teem with such ambiguous (anti-)tourist practices, attitudes, and rhetorics, so as to raise such questions: Does travel index a routinized disorientation? Or does travel provide the routes/roots as well as other necessary nourishments of dislocation/dislocution required for an intercultural, intercontinental identity fluidity, which has been adopted as the alternative (post)modernist poetics and politics of identity? Eliot’s work is a textualization of (post)modernist ethnography; it is full of cosmopolitan tourists, be they English, American, German, or other Europeans, Gentiles or Jews.

2. The poetics of “making of home away from home” will provide an alternative thesis to the notion of “home” as a fixed and stable locus of rootage and attachment. For example, Fredrik Barth’s Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, James Clifford’s Routes, Nigel Rapport and Andrew Dawson’s Migrants of Identity all suggest that there is yet much scope for reconsidering notions. The traditional conceptions of individuals as members of separate localized communities and insulated cultures have been challenged in the process of urbanization and globalization, so much so that such urban metaphors as “community,”

(11)

“ethnicity,” or even “home” have invited further debates and re-definitions.

3. My use of “virtuality” here derives from Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s theories. What I emphasize is not an overdrawn opposition of the real and the virtual. Instead, I maintain that the virtual as a term is characterized not so much by a concept of possibility as by senses of multiplicity, hybridization, and transcreation. The virtuality involves a process of active becoming, and “to become” is a kind of

self-differentiation, which in turn is the actualization of the potential perfection and another trajectory of a virtuality. The virtual, therefore, envelops a continuum of variations or self-translations that diagrams a persistent movement across thresholds and towards the limits of new being and no being.

Bibliography

Ackroyd, Peter. T. S. Eliot: A Life. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1985. Print.

Aiken, Conrad. “To Robert N. Linscott.” 3 December 1921. Letter 40 of Selected Letters of Conrad Aiken. Ed. Joseph Killorin. New Haven: Yale UP, 1978. 62-65. Print.

Badenhausen, Richard. T. S. Eliot and the Art of Collaboration. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. Print. Barth, Fredrik. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Cultural Difference. Oslo:

Universitetsforlaget, 1969. Print.

Benjamin, Walter. Charles Baudelaire: A Lyric Poet in the Era of High Capitalism. Trans. Harry Zohn. London and New York: Verso, 1983. Print.

---. Illuminations: Essays and Reflections. Trans. Harry Zohn. Ed. and Introduction by Hannah Arendt. New York: Schocken Books, 1968. Print.

---. One-Way Street and Other Writings. Trans. Edmund Jephcott and Kingsley Shorter. London: New Left Books, 1979. Print.

Blanshard, Brand. “Eliot at Oxford.” T. S. Eliot: Essays from The Southern Review. Ed. James Olney. Oxford: Clarendon, 1988. 27-38. Print.

Braidotti, Rosi. Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory. New York: Columbia UP, 1994.

Bush, Ronald. T. S. Eliot: A Study in Character and Style. New York: Oxford UP, 1984. Print. Butor, Michel. “Travel and Writing.” Mosaic 8.1 (Fall 1974): 1-16. Print.

Buzard, James. “Eliot, Pound, and Expatriate Authority.” Raritan 13.3 (Winter 1994): 106-122. Print. Cawelti, John G.. “Eliot, Joyce, and Exile.” ANQ 14.4 (Fall 2001): 38-45. Print.

Clifford, James. “Notes on Travel and Theory.” Inscriptions 5 (1989): n. pag. Center for Cultural Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz. Web. 21 June 2012.

---. Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1997. Print.

Crawford, Robert. The Savage and the City in the Work of T.S. Eliot. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987. Print.

Deleuze, Gilles. Bergsonism. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam. New York: Zone Books, 1988. Print.

Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Trans. Robert Hurley, Mark Seem, and Helen R. Lane. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1983. Print.

---. Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature. Trans. Dana Polan. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1986. Print. ---. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Trans. Brian Massumi. Minneapolis and London:

U of Minnesota P, 1987. Print.

(12)

Eliot, T. S. “Burbank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar.” The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 40-41. Print.

---. “The Burial of the Dead.” The Waste Land. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 61-63. Print.

---. “Burnt Norton.” Four Quartets. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 171-176. Print.

---. “The Dry Salvages.” Four Quartets. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 184-190. Print.

---. Four Quartets. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 169-198. Print.

---. “In Memory of Henry James.” The Egoist 5.1 (1918): 1-2. Print.

---. “Little Gidding.” Four Quartets. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 191-198. Print.

---. “Mélange Adultère de Tout.” The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 47. Print.

---. Preface. For Lancelot Andrewes: Essays on Style and Order. London: Faber and Faber, 1928. 7-8. Print. ---. Preface. This American World. Edgar Ansel Mowrer. New York: J. H. Sears, 1928. ix-xv. Print.

---. “To Conrad Aiken.” 19 July 1914. Letter. The Letters of T.S. Eliot, Volume I, 1898-1922. Ed. Valerie Eliot. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. 40-43. Print.

---. “To Conrad Aiken.” 25 July 1914. Letter. The Letters of T.S. Eliot, Volume I, 1898-1922. Ed. Valerie Eliot. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. 43-47. Print.

---. “To Henry Eliot.” 15 February 1920. Letter. The Letters of T.S. Eliot, Volume I, 1898-1922. Ed. Valerie Eliot. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. 363-365. Print.

---. “To Mary Hutchinson.” [9? July? 1919]. Letter. The Letters of T.S. Eliot, Volume I, 1898-1922. Ed. Valerie Eliot. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. 311-312. Print.

---. “Tradition and Individual Talent.” Selected Essays. Third Enlarged Edition. London: Faber and Faber 1951. 13-22. Print.

---. “Turgenev.” Review of Turgenev, Edward Garnett, foreword by Joseph Conrad. The Egoist 4.11 (December 1917): 167. Print.

---. “ The Unity of European Culture.” Notes Towards the Definition of Culture. London: Faber and Faber, 1948. 110-124. Print.

---. The Waste Land. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 59-80. Print.

---. “What the Thunder Said.” The Waste Land. The Complete Poems and Plays of T.S. Eliot. London and Boston: Faber and Faber, 1978. 72-75. Print.

Eliot, Valerie. “Introduction.” The Letters of T.S. Eliot, Volume I, 1898-1922. Ed. Valerie Eliot. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. xv-xvii. Print.

Featherstone, Mike. “Archiving Culture.” British Journal of Sociology 5.1 (January / March 2000): 161-184. Print.

---. Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity. London: SAGE, 1995. Print. Featherstone, Mike and Scott Lash. “Introduction.” Spaces of Culture: City, Nation, World. Eds. Mike

(13)

Frisby, David. “The Flâneur in Social Theory.” The Flâneur. Ed. Keith Tester. London and New York: Routledge, 1994. 81-110. Print.

Fussell, Paul. Abroad: British Literary Traveling Between the Wars. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1980. Print. Gordon, Lyndall. Eliot’s Early Years. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1977. Print.

Gross, Harvey. “The Figure of St. Sebastian.” T.S. Eliot: Essays from the Southern Review. Ed. James Olney. Oxford: Clarendon, 1988. 103-114. Print.

Hay, Eloise Knapp. “Conversion and Expatriation: T. S. Eliot’s Dual Allegiance.” The Fire and the Rose: New Essays on T. S. Eliot. Ed. Vinod Sena and Rajiva Verma. Delhi and Oxford: Oxford UP, 1992. 1-24. Print.

Jain, Manju. A Critical Reading of the Selected Poems of T.S. Eliot. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1991. Print. Jeffreys, Mark. “‘Mélange Adultère de Tout’ and T. S. Eliot’s Quest for Identity, Belonging, and the

Transcendence of Belonging.” Journal of Modern Literature 18.4 (Fall 1993): 395-409. Print. Julius, Anthony. T. S. Eliot, Anti-Semitism, and Literary Form. New York: Cambridge UP, 1996. Print.

Kaplan, Caren. Questions of Travel: Postmodern Discourses of Displacement. Jurham and London: Duke UP, 1996. Print.

Lamos, Colleen. Deviant Modernism: Sexual and Textual Errancy in T.S. Eliot, James Joyce, and Marcel Proust. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998. Print.

MacCannell, Dean. The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. Berkeley and London: U of California P, 1999. Print.

Massumi, Brian. A User’s Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT P, 1992. Print.

Mayer, John T. T.S. Eliot’s Silent Voices. New York and Oxford: Oxford UP, 1989. Print. Moody, A. D. Thomas Stearns Eliot: Poet. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print.

Morrison, Paul. The Poetics of Fascism: Ezra Pound, T.S. Eliot, Paul de Man. New York: Oxford UP, 1996. Print.

North, Michael. The Dialect of Modernism: Race, Language, and Twentieth-Century Literature. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1994. Print.

Omer, Ranen. “‘It Is I Who Have Been Defending a Religion Called Judaism”’: The T. S. Eliot and Horace M. Kallen Correspondence.” Texas Studies in Literature and Language 39.4 (1997): 321-56. Print.

Perl, Jeffrey M. “Disambivalent Quatrains.” A Companion to T. S. Eliot. Ed. David E. Chinitz. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 133-144. Print.

Pound, Ezra. “To William Carlos Williams.” 10 November 1917. Letter 137 of The Letters of Ezra Pound, 1907-1941. Ed. D. D. Paige. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1950. 123-125. Print.

---.. “To William Carlos Williams.” 11 September 1920. Letter 170 of The Letters of Ezra Pound, 1907-1941. Ed. D. D. Paige. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1950. 156-159. Print.

Rapport, Nigel and Andrew Dawson, eds. Migrants of Identity: Perceptions of “Home” in a World of Movement. Oxford: Berg, 1998. Print.

Read, Herbert. “T. S. E.—A Memoir.” In T. S. Eliot: The Man and His Work. Allen Tate ed. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1971. 16-41. Print.

Ricks, Christopher. T. S. Eliot and Prejudice. London: Faber & Faber, 1994. Print.

---. ed. Inventions of the March Hare: Poems 1909-1917. London: Faber and Faber, 1996. Print.

(14)

Print.

Schuchard, Ronald. “Burbank with a Baedeker, Eliot with a Cigar: American Intellectuals, Anti-Semitism, and the Idea of Culture.” Modernism/Modernity 10.1 (January 2003): 1-26. Print.

Senn, Fritz. Joyce’s Dislocutions: Essays on Reading as Translation. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins UP, 1984. Print.

Sherry, Vincent. “‘Where are the eagles and the trumpet?’ Imperial Decline and Eliot’s Development.” A Companion to T. S. Eliot. Ed. David E. Chinitz. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 91-104. Print.

Sloane, Patricia. T. S. Eliot’s Bleistein Poems: Uses of Allusion in “Burbank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar” and “Dirge.” New York: International Scholars Publications, 2000. Print.

Smith, Grover. T.S. Eliot’s Poetry and Plays: A Study in Sources and Meaning. Second Edition. Chicago and London: U of Chicago P, 1974. Print.

Smith, Sidonie. Moving Lives: Twentieth-Century Women’s Travel Writing. Minneapolis and London: U of Minnesota P, 2001. Print.

Southam, B. C. A Guide to the Selected Poems of T. S. Eliot. Sixth Edition. San Diego: Harcourt, 1994. Print. Williamson, George. A Reader’s Guide to T. S. Eliot. London: Thames and Hudson, 1967. Print.

Yang, Carol L. “Rhapsody on a City of Dreadful Night: The Flâneur and Urban Spectacle.” Yeats Eliot Review 26.3-4 (Fall 2009): 2-12. Print.

___. “Revisiting the Flâneur in T.S. Eliot’s ‘Eeldrop and Appleplex—I’.” Orbis Litterarum 66.2 (2011): 89-120. Print.

___. “The Waste Land and the Virtual City.” In The Waste Land at 90: A Retrospective. Ed. Joe Moffett. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi Press, 2011. 187-216. Print.

(15)

(16)

科技部補助專題研究計畫執行國際合作與移地研究心得報告

日期： 105 年 10 月 31 日

一、執行國際合作與移地研究過程

本人執行（艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯）(MOST102-2410-H-004-177-MY3，執行期限為 102 年 8 月 1 日至 105 年 7 月 31 日)，其中計畫內容規劃有出席國際會議與移地研究，本人於 105 年 5 月 16 日提請計畫變更，旨在將上述兩項核定經費合併使用，出國行程訂為 105 年 6 月 15 日赴義大利拉帕洛(Rapallo)，先行參加 6 月 17-21 日之三十七屆艾略特學會之國際學術會議，會後再續留義大利，進行為期 6 月 21-27 日之移地研究。今年（105 年）5 月 16 日，本人基於以下三項考量提請研究計畫內容變更： 1）學術研究成就考量：第三十七屆艾略特學會年會可謂學會之一大創舉，今年特與龐德學會合辦，不但開會地點由傳統的美國聖路易市（即艾略特之出生地），移師到義大利的拉帕洛，以資紀念艾略特與龐德之私人情誼與文學合作淵源，年會規模更盛以往，會期共 5 天(Rapallo, Italy, June 17-21, 2016)，與會人士近 150 人，分別來自歐美亞各國，包括英美德法義西台日韓等各國艾略特與龐德研究之學者專家。本人是以〈艾略特與佛教：文化遭逢與迻譯〉(“T. S. Eliot and Hindu-Buddhism: Cultural Encounter and Translation”)一文獲邀出席第三十七屆艾略特學會年會，發表論文。 2）研究計畫經費之最大效能運用考量：由於遠赴歐洲之機票昂貴，生活費用亦耗費不貲，擬申請合併使用移地研究及出席國際會議之經費，核定總金額則不變。因此，本人基於配合艾略特學會 2016 年年會之地點之考量，擬將本人專題研究計畫項下之移地研究地點，由原來規劃之巴黎─倫敦，移至義大利執行，因為法國（尤其巴黎）、英國（尤其倫敦）、義大利（尤其北義）、德國（尤其馬堡）、荷比盧等地，均在艾略特早年發展期中，扮演著重要之形塑元素。 3）學校事務考量：然而，七月期間時值學期末了之際，本人仍需處理諸多重要學校事務，如繳交學生成績、研究生論文指導及口試等等，基於教學責任考量，本人必須於七月初儘快返國處理上述相關事宜，無法續留歐洲進行原先規劃約一個月之移地研究。不過，本人將藉此次義大利之行，順道德國荷比盧，拜訪與艾略特研究有淵源之學術單位與學者，俾以進行明年之移地研究事宜。因此，本人提請兩項研究計畫內容變更，分別為（一）申請合併使用移地研究及出席國際會議之

計畫編號

MOST102-2410-H-004-177-MY3

計畫名稱

艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯

出國人員

姓名

楊麗敏

服務機構

及職稱

國立政治大學英國語文學系

出國時間

2016 年 6 月 21 日

至

2016 年 6 月 27 日

出國地點

義大利.米蘭

出國研究

目的

□實驗 ■田野調查 □採集樣本 □國際合作研究 □使用國外研究設施

(17)

經費，（二）變更移地研究之地點。兩項變更同案於 105 年 5 月 16 日提出變更申請後，皆已簽准在案。

二、研究成果

艾略特於 1910-1911 年間遊學旅居於法國巴黎一年，曾如艾略特於〈法國之於你〉[“What France Means to You,” La France Libre 8.44 (15 June 1944): 94]文中所言：此乃「非比尋常之幸運」。艾略特終身熱愛藝術，不論古典傳統或前衛運動，皆有所浸淫。旅居巴黎一年，對於甫自哈佛大學研究所畢業的年少艾略特而言，真是如魚得水，他求知若渴，除了積極參與法國、巴黎境內之各種學術講座與藝文活動外，並廣為旅行，參訪歐洲各地之著名博物館與美術館，其中尤以義大利之旅影響深遠。1911 年夏天，艾略特離開巴黎，動身前往德國與義大利，期間取道威尼斯 (Venice)、貝爾加莫(Bergamo)、米蘭(Milan) 、佛羅倫斯(Florence)，造訪當地著名之博物館、美術館、教堂與古建築。艾略特終其一生醉心義大利之人文藝術，因此寫就了許多膾炙人口之詩篇，除了廣為人知的《荒原》(The Waste Land)外，其他如 “Burank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar”便是以威尼斯為具焦點; “Lune de Miel”則是以一對美國新婚夫婦之蜜月之旅為敘述主軸，描寫普羅大眾觀光客如何由荷比盧取道義大利，走馬看花奔波困頓於一些藝術觀光景點之種種; “La Figlia che Piange” 緣起於艾略特在展館內失之交臂之石雕作品，進而發展而成文字藝術與空間藝術、詩與美術之對話； “The Love Song of St. Sebastian”則是受到繪畫藝術中聖賽巴斯汀殉道封聖主題之影響，在在展現扣問文化與慾望、個人與社群權威之衝突。本人此次北義之移地研究，旨在重溯艾略特當年北義之旅，探討詩人作品中有關符號與再現、文化遭逢與迻譯等議題。本人將以本次移地研究搜尋所得之資料，撰寫艾略特作品中之義大利詩選，如“Burank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar”等詩，旨在探討探詩人作品中有關文化位移、文化遭逢與迻譯等議題，繼而投稿國外學術期刊，或投稿國外學術專書出版甄選計畫。

三、研究心得

移地研究對於本人目前所進行之文化位移、文化遭逢與文化迻譯研究非常重要，舉凡旅行/居留、書寫/迻譯、身份認同/居間性等糾纏牽惹之議題，都在艾略特的文化歐洲之繪製行旅圖中，見證了其虛擬生成本質。雖然此次之義大利移地研究，因為配合第三十七屆艾略特學會年會之時間地點，最後又礙於教學義務責任之考量，必須提前結束，無法如計畫書規劃進行一個月之移地研究，但是本人仍覺得收穫良多。本人希望科技部能繼續支持專題研究計畫所規劃之移地研究，本人也希望明年能更從容規劃移地研究，希望能在教學與研究中取得合宜合度之平衡係數。

(18)

科技部補助專題研究計畫出席國際學術會議心得報告

日期： 105 年 8 月 5 日

一、參加會議經過

本人近年之研究重心以城市文學與文化研究為主軸，舉凡本人之論文著作發表與國科會/科技部計畫執行（例如本人所執行之國科會計畫【補助人文及社會科學研究圖書計畫規劃主題：城市與文學】NSC 97 – 2420 - H- 004 – 001 - 2E，NSC 96 – 2420 – H – 004 – 018 - 2E；專書寫作計畫【渥坦貝克劇作中之逃逸路線：性別/文本權術策略（III ─I）】(NSC 100–2410-H-004-206，執行期限： 2011/08/01-2012/07/31)與【渥坦貝克劇作中之逃逸路線：性別/文本權術策略（II ─II）】(NSC 101-2410-H-004-196，執行期限：2012/08/01-2013/07/31)），皆以城市文學與文化為主要之研究領域，此乃本人之專長現代詩與現代/後現代理論之自然延伸。又，本人為「艾略特學會」(T.S. Eliot Society) 之會員，近年來更因學會之邀約，除參加「艾略特學會」之年會外，還代表學會出席其他大型國際會議，例如「第十九屆美國文學學會年會」(the 19th

Annual Conference of American Literature

Association)與「第三十八屆路易斯維爾十九世紀以降之文學與文化國際會議」(The 38th Annual

計畫編號

NSC102-2410-H-004-177-MY3

計畫名稱

艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯

出國人員

姓名

楊麗敏

服務機構

及職稱

國立政治大學英文系教授

會議時間

2016 年 6 月 17 日

至

2016 年 6 月 21 日

會議地點

義大利拉帕洛

會議名稱

(中文)第３７屆艾略特學會年會

(英文)The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the T. S. Eliot Society

發表題目

(中文)艾略特與佛教：文化遭逢與迻譯

(英文)T. S. Eliot and Hindu-Buddhism: Cultural Encounter and

Translation

(19)

Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture since 1900)等。2012 年 2 月本人參加於義大利佛羅倫

斯所舉行之艾略特國際研討會「艾略特與現代主義文學之羅馬與義大利傳承」(T. S. Eliot and the Heritage of Rome and Italy in Modernist Literature: An International Symposium, Florence, Italy,

February 4-11, 2012)。2014 年本人以〈艾略特的時間/空間詩學：他者之誤現與再現〉("T. S. Eliot and

the Poetics of Ekphrasis: A Mis/Representation of the Other ")一文獲「艾略特學會」之推薦，與另五位

艾略特學者代表「艾略特學會」出席「美國文學學會」第二十五屆年會。2015 年本人再以〈艾略特的旅遊指南：文化遭逢與迻譯之新詩學〉("T. S. Eliot with a Baedeker: A Poetics of Cultural Encounter a 之 nd Translation ")一文獲「艾略特學會」之推薦，與另五位艾略特學者代表「艾略特

學會」出席「美國文學學會」第二十六屆年會(American Literature Association: the 26th

Annual

Conference on American Literature, Boston, U.S.A., May 21-24, 2015

)

。今年則是以〈艾略特與佛教：文化遭逢與迻譯〉(“T. S. Eliot and Hindu-Buddhism: Cultural Encounter and Translation”

)

一文獲邀出席第三十七屆艾略特學會年會(The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the T. S. Eliot Society, Rapallo, Italy, June 17-21, 2016

)

發表論文。

二、與會心得

誠如學會會長 Professor Frances Dickey 在大會致詞中所言，第三十七屆艾略特學會年會可謂學會之

一大創舉，今年特以與龐德學會合辦，不但開會地點由傳統的美國聖路易市（即艾略特之出生地），移師到義大利的拉帕洛，以資紀念艾略特與龐德之私人情誼與文學合作淵源，年會規模更盛以往，會期共 5 天，與會人士近 150 人，分別來自歐美亞各國，包括英美德法義西台日韓等各國艾略特與龐德研究之學者專家。本人以為，此次年會之特色有三，分別為廣度與深度並蓄，專業與多元間容，在地與寰宇共榮。此次年會為期 5 天，除了傳統之論文發表場次與艾略特詩歌朗誦外，更增闢了「研究小組」、「圓桌會議」、「文藝創作發表與戲劇工作坊表演」等項目。以本人為例，本人在學會會長 Professor Frances

Dickey 之邀約與建議下，參加由 Professor Jahan Rmazani 所主導之「寰宇艾略特」研究小組(“Global

Eliot”)，研究小組成員在 2016 年月 1 日前必須完成論文撰寫，提供全文於研究小組主席與所有成

員，俾以進行網路網際討論，會期當天，即 2016 年 6 月 17 日，大家再齊聚一堂，進行進一步之切磋交流，此研究小組之場次，僅限小組同儕參加，並不開放於其他之會議聽眾。本人以為，此研究小組之構想，類似專書專題研究，學會希望透過此種研究小組之規劃，能夠為艾略特研究在

(20)

年度盛會之繁華過後，作更後續深層之耕耘。此次之研究小組有四組，分別為：「散文艾略特」、「寰

宇艾略特」、「四首四重奏」、與「龐德與艾略特」。另外，學會亦以「圓桌會議」之方式與場次，

與大家分享學會近年來之豐碩學術成果，那便是艾略特散文之結集出版，為國際知名艾略特學者 Professor Ronald Schuchard 所主導，目前已出版到第四冊，第五、六冊正在進行中。Professor Ronald

Schuchard 在「艾略特基金會」之首肯與授權下，致力於整理艾略特散落於各地之不同類型之散文

文稿，例如學院專題講座系列講稿、廣播節目講稿、文學期刊評論等等，可謂嘉惠現今與日後之艾略特學術研究良多。又，此次會期亦安排來自不同領域之藝術表演者，分別以或音樂或漫畫或戲劇或戲曲之方式來詮釋/再現艾略特之詩作。此外，艾略特學會又得拉帕洛委員會與熱那亞大學之襄助，前四天之會期皆在拉帕洛之戲劇廳(the Teatro Auditorium delle Clarisse)舉行，最後一天則移師熱那亞大學舉行，誠如學會會長 Professor Frances Dickey 在大會致詞中所言，此次文學盛會得以順利舉行，熱那亞大學之 Professor Massimo Bacigalupo 居功厥偉。而 Professor Massimo Bacigalupo 也以 “The Rapallo Vortex”為題目，在其大會開幕演講中廣議推崇拉帕洛與英美文學墨客騷人之淵源，除艾略特與龐德外，葉慈(W. B. Yeats)、勞倫斯(D. H. Lawrence)、海明威(Ernest Hemingway) 等人亦與拉帕洛有所交集牽惹，成功的塑造了「文學拉帕洛」(the literary Rapallo)之形象與定位，見證了在地與寰宇文化共榮之願景。

三、發表論文全文或摘要

Since the earlier twentieth century, T. S. Eliot’s far from casual interest in Eastern philosophy and

philology, especially Hindu-Buddhism, has been well recognized by his acquaintances and critics. Thanks to a

line of distinguished scholarship that has examined Eliot’s graduate studies, it is now possible to define the

extent of Eliot’s knowledge of Hindu-Buddhist scriptures. Nor is it difficult to identify a Hindu-Buddhist

context in Eliot’s poetry and drama. Critics tend to maintain that Eliot’s poetry and dramaturgy function as a

didactic representation of the Buddhist doctrines and ideologies which shaped Eliot as a thinker and writer.

However, Eliot’s Christian outlook and Western classical learning, which are well charted in his works and

criticisms, prevent the tendency to associate Eliot solely with Buddhism and other new inheritances of the

East. Intriguingly, all such controversies and contradictions arising from different critical interpretations do

reflect the textual dissemination and exorbitant nature in Eliot’s works that tends to upset any kind of

singularity and totality that is grounded on logocentrism and either-or binary opposition. I propose that Eliot is

(21)

modernism, it is Eliot who speaks most eloquently to the postmodernist sense of de-centralization,

fragmentation, syncretism, hybridization, and indeterminacy. Such a (post)modernist poetics is based on

Eliot’s growing experience as a polyglot cosmopolitan and his diasporic expatriation on the Continent. Eliot’s

wanderings from city to city in America, Italy, France, Germany, and Britain represent an intellectual

itinerary—a literary Baedeker—that is devoted to re/mapping the routes/roots of a European culture/literature

which is imbued with alternate otherness, diversity, and virtuality. What results is a (post)modernist

text/textile laden with linguistic, cultural, and religious travel and encounter, tradition and translation,

dislocation and dislocution.

Keywords: T. S. Eliot, Hindu-Buddhism, cultural encounter and translation, (post)modernist text/textile

四、建議

本人以為，此次參與「第三十七屆艾略特學會年會」，實為個人多年來出席「艾略特學會」相關學術活動之累積成果之一，此行之收穫可待。本人以為，藉由參與這些有歷史有傳統、國際知名、學術地位崇高之大型國際會議，一則個人能與國際知名之學者齊聚一堂切磋對話；二則是讓台灣學術、政治大學英美文學文化研究有機會在國際學術場合發聲；三則得以與國際知名學學術機構與學者們保持互動切磋，甚至規劃未來合作之可能性，多位艾略特研究學者與城市文學文化學者，如 Professor Jewel Spears Brooker, Professor Nancy D. Hargrove, Professor Nancy Gish, Professor Steve Ellis, Professor Mike

Featherstone 皆是日後有機會合作之國際知名學者。希望有朝一日，國內大學如政治大學能有能力、有機會或承辦或發展此種有傳統、有口碑之大型國際會議。本人一向以學術研究國際化自許，一直積極向國外期刊、學術專書投稿，本人深耕數年，成果已逐漸一一顯現。本人此次在「第三十七屆艾略特學會年會」上所發表之論文也會在「艾略特學會」之協助下，進行後續出版事宜。希望科技部對於國內學者出席國際知名、學術地位崇高之國際會議發表論文，能夠予以積極之鼓勵與贊助。

五、攜回資料名稱及內容

第三十七屆艾略特學會年會之議程，以及學會研究成果之相關資訊。

(22)

(23)

科技部補助專題研究計畫出席國際學術會議心得報告

日期： 105 年 8 月 5 日

一、參加會議經過

本人近年之研究重心以城市文學與文化研究為主軸，舉凡本人之論文著作發表與國科會/科技部計畫執行（例如本人所執行之國科會計畫【補助人文及社會科學研究圖書計畫規劃主題：城市與文學】NSC 97 – 2420 - H- 004 – 001 - 2E，NSC 96 – 2420 – H – 004 – 018 - 2E；專書寫作計畫【渥坦貝克劇作中之逃逸路線：性別/文本權術策略（III ─I）】(NSC 100–2410-H-004-206，執行期限： 2011/08/01-2012/07/31)與【渥坦貝克劇作中之逃逸路線：性別/文本權術策略（II ─II）】(NSC 101-2410-H-004-196，執行期限：2012/08/01-2013/07/31)），皆以城市文學與文化為主要之研究領域，此乃本人之專長現代詩與現代/後現代理論之自然延伸。又，本人為「艾略特學會」(T.S. Eliot Society) 之會員，近年來更因學會之邀約，除參加「艾略特學會」之年會外，還代表學會出席其他大型國際會議，例如「第十九屆美國文學學會年會」(the 19th

Annual Conference of American Literature

Association)與「第三十八屆路易斯維爾十九世紀以降之文學與文化國際會議」(The 38th Annual

計畫編號

NSC102-2410-H-004-177-MY3

計畫名稱

艾略特在歐洲：文化位移，遭逢，與迻譯

出國人員

姓名

楊麗敏

服務機構

及職稱

國立政治大學英文系教授

會議時間

2016 年 6 月 17 日

至

2016 年 6 月 21 日

會議地點

義大利拉帕洛

會議名稱

(中文)第３７屆艾略特學會年會

(英文)The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the T. S. Eliot Society

發表題目

(中文)艾略特與佛教：文化遭逢與迻譯

(英文)T. S. Eliot and Hindu-Buddhism: Cultural Encounter and

Translation

(24)

Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture since 1900)等。2012 年 2 月本人參加於義大利佛羅倫

斯所舉行之艾略特國際研討會「艾略特與現代主義文學之羅馬與義大利傳承」(T. S. Eliot and the Heritage of Rome and Italy in Modernist Literature: An International Symposium, Florence, Italy,

February 4-11, 2012)。2014 年本人以〈艾略特的時間/空間詩學：他者之誤現與再現〉("T. S. Eliot and

the Poetics of Ekphrasis: A Mis/Representation of the Other ")一文獲「艾略特學會」之推薦，與另五位

艾略特學者代表「艾略特學會」出席「美國文學學會」第二十五屆年會。2015 年本人再以〈艾略特的旅遊指南：文化遭逢與迻譯之新詩學〉("T. S. Eliot with a Baedeker: A Poetics of Cultural Encounter a 之 nd Translation ")一文獲「艾略特學會」之推薦，與另五位艾略特學者代表「艾略特

學會」出席「美國文學學會」第二十六屆年會(American Literature Association: the 26th

Annual

Conference on American Literature, Boston, U.S.A., May 21-24, 2015

)

。今年則是以〈艾略特與佛教：文化遭逢與迻譯〉(“T. S. Eliot and Hindu-Buddhism: Cultural Encounter and Translation”

)

一文獲邀出席第三十七屆艾略特學會年會(The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the T. S. Eliot Society, Rapallo, Italy, June 17-21, 2016

)

發表論文。

二、與會心得

誠如學會會長 Professor Frances Dickey 在大會致詞中所言，第三十七屆艾略特學會年會可謂學會之

一大創舉，今年特以與龐德學會合辦，不但開會地點由傳統的美國聖路易市（即艾略特之出生地），移師到義大利的拉帕洛，以資紀念艾略特與龐德之私人情誼與文學合作淵源，年會規模更盛以往，會期共 5 天，與會人士近 150 人，分別來自歐美亞各國，包括英美德法義西台日韓等各國艾略特與龐德研究之學者專家。本人以為，此次年會之特色有三，分別為廣度與深度並蓄，專業與多元間容，在地與寰宇共榮。此次年會為期 5 天，除了傳統之論文發表場次與艾略特詩歌朗誦外，更增闢了「研究小組」、「圓桌會議」、「文藝創作發表與戲劇工作坊表演」等項目。以本人為例，本人在學會會長 Professor Frances

Dickey 之邀約與建議下，參加由 Professor Jahan Rmazani 所主導之「寰宇艾略特」研究小組(“Global

Eliot”)，研究小組成員在 2016 年月 1 日前必須完成論文撰寫，提供全文於研究小組主席與所有成

員，俾以進行網路網際討論，會期當天，即 2016 年 6 月 17 日，大家再齊聚一堂，進行進一步之切磋交流，此研究小組之場次，僅限小組同儕參加，並不開放於其他之會議聽眾。本人以為，此

(25)

研究小組之構想，類似專書專題研究，學會希望透過此種研究小組之規劃，能夠為艾略特研究在