Please wait a minute...
北京第二外国语学院学报  2020, Vol. 42 Issue (4): 79-91    DOI: 10.12002/j.bisu.294
外国文学研究     
《赎罪》中的他者叙述伦理
郭龙()
中南大学外国语学院,长沙 410083
Narrating Alterity Ethics in Atonement
Long Guo()
School of Foreign Languages, Central South University,Changsha 410083, China
 全文: PDF(1187 KB)   HTML
摘要:

伊恩•麦克尤恩的《赎罪》因其对自我和他者关系的探索而传达了丰富的他者伦理内涵。这一伦理效果不仅源于他对小说故事情节的精心构思,更源于其在小说叙述形式上的探索。在叙述形式层面,麦克尤恩将元小说嵌套叙述、视角转换和不可靠叙述相结合,探索出一套独特的伦理叙述话语,揭示了作品的他者伦理意蕴,展示了作者、叙述者和读者的伦理意识表达与叙述呈现之间的关系。本文将着重聚焦这三种叙述形式在强化《赎罪》中的他者伦理表达方面的作用,探讨作者麦克尤恩如何通过叙述形式层面的他者伦理内涵引导读者进行自我伦理意识的反思。分析发现,麦克尤恩在《赎罪》中采用的叙述形式具有丰富的伦理内涵,这一叙述形式与小说内容共同强化了小说中的他者伦理意蕴。探究《赎罪》中叙述形式在伦理表达方面的效果能够充分挖掘该小说的伦理内涵,也有助于引起学界对麦克尤恩小说中叙述伦理的关注。

关键词: 赎罪他者伦理嵌套结构视角转换不可靠叙述    
Abstract:

Atonement, a novel written by Ian McEwan, conveys rich ethical connotations of the Other because of its exploration of the relationship between the Self and the Other. Such an ethical affect not only springs from his ingenious plot but also from his exploration of an innovative pattern of narrative discourse that combines embedded narration, shift of points of view, and unreliable narration to disclose implication of alterity ethics as well as the relation between the ethical expression of author, narrator, and reader and style of the narrative. The author of this paper examines the function of these three narrative techniques in strengthening the expression of alterity ethics and explores how McEwan guides readers to reflect on their ethical consciousness through alterity ethics at the narrative level. With this research, the author suggests that McEwan employs the narrative forms with profound ethical connotations that, together with the content of the novel, strengthen the expression of alterity ethics in the novel. Exploring the roles played by the narrative forms in expressing alterity ethics in Atonement may fully uncover its ethical connotations as well as garner attention to the ethical dimensions of narrative arts in McEwan’s novels.

Key words: Atonement    alterity ethics    embedded structure    shift of point of view    unreliable narration
收稿日期: 2018-01-02 出版日期: 2020-08-30
PACS:  I106.4  
作者简介: 郭龙,中南大学外国语学院,410083,研究方向:英美文学。电子邮箱:guolong206@163.com
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章  
郭龙

引用本文:

郭龙. 《赎罪》中的他者叙述伦理[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2020, 42(4): 79-91.

Long Guo. Narrating Alterity Ethics in Atonement. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2020, 42(4): 79-91.

链接本文:

https://journal.bisu.edu.cn/CN/10.12002/j.bisu.294        https://journal.bisu.edu.cn/CN/Y2020/V42/I4/79

[1] Bernasconi R & Wood D. The Provocation of Levinas:Rethinking the Other[M]. London:Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2003.
[2] Berning N. Toward a critical ethical narratology for literary reportages:Analysing the story ethics of Alexandra Fuller’s Scribbling the Cat[J]. Literaire Interferenties, 2011(7):189~221.
[3] Cormack A. Postmodernism and the ethics of fiction in Atonement[C]// Sebastian G. Ian McEwan:Contemporary Critical Perspectives. London:Continuum, 2009: 70~82.
[4] Finney B. Briony’s stand against oblivion:The making of fiction in Ian McEwan’s Atonement[J]. Journal of Modern Literature, 2004,27(3):68~82.
doi: 10.1353/jml.2004.0073
[5] Head D. Contemporary British Novelists:Ian McEwan[M]. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2007.
[6] Levinas E. Totality and Infinity:An Essay on Exteriority[M]. Lingis A(Trans.). The Hague:M. Nijhoff Publishers, 1979.
[7] Lynn D. A conversation with Ian McEwan[J]. The Kenyon Review, 2007,29(3):38~51.
[8] McEwan I. Only Love and Then Oblivion. Love Was All They Had to Set Against Their Murderers[EB/OL]. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/15/september11.politicsphilosophyandsociety2, 2001-09-15/2017-12-28.
[9] Müller W G. An ethical Narratology[C]// Astrid E,Herbert G & Ansgar N. Ethics in Culture:The Dissemination of Values through Literature and Other Media. Berlin:Walter de Gruyter, 2008: 117~130.
[10] Nicklas P. Ian McEwan:Art and Politics[M]. Heidelberg:Universitätsverlag Winter, 2009.
[11] O’Hara K D. Briony’s being-for:Metafictional narrative ethics in Ian McEwan’s Atonement[J]. Critique:Studies in Contemporary Fiction, 2011,52(1):74~100.
[12] Phelan J. Narrative judgments and the rhetorical theory of narrative:Ian McEwan’s Atonement[C]//Phelan J & Rabinowitz P J. A Companion to Narrative Theory. Oxford:Blackwell, 2005: 322~336.
[13] 安斯加尔•纽宁, 汤轶丽. 叙事学与伦理批评:同床异梦,抑或携手联姻[J]. 上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2016,24(4):26~37.
[14] 胡慧勇. 常论与悖论——小说《赎罪》中敦刻尔克奇迹的自我消解[J]. 海南大学学报(社会科学版), 2013,31(2):37~42.
[15] 江守义. 伦理视野中的小说视角[J]. 外国文学研究, 2017,39(2):20~28.
[16] 罗媛. 移情视阈下的伊恩•麦克尤恩小说研究[D]. 南京:南京大学, 2012.
[17] 热拉尔•热奈特. 叙事话语新叙事话语[M]. 王文融,译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1990.
[18] 尚必武. 新世纪的伊恩•麦克尤恩研究:现状与趋势[J]. 外国文学动态, 2013(1):4~7.
[19] 尚必武. 从“两个转向”到“两种批评”——论叙事学和文学伦理学的兴起、发展与交叉愿景[J]. 学术论坛, 2017,40(2):7~12.
[20] 申丹. 何为“不可靠叙述”?[J]. 外国文学评论, 2006(4):133~143.
[21] 伍茂国. 现代性语境中第一人称叙事的伦理意义[J]. 中国文学研究, 2011(3):97~100.
[22] 伍茂国. 在时间中成就德性——论作为叙事主题与形式的时间叙事伦理[J]. 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2012(6):110~113.
[23] 伊恩•麦克尤恩. 赎罪[M]. 郭国良,译. 上海: 上海译文出版社, 2008.
[24] 詹姆斯•费伦, 玛丽•帕特里夏•玛汀. 威茅斯经验:同故事叙述、不可靠性、伦理与《人约黄昏时》[C]//戴卫•赫尔曼. 新叙事学. 马海良,译 . 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2002: 35~57.
[25] 赵毅衡. 当说者被说的时候:比较叙述学导论[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 1998.
[1] 张 菊. 善以恶行——“纯真”与不可靠的叙述[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2015, 37(2): 57-.