欢迎访问《文艺理论研究》，
文艺理论研究

文艺理论研究 ›› 2021, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (6): 139-147.

• 专题：西方马克思主义文论研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

“莱维悖论”及其解决： 阿甘本的见证诗学

周逸群


  

  1. 华东师范大学中文系
  • 出版日期:2021-11-25 发布日期:2021-12-16
  • 作者简介:周逸群，华东师范大学中文系文艺学专业在读博士生，主要从事文艺社会学研究。
  • 基金资助:
    国家社科基金青年项目“战后意大利文艺美学思想研究”［项目编号： 21CZW061］

 “Levi’s Paradox” and Its Solution： Giorgio Agamben’s Poetics of Witnessing

Zhou Yiqun   

  1. Department of Chinese Language and Literature， East China Normal University

  • Online:2021-11-25 Published:2021-12-16
  • About author:Zhou Yiqun， is a Ph.D. candidate at the Department of Chinese Language and Literature， East China Normal University. His research areas cover the sociological theory of literature and art.
  • Supported by:

    Youth Project of the National Social Sciences Foundation (21CZW061)

PDF (PC)

258

摘要： 见证奥斯维辛面临着“莱维悖论”： 无言者作为彻底的见证者，因触碰死亡而无法作证，幸存者作为奥斯维辛的例外，在某种意义上只是伪见证者。阿甘本认为，无言者与幸存者皆无法独自承担见证，见证者应该被视为由二者相互“排除性纳入”而建筑的界阈，亦即一种“统一-差异”的断裂构造。由此，见证的不可能性与可能性彼此构成，为无言者见证的不可能作证的幸存者就是见证者，见证者是通过为见证的不可能作证而得以承担见证之责的人。与之无异，证词同样呈现为一种断裂构造，证词来自语言为非语言作证，来自语言对非语言的回应，证词是被语言作证的非语言。在阿甘本看来，这意味着证词的语言不再意指，因为被语言作证的非语言是声响已逝而意义未至的声音/死语言，证词的实质是声音/死语言。也正是作为声音/死语言的证词奠定了文学的可能性。文学在奥斯维辛之后若要表明其继续存在的正当性，它的语言必须是声音/死语言。

关键词: 阿甘本； , 见证； , 莱维悖论； , 界阈； , 声音/死语言

Abstract:

 Witnessing Auschwitz is confronted with “Levi’s paradox”： The speechless as a thorough witness cannot testify because of their death; and the survivor as an exception of Auschwitz， to some extent， is only a pseudo-witness. Agamben argues that neither the speechless nor the survivor can bear witness alone， and the witness should be seen as a threshold constructed by the mutual “exclusive inclusion” of the speechless and the survivor， that is， a fractured construction of “unity-difference.” As a result， the impossibility and possibility of witnessing constitute each other. The survivor who bears witness to the speechless’s impossibility of witnessing is the witness; the witness is the one who can bear the responsibility of witnessing through bearing witness to the impossibility of witnessing. In the same way， testimony also presents itself as a fractured construct， which comes from language that bears witness and responds to the non-language. Testimony is the non-language testified by language. For Agamben， this means that the language of testimony no longer signifies， because the non-language testified by language is the Voice/dead language， which is “no-longer” a voice and “not-yet” any meaning. The essence of testimony is Voice/dead language. It is also the testimony as Voice/dead language that establishes the foundation for the possibility of literature. If literature wants to justify its existence after Auschwitz， its language must be Voice/dead language.

Key words:

Giorgio Agamben,  witnessing,  Levi’s paradox,  threshold,  Voice/dead language