臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

論文提要：
本論文主要以巴赫汀的「眾生喧嘩」論述，探討約翰．傅傲斯小說《狂想》中不同角色的聲音以及在言談內容中表現每位說話者如何深受宗教、階級、家庭、性別與教育的影響，而這些影響箝制了說話者的意識形態。傅傲斯巧妙安排一個問話者藉由合法的「審問」方式，使所有說話者的聲音皆能完整的傳達並反映說話者在十八世紀英國社會中所需面臨的多重問題與壓力。最終，因多重聲音呈現而造就《狂想》的開放性結局。
本論文分為五章，第一章說明研究主題並強調巴赫汀的眾生喧嘩理論可應用於分析《狂想》。第二章探討在十八世紀保守的英國社會中，宗教如何影響人的生活、言語，以及宗教如何充斥在人們的日常生活與言語中。第三章討論在十八世紀英國社會中，人們深受社會階層框架的牽制；在具有強大權力的上流階層全力壓迫下，傅傲斯安排機會，讓低下階層角色為自己發聲，進而說出自身的想法。第四章著重於性別議題。說話者的不同性別影響著其說話的方式及內容。男性與女性各有不同的說話特色。男性在十八世紀英國社會中雖佔有主導地位，但並不意味女性總是活在男性的掌控中，此小說的女主角便是此現象最好的證明。透過不同的性別，男性與女性得以展現自身說話的風格，使女性不再是沈默者。論文中的結論部分則闡述在眾聲喧嘩過後，留給聽話者的是不同說話者的多重論述及結論。即使透過宗教、階級、性別等層面探討，終究無法得到唯一的真理，「眾生喧嘩」為聽者帶來的是一個如謎一般永不停止的狀態。

This thesis attempts to investigate different characters’ voices and how each speaker’s discourse are influenced and controlled by religion, social class, family, gender and education in John Fowles’s A Maggot via M. M. Bakhtin’s heteroglossia. Moreover, the thesis presents that how Fowles arranges an interrogator to practice legal interrogations ingeniously to make all speakers’ voices are listened totally and via the interrogations and their discourses to show the multi-problems and pressure that they have to confront in the 18th-century British society. At the end of the thesis, it expresses that multi-voices result in an open-ending.
This thesis consists of five chapters. The introduction explains the fundamental motifs of the thesis and its relation with Bakhtin’s theory—heteroglossia. Chapter Two deals with in the 18th-century British conventional society, how religion has impact on people’s daily lives, as well as how religious influence permeates people’s discourses. Chapter Three concentrates on the situation that people were deeply controlled by social-class system in the 18th-century British society. Under the oppression of high social class’ authority, Fowles gives his lower-working-class characters chances to speak for themselves and show their thoughts. Chapter Four investigates the topic of gender—Fowles presents that different genders have influence on the speakers’ speaking styles and contents. Male or female presents his/ her own speaking features via different genders. Although men occupy the authoritative position, it does not mean women are always under men’s control and the heroine of the novel is the best example. Both male and female can show his and her speaking styles. Female is no longer silent. Chapter Five will be the conclusion. After the speakers’ heteroglossia, what they left to the listeners are the speakers’ multi-discourses and multi-conclusions. However, there is no one can offer a definite truth for the enigma in the novel to the listeners. There is no single truth to the enigma of the novel even via the analyses of religion, social class and gender. In the end, heteroglossia brings us listeners an endless state—a mysterious state.

Table of Contents


Chapter One
Introduction: Heterogeneous Voices and Bakhtin’s
Heteroglossia in A Maggo…………………………………………………1

Chapter Two
Religion Co-exists with 18th-Century People’s Lives…………………17

Chapter Three
Socio-Hierarchical Inequality of Different Speakers’ Voices…………38

Chapter Four
Gender-Inequality in the Investigations………………………………61

Chapter Five
Conclusion: The Polemic Discourses in A Maggot………………………84

Works Cited……………………………………………………………………93

Works Cited
Acheson, James. Introduction. John Fowles. By Acheson. London: Macmillan Press, 1998. 1-9.
---. John Fowles. London: Macmillan Press, 1998.
---. “A Maggot.” Acheson 76-91.
Aronowitz, Stanley. “Literature as Social Knowledge: Mikhail Bakhtin and the Reemergence of the Human Sciences.” Mandelker 119-35.
Bakhtin, Mikhail. The Dialogic Imagination. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Ed. Michael Holquist. Texas: Texas UP, 1990.
---. Introduction. The Dialogic Imagination. By Bakhtin. Ed. Michael Holquist. Texas: Texas UP, 1990. xv-xxxiv.
---. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. and Trans. Caryl Emerson. Theory and History of Literature. 8. Minneapolis: Minnesota UP, 1997.
Balsamo, Gian. “The Narrative Text as Historical Artifact: The Case of John Fowles.” Downing and Bazargan 127-52.
Bauer, Dale M. and Susan Jaret McKinstry. Feminism, Bakhtin, and the Dialogic. New York: New York UP, 1991.
---, eds. Introduction. Feminism, Bakhtin, and the Dialogic. Eds. Dale M. Bauer and Susan Jaret McKinstry. New York: New York UP, 1991. 1-6.
Bernstein, Michael Andre. “When the Carnival Turns Bitter: Preliminary Reflections upon the Abject Hero.” Morson 99-121.
The Bible. “New Testament.” Good News: Bible. Nashville: Catholic Bible Press, 1993.
Booth, Wayne C. “Freedom of Interpretation: Bakhtin and the Challenge of Feminist Criticism.” Morson 145-76.
---. Introduction. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: Minnesota UP, 1997.xiii-xxvii.
Branham, R. Bracht. “Inventing the Novel.” Mandelker 79-87.
Coates, Ruth. Christianity in Bakhtin: God and the Exiled Author. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998.
Crapanzono, Vincent. “The Postmodern Crisis: Discourse, Parody, Memory.” Mandelker 137-50.
De Man, Paul. “Dialogue and Dialogism.” Morson and Emerson 105-14.
Donovan, Josephine. “Style and Power.” Bauer and McKinstry 85-94.
Dore, John. “The Emergence of Language from Dialogue.” Mandelker 151-76.
Downing, David B. and Susan Bazargan, eds. Image and Ideology in Modern/ Postmodern Discourse. New York: New York State UP, 1991.
---. “Image and Ideology: Some Preliminary Histories and Polemics.” Downing and Bazargan 3-44.
Emerson, Caryl. Editor’s Preface. Introduction: Dialogue on Every Corner, Bakhtin in Every Class. Bakhtin in Contexts: Across the Disciplines. Ed. Amy Mandelker. Illinois: Northwestern UP, 1995. 1-30.
---. “The Outer Word and Inner Speech: Bakhtin, Vygotsky, and Internalization of Language.” Morson 21-40.
---. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. Emerson. Minneapolis: Minnesota UP, 1997. xxix-xliii.
---.“The Tolstoy Connection in Bakhtin.” Morson and Emerson 149-70.
Fawkner, H. W. The Timescapes of John Fowles. Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson UP, 1984.
Fogel, Aaron. “Coerced Speech and the Oedipus Dialogue Complex.” Morson and Emerson 173-96.
Fowles, John. A Maggot. London: Vintage, 1996.
Fowles, John and Dianne Vipond. “An Unholy Inquisition.” Twentieth Century Literature 42.1 (1996):12-28.
Herndl, Diane Price. “The Dilemmas of a Feminine Dialogic.” Bauer and McKinstry 7-24.
Hirschkop, Ken. “A Response to the Forum on Mikhail Bakhtin.” Morson 73-79.
Hitchcock, Peter. “Radical Reading.” Bauer and McKinstry 95-121.
Holmes, Frederick M. “History, Fiction, and the Dialogic Imagination: John Fowles’s A Maggot.” Contemporary Literature 32.2 (1991): 229-41.
Hutcheon, Linda. “Modern Parody and Bakhtin.” Morson and Emerson 87-103.
---. The Politics of Postmodernism. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2002.
Kehde, Suzanne. “Voices from the Margin: Bag Ladies and Others.” Bauer and McKinstry 25-38.
Kinser, Samuel. Rabelais’s Carnival: Text, Context, Metatext. California: California UP, 1990.
Lodge, David. After Bakhtin: Essays on Fiction and Criticism. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Loveday, Simon. The Romances of John Fowles. London: Macmillan Press, 1985.
Mandelker, Amy, ed. Bakhtin in Contexts: Across the Disciplines. Illinois: Northwestern UP, 1995.
Martinez, Maria Jesus. “Astarte’s Game: Variations in John Fowles’s ‘The Enigma.’” Twentieth Century Literature 42.1 (1996): 124-44.
Morson, Gary Saul. Bakhtin: Essays and Dialogues on His Work. Chicago: Chicago UP, 1986.
---. “Dialogue, Monologue, and the Social: A Reply to Ken Hirschkop.” Morson 81-88.
---, ed. “Parody, History, and Metaparody.” Morson and Emerson 63-86.
---. Preface: Perhaps Bakhtin. Bakhtin: Essays and Dialogues on His Work. Ed. Morson. Chicago: Chicago UP, 1986. vii-xiii.
Morson, Gary Saul and Caryl Emerson, eds. Introduction: Rethinking Bakhtin. Rethinking Bakhtin: Extensions and Challenges. Eds. Morson and Emerson. Illinois: Northwestern UP, 1989. 1-60.
---. Rethinking Bakhtin: Extensions and Challenges. Illinois: Northwestern UP,1989.
Murphy, Patrick D. “Prolegomenon for an Ecofeminist Dialogics.” Bauer and Mckinstry 39-56.
O’Connor, Mary. “Subject, Voice, and Women in Some Contemporary Black American Women’s Writing.” Bauer and McKinstry 199-217.
Onega, Susana. “A Maggot.” Form and Meaning in the Novels of John Fowles. London: OMI Research Press, 1989. 137-63.
---. “Self, World, and Art in the Fiction of John Fowles.” Twentieth Century Literature 42.1 (1996):29-57.
Pearlman, E. “A Maggot.” Library Journal 100.13 (1985):115-. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. NKNU, Lib. 22 March 2005 <http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7468433&lang=zh-tw>
Roberts, Mathew. “Poetics Hermeneutics Dialogics: Bakhtin and Paul de Man.” Morson and Emerson 115-34.
Rossner, Jeffrey. “Unsolved Mysteries: Agents of Historical Change in John Fowles’s A Maggot.” Papers on Language and Literature 36. 3(2000): 302-. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. NKNU, Lib. 22 March 2005 <http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=3510919&lang=zh-tw>
Salami, Mahmoud. Introduction: The Literary Theory of Narrative and John Fowles’s Fiction. John Fowles’s Fiction and the Poetics of Postmodernism. By Salami. Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinsin UP, 1992. 13-45.
---. John Fowles’s Fiction and the Poetics of Postmodernism. Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinsin UP, 1992.
Stevenson, Sheryl. “Language and Gender in Transit: Feminist Extensions of Bakhtin.” Bauer and McKinstry 181-98.
Tarbox, Katherine. The Art of John Fowles. Georgia: Georgia UP, 1988.
---. Introduction. The Art of John Fowles. By Tarbox. Georgia: Georgia UP, 1988. 1-10.
---. “A Maggot.” Tarbox 136-68.
Todorov, Tzvetan. Introduction. Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle. By Todorov. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1984. ix-xiii.
---. Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle. Trans. Wlad Godzich. Theory and History of Literature. 13. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1984.
White, Hayden. The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UP, 1987.
Woodcock, Bruce. Male Mythologies: John Fowles and Masculinity. Sussex: The
Harvester Press, 1987.
Yaeger, Patricia. Afterword. Feminism, Bakhtin, and the Dialogic. Eds. Dale M. Bauer and Susan Jaret McKinstry. New York: New York UP, 1991. 239-45.