(3.231.29.122) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/25 15:30
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:游智凱
研究生(外文):Chih-Kai Yu
論文名稱:從冷戰孤島到兩岸節點?金門高粱酒的跨域流動之前哨意義再生產
論文名稱(外文):The Redefinition of a Cold-War Outpost as a Cross-strait Bridge? The inter-regional flow of Kinmen Kaoliang Liquor
指導教授:黃宗儀黃宗儀引用關係
口試委員:譚鴻仁張碧君
口試日期:2014-02-14
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:地理環境資源學研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:地理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:中文
論文頁數:120
中文關鍵詞:金門高粱酒物質性邊界前哨國家符碼
外文關鍵詞:kinmen kaoliang liquormaterialityboundaryfrontiernational code
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:734
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
金門本身複雜的政治歷史、特殊的地緣關係與區域特性,在兩岸發展的進程中扮演關鍵的試驗地位。作為研究兩岸的特殊場域,本論文將以金門重要的地方特產--金門高粱酒為例,體現商品中兩岸的地緣與文化關係,並突顯金門作為前哨意義的彈性變化。本論文的研究方法取徑物質性與文本再現分析,試圖透過在地原物料、白酒酒香、商品符號價值與文化論述文本,說明金酒商品跨域兩岸市場後的現象。本論文發現,金門高粱酒指涉的金門應有兩種層面解讀,除了代表冷戰時期的「戰地金門」,也是穿梭兩岸的「臺灣金門」。國家前哨雙重的身分建構不僅幫助兩岸經貿與文化的整合,也彌補兩岸政治歷史的情感裂痕;然而,當跨越邊界造成假酒與商品治理問題,金酒的國家符碼便成為突顯兩岸差異、作為區隔我者與他者的保護手段。對此,金門作為國家前哨的概念,即是國家政治與資本拓張反覆協商後的彈性存在。

Kinmen has played a significant role in the development of cross-strait relations due to its complex political history and geo-spatiality. As a special field for cross-strait relations, this study uses Kinmen Kaoliang Liquor as an example to elaborate the flexible meanings Kinmen is endowed with in the context of the worldwide flow of goods and regionalization. A materiality and cultural discourse analysis approach will be adopted in this study, which aims to illustrate what social relations were changed, shaped or appropriated when Kinmen Kaoliang Liquor crossed the political and cultural boundary that is the Taiwan Strait. This will enable an examination of the range of meanings embodied by Kinmen with relation to Kaoliang liquor as a commodity, one being a rigid representative of a former battlefield, and the other a producer of a local cultural specialty. The construction of this dual identity helped to smoothly re-integrate the traditional Chinese spirits industry and the capital market, however, it can also act as a form of protection, in differentiating between “us” and “others” in terms of commodity governance. Therefore, the concept of ‘nation’ or ‘frontier’ is based on the constant negotiation between national role and capital expansion.

口試委員審定書…………………………………………………………………… i
謝誌………………………………………………………………………………… ii
中文摘要 ……………………………………………………………………………iv
英文摘要 ………………………………………………………………………………v
目錄…………………………………………………………………………………vi
圖目錄………………………………………………………………………………vii
表目錄………………………………………………………………………………viii

第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機與目的…………………………………………………1
第二節 文獻回顧…………………………………………………………5
第三節 研究定位、方法與限制…………………………………………18
第四節 章節架構安排……………………………………………………24

第二章 冷戰結構下的金門高粱地景………………………………………………27
第一節 高粱地景的生產…………………………………………………28
第二節 金門高粱、軍隊與國家敘事分析………………………………39

第三章 金門高粱酒的物質性………………………………………………………47
第一節 金門高粱的商品化歷程…………………………………………49
第二節 金門高粱酒的在地性……………………………………………55
第三節 中華白酒文化……………………………………………………62
第四節 從戰地紀念品到兩岸伴手禮……………………………………69

第四章 金門高粱酒的跨境論述與文本再現………………………………………77
第一節 金酒文本與廣告分析……………………………………………79
第二節 前哨意義的再生產………………………………………………87
第三節 文本之外:金門高粱酒的發展與侷限…………………………94

第五章 結論………………………………………………………………………100
第一節 研究發現………………………………………………………100
第二節 未來研究發展建議……………………………………………105

參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………107
附錄…………………………………………………………………………………114


一、英文文獻
Agnew, J. (2004) ‘Nationalism’ in James S. Duncan, Nuala C. Johnson and Richard. H. Schein (eds), A Companion to Cultural Geography. Malden: Blackwell.
Alexander, J. C. (2004) ‘Cultural Pragmatics: Social Performance between Ritual and Strategy.’ Sociological Theory 22(4): 527 – 573.
Amin, A. (2004) ‘Regions Unbound: Towards a New Politics of Place.’ Geografiska Annaler 86 B: 33 – 44.
Anderson, B. and J. Wylie. (2009) ‘On Geography and Materiality.’ Environment and Planning A 41: 318 – 335.
Anderson, M. (1996) Frontiers, territory and state formation in the modern world. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Anholt, S. (2004) ‘Branding places and nations’ in R. Clifton, J. Simmons and S. Ahmad (eds), Brands and branding. Princeton: Bloomberg Press.
Anholt, S. (2007) ‘Competitive Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions.’ Journal of Brand Management 14: 474 – 475.
Appadurai, A. (2005) ‘Materiality in the Future of Anthropology’ in Wim van Binsbergen and Peter L. Geschiere (eds), Commodification: Things, Agency, and Identities (The Social Life of Things Revisited). Munster: LIT Verlag.
Appadurai, A. (ed.) (1986) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bakker, K. and G. Bridge. (2006) ‘Material worlds? Resource geographies and the ''matter of nature.''’ Progress in Human Geography 30(1): 5 – 27.
Barney, K. (2009) &;#699;Laos and the making of a “relational” resource frontier.&;#700; The Geographical Journal 175(2): 146 – 159.
Binsbergen, W. V. (2005) ‘Commodification: Things, agency, and identities: Introduction’ in Wim van Binsbergen and Peter L. Geschiere (eds), Commodification: Things, Agency, and Identities (The Social Life of Things Revisited). Munster: LIT Verlag.
Britton, S. (1991) ‘Tourism, Capital, and Place: towards a Critical Geography of Tourism.’ Environment and planning D: society and space 9(4): 451–478.
Chien, H. T. (2004) ‘Cultural Landscape in the Island with the Status of Borderland: A Case of Kinmen.’ Islands of the World VIII: 379–400.
Dalby, S. (1990) Creating the Second Cold War: The Discourse of Politics. London: Pinter Publisher.
Dant, T. (1997) Material Culture in the Social World. Values, Activities, Lifestyles. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Dant, T. (2005) Materiality And Society. Maidenhead : Open University Press.
Davis, F. (1979) Yearning for Yesterday: A Sociology of Nostalgia. New York: Free Press.
Duncan, J, and N. Duncan. (1988) ‘(Re)reading the landscape.’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 6(2): 117 – 126.
Flath et al. (2011) . ‘Beyond Suffering: Recounting War in Modern China. ’UBC Press.
Gallerher C. et al. (2009) Key Concepts in Political Geography. London: Sage.
Geismar, H., &; Horst, H. A. (2004). Materializing ethnography. Journal of Material Culture, 9(1), 5–10.
Giambelli, R. A. (1998). ‘The coconut, the body and the human being. Metaphors of life and growth in Nusa Penida and Bali.’ The Social Life of Trees: Anthropological Perspectives on Tree Symbolism. Oxford: Berg, 133–57.
Gottman, J. (ed.) (1980) Centre and Perifihery: Spatial Variation in Politics. London: Sage.
Harre, R. (2002) Cognitive science: A philosophical introduction. London: Sage.
Harvey, D. (2002) ‘The Art of Rent: Globalization, Monopoly and the Commodification of Culture.’ Socialist Register 38: 93 – 110.
Houtum, H. V. (2005) ‘The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries.’ Geopolitics 10(4): 672-679.
Hung, P. Y. (2013) Mountains of Green Gold: Tea Production, Land-use Politics, and Ethnic Minorities on China''s Southwest Frontier. University of Wisconsin –Madison.
Hutchinson, J. (2005) Nations as Zones of Conflict. London: Sage.
Jones, A. (2007) Memory and Material Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaneva, N. and D. Popescu. (2011) ‘National Identity Lite: Nation Branding in Post-Communist Romania and Bulgaria.’ International Journal of Cultural Studies 14(2): 191 – 207.
Kopytoff, I. (1986) ‘The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process’ in A. Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kristof, L. K. (1959) ‘The nature of frontiers and boundaries.’ Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 49(3): 269 –282.
Lamont, M., &; Molnar, V. (2002) ‘The study of boundaries in the social sciences.’ Annual review of sociology, 28: 167 –195.
Langenbacher, E. and Y. Shain. (2010) Power and the Past: Collective Memory and International Relations. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.
Leimgruber, W. (1994) ‘Marginality and Marginal Regions: problems of definition’ in Chang-Yi D. Chang. et al. (eds) Marginality and Development Issues in Marginal Regions. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
Littrell M. A. et al. (1994) Souvenirs and Tourism Styles. Journal of Travel Research 33(1): 3 – 11.
Lowenthal, D. (1985) The Past is a Foreign Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Massey, D. (1994) Space, Place, and Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Miller, D. (1998) ‘Why Some Things Matter’ in Daniel Miller (ed.), Material Cultures: Why Some Things. London: University College Press.
Mitchell, D. (2003) ‘California Living, California Dying: Dead Labor and the Political Economy of Landscape’ in K. Anderson, M. Domosh, S. Pile and N. Thrift (eds), Handbook of Cultural Geography. London: Sage.
Muller M. (2008) ‘Reconsidering the Concept of Discourse for the Field of Critical Geopolitics: Towards discourse as language.’ Political Geography 27(3): 322 –338.
Paasi, A. (2005) Generations and the “Development” of Border Studies. Geopolitics 10(4): 663 – 671.
Paasi, A. (2005) Generations and the “Development” of Border Studies. Geopolitics 10(4): 663 – 671.
Paasi, A. (2011) ‘A Border Theory: An Unattainable Dream or a Realistic Aim for Border Scholars?’ in D. Wastl-Walter (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Border Studies. London: Ashgate.
Paasi, A. (2011) ‘The Region , Identity, and Power.’ Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 14: 9–16.
Peet, R. (1996) ‘Discursive Idealism in the “Landscape-as-Text” School.’ The Professional Geographer 48(1): 96 – 98.
Pike, A. (2011) ‘Introduction: Brands and Branding Geographies’ in Andy Pike (ed.), Brands and Branding Geographies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Prescott, J. R. V. (1965) The Geography of Frontiers and Boundaries. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Russell, N. (2006) ‘Collective Memory Before and After Halbwachs.’ in The French Review 79(4): 792 – 804.
Saukko, P. (2003). Doing Research in Cultural Studies: An Introduction to Classical and New Methodological Approaches. London: Sage.
Su, X. (2013) ‘From Frontier to Bridgehead: Cross-border Regions and the Experience of Yunnan, China.’ International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37(4): 1213 – 1232.
Swanson, K. K. and Timothy, D. J. (2012) ‘Souvenirs: Icons of Meaning, Commercialization and Commoditization.’ Tourism Management 33(3): 489 – 499.
Szonyi, M. (2008) Cold War Island: Quemoy on the Front Line. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weiner, A. B. &; J. C. Schneider. (eds). (1989) Cloth and Human Experience. Smithsonian Institution Press.
Woodward, I. (2007) Understanding Material Culture. London: Sage.
&;#8195;
二、中文文獻
方仁琦,2012。金門實驗戰地政務時期的地方自治與民權訓練─以烈嶼鄉五個行政村為中心。國立清華大學歷史研究所碩士論文。
王勁豪,2010。金門高粱酒西進大陸一線城市之行銷策略研究。國立中山大學高階經營碩士班碩士論文。
王淑貞,2002。金門高粱酒文化對金門發展之影響。銘傳大學應用中國文學研究所碩士論文。
江柏煒,2013。人口遷徙、性別結構及其社會文化變遷:從僑鄉到戰地的金門。人口學刊46:47-86。
行政院經濟建設委員會,2009。金馬中長期經濟發展規劃。行政院。
吳啟釗,2012。連緣心 海峽情——從海峽兩岸酒看兩岸酒文化。兩岸關係2012(6):60-63。
吳鈞堯,2008。金門現代文學發展之研究。東吳大學中國文學系碩士論文。
李嘉珍,2005。金門高粱酒行銷大陸市場策略之研究。銘傳大學觀光研究所碩士論文。
李福井,2012。烽火甘泉──金門高粱酒傳奇。新北市,大堯文創。
周意華,2011。消費者對金門高粱酒品牌形象之探討。國立高雄餐旅大學餐旅管理研究所碩士論文。
金門縣政府,2009。金門縣誌《經濟志、農業志》。金門縣政府。
胡璉,1976。金門憶舊。臺北,黎明文化公司。
徐志杰,2010。高粱酒之感官品質分析。國立臺灣大學食品科技研究所碩士論文。
馬相金,2011。歷史地理視角下的中國酒業經濟及酒文化研究。南京師範大學碩士論文。
張梨慧,2008。全球化下衝突性邊界的觀光規劃─以金門為例。城市與設計學報20:131-163。
黃茱珺,2012。金門紀念品:從在地鑲嵌到文化創意的實踐。國立高雄師範大學地理學系博士論文。
黃茱珺、吳連賞,2009。金門紀念品在地黏著性之探討。環境與世界20:1-26。
黃應貴,2004。物與物質文化。中研院-民族學研究所。
楊天厚、林麗寬,2001。金門高粱酒鄉。新北市:稻田出版有限公司。
楊廷標,2004。金門縣高粱保價政治經濟分析1952~2002。銘傳大學國家發展與兩岸關係碩士在職專班碩士論文。
董毓雯,2005。戰地政務解除前後金門中地系統的變遷。國立臺灣師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
蔡珮君,2009。從傳統聚落到“戰鬥村”:以金門瓊林為例。國立金門技術學院碩士論文。
羅志平,2011。金門地方書寫與研究書目彙編。Showwe秀威資訊。
羅德水. 2000。兩岸關係發展與金門地位變遷之研究。淡江大學中國大陸研究所碩士論文。

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔