友伴式婚姻之渴求：德徠賽〈自由〉及〈獨舞的婚姻〉評介與中譯

Abstract

本文以美國作家德徠賽為研究對象。他的兩部短篇小說〈自由〉(“Free”)及〈獨舞的婚姻〉(“Marriage—For One”)，透過「友伴式婚姻」的觀點，體現人們對於營造夫妻親密情感之渴望。一方面，我仿照原文風格將之譯成中文；另一方面，我假定十九世紀的中產階級面臨婚姻的兩難，須兼顧實質上的財富、地位或利益等考量以及情感上難以自抑的奔放流淌，友伴式婚姻強調婚姻的締結由重視社會資產、道德責任轉而重視個人自由、戀愛的可能性。此外，我也主張，儘管十九世紀晚期美國的中產階級宣稱不含感情成分的婚姻形同災難，同時期的自由戀愛主義者甚至堅決婚嫁。理由是，他們認為婚姻讓女性背負了過於沉重的社會批判及多重身分，既要賺錢養家、協助家務，還須贏取他人肯定。因此，想要落實女性真正的獨立，就只能對婚姻說不。

本文接著探討〈自由〉及〈獨舞的婚姻〉的內涵。〈自由〉一文的旨趣，在於摹寫十九世紀步入婚姻的中產階級男女，如何為了成為獨特的個體而奮力一搏。他們不甘被運氣、命運、愛情來電、宿命論、父母介入、或社會義務所擺佈。他們要主宰自己的人生。我發現故事的主人翁郝梅克先生，夾雜在對婚姻愛情的憧憬，與索然無味的婚姻現實之間，掙扎不已。

在〈獨舞的婚姻〉故事中，德徠賽精心描繪了造成那對新婚夫婦不睦的核心要素：身為妻子的貝西，她的性格較為自由奔放，對於丈夫希望她能永遠保持矜持、恬靜、心思單純的想法嗤之以鼻。小說的篇名恰恰呼應了丈夫內心對於封閉式婚姻的期待，也就是非你莫屬的愛情觀的執著，以致於在現實生活中，無法兌現基於自由個體選擇而結合的婚姻。

In this thesis, I choose to study Theodore Dreiser, whose “Free” and “Marriage—For One” reveal a longing for sentimental closeness between partners in the name of companionate marriage. On the one hand, I translate the two literary texts into Chinese by following similar language style used in the original work. On the other hand, I posit that 19th-century middle class faced with a dilemma between marriage as a result of interested motive, such as wealth, social position, or other advantages and marriage as a result of a predominantly affectionate outpouring of impulse. Companionate marriage is the movement from individualistic liberty and romantic possibility to social propriety and moral responsibility. Moreover, I argue that whilst late-19th-century middle class announced that passionless marriage was a tragedy, contemporaneous Free Lovers rejected marriage because it bears so important public judgment and status for women such as economic support, assistance, or respectability that women’s true independence necessitates an opposition to marriage.

Then, I examine “Free” and “Marriage—For One” in my thesis. “Free” features 19th-century middle-class men’s and women’s struggle to become a unique individual who enters a marital structure, not as an object of luck, fate, chemistry, determinism, parents’ interference, or compulsory social obligations, but as a subject. What I find is that the male protagonist, Haymaker, is sandwiched between his longing for conjugal love and an essential prosaicness of his marriage.

In “Marriage—For One,” Dreiser portrays what he believes to be the very core component in the newlyweds’ dissonance: the wife, Bessie, is more liberalized and goes so far as to reject her husband’s preference for her stagnation in a more innate, inactive, and unchanged state of simple-mindedness. The title of the short story echoes the husband’s expectations of a closed marriage for life with complete emotional exclusiveness that in actuality destroys the promise of forming a marital relation on the basis of free, individual choice.