2008-08-012024-05-18https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/712008摘要：本研究擬探討「批判式反烏托邦」(critical dystopia) 的定義問題以及非裔女性作家奧塔維亞‧巴特勒 (Octavia Butler) 的作品在反烏托邦傳承中的定位。 「批判式反烏托邦」是二十世紀八０年代以來烏托邦文學的重要發展。「批判式反烏托邦」多描述浩劫後的世界，生態迭遭破壞，資源枯竭，暴力橫行，人類身處險境， 面臨喪亡的危機。「批判式反烏托邦」在形式和政治訴求二方面兼採抗拒策略，以試圖在世紀末的悲觀氛團和絕望情懷中重新探討烏托邦願景的可行性。然而此等定義似未能完全釐清「批判式反烏托邦」與「傳統反烏托邦」之間的岐異，而「批判式反烏托邦」所指涉的年代亦有值得商榷之處。「批判式反烏托邦」的發展由1980年左右迄今已近三十年，針對「批判式反烏托邦」風貌的討論應更細緻，以期更能突顯其發展的脈絡。 奧塔維亞‧巴特勒的作品即是一個值得學界深思的例子。評家Baccolini對於「批判式反烏托邦」的討論，開宗明義即以巴特勒的兩本小說為例：1979年的《宗親》（Kindred） 和1993年的《撒種的比喻》（Parable of the Sower）。然而，此等探討方式儘管呈現了巴特勒小說的共同面向，但在「批判式反烏托邦」的大傘籠罩之下，卻也可能掩蓋了二者之間的諸多歧異。整體而言，巴特勒由《宗親》到《撒種的比喻》的發展其實見證了「烏托邦核心」（”a utopian core”）或「希望場域」（”a locus of hope”）（皆為 Baccolini用語，見頁13）的漸形消遁。《宗親》較具「希望場域」，而《撒種的比喻》中屢見末世景象，雖仍有殘存的希望，但抗拒的力量顯然薄弱許多。職是，學界對於「批判式反烏托邦」的探討，或許應朝分期的方向研究，以其更能呈現此一次文類的發展脈絡。 <br> Abstract: This project attempts to explore the feasibility of the current usage of the term “critical dystopia” to designate dystopias after the 1980s. The project aims to investigate the definition of the term and pinpoint its limitation in either accentuating distinctive features of contemporary dystopias or comprehensively mapping their trajectory. Features of “critical dystopia,” such as “genre blurring,” “resisting closure,” and “formally and politically oppositional” (Baccolini and Moylan, “Introduction: Dystopia and Histories,” Dark Horizons 7), fail to accentuate the difference between “canonical dystopia” and “critical dystopia,” as those features also tend to characterize canonical dystopias such as Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We. On the other hand, while “maintain[ing] the utopian impulse within the work” (Baccolini and Moylan 7) may indeed be what’s integral to “critical dystopia,” there may be the need for further demarcation within the sphere as so-called “utopian core” or “locus of hope” (Baccolini, “Gender and Genre in the Feminist Critical Dystopias of Katharine Burdekin, Margaret Atwood, and Octavia Butler,” Future Females, The Next Generation 13) sees constant decline from 1980s to the beginning of the twenty-first century. Octavia Butler is a case in point. Her two novels, Kindred (1979) and Parable of the Sower (1993), are both cited by Raffaella Baccolini as examples of critical dystopia (13). Under this umbrella term, however, the crucial distinction between the two dystopias is somewhat neglected. A comparative study of them will unravel the fact that, while the former harbors an obvious “utopian core,” the latter is filled with apocalyptic images and verges on despair. Although there is still some lingering hope for a different future toward the end of the novel, that hope remains precarious. The 14-year difference between the publications of the two novels indeed indicates much about the development of “critical dystopia.”批判式反烏托邦奧塔維亞‧巴特勒《宗親》《撒種的比喻》critical dystopiaOctavia ButlerKindredParable of the Sower