摘要

本文將兩位客籍作家放在相對的位置，旨在說明二者對於「客家情結」有不同的詮釋方式，因而造成他們在台灣文學中的位階懸殊──鍾理和享有「倒在血泊裡的筆耕者」之譽，代表台灣農民強烈的反抗精神，而龍瑛宗則博得「台灣知識份子的委屈」的認可，被放在台灣文學論述中較邊緣的位置。兩位作家所代表的客家情結，簡言之，是一種居於族群弱勢的自覺感受，然發之為文，卻衍生出不同的寫作風格：鍾理和獲得的評價是「反抗性」，生命實踐上雖得到「背德者、敗家子、殘廢者」的指控，終究不改其志，極符合台灣文學論述的「正港」（authentic）戰鬥精神；而龍瑛宗的則是「被壓迫性」，表現出「屈從、自棄、唯美」，加上曾經受到日本文壇肯定而在戰後被刻意排擠，戰後停筆數十年，遲至 1980 年代解嚴後才逐漸受到討論，但在比較重視意識形態的評論家眼中，並不屬於正宗寫實主義的台灣文學核心作家群。本文以為這兩位作家對於客家情結的感受植基於他們的「客家意識」，而其客家意識並非具有本質性的集體認同，而是源於地方歷史和區域文化的特殊建構：鍾理和的美濃代表南部客家內聚團結的特色，而龍瑛宗的北埔家鄉則代表北部客家的族群跨越與衝突。這兩地的客家意識雖有相似處（如社會和經濟地位的不平等），但歧異點更能說明客家主體性其實不只一個。本文指出，鍾理和受到論述者的熱切關注，極有可能是他們檢選了客家意識的其中一個面向（勤奮、硬頸、農民的受壓迫），因為那符合台灣文學在建構主體性時所需要的規劃疆界的策略，而龍瑛宗的另一種客家意識（強調越界所需要的忍從精神）所彰顯的生命力反而受到忽視或誤解。

This paper discusses two Hakka writers with a focus of their different expressions of “Hakka complex.” Drawing from Carl Jung’s theory of complex, I use the phrase to mean a collective unconscious that characterizes Hakka ethnicity in Taiwan. This complex refers to a group of repressed desires and memory that dominate Hakka personality; in the two writers’ case, when their complex surfaces on the conscious level in their writing, we find they express their strong feelings in two opposite ways: Zhong Lihe’s resistance and Long Yingzong’s submissiveness. From the viewpoint of constructing Taiwan’s national identity, which most critics have emphasized, Zhong apparently is less controversial than Long and hence enjoys his literary fame in the current historiography of Taiwan literature. The aim of this paper is to re-position their contribution from the perspective of their Hakka ethnicity, arguing that both resistance and submissiveness are two faces of one coin that is characterized as Hakka complex. The reason of this contrast is based on the geographical difference in Northern and Southern Taiwan through a long history that features Hakka unyielding spirit in two different ways of expression.

全文下載