Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
標題: 身體的詭怪: 論《科學怪人》暨《生化人是否夢見電子羊?》
Body Monstrosity: A Cyborg Reading of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
作者: 曾文玲
Tseng, Wen-ling
關鍵字: cyborg;身體;science fiction;body
出版社: 外國語文學系所
引用: Work Cited Balsamo, Anne. Technologies of the Gendered Body: Reading Cyborg Women. Durham and London: Duke UP, 1995. Balsamo, Anne. “Reading Cyborgs, Writing Feminism.” Cybersexualities: A Reader on Feminist Theory, Cyborgs and Cyberspace. Jenny Wolmark, Ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999. Badmington, Neil, Ed. Posthumanism. New York: Palgrave, 2000. Bukatman, Scott. “Introduction.” Terminal Identity: The Virtual Subject in Postmodern Science Fiction. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1993 Badley, Linda. Film, Horror, and the Body Fantastic. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1995. Brook, Peter, Ed. “What is a Monster? (According to Frankesntein).” Body Work: Objects of Desire in Modern Narrative. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1993. 199-220. Clarke, Julie. “The Human/ Not Human in the Work of Orlan and Stelarc.” Zylinska, Joanna, Ed. The Cyborg Experiments: the Extensions of the Body in the Media Age, London and New York: Continuum, 2002. Clayton, Jay. “Concealed Circuits: Frankenstein Monster, the Medusa and the Cyborg.” Raritan15(1996): 53-69. Crewe, Jonathan. “Transcoding the world: Haraway’s Postmodernism.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 22-4 (1997):891-905 Chapple, J. A.V. Science and Literature in the Nineteenth Century. London: Macmillan, 1986: 38. Cross, Ashley J. “‘Indelible Impressions’: Gender and Language in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Women''s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal (1998): 547-580 Dick, Philip K. Valis. New York: Vintage, 1981. 77. ---. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. New York: Ballantine, 1968. Doane, Mary Ann. “Technophilia: Technology, Representation, and the Feminine.” Body/Politics: Women and The Discourses of Science. Jacobus, Mary, Evelyn Fox Keller and Sally Shuttleworth, eds. London: Routledge, 1990. Foucault, Michel. “Docile Bodies.” Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the prison. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Vintage, 1995. Gray, Chris Hables et al. The Cyborg Handbook. Routledge, 1995. Galvan, Jill. “Entering the Posthuman Collective in Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” Science Fiction Study. 24(1997):413-429. Gray, Chris Hables. Cyborg Citizen: Politics in the Posthuman Age. Routledge, 2002. Gwaltney, Marilyn. “Androids as a Device for Reflection on Personhood.” Retrofitting Blade Runner: Issues in Ridley Scott''s Blade Runner and Philip K. Dick''s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Kerman, Judith, Ed. Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1991 Haraway, Donna. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.” In Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991. 149-181. ---. “Introduction: the Persistence of Vision.” Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science. New York: Routledge, 1989. ---. Modest Witness@Second Millenium. FemaleMan© Meets OncoMouse™. New York, NY: Routledge, 1997. ---. The Comanion Species Manifesto: Dogs, people, And Significant Otherness. Prickly Paradigm Press, 2003. ---. The Haraway Reader. New York: Routledge, 2004. Hayles, N. Katherine. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 1999. Jacobus, Mary, Evelyn Fox Keller and Sally Shuttleworth, eds. Body/Politics: Women and the Discourses of Science. London: Routledge, 1990. Kirkup, Gill. “Introduction to Part One.” The Gender Cyborg: A Reader. Ed. Gill Kirkup et al. New York: Routledge, 2000. Kull, Anne. “The Cyborg as An Interpretation of Culture-Nature.” Zygon36-1 (2001):49-56. ---. “Speaking Cyborg: Technoculture and Technonature.” Zyon 37-2 (2002): 279 Kunzru, Hari. “You are Cborg.” Wired Magazine. 1997. 5 Jan. 2007. 〈〉 Ketterer, David. “Frameups and Double-Talk ‘in’ Frankenstein.” SFS Website. 15 Feb. 2007. 〈〉 O’Brien J., Kevin. “An Ethics of NatureCulture and Creation: Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Ethics as a Resource for Ecotheology.” Ecotheology 9-3 (2004):298 Mcluhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. London: Routledge, 2001. Poster, Mark. “High-Tech Frankenstein, or Heidegger Meets Stelarc.” Zylinska, Joanna, Ed. The Cyborg Experiments: the Extensions of the Body in the Media Age, London and New York: Continuum, 2002. Persson, Hans. “Do Androids Dream of Being Human?” LSFF. 25 Jan. 2007. 〈〉 Robins, K., and F. Webster. Times of the Technoculture. New York: Routledge, 1999. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Penguin Books, 1818. Sachs, Matthew. “BladeRunner and Humanity.” 12 Feb. 2007.〈〉 Schor, Esther, Ed. The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Zylinska, Joanna, Ed. “Extending Mcluhan into the New Media Age: An Introduction.” The Cyborg Experiments: the Extensions of the Body in the Media Age, London and New York: Continuum, 2002. Vacarescu, Theodora-Eliza. “From Frankenstein''s Monster to Haraway''s Cyborg: Gender. in Monstrosity, Cyborgosity and (Post)Humanity.” Gender and the (Post) East/ West Divide. Eds. Micaela Frunza and Theodora-Eliza Vacarescu. 2005. 5 Mar. 2007. 〈 〉 Vlahogiannia, Nicholas. “Disabling Bodies.” Changing Bodies, Changing Meanings: Studies on the Human Body in Antiquity. Ed. Montserrat, Dominic. London: Routledge, 1998. 13-36.
在《科學怪人》(Frankenstein)暨《生化人是否夢見電子羊?》(Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?)中,身體的詭異為社會建構的結果。本論文旨在運用哈樂崴 (Donna Haraway) cyborg理論來分析身體的詭異性,並點出身體為界在自然/文化場域中的媒介其所接受的社會建構也吊詭的挑戰此建構的可能性。從cyborg的觀點來看,身體擁有此種解構的力量。
在《科學怪人》中,怪物是第一個結合科技及科學的產物,為「賽伯格原形」(proto-cyborg)。 首先,它的身體打破了性別的藩籬。怪物的身體是被語言所標記的,然而,它卻可使用語言和它的創造者對抗,為cyborg生存反叛者。同時,它的身體也顯現出在語言上分類範疇的問題。
《生化人是否夢見電子羊?》呈現從人文主義到後人文主義的演變,打破了以人為中心的幻覺。科技及科學因子滲透入人的身體。媒體和資本主義結合成為強而有力的社會力量。生化人羅猗˙貝提(Roy Baty)被塑造成救世主形象,打破人為中心的幻象。生化人睿秋˙羅森(Rachael Rosen),則使用其身體成為反叛的力量。並且,它的存在顯現出科學神話的迷思,人的完整主體性也受到挑戰。Cyborg就是我們;我們就是它。

The motif of body monstrosity in both Frankenstein and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? reveals the consequence of social construct. This thesis aims at analyzing body monstrosity by way of Donna Haraway''s cyborg theory to illustrate the body as a site in-between nature/culture. The body is a site which is constructed and reconstructed by social power. In cyborg's perspective, the body has the rebellious power to problematize the social construction.
In Frankenstein, the Monster is the “proto-cyborg,” the first product embodiment of technology and science. First, its monstrous body dissolves the gender boundary. Second, the Monster's body is marked by language. It uses language which marks it as other to fight against its creator, surviving as a cyborg fighter in-between-ness. Its body shows the rebellious power to the dominant dualism. Also, it reveals the problematic classification and categorization of language.
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? illustrates the shift from humanism to posthumanism, which breaks down the human-centered illusion. The body has been infiltrated with technology and science. Mass media become an inculcating ideology cooperating with capitalism, together they serve as the powerful social construct. The replicant, Roy Baty, is shaped as a savior figure who breaks down the human-centered illusion. Another replicant, Rachael Rosen, uses her body a tool to undermine capitalism and the Rosen Association to rescue those rebellious replicants. Her construction is tinged with monstrosity, a result deriving from the advanced technology of science. She, therefore, problematizes the myth of science, the classification of language, and the idea of unified subject believed by humans. She makes us cyborg; she is one of us, and we are her.
其他識別: U0005-1308200716231700
Appears in Collections:外國語文學系所

Show full item record

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.