Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|標題:||Father Complex and Parricide in Andrei Bely's Petersburg||作者:||Joel Janicki||關鍵字:||父親情結;父親形象;思想的全能;困擾;阿波羅－酒神對立;俄國1905年革命;father complex;father figure;omnipotence of thoughts;obsession;Apollonian-Dionysian dichotomy;1905 Revolution||Project:||Intergrams, Volume 16, Issue 1, Page(s) a1-19.||摘要:||
廣大的俄羅斯土地，長期處於沙皇的鐵腕及其他威權統治者的政策之下，看似毫無約束，但俄羅斯境內的無政府主義正在醞釀。俄國人民敬畏當局統治者的威權，稱呼其中的一位統治者為「小父親」（little father），這位「小父親」提供這些人民安全感，保護人民不受敵人威脅，並對抗生活中的不確定性。現代俄羅斯官僚政府體制的建立者，彼得一世的形象特別深植於俄國人的社會文化之中，彼得一世更是推動俄羅斯由落後退縮的亞洲內陸國家，轉變為歐洲國家背後強而有力的推手。1905年，俄羅斯政治的官僚生態與父親的形象面臨危機。在Petersburg（1916）中，作者Andrei Bely（1880－1934）用小說中的父親ApollonApollonovich Ableukhov與兒子Nikolai Apollonovich間的父子情結，呈現蘇俄首府受到戰爭時混亂、暴力及恐怖份子行動的折磨下，政府與人民的對立關係。父子間的對立，就在這位身為俄羅斯政府高級官員的父親，發現他兒子即將成為刺客時，焉然展開。本論文從幾個面向探討父子間的關係：以《悲劇的誕生》（1872）中，尼采用阿波羅－酒神的對立作為架構，聚焦於父親嚴格刻板的理性行為，以及主宰著兒子無意識與潛意識中夢想與著迷的弒父想法；文中也以佛洛依德的文章〈杜思妥也夫斯基與弒父母〉（Dostoevsky and Parricide）（1928）以及《圖騰與禁忌》（1913）一書中的第三篇文章，來檢視自戀階段和原始的、兒童對宇宙及早期慾望形成的關聯，以分析兒子Nikolai對父親日漸增長的敵意、同時尋求愛和認同的矛盾心理。根據佛洛依德，過度重視自我和個人幻想將導致「思想的全能」，而將個人內在心靈投射到外在世界。Nikolai的困擾與固執證實了他對現實的虛構、失序與迷惑以及父親情結。本論文同時著墨於AlexanderDudkin在小說中的性格與扮演的角色：他革命家的身分、Nikolai的第二個自我、以及尼采式的意志代理人－那個謀殺他精神中的父親的人。
The vast Russian lands, seemingly boundless and anarchic, have long been governed by the iron hand of the Tsar and other more modern figures of absolute authority. The Russian ruler has been both feared and revered by his people, who have bestowed the epithet of «Батюшка» ＂little father＂ on him. The little father provides them with a sense of security against life's uncertainties and protection against Russia's numerous enemies. Peter the Great in particular set his imprint on Russian society and culture as founder of the modern Russian bureaucratic state and implacable agent who transformed Russia from a backward Asiatic hinterland into a powerful European state. The year 1905 marked a year of crisis for the Russian bureaucratic state and the authority of the Russian father figure. In his novel Petersburg (1916), Andrei Bely (1880-1934) presents a complex relationship between father, Apollon Apollonovich Ableukhov, and son, Nikolai Apollonovich, in the context of the chaos, violence and terrorist acts that afflicted the Russian capital in those revolutionary times. The father, a high-ranking official in the Russian government, finds himself at odds with his would-be assassin son. The present study proposes to examine the father-son relationship from several perspectives: the Apollonian-Dionysian dichotomy as outlined in Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy (1872) provides a framework to focus on the rigid rationalistic behavior of the father, and the dreams and obsessive patricidal thoughts that govern the son's unconscious and subconscious mind. Reference will also be made to Freud's essay entitled Dostoevsky and Parricide (1928) and the third essay from Totem and Taboo (1913) which examines the narcissistic phase associated with a primitive, child's understanding of the universe and early libidinal development in analyzing Nikolai's growing fascination with his own childhood and childhood memories that are manifested by a deep ambivalence: one of increasing hostility and a search for love and acceptance. According to Freud, an overvaluation of the self and individual fantasies leads to an ＂omnipotence of thoughts＂ and a projection of inner mental life onto the external world. Nikolai's imaginary construction of reality is manifested by his obsessive thinking, delusional disorders and his father complex. The paper also addresses the character and role of Alexander Dudkin, in his capacity as revolutionist, alter-ego of Nikolai and as the Nietzschean agent of will who murders his spiritual father.
|Appears in Collections:||第16卷 第01期|
Show full item record
TAIR Related Article
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.