[心得] 本土劇的顛覆性+思瑤小分析

[concious (one day more)]

A Short Analysis on Taiwanese Local Melodrama Siyao+Xiaoting





The queer couple Siyao and Xiaoting currently featured in the Taiwanese Set
TV series provides us with an alternative conceptualization to perceive the
long dismissed genre of local melodrama that challenges the hegemony of the
Enlightenment realism, and a glimpse of the formation of the self-alienation
that results in a paradoxical narcissistic subject who cedes the object of
love to the other as a defense mechanism. This short analysis will lead
through the theoretical discourses with a psychoanalytical slant. The aim of
this analysis lies in the query of the tandem between the unreliability of
the narrative and the agency of such an unreliable narrative.




The subversive elements of local melodrama

Without much introduction to the Enlightenment project, its ideology, and
realism which follow its suits, I prefer to point out the pitfalls of
realism. 1) the omnipresent, omnipotent narrator presupposes a viewpoint that
is above all human beings and implies a moral high point that could be
assumed by the reader/viewer. 2) the plot which must be rational, or in other
words explainable, tends to ignore the antagonism of
individual/cultural/social/political dimensions in real life. 3) the
characterization of round vs. flat character with an overwhelming emphasis on
the round character, though in a sense does pay attention to the human depth,
more often than not stereotypes character and consequently compromises human
complexity such as weakness and darkness. 4) the linear temporality preferred
in realism ignores that human perception of time never coincides with the
scientifically flowing time. Rather human experience of time of encounters a
frozen or even regression of time that cannot be accounted of be the
linearity.

I would like to point out that the multiple narratives adopted by Taiwanese
local melodrama is extreme progressive in a sense because this fundamentally
challenged the omnipresence and the omnipotence of the narrator. With
multiple narratives which could testify or contradict each other, there no
longer exists a single point of view and a highest moral stand. The strategy
of Set, I would like to further point out, of simultaneously shooting and
casting, creates highly unreliable narratives and characterizations that
cannot be consistently rationalized. These, to some viewers, may appear
unacceptable and ridiculous, and many viewers may put many efforts to find a
consistency in the characters who weaver all the time. However, it is exactly
the subversive elements of local melodrama in terms of challenging the
western uni-centrism that the east learns to adore since the colonialism.




Narcissism, the object of love, and love for the other

Since Siyao lost her eyesight, I observe a narcissistic regression that leads
her unintentionally to paradoxically cede the object of love in order gain
love of the other. This is, as many has observed, she always does, but I
would like to put this in a psychoanalytic framework. The common usage of
narcissism often misleads. In psychoanalysis we call someone narcissistic
when the one in concerned refuses ceding the object of love or cedes just
merely in return of more. Ceding concerns the formation of a symbolic
subject. In the infantile stage, the infant has no distinction between the
maternal/caretaker body/voice and its own. Once the infant’s basic need such
as food is not fulfilled, however, there occurs alienation which makes the
mother/caretaker a formidable other, a maternal other that the infant both
loves and fears. In response to the unfulfilled need, but more as a response
to its own need of attachment to the maternal other, the infant cedes its
object of love to the maternal other. The ceding of object of love usually
involves the so-called growth or learning of the infant such as control of
feces or self-feeding. The ceding to a certain degree will pleases the
maternal other, but at this stage the symbolic father has entered and the
infant is now in the process of becoming the subject. It no longer relies
solely on the maternal other for identification; the symbolic father at this
plays a molding role.

In the case of Syiao, I defines her as narcissism because 1) she has no
scruple to give up everything for Xiaoting, which leads me to the assumption
that this is indeed a very attaching love. 2) she cedes Xiaoting not due to
lack of love but because she would rather Xiaoting loves her as she remaining
perfect, a gesture, in other words, begging for more love.

The above argument is founded on the assumption that Xiaoting can serve as
Siyao’s maternal other. I would say that although Siyao has tended to play
the strong, she is the one who is more unsecure internally, as we can find in
many of her solos and her social attitude.



--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 118.169.114.149
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/the_L_word/M.1402815669.A.3CE.html
推 Gabby1122:推！
推 esasin:splitting, i think, is Syiao's fundamental issue
→ sphinx1031:全英文@@
推 onor:挖塞!!!!
→ javapie:不覺得思瑤narcissism....
→ esasin:作者已經說明，精神分析裡的narcissism不是一般所謂的自戀
推 alicecute:以為後面會有中譯文結果沒有XDDDDD 只好慢慢看...
→ esasin:非常同意在婷瑤和婷哲的關係裡，曉婷看似柔弱、需要被照顧
→ esasin:的一方，其實他才是兩人對母親形象的投射客體
→ esasin:很粗糙地說，誰能毫無保留的愛你?通常只有媽媽才做得到
推 shingou:我什麼時候變成英文白吃了....
→ javapie:看了，但不覺得是作者說的narcissism。
→ esasin:這樣說不知道會不會好一點，嬰兒的自戀是每個人發展的必經
→ esasin:之路，這是該理論的觀點
→ esasin:剩下的原PO你自己出來面對啦XDD
推 HIGHDAY:啊~英文~倒地不起~~
→ HIGHDAY:我只知道Narcissus是西方神話 水仙花的由來>"<
→ javapie:嬰兒期？口腔期？不要告訴我接下來是戀母情結…囧…佛洛
→ javapie:伊德很…算了不說了。XD
→ concious:感謝esasin 我先道歉用英文寫 因為用中文我無法寫理論
→ esasin:不是，原PO引的精神分析理論不是平常檯面看到的那些什麼期
→ concious:如果對精神分析有敵意看這篇依定會消化不良的 雖然我必須
→ HIGHDAY:同JAV大~佛氏論點.就~~佛心來的..但是我很認同閹割論
→ concious:澄清我是Lacan/Zizek派 在這這派別的脈絡下自戀只是一種
→ HIGHDAY:我是很好奇+疑問 思瑤在編排上設為強者/父權 代表
→ HIGHDAY:我是指瑤婷二人關係上..不包括抓姦那一段
→ concious:一種主體對小客體(objet petit a)的索取方式不同其他主體
→ concious:思瑤的確是有代表symbolic order的面向 但是那樣太簡化了
→ esasin:(吃水果坐等原PO繼續)
→ concious:如果考慮到the imaginary和the real另外兩個層次 思瑤其
→ HIGHDAY:失明,應該是Repression沒有出口發洩,呈現出身體缺失警訊
→ concious:確如二樓說的是split的狀態 但是我檢視她整體發展還是認
→ concious:為整體上是呈現infantile regression的狀態 也就顯現出了
→ HIGHDAY:進而帶出Identification方向討論..而且是二個人的
→ concious:自戀傾向 我認為失明與其說是repression更多是regression
推 lword:媽啊 這篇怎麼那麼專業@@!
→ concious:如果要討論identification還是停留在symbolic層次 但是
→ HIGHDAY:嗯~認同
→ glovech:哭。讀中文系是我的錯
→ concious:narcissism已經是比較偏向imaginary和real的面向
→ HIGHDAY:所以都是自我防禦???
→ javapie:國文老師讓我大笑了 XDDDDDDDD
→ concious:自我防禦是我簡化的說法 如果真的要很細緻的說 是一種
推 esasin:再次推原PO；前面談泣29八點檔操作本質和硬傷也很有趣，
→ esasin:如果觀眾沒有辦法在觀戲過程中得到一種完整全知，或至少是
→ concious:緊抓著imaginary的image(love object)用來抵禦the real的
→ esasin:整合一體的視角，對於習慣若A則B的思維其實是頗煎熬的(?)
→ HIGHDAY:我看到瑤婷在婚禮上的重逢對話,只想到Rationalization(昏)
→ concious:隨時會炸出來的主體本身的匱乏性 這也在思瑤的完美主義呈
→ HIGHDAY:認同~是說看八點檔,看到這樣子 我還是第一次
推 trueblue:好厲害的一篇～
→ HIGHDAY:之前都一直笑我媽 邊看邊睡沙發
→ esasin:突然很想請原PO停手，思瑤快被你扒光了XDD
→ concious:現出來 思瑤的自戀在於她想要守的完美形象其實也是自我
推 coleridge:her gesture of love leads to be the splitting betwee
→ coleridge:n narcissism and perfectionism, back to regression,
→ coleridge:which completes her own attachment toward her own su
→ coleridge:bject.
→ HIGHDAY:不要停啦~~也想要一篇曉婷的心理分析
→ concious:異化(alienation) 她對於曉婷這個母性他者的態度我寫過了
→ concious:thx coleridge for explaining for me
推 uma1121:ABCD狗咬豬，我來問google大神好了XDD
推 P636516:看不懂的只能淚推
→ javapie:讚嘆並感謝板上的各種分析文，讓我有機會成長。只想順順
→ javapie:的看個戲卻被(天公伯)搞到這麼累卻是我始料未及的，只能
→ javapie:說自己真是好傻好天真。
推 HIGHDAY:真心推一篇曉婷的Personl Unconscious..這角色心理太豊富
→ esasin:If:思瑤沒有失明呢?  我說的split不是針對失明後的狀態
→ esasin:完美主義很難不指向splitting，或者思瑤對偉哲的態度也是
→ concious:esasin我同意妳 思瑤本身站在symbolic裡是傳統男性的位置
→ concious:但她又要做到所有的位置兼顧 基本上就是會涉及到社會文化
→ concious:裡面的antagonism 這勢必會導致real面相出來引爆主體的
→ concious:fundamental lack 失明則是再帶出regression
→ HIGHDAY:symbolic裡是傳統男性的位置,被我歸為是Projection
→ HIGHDAY:思瑤從跟曉婷相愛後,就開啟了ego-defen-se mechanisms
推 lvgecg123:真的很專業 看完好像上了一課
→ HIGHDAY:我不是指愛上同性別這件事.是"成為方思瑤這件事一直被推翻
→ esasin:是推翻呢，還是成為新的我呢~~
→ esasin:可惜思瑤的自我運作方式在曉婷出現以前功能太良好，
→ esasin:注定他會用僵化(哪個完美主義不僵化)的方式面對這個新客體
推 bluechm:一開始我以為我開這篇文的方式不對，有駭客，原來是全英
→ bluechm:文的文章
推 HIGHDAY:認同版大~~太完美,往往不真實..真實的人生,沒有完美兩字
→ concious:在我的私心看來失明是return of the real是思瑤要面對的
→ esasin:原PO說得我起雞皮疙瘩呢，說得真好
→ concious:功課 思瑤太被侷限在symbolic中而忽略the real的反撲力量
推 HIGHDAY:推con大~~
→ HIGHDAY:那我來問一個問題...思瑤有出櫃嗎XDD
→ concious:看H大要定義怎樣的出櫃 如果只是symbolic層次當然有 但是
→ concious:在實際的the real的面向我認為思瑤沒有跟自己出櫃 她是直
推 lts0716:我知道你要說什麼，但我不覺得是return，而是release
→ concious:接去assumeue一個既定的gender role
→ esasin:關於"一個男人"該給妻小的生活，agree~
→ esasin:return是在原PO分析的脈絡下，也惟有如此他才不必再用分裂
→ esasin:的方式去處理good & bad
→ memorytsai:剛被英文考題摧殘完...回到家看到這篇...瞬間掛掉.Orz
→ HIGHDAY:同con+1
推 lts0716:另外，思瑤是一直都在begging for more love，一個人強烈
→ HIGHDAY:較大寶一直被re來re去,我家夫人真的很Natural(愛就來啊XD)
→ lts0716:的某些行為，往往就是內在渴望的呈現
推 esasin:HIGH...那隻也壞得很兇(轉頭看並嘆氣)
→ HIGHDAY:版大~一物克一物~
→ HIGHDAY:我忘了本書上寫"我照你的話做,成為你希望要我做的人,
推 lts0716:包裝在一物剋一物表面的互相摧殘，阿～
→ lts0716:其實瑤婷從關係的本質上來看，是很可怕的
→ HIGHDAY:但是請不要破壞我...其實屈服已經是一種人格破壞
→ lts0716:自我的喪失和毀滅
→ HIGHDAY:所以我才覺得曉婷在"愛"的地位 太過卑微..不過是對誰
→ HIGHDAY:錯字太多~國文老師會抓狂
推 lts0716:國文老師剛剛不是已經崩潰惹嗎XDDDD
→ HIGHDAY:更正 不論是對誰
→ concious:在我的理論脈絡中曉婷可以算是pervert的主體 請不要跟一
→ concious:一般的pervert搞混喔~ 但是我今天好累改天再來寫
推 HIGHDAY:謝謝con大~~
→ cowog:推，雖說請出GOOGLE幫忙了，還是看得有些吃力XDDD
推 cowog:當年應該好好背單字的....
推 coleridge:return of the real是條明路,但沒有realise的話,何來ret
→ coleridge:urn or release 之有？ repression, regression都是後
→ coleridge:事。
推 coleridge:不對,不是後事。my bad.
推 tlpil:我覺得思瑤是一個自我認同非常僵化的人 在瑤哲 婷瑤中她都是
→ tlpil:主導的那方 我猜這和她原生家庭有穩固的分工有關 相較曉婷在
→ tlpil:婷哲 瑤婷 都是屬於全心全意去包容對方 以對方為主
→ esasin:就是原PO說的pervert: only say yes(有興趣請google)
推 Damance:終於了解那一堆英文是什麼了~囧  我滿贊同這個說法的~
推 TTTTTkkkkk:這篇好艱深喔!(倒~~~
推 TTL2009:咦..是我按 → 的方式不對嗎....Orz
推 xyz710263p:@o@ 放棄~（飄走
推 iWhat:默默路過+看不懂推......... <媽我對不起妳沒好好讀書>
推 rileymurray:很想認真看，但我.... 囧"
→ esasin:這篇跟英文無關啦XDD
推 tearheart:XD 默默飄走
推 bridgetw:太多專業用詞了...看不懂推...orz
推 sucloud:瑤婷已經無國界了哦0...0  看不懂推+1
→ Luke74:呃，剛剛進來以為是亂碼，原來真的不是我眼花，倒.....
推 kenzierj:con貼來這裡是對的!
→ esasin:kenken我下午都等你出現在這篇捏
→ bluechm:西累，有中文版嗎@@
→ esasin:建議樓上拿出卡片召喚荔枝(逃~
推 rrcmjp:荔枝~~大耶在呼喚你~~緊來哦( ′﹀‵)／︴<>< <>< <>< <><
推 coleridge:收到飛鴿銜來一張召喚卡.. 但我有反轉召喚卡喔！嘿嘿～
→ coleridge:大家可以看in the case of siyao那段就大概可以明白了
→ concious:害羞舉手 如果可以的話前一段理論看一下還是會比較好
→ concious:真的很抱歉荼毒大家了 但我真的中文太爛...
推 coleridge:con大抱歉.. 你的文章寫得很好,是該完整讀完。
推 xyz710263p:其實是我們英文太爛QAQ
推 bridgetw:英文太爛+1 Orz
→ esasin:我可以幫忙翻但我又好懶，所以(講這麼多廢話...)
→ esasin:而且，這篇的思瑤部分英文真的不是重點，理論背景才是障礙
→ javapie:有沒有上tlw板後發現中英文都很爛自爆自棄的八卦…囧
推 rrcmjp:樓上你還有java啊XDDD  java語言也不是很好懂得捏XDDDDD
→ xyz710263p:rr好壞XXDDD
→ javapie:有沒有上了tlw板之後覺得自己白活了的八卦…囧…java忘的
→ javapie:非常乾淨了
推 coleridge:那就拜託板大了..（鞠躬
→ esasin:我已經睡了喔，不要叫我ZZZ
推 iWhat:<跪> <抱一下版版的大腿>  >///<      請救救蔡英文 XDDD
推 rrcmjp:叉燒我哪裡壞惹~~  我是認真的好嗎XDDDD
→ rrcmjp:我也曾被java傷得體無完膚啊~~~~(遠目
→ javapie:(安慰自己至少會泡茶拖地中……)
→ xyz710263p:我也學過啊~不過早忘光XXDDD
推 coleridge:先說我沒辦法喔.. 翻成中文對我來說太難了！沒辦法應付
→ coleridge:長篇中文！我會死掉。
推 bridgetw:我只學過C++,不過都忘光了XD
→ iWhat:java還好我也會泡茶拖地...還會刷廁所跟洗碗... >//<
→ javapie:有國文老師在怕什麼 (<—牽拖！大誤
推 rrcmjp:VB,C,JAVA都學過....現在還不是只記得Hello World XDDDDD
→ rrcmjp:沒有用就會忘啦....又不是一天到晚都要跟電腦溝通XDDDD
推 bridgetw:Hello World我都差點忘了XDDDDDDDDDDD
推 le0913:現在歪樓到java了？
推 grassss10:從精神分析到電腦語言，這是甚麼節奏？
推 lts0716:這是要逼各種專業人士站出來的意思嗎XDDD
推 lword:到底在專業什麼!!
推 sphinx1031:各方面都沒學過...唉...
推 cafefish68:嗯....先推了@@
推 zhickun:我的vc,c,java超弱的...每次都不及格
→ zhickun:*vb
→ zhickun:還好我看的懂這篇XD
推 cowog:早上帶著比較清醒的神智再看一遍總算懂了(揮汗
推 discuz7:tlw 版一堆強者，是怎樣啦！XD
推 perle01:推專業文  英文ok但理論無能（汗
→ perle01:其實我覺得思瑤還蠻好理解的 反而是曉婷現在變來變去 我
→ perle01:看謀
→ perle01:期待con大也可以分析一下
推 esasin:曉婷變來變去...人的感情不是刀切豆腐非黑即白呀
→ HIGHDAY:http://jsy66621.pixnet.net/blog/category/534205
→ HIGHDAY:谷歌上很多關於Lacan的,這裡站覺得很好..
→ HIGHDAY:然後我無法百分百認同曉婷是Pervert,又想不出解套說法
→ esasin:原/新精神分析一脈相承的特質就是解釋力太強，強到什麼都可
→ esasin:套，搞得有點"都給你講就好啦"這種感覺，不過有時理論
→ esasin:只是各編不同名詞來講一樣的事情，不必太糾結XD
→ HIGHDAY:這倒是~
推 yazi:超後悔大學時不乖乖嗑原文書而選偷懶又不認真的看中譯本Q Q