“奈保尔谬误”的再审视——以《河湾》中的后殖民书写为例  

A Review of"the Naipaul Fallacy":Post-colonial Writing in A Bend in the River

作　　者：华雨晨 Yuchen Hua(School of Foreign Language,Nanjing Normal University,Nanjing,Jiangsu,China)

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学外国语学院,南京江苏210024

出　　处：《外国语言与文化》2023年第2期44-53,共10页Foreign Languages and Cultures

摘　　要：作为后殖民文学经典的《河湾》,集中体现了文学评介中“奈保尔谬误”的争议与矛盾。本文运用霍米·巴巴的“双重视界”理论对小说叙事者萨林姆进行观照,客观审视非洲去殖民化运动中殖民帝国与民族国家双重欲望的交错,展现出一种审慎的文学伦理距离。在文化混杂的后殖民社会,这种边缘性视野突破了用单一眼光看待事物的霸道方式,避免了两极对立和二元分割的狭隘手段,具备一种本土世界主义的关怀,成为重构“奈保尔谬误”,反思作家后殖民书写的一个突破口。A Bend in the River,as a post-colonial literary canon,epitomizes the literary controversy of"the Naipaul Fallacy."The main narrator Salim has"double vision"in the sense of Homi Bhabha,through whose perspective the dual desires of colonial empire and nation state are presented objectively in the decolonization movement of Africa,displaying prudent literary ethics.In the post-colonial society with cultural hybridity,the double vision breaks discourse hegemony and binary opposition to a certain degree,embodying a concern of"vernacular cosmopolitan",which contributes to the reconstruction of"the Naipaul Fallacy"and reexamination of Naipaul's post-colonial writing.

关 键 词：《河湾》 V.S.奈保尔 霍米·巴巴 双重视界 后殖民 

分 类 号：I561[文学—其他各国文学]