集體記憶與認同構塑—以美麗島事件為例
Collective Memory and the Construction of Identiry-- the Case of "Kao-Hsion Incident"

翁秀琪
Weng, Shieu-chi

本文探討語言再現真實時所涉及的概念及過程，選擇台灣當代史上最具關鍵性的歷史事件之一的美麗島事件作為分析的對象， 從集體記憶的理論角度探討主流媒體以及行動者（特別是本文所研究的四家主流媒體的工作者）是如何透過對於美麗島事件的文字報導和口述歷史報導來建構集體記憶並以之來影響國家和族群的認同。

針對本研究所提出的三個研究問題， 我們發現從1980-1999四報對於美麗島事件的報導，幾乎可以說是付之闕如，除了77/78兩年對於許\信良叛亂案（許\信良當時偷渡返國，面臨叛亂罪的起訴）的報導，以及88年則因為黃信介的去世以及美麗島事件二十週年慶，才有了稍多的報導篇幅。

如果從集體記憶的理論來看，則集體記憶的建構者與被建構對象所握權力的大小，會影響集體記憶建構的內涵。Baumeister和Hastings(1997)的研究曾指出選擇性遺漏、怪罪仇敵（blaming the enemy）、歸咎環境（blaming circumstances）等集體記憶的運作機制，都可在本研究中得到證明。另外，當年美麗島事件的「叛亂犯」，如今都已是台面上的人物，自然對於「美麗島事件」此一歷史事件該如何被記憶，擁有大別於二十年前的歷史詮釋權。

正如Woodward(1997)所說，認同透過語言和象徵系統被賦予意義，而差異型塑認同，創造差異因此是分類系統中最重要的元素。而Gillis(1994)也指出大眾媒介「儲存」並「分類」的過去，使這種對於過去（美麗島事件及萁相關社會行動者）所建構出來的集體記憶，成為當代人合理化權力的資源，其力足以凝聚集體行動，並加強認同的運作。

Based on the theory of collective memory and with the help of discourse analysis and oral history, this study tried to analyze how mainstream newspapers and journalists "represent" the Kao-hsion Incident.

This study found that "how" and "what" will be represented in the mainstream newspapers depend upon the power- relation between the constructer of collective memory and those who were the object of the collective memory, be it an incident, a single person, or a group of persons.

Woodward(1997) mentioned, that through language and its building of symbole systems, identity first gains its meaning. Since difference constructs identity, thus the creation of difference becomes the most important part and mechanism of the creation of identity. Gillis(1994) pointed out, that mass media saved and categorized our human past, and throut it mass media helped to construct the collective memory of society. This becomes the legitimation of power, which triggers collective action of society and reeinforces the constructing processes of identity.

集體記憶，認同構塑，再現，分類系統，創造差異

collective memory，the construction of identity，representation，Categorization system，the creation of differenc

2000.06.26

已授權

集體記憶與認同構塑—以美麗島事件為例.pdf