上海大学学报(社会科学版)

• 特稿 •    下一篇

文化研究的三道难题 ——以上海大学文化研究系为例

  

  1. 上海大学文学院
  • 出版日期:2010-01-15 发布日期:2010-01-15
  • 作者简介:王晓明(1955),男,上海人。上海大学文学院中国当代文化研究中心教授,博士生导师。

Three Problems in Cultural Studies——Taking as the Study Case

  • Online:2010-01-15 Published:2010-01-15

摘要:

在中国大陆,作为一种成规模的学术和思想运动,文化研究是在1990年代末和2000年代初,才真正开展起来 ,到2004年,形成了一股“文化研究热”。这个“热”至今仍在延续。主要有两方面的原因:一是学术/学院体制运转的需要,二是社会现实的刺激。而后者在一定意义上更为重要,并且比较复杂。正是在这样的背景下,在上海,文化研究的研究、教学和与之配套的学院建制活动相继展开。2001年,上海大学成立了中国当代文化研究中心,这是中国大陆第一个文化研究机构。其后的4年间,上海各大学陆续建立了类似的研究机构。这些机构吸收了来自文学、历史、社会学、人类学、传媒研究、电影研究等方面的有志于文化研究的学者。其人员亦互有交叉。在这些研究活动进展过程中引发了一系列具体实践和理论思考的困难。首先是文化研究与现有大学体制之间关系的问题。文化研究是反体制的,但是中国现有的体制又无法改变,所以在硬着头皮挤入现行大学体制的同时,尽可能开拓和保持文化研究的“跨学科性”,为此,将“当代支配性文化的生产机制”,以及这个文化与那一段“社会主义”历史的相互生产的关系,确定为今日中国大陆文化研究的主要对象;用“双线”来勾勒中国大陆文化研究的方法论:它既是“批判性分析”,也是“促进性介入”,借用一对1950年代的政治概念,既是“破”,也是“立”,二者互为条件,相伴共生。其次是文化研究在不排除关注城市文化的同时,如何将关注的目光转向农村,从而解决文化研究教学与社会改良之间的关系。最后是保持中国大陆文化研究的中土特质,关键一点自然是直面当代中国人的活生生的日常经验,并汲取中国革命的思想和实践历史的丰富资源。也就是直面日常的生活感受,承继“中国革命”的丰富记忆,追究现实内部的压迫性结构。

关键词: 文化研究;学术体制;社会改良;中土经验

Abstract:

In China' s mainland, as a largescaled movement of learning and ideology, cultural studies didn' t commence actually until the late 1990s and the early 20th century. And up to 2004, there was a "boom of cultural studies", which still continues. Chiefly, there are two reasons for this: first, the requirement of system operation for research or academy; secondly, the stimulation of social reality. In a sense, the latter is more important and more complex. It was in this context that, in Shanghai, not only the research and teaching of cultural studies but also the accompanying academic system operation started out one after the other. In 2001, Shanghai University established the Center for China' s Contemporary Cultural Studies, which is the first institute of cultural studies in China' s mainland. And during the subsequent four years, the similar institutions were gradually established in all the other universities in Shanghai. Those scholars, who were interested in cultural studies and came from such circles as literature, history, sociology, anthropology, and mass media, were admitted into the institutions, but maybe there was an overlap. In the course of these studies, arise a series of problems both in theory and practice. The first problem concerns about the relation between cultural studies and existing university systems. On the one hand, cultural studies are against any systems; and on the other hand, China' s existing systems are relatively unchanged. Therefore, the scholars, while helplessly squeezing into the existing university systems, try hard to develop and maintain the "interdisciplinarity" of cultural studies, thus the "production mechanism of contemporary dominant culture" as well as the interactional relation between this culture and that period of the history of "socialism" being defined the main target of the current cultural studies in China' s mainland. If we want to outline this kind of methodology, the "double lines" may be proper, that is, the "critical analysis" and the "promotive intervention", or, borrowing from two political terms in 1950s, the "destroying" and the "establishing". These two are interdependent, supplementing each other. In the next place, it is by what means that we can, continuing to concern about the urban culture, pay more attention to the countryside culture so as to mend the relation between the teaching of cultural studies and the social improvement. Finally, it is how to maintain the native characteristics of cultural studies in China' s mainland. Of course, the most important for this is to face the Chinese daily experience and draw from the rich resources of the Chinese revolutionary ideology and practical history. In other words, it is by virtue of daily life experiences that we can inherit the rich memories of the "Chinese Revolution" and pursue for the oppressive structure of internal reality.

Key words: cultural studies; academic system; social improvement; Chinas native experience

中图分类号: