La Mise Hors Scène: The Flesh of Words

━━━━━━━━━ 林欣怡
《藝術觀點ACT》67期,2016年7月出版

 

時日已到,到六張犁去。
我們就得忙著聽證、調查、忙著記錄和論述。
(揮動仙撣。揚撒冥紙)
——陳映真,《春祭》,1995

 

一九八九的《人間雜誌》六月號,以漢城一名頭帶上寫著「打倒獨裁」四個字、口裡高呼反美口號的韓國大學生作為封面影像。這一期收錄了長達約六十頁的「陳映真現地報告:激盪中的韓國民主化運動」專輯,為陳映真從四月九日到二十三日在韓國為期兩周的訪問,內容以韓國民主運動中的政治、工運、學運、報紙、宗教文學、藝術、戲劇、電影、環保、學術等全向度的視角,組構出數萬字觀察韓國民主化運動的報告。除此之外,陳映真在這一期寫下〈悲傷中的悲傷:寫給大陸學潮中的愛國學生們〉,作為當時六四事件的回應。文章提及,陳映真在韓國參與的研討會中,應要求進行了一個比較台灣、南韓與中國民主人權的報告,從台灣的親美反共到南韓的反美、「脫冷戰」立場,一路論述至對岸知識份子思想生態的描述,陳映真帶著這樣的思考回到台北;文末,對正在進行中的六四事件給出了諸多情感、提問與批判。這些提問此刻看來,仍是擲地有聲卻難以回答的歷史回音。

 

在韓國民主化現地報告中,陳映真訪問了漢城「Hanmadang藝術劇場」的柳寅澤,從觀看韓國民族劇(Madangkutt)「米國.美國.未國」的身體經驗描述開始,書寫韓國一九六〇以來的歷史環境如何地影響了韓國的戲劇活動。這一篇文章後來收錄於莫昭如、林寶元編著的《民眾劇場與草根民主》(1994)一書中。而這本書關於民眾劇場(People’s Theatre)的策劃書寫,正是此專題的觸點所在。

 

 

六十五期「歷史旁白.負像劇場」的別冊〈野台〉中,收錄了施俊州、周定邦所整理的臺語(白話字)劇本年表,最早一九一〇年幢影樓主人所寫的《可憐之壯丁》於《語苑》開始連載,直至一九四六年宋非我以簡國賢日語、中文原著做底本編譯《壁》劇本,稱「臺灣語獨幕戲曲」,宋非我亦在臺灣廣播電台以臺語播《壁》劇本。《壁》演出的盛況與群眾的熱烈回應招來查禁之禍,吳濁流認為「臺語」的使用成為觸動當時社會階級的主要原因。劇場裡的「身體語言」與「話語」共同形成「舞台調度」,當觀者直接觸視舞台調度各層面的感知時,騷動場所於焉形成。透過一個臺語劇本的追尋叩問,話語、身體、入眾、共在…這些詞語集合正是民眾劇場之所欲,亦是當代參與性創作的雙身。於是,從〈野台〉延續,自譯體、口傳譯語專題之後,歷史與文字書寫創作如何於身體中「再轉譯」?如何調度一具身體返身成為局部歷史書寫的表述?成為我對於「詞語—身體」的具體提問。如果說場面調度是一種「前劇場」的秩序化總合,那麼「場外調度」則是將景框外的事實、演台外的真實調度進入場景中,為正在進行的詞語、軀體運動,補償了不可見的鏡頭。是以,我開始尋找這些劇場書寫的詞語肉身,此具肉身目光朝向的,除了民眾劇場、劇本文學、事件劇場化之外,亦包括文本、話語、身體裝配成的場外調度,構成由它而來的思想實驗場所,一個精神的劇場,試著調度詞語化為身動,朝向民眾身體的言成肉身書寫場所。事實上,這樣的專題書寫無異於「文本脈絡」的查閱,亦無異於每一齣劇的「劇本」位置。它位於身體表達之前、之內、之外、之後,不同於紀實報導,「劇本」書寫隱含了「再構之必要」(而非杜撰)的藝術政治性格。這裡指稱的「再構」,意味著讓可述者、可見者、可為者以不同的方式重新(或再次地)構造事件、指認事件、陳述事件、演出事件。在此,事件為再次構造的實存,然而構造的形式手段為事件之虛處,它無法直接成為事件本身,但透過「再構」,我們得以疊層、銘刻此刻的感知經驗於歷史事件中,累積縱深重量,與歷史異時共振。如果我們的美學經驗可以碰觸政治,那麼此種「再構」,便是碰觸事件真實的肉身場所。

 

關於此點,我想以兩個場景角度切入。一個場景是,陳映真在一九九五年出版的第一個劇本創作《春祭》,以報告劇的文學形式,從六張犁公墓裡的英塚為場景,召喚白色恐怖時期的徐慶蘭、黃逢開、張添丁等人的魂魄,將一九五〇年代白色恐怖的淒厲,以詞語文字再次訴說。《春祭》於一九九四年三月十四日,由鍾喬導演,初演於臺北海南路藝術館。根據陳映真,《春祭》的劇本生產與一九八六年七月號《人間雜誌》所策劃的「怒吼吧!花岡」專題有關。因王墨林的引介,人間與日本劇場運動者石飛仁的「不死鳥」劇團合作,以報告劇的形式在台灣演出《怒吼吧!花岡》國語版,這是陳映真首次接觸報告劇。

 

報告文學是文學形式的一種。同樣,報告劇在本質上也是戲劇的一種。但它們與其他文學、戲劇之根本的不同,在於它是真實的報告,從而具有新聞性、及時性和時效性。它們不容許虛構、不容許在人、時、事、因果等問題上摻入任何杜撰、不實的想像。但在表現手段上,則在嚴守真實的條件下,可以運用一切小說、詩歌、散文等文學手法和一切戲劇舞台的手段。(陳映真,1995:66-67)

 

報告劇透過幻燈投映,將新聞紀錄、歷史照片等影像於舞台上放大釋出歷史迫力,但拒絕任何舞台表演可能給出的「幻覺」或人工幻境,盡可能讓觀看者逼近歷史真實。《春祭》劇本中,陳映真以歷史使女「合唱隊」(Chorus)作為主旁白,同時加入場外聲效、獨白等調度為身體內容。「報告劇」的再構,一方面堅守言說之人

《花岡ものがたり:木刻連環画集》 新居広治, 牧大介, 滝平二郎, 野添憲治

之物之事的寫實,一方面開放出此寫實事件的臨摹與情動操作;前者讓觀者具體地進入歷史,後者驅動此理解轉譯為感知行動。作者、觀者、演出者便在這樣的雙重場域中運動。另一個場景是,人間雜誌策劃的「怒吼吧!花岡」專題中,收錄了大量新居廣治、瀧平二郎與牧大介關於花岡事件的木刻版畫(《花岡ものがたり―木刻連環画集》,秋田:無明舎,1981年10月初版),亦收錄了王墨林的一篇文章〈歷史斷層裡的哭聲〉。文中王墨林提及他要求導演石飛仁分配一個角色演出花岡事件的報告劇,「『報告劇』不需要背台詞,臨場照劇本朗誦即可,因而旨在聲音方面求其動人,不必依賴所謂『身體語言』的動作表達劇力。這種形式的好處,豈不就在於每一個人都可以立即變成這齣戲的參與者嗎?」(王墨林,1986:7)文章寫到除了歷史證人劉智渠、李振平,這場報告劇亦邀請了曾經在中國參加「三光作戰」的舊日本兵塚越正男先生進行證言。我們看到花岡事件從歷史證人、歷史影像的現身,疊加朗讀歷史證言的演員(日本、台灣)、圖像(木刻版畫)與另一事件見證者的口述,這些異質的可述者、可見者、可為者各自以自身的身體經驗素樸地揉雜進事件中,要求觀者歷歷在目。

 

「場外調度:詞語的肉身化」專題便是在這樣的一個基礎點上,調度鍾喬的《南風─證言劇場》(2016)、王墨林的《軍史館殺人事件》(2004)、香港《碧街事變》(2015)街頭劇與櫻井大造的帳篷劇等相關書寫,對「再構」進行論述。另介入印度街頭劇作家薩夫達的專文譯稿及韓國藝術家任興淳(IM Heung-soon)的《安慰工業區》(2014)作品書寫、許家維的《御甲戲園》(2016)影像劇本等進行文本、影像構造。每一次的歷史再構與重述,每一次的「聽證、調查、忙著記錄和論述」,都是為了透過詞語的肉身化,能夠不斷地調度事件於演出之內、場景之外的言說力量,為歷史事件不斷地增加厚度。

 


 

陳映真,〈陳映真現地報告:激盪中的韓國民主化運動專輯〉,《人間雜誌》第44期「人間:打倒獨裁《韓國專輯》/台灣影生動物專輯」,台北:人間,1989年6月,頁98-155。
王墨林,〈歷史斷層裡的哭聲〉,《人間雜誌》第9期「人間:《怒吼吧!花岡》特輯」,台北:人間,1986年7月,頁24-33。

 


 

La Mise Hors Scène: The Flesh of Words

━━━━━━━━━ Lin Hsin-I

 

The time has arrived to go to Liuzhangli.

We must now hear and study, record and discuss. 

(Wandering Xianshan.  Scattering Paper Money)

Chen Yingzhen, Spring Worship, 1995

 

In 1964, Song Feiwo produced the script for “The Wall” based on Jian Guoxian’s original Japanese and Chinese text, which was called “Taiwanese Single-Act Opera”. Song Feiwo also broadcasted the “The Wall”  in the Taiwanese language on Taiwan Radio Station.  The grand occasion of the performance of “The Wall”, in addition to the enthusiastic response of the crowds brought about the curse of censorship. Wu Zhuoliu believes that the primary application of the “Taiwanese language” is to get in touch with the social classes of that time period. The ‘body language’ and ‘dialogue’ on stage both constitute the “stage arrangement”. An uproar occurs when the viewer is directly touched by the different aspects of the stage. Through the inquisitive search of a Taiwanese script, dialogue, body language and public involvement, which all simultaneously and collectively reflect the desires of the open public play, it also serves as the counterpart to the creative potential of participants. How can history and the written word be reinterpreted as body language? How does one arrange the body into an expression of a historical event? To me, it becomes the specific question of the relation between verbal expression and body language. If the on-stage arrangement is considered to be a type of orderly combination for the “pre-theater”, then the off-stage arrangement uses the reality from beyond the stage, integrating the off-stage reality into the scene, so that the invisible lens is made up for by the ongoing written word and body language. Therefore, I began to search for the verbal expressions themselves found in written plays, the aim of the writing system, besides the public stage, the dramatic literature, and the dramatization of an event, and also including the outside-stage arrangement assembled by text, dialogue and body which the system also constitutes the experimental region of thought, a spiritual stage, in order to express the written word as body movements, aiming towards the corporal experience. In reality, this form of writing is no different from looking into the context, it is also no different from the position of each script. It exists in front, within, without and behind the corporal expression, unlike journalistic reporting, the script implies an artistic political disposition of the necessity of reconstruction(distinct from a fabrication). The so-called reconstruction referred to here signifies the permission for a person who is able to describe, witness and act to reconstruct, represent, identify and act an event following a different method(perhaps anew). The event here represents the existence of the reconstruction, however, the method of reconstruction embodies the intangibility of the event, it cannot directly become the event itself, but through the reconstruction, we are able to acutely engrave our perception of the moment from this historical event to accumulate the depth and weight that resonates with a different historical time period. If your aesthetic experience can impact the political realm then this kind of reconstruction will be the tangible reality that touches the event.

 

Regarding this context, I want to dissect it from two different perspectives. The first perspective: The first version of the script published in 1995 by Chen Yingzhen as “Spring Worship”, using the literary forms of reporting theater, from the scene inside the memorial tombs of Liuzhangli public cemetery, summoning the spirits of White Terror victims,  Xu Qinglan, Huang Fengkai, Zhang Tianding, using the written word to re-express the brutality of the 1950’s era White Terror.  The play, “Spring Worship”, directed by Zhong Qiao, premiered on March 14, 1994,  at The Taipei Hainan Road Art Museum. According to Chen Yingzhen, the production of the script for “Spring Worship” is related to the article, “Roar! Hanaoka!” which was published in the July 1986 edition of “RenJian” magazine. Due to the introduction by Wang Molin, RenJian cooperated with the “Immortal Bird” theater troupe, which was lead by the Japanese theater activist Shi Feiren, to perform the Mandarin version of the play, “Roar! Hanaoka!” in Taiwan in the form of journalistic drama. This is Chen Yingzhen’s first experience with journalistic drama.

 

“Journalistic drama is a type of literary form. Likewise, journalistic drama, in essence, is a type of drama. However, it is fundamentally different from other types of literature and drama due to the fact that its reporting is based on reality thus possessing elements of journalism, immediacy and timeliness. Fictional elements are not allowed, neither is the fabrication of any imaginary things that concern human, time, business and karma issues. In terms of the methods of expression, as long as reality is strictly adhered to, then one can employ all types of novels, poems, prose and other forms of literary techniques as well as all types of theatrical techniques.”

– Chen Yingzhen (1995: 66-67).

 

Journalistic drama uses slide projectors to display news reports and historical photos on the stage to create a historical impact. However, journalistic drama should refuse any “illusions” or “man-made scenes” caused by the theatrical performance and ensure viewers can approximate the historical reality. In the script of “Spring Worship”, Chen Yingzhen arranges a historical maiden “chorus” to serve as the primary narrator while simultaneously including off-stage sound effects and monologues to compose the main contents. The reconstruction of “Journalistic drama”, on one hand, must strictly adhere to realism to describe humans, things and events, while, on the other hand, must be open to the imitation of and emotional triggers of real events. The former allows the viewer to experience tangible history while the latter drives the transformation of understanding into perception. The writer, viewer and actor all interact on this two-sided field.

 

The other scene is found in the main topic of “Roar! Hanaoka!” published in Renjian Magazine including large quantities of wood engravings by Xinju Guangzhi, Longpin Erlang and Mu Dajie regarding the Hanaoka Mine Incident(木刻連環画集花岡ものがたり, 秋田 : 無明舎 October 1981 First Edition.), and also an article by Wang Molin called “The Weeping found in Historical Fault Lines”. In the article, Wang Molin mentioned his request to Shi Feiren to designate an actor for the journalistic dramatization of the Hanaoka Mine Incident, “ For ‘Journalistic drama’, there is no need to memorize the script just read directly from the lines as the main purpose is to use your voice to touch the audience, it is not necessary to rely on so-called ‘body language’ to express the drama’s depth. Isn’t the good thing about this form the fact that everyone can immediately become a participant of this play.” (Wang Molin 1986:29). Besides the historical witnesses, Liu Zhiqu and Li Zhenping, this journalistic drama also invited a Japanese veteran, Masao Ōtsuka, who was a participant in the Three Alls Policy during the Second Sino-Japanese War to serve as a historical witness. We can view the Hanaoka Mine Incident through historical witnesses and the presentation of historical photographs, moreover, the actors(Japanese and Taiwanese) who narrate the historical events, the images(wood engravings) and the eyewitness account of the other historical incident. This diverse group of people, who are able to describe, witness and produce, each can utilize their individual experiences to simply integrate into the historical event in order to let the audience have a vivid impression. The journalistic drama work of Taiwan Public Theater director, Zhong Qiao, “Testimony” (2015) and “Horse Carriage Etude” both use this form to reconstruct and retell the history. Every time “we hear and study, record and discuss” is all for the embodiment of the written word, to allow the hidden meaning to be expressed so that the historical event can be seamlessly arranged on stage along with the impact of language beyond the scene in order to strengthen the historical experience.

 


 

林欣怡 國立交通大學應用藝術研究所副教授、ICCS 文化研究國際中心研究員
Posts created 46

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top