台灣左翼文學傳統在戰爭結束後，基本上已停止發展。左翼思想的失語與失憶，是一九五○年代至七○年代文化上的主要現象。必須到一九八○之後，當威權體制開始鬆動之後，左翼作家才重現生機。其中最值得注意的兩位作家是葉石濤（1925-2008）與陳映真（1937-），他們分別代表台灣社會「左獨」與「左統」的兩種思想光譜。在台灣解嚴前後，資本主義發展持續高張，而全球化浪潮席捲海島之際，左翼記憶的重塑與再現，受到台灣文壇的普遍矚目。葉石濤的《一位台灣老朽作家的五○年代》，以及陳映真的《鈴鐺花》，以系列小說對戰後左翼運動投以深情回眸，其中蘊藏兩人不可說不能說卻又不得不說的微言大義。葉與陳的文學志業都背負威權時代的歷史傷痕，並見證資本主義改造台灣社會的事實，其內心痛楚較諸過去的牢獄經驗還要沈重。他們的小說並非只是競逐台灣歷史解釋權，也不只是爭衝鄉土文學論戰未完的發言權；面對民主運動的崛起，他們對台灣未來的願景顯然懷抱無止盡的期待。政治信仰使兩人選擇站在對立的陣營，但是全球化趨勢又使他們對資本主義採取同樣的批判立場。這篇論文通過葉、陳小說的再閱讀，重新檢視台灣文學的紅色遺產，並追索左獨、左統兩位知識份子的悲劇命運。 Yeh Shih-Tao (1925-2008) and Chen Ying-Chen (1937-) were the two representative writers in the spectrum of political ideology for “ pro-independence leftist” and “pro-unification leftist” respectively in 1980s Taiwan. Before and after the lifting of martial law during the 1980s when the development of capitalism continued to reach its apex whereas the waves of globalization began to sweep across this small island, the reshaping and reemergence of the leftist memory had attracted wide attention from the literary scene in Taiwan. Yeh’s memoir The 1950s of An Old Taiwanese Writer and Chen’s series fiction Bell Flowers had cast retrospective gaze upon the post-war leftist movement, both of which not only bore the unbearable and unspeakable marks of historical wounds done by the era of authoritarianism, but also witnessed the transformation of Taiwanese society done by the coming of capitalism. The inner pain as expressed in their literary writings was even heavier than their experience of prison in the past. In the face of the ever rising democratic movement, both of them embraced the high expectation of Taiwan’s future. Therefore, their works were devoted to competing for the rights for interpreting history and for the voice in the polemics over “homeland literature”. The trend of globalization enabled them to choose different sides of the democratic movement, but their critical attitudes toward capitalism remained the same. This article proposes to reexamine the red legacy of Taiwanese literature and to search for the tragic fate of the two intellectuals of pro-independence and pro-unification leftists.
台灣文學學報, 17, 27-44 Bulletin of Taiwanese literature, 17, 27-44