淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-1407201413210400
中文論文名稱 暴力影像的弔詭:從黑暗騎士到漢內克
英文論文名稱 Paradoxes of Violent Image: From The Dark Knight Rises to Haneke
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 英文學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of English
學年度 102
學期 2
出版年 103
研究生中文姓名 林岳琪
研究生英文姓名 Yueh-Chi Lin
學號 699110010
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2014-06-09
論文頁數 99頁
口試委員 指導教授-涂銘宏
委員-吳怡芬
委員-邱彥彬
中文關鍵字 弔詭  暴力影像  影像政治  觀看倫理  觀者行為  施受虐症  麥可漢內克  《黑暗騎士:黎明昇起》  《班尼的錄影帶》  《大快人心》 
英文關鍵字 paradox  violent image  image politics  viewing ethics  spectatorship  sadomasochism  Michael Haneke  The Dark Knight Rises  Benny’s Video  Funny Games 
學科別分類 學科別人文學語言文學
中文摘要 本研究以德波式的悲觀主義出發,旨在為暴力影像的批判力辯護,認為暴力影像的弔詭性可以是重思影像道德及其政治性的關鍵。論文分為三個部分,第一章聚焦於《黑暗騎士:黎明昇起》其內容、形式與好萊塢體系的弔詭與矛盾,以此理解商業暴力電影的力量與危機。

第二章處理《班尼的錄影帶》中關於凝視暴力的弔詭,藉此探討導演與觀眾的道德兩難。進一步探究漢內克呈現暴力的極端策略以及恐怖對觀眾的吸引力可發現,《班尼的錄影帶》展演出一種創傷式的觀看位置與隨之而來的「不愉快的愉悅感」,並以這兩個特點作為對主流暴力電影的抵抗。

第三章則以《大快人心》中的遊戲性重思導演、觀眾、影像之間的位階關係,認為漢內克的遊戲使影像與觀眾的權力關係產生不穩定性,而兩者的互動也使暴力影像政治的激進特質產生更多可能。

總結來說,暴力影像不應僅限於娛樂性質的呈現。當暴力成為影像的基調時,其先天的弔詭便揭序了觀者的反思與行動。暴力影像作為影像與觀者間的創傷性相遇,不僅顯露出社會問題,隨之產生的驚嚇與撞擊也使觀眾進一步發展自己的詮釋,並且對真實世界的認知有所改變因而「感動」,意即對暴力有所感而行動。在這層意義上,暴力影像無論是在電影工業層面抑或是現實層面上皆有可能作為對資本壓迫的抵抗。
英文摘要 For a long time violence has been considered sinful and something that should be rejected. However, violence can also be a powerful and positive trigger under certain situation. Taking Debordian pessimism on media image as a point of departure, this thesis aims to justify the critical power of violent image, arguing that the paradox of violence may be the key to rethink ethics and politics of cruel image. The thesis is divided into three chapters, in which I cope with violent image itself, and tried to look into the institution behind it. In chapter one, we discuss capitalistic structure, in chapter two with viewing ethics, and relations between director and the audience in chapter three.

The first chapter focuses on the paradoxes and ambivalence of content, form and Hollywood industry in The Dark Knight Rises in order to see the power and dangers of commercial violent movies. By blurring the boundary between good and evil, hero and villain, the movie prompts the audience to review the complex implications of justice and law. Nevertheless, there are ambivalence and dangers which are embodied in character setting and Hollywood structure.

The second chapter deals with the paradoxes of gazing violence, which explores ethical dilemma of both the director and the audience in Benny’s Video, and considers that the film resists mainstream violent movies by means of traumatic looking and “displeasurable pleasure.” The audience in this film is alienated. In view of Haneke, alienation does not detach the viewers from being affected, but in fact it strengthens the viewers’ awareness. While seeing the crime from a distance and recognizing their scopophilia, the audience is traumatized by ethical dilemma.

The third chapter reconsiders the hierarchical relations among director, spectator and image through the gameness in Funny Games, arguing that Hanekian games destabilize the power relation between image and spectators, in which the interaction brings possibilities of politically radical engagement. Being a parody of Hollywood thrillers, the film mocks on its conventions. By way of emphasizing the absurdity and de-emphasizing the ambiguity, violence is no longer pleasurable in the games between Paul and the family or Haneke and the audience. Instead, violence becomes a provocation through the agency of Paul’s winks, gazes and questions. In this sense, the audience seems to be the victimized masochist under Haneke’s sadistic authority. However, as Paul imposes his power over spectators, audiences are also staring at him. As a result, the power relations change by the audience’s potential resistance. As viewers dare to look at the violence, they start to reconsider their relations with it and then reconfigure their position according to their own understanding. In this case, at the moment we indicate a director to be a sadist, the counterforce of the audience is simultaneously implied.

To sum up, violent image is more than an entertaining presentation. With the paradoxical nature, violence-as-image manifests itself as the beginning of reflections and actions. It is the traumatic encounters that reveal social problems for the audience to develop their own interpretations and take actions. In this sense, violent image may work as a resistance to capitalistic oppressions in both dimensions of cinema and reality.
論文目次 Table of Contents

Introduction.............................................1

Chapter One: Paradox of Capitalism in The Dark Knight Rises....................................................19
From Superhero to Supervillain...........................21
The Re-institution of Imperial Capitalism................27
Ambivalent Hollywood in The Dark Knight Rises............32
A. Ambiguity of Hollywood Framing..................................................32
B. Two-facedness of Hollywood Politics.................................................35

Chapter Two: Paradox of Gazes in Benny’s Video...........39
Distance, Alienation and Apathy..........................40
Hanekian Suspense and Ethics.............................45
Violence as Shock Therapy................................53
Paradox of Gazes: The Re-institution of Trauma...........56

Chapter Three: Paradox of Sadomasochism in Funny Games...62
Haneke’s Parody of Hollywood Thrillers...................64
Effects of Parody: Funny Games versus Seven..............66
Haneke’s Gameness........................................72
A. Principle of Emphasis and Absurdity................................................72
B. Principle of De-emphasis and Ambiguity................................................77
Games of Violence: Inside and Outside the Diegesis.......80
Ambivalence in the Re-institution of Sadomasochism.......84

Conclusion...............................................89

Works Cited..............................................95
參考文獻 Works Cited

Abrams, M. H., and Geoffrey Galt Harpham. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 9th ed. Boston : Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Appadurai, Arjun. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1996. Print.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Trans. Sheila Faria Glaser. US: U of Michigan P, 1995. Print.
---. Symbolic Exchange and Death. London: Sage Publications, 1993. Print.
Callinicos, Alex. Implicating Empire: Globalization and Resistance in the 21st Century World Order. New York: Basic Books, 2003. Print.
Carroll, Noel. The Philosophy of Horror, or, Paradoxes of the Heart. New York: Routledge, 1990. Print.
Debord, Guy. The Society of the Spectacle. New York: Zone Books, 1994. Print.
Deleuze, Gilles, and Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch. Masochism: Coldness and Cruelty & Venus in Furs. Trans. Jean McNeil and Aude Willm. New York: Zone Books, 1991. Print.
Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P,1986. Print.
Dorfman, Ariel, and Armand Mattelart. How to Read Donald Duck: Imperialist Ideology in the Disney Comic. US: International General, 1991. Print.
Epstein, Edward Jay. The Big Picture: The New Logic of Money and Power in Hollywood. US: Random House, 2005. Print.
Gehring, Wes D.. Parody as Film Genre: Never Give a Saga an Even Break. Westport: Greenwood P, 1999. Print.
Grundmann, Roy, ed. A Companion to Michael Haneke. UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. Print.
---. “Unsentimental Education: An Interview with Michael Haneke.” Grundmann 598-99.
Haneke, Michael. “Violence and the Media.” Trans. Evan Torner. Grundmann 576-77.
Harris, Dan. “Film Parody and the Resuscitation of Genre.” Genre and Contemporary Hollywood. London : British Film Institute, 2002. Print.
Hill, Annette. “Risky Business: Film Violence as an Interactive Phenomenon.” Identifying Hollywood's Audiences: Cultural Identity and the Movies. Ed. Melvyn Stokes and Richard Maltby. London: British Film Institute, 1999. Print.
Hills, Matt. “An Event-Based Definition of Art-Horror.” Dark Thoughts: Philosophic Reflections on Cinematic Horror. Ed. Steven Jay Schneider and Daniel Shaw. US: Scarecrow P, 2003. Print.
Horkheimer, Max, and Theodor W.Adorno. Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum, 2000. Print.
Mattelart, Armand. The Invention of Communication. Trans. Susan Emanuel. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1996. Print.
McGowan, Todd. The Fictional Christopher Nolan. Austin: U of Texas P, 2012. Print.
Orwell, George. 1984: A Novel. New York: New American Library, 1961. Print.
Ranciere, Jacques. The Emancipated Spectator. Trans. Gregory Elliot. US: Verso, 2010. Print.
Sharrent, Christopher. “The World That Is Known: An Interview with Michael Haneke.” Grundmann 582-89.
Sipos, Thomas M.. Horror Film Aesthetics: Creating the Visual Language of Fear. Jefferson: McFarland, 2010. Print.
Sontag, Susan. Regarding the Pain of Others. New York: Picador, 2003. Print.
---. On Photography. New York : Anchor Books, 1990. Print.
Wheatley, Catherine. Michael Haneke’s Cinema: The Ethic of the Image. US: Berghahn Books, 2009. Print.
Young, Alison. The Scene of Violence: Cinema, Crime, Affect. London: Routledge, 2010. Print.

Films
Branagh, Kenneth, dir. Thor. Paramount Pictures, 2011. Film.
Favreau, Jon, dir. Iron Man. Paramount Pictures, 2008. Film.
Fincher, David, dir. Seven. New Line Cinema, 1995. Film.
Haneke, Michael, dir. Fragments of a Chronology of Chance. Cinemien, 1994. Film.
---. Amour. Artificial Eye, 2012. Film.
---. Benny’s Video. Perf. Arno Frisch. BFI Distribution, 1992. Film.
---. Cache. Artificial Eye, 2005. Film.
---. Code Unknown. Curzon Film World, 2000. Film.
---. Funny Games U.S.. Warner Independent Pictures, 2007. Film.
---. Funny Games. Perf. Arno Frisch. Madman Entertainment, 1997. Film.
---. The Piano Teacher. MK2 International, 2001. Film.
---. The Seventh Continent. Cinema Parallel, 1989. Film.
---. The White Ribbon. Filmladen, 2009. Film.
Johnston, Joe, dir. Captain America: The First Avenger. Paramount Pictures, 2011. Film.
Lee, Ang, dir. Hulk. Universal Pictures, 2003. Film.
Montmayeur, Yves, dir. Michael H. Profession: Director. Docu Zone, 2013. Film.
Nolan, Christopher, dir. Batman Begins. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2005. Film.
---. Following. Momentum Pictures Zeitgeist Films, 1998. Film.
---. Inception. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2010. Film.
---. Memento. Summit Entertainment, 2000. Film.
---. The Dark Knight Rises. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2012. Film.
---. The Dark Knight. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2008. Film.
---. The Prestige. Warner Bros. Pictures, 2006. Film.
Raimi, Sam, dir. Spider-Man. Columbia Pictures Corporation, 2002. Film.
Roberts, Alan, dir. Innocence of Muslims. Prod. Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. 4shared. Titustagoe, Sep. 2012. Web. 16 Mar. 2013.
Singer, Bryan, dir. Superman Returns. Warner Bros Pictures, 2006. Film.
---. X-Men. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, 2000. Film.
Whedon, Joss, dir. The Avengers.Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, 2012. Film.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2014-07-16公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2014-07-16起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信