Appropriating the Euro-American Canon in Contemporary East Asia

当代东亚对欧美经典的借鉴

• 批准号: 2583093
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: King's College London
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2021
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2021 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2583093
• 关键词: Appropriating; Euro; American; Canon; Contemporary

My doctoral thesis will explore contemporary adaptations and appropriations of Graeco-Roman antiquity and the Victorian era by authors in China, Japan and Korea, across a range of print, visual and digital media. The relationship between East Asian cultural production and the Euro-American literary canon has been marked by colonialism and imperialism since at least the nineteenth century, but recent examples of cross-cultural adaptation, I contend, have begun moving beyond "the limits of colonial identification [... or] the postcolonial politics of resentment" (Chen 2010) to establish mutually enlightening dialogues with their source texts and contexts. I have chosen to centre my discussion on classical Greece and Rome and Victorian England because of their historical and current prominence in the production and consumption of narrative media not only in East Asia, but also other culturally distant locales. Any project that concerns itself with adaptations of the Euro-American literary canon cannot afford to overlook the subfield of adaptation studies, and mine is no exception. While still "dominated by twentieth-century Anglophone literature and film" (Elliott 2020), adaptation studies has been gradually expanding its ambit to other languages, media and periods. The reception of Graeco-Roman antiquity, however, remains a distinct field of study beyond the reach of most adaptation scholars, with the vast majority of research in the area being conducted by the parallel subfield of classical reception studies instead. These two subfields have developed more or less in isolation from one another despite sharing a similar preoccupation with texts that announce and display an extended engagement with a prior source. The reasons for this curious phenomenon can be partly attributed to the disciplinary divide between Classics and literary studies within the modern academy, but also to more recent theoretical divergences. I believe, however, that these differences unjustly obscure the potential for greater interdisciplinary dialogue. My project thus aims to demonstrate the utility of unifying the tenets and methodology of each subfield, especially with regards to examining cross-cultural adaptation in the East Asian context.Both classical reception and adaptation studies have paid comparatively little attention to how Euro-American texts have been received and repurposed in East Asia. Considering how ill-equipped these conventionally Eurocentric fields are for the task of 'reading' East Asian cross-cultural adaptations, a second major objective of my research will be investigating how their critical idioms can be fruitfully deployed without colonialism or imperialism as intervening influences. In this regard, I will be guided by the analytical framework laid out by Kuan-Hsing Chen in Asia as Method (2010), in order to avoid the pitfalls of reactive postcolonial critique myself.By choosing to focus on Euro-American canonical reception in China, Japan and Korea, I hope to address a lack in current scholarship that extends beyond mere geography. While classical reception and adaptation scholars have now devoted much critical attention to postcolonial writing within their respective disciplinary silos (such as Hardwick 2007, Hutcheon 2006 and Ponzanesi 2014), they have yet to articulate a distinct theoretical position from which to approach texts produced in territories that were never wholly colonised by a Western power, but nevertheless subject to varying degrees of colonial and imperialist hegemony. East Asia is the case study par excellence for the semicolonial condition, and exploring the vicissitudes of cross-cultural adaptation in the region will allow me to tease out the nuances of a unique form of postcoloniality capable of dislodging from its ideological pedestal the simplistic East-West binary that has dogged comparative studies since its inception.

我的博士学位论文将探索中国，日本和韩国作者对Graeco-Roman古代和维多利亚时代的当代改编和拨款，并在各种印刷，视觉和数字媒体中进行。我认为，东亚文化生产与欧美文学佳能之间的关系至少是殖民主义和帝国主义的标志，但我认为，最近的跨文化适应性的例子已经开始超越“殖民身份识别的限制[...我选择将讨论集中在古典希腊，罗马和维多利亚时代的英格兰，因为它们在叙事媒体的生产和消费中的历史和当前不仅在东亚，而且是其他文化遥远的地方。任何关注欧美文学佳能的改编的项目都无法忽略适应研究的子场，而我也不例外。尽管仍然“以20世纪的英语文学和电影为主导”（Elliott 2020），但适应研究逐渐将其范围扩展到其他语言，媒体和时期。然而，格雷科 - 罗马古代的接受仍然是一个独特的研究领域，超出了大多数适应学者的范围，而经典接收研究的平行子领域进行了大部分研究。尽管这两个子领域或多或少地彼此隔离开发，尽管与文本共享了类似的关注，这些文本宣布并显示了与先前来源的扩展参与度。这种奇怪现象的原因可以部分归因于现代学院内经典研究和文学研究之间的纪律鸿沟，也归因于最近的理论分歧。但是，我相信这些差异不公正地掩盖了更大的跨学科对话的潜力。因此，我的项目旨在证明统一每个子领域的原则和方法的实用性，尤其是在检查东亚环境中跨文化适应的方面。经典的接受和适应研究的关注很少，对欧美文本如何在东亚亚洲接受和重新推销。考虑到这些传统上以欧洲为中心的领域的设备不足是为了“阅读”东亚跨文化适应的任务，我的研究的第二个主要目标将是调查如何在没有殖民主义或帝国主义的情况下将其关键的成语作为中间的影响。在这方面，为了避免我自己的反应性后殖民后批评的陷阱，我将以亚洲kuan-hsing chen在亚洲作为方法（2010年）规定的分析框架为指导。选择专注于中国，日本和韩国的欧美规范接待处，我希望解决当前的奖学金的缺乏，而是超越梅尔的地理位置。 While classical reception and adaptation scholars have now devoted much critical attention to postcolonial writing within their respective disciplinary silos (such as Hardwick 2007, Hutcheon 2006 and Ponzanesi 2014), they have yet to articulate a distinct theoretical position from which to approach texts produced in territories that were never wholly colonised by a Western power, but nevertheless subject to varying degrees of colonial and帝国主义霸权。东亚对于半殖民状况的案例研究是卓越的，并且探索该地区跨文化适应的替代性将使我能够逗弄独特形式的后殖民地的细微差别，能够从其意识形态的基座上脱离其自由学比较研究的简单性东西方面的​​简单性东西方。