《两个钓鱼人》与《摸彩》的互文性解读
An Intertextual Analysis of “Two Fishermen” and “The Lottery
DOI: 10.12677/wls.2025.134064, PDF,   
作者: 罗姝仪:四川大学外国语学院,四川 成都
关键词: 《摸彩》《两个钓鱼人》互文性替罪羊The LotteryTwo Fishermen Intertextuality Scapegoat
摘要: 莫利·卡拉汉的《两个钓鱼人》与雪莉·杰克逊的《摸彩》的情节具有相似之处,均体现了替罪羊这一集体无意识原型,基于此,其人物和主题也具有互文关系。人物上,《两个钓鱼人》中以记者迈克尔·福斯特为代表的村民与《摸彩》中未中奖的村民相对应;《两个钓鱼人》中的刽子手K·史密斯则与《摸彩》中的中奖者泰西·哈钦森相对应。两组人物的冲突体现出了两篇小说共同的主题,即对人性复杂性及权力与正义关系的探讨。但面对相同主题,杰克逊用哥特的手法表现出愤怒,卡拉汉则用海明威式简洁的语言表现出接受命运的、悲观的自然主义倾向。通过对两篇小说进行互文性解读,更能理解两位作者的写作倾向以及文本与其背后社会空间的互文关系。
Abstract: Morley Callaghan’s “Two Fishermen” and Shelley Jackson’s “The Lottery” have similar plots, reflecting a collective unconscious archetype, namely, scapegoat archetype. Based on this, their characters and themes have intertextual relations. In terms of characters, the villagers represented by journalist Michael Foster in “Two Fishermen” correspond to the villagers who did not win the lottery in “The Lottery”. K. Smith, the executioner in “Two Fishermen”, corresponds to Tessie Hutchinson, the winner in “The Lottery”. The conflict between the two groups of characters reflects the common themes of the two novels, namely, the discussion on the complexity of human nature and the relationship between power and justice. However, when confronted with the same themes, Jackson’s anger is expressed in a Gothic way, while Callaghan’s naturalistic and pessimistic tendency to accept fate is described in Hemingway’s terse language. Through the intertextual interpretation of the two short stories, the different writing styles of the two writers and the intertextual relationship between text and cultural space can be better understood.
文章引用:罗姝仪. 《两个钓鱼人》与《摸彩》的互文性解读[J]. 世界文学研究, 2025, 13(4): 445-449. https://doi.org/10.12677/wls.2025.134064

参考文献

[1] 王瑾. 互文性[M]. 桂林: 广西师范大学出版社, 2005.
[2] Jung, C.G. 荣格性格哲学[M]. 李德荣, 译. 北京: 九州出版社, 2003.
[3] 刘世文, 付飞亮. 文学艺术的本质: 集体无意识和原型——论荣格的原型批评理论[J]. 重庆科技学院学报, 2006(5): 56-59.
[4] Jackson, S. (2005) The Lottery and Other Short Stories. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
[5] 孙晶. 用勒内∙吉拉尔的替罪羊机制解读《最蓝的眼睛》佩科拉的悲剧命运[J]. 才智, 2014(21): 281-282.
[6] 吉拉尔, 勒内. 替罪羊[M]. 冯寿农, 译. 北京: 东方出版社, 2002.
[7] Callaghan, M. (1959) Morley Callaghan’s Stories. Macmillan of Canada/Toronto.
[8] 张程鑫. 符号学视角下的《劝导》解读——对克丽斯蒂娃互文性理论的运用[J]. 大众文艺, 2024(15): 16-18.