全球传播语境中的国家创伤与媒介记忆——中、日、美、英“南京大屠杀”相关报道(1949-2014年)的内容分析
|
摘要
全球化背景下,如何对"南京大屠杀"进行表征和记忆,关系到其意义能否真正得到世界认同。高度媒介化的社会,集体记忆依赖于大众传播媒介,可通过媒介如何表征记忆来观察和理解集体记忆。本文将"南京大屠杀"媒介记忆置于全球传播语境中,力图呈现它的世界面貌。主要运用媒介记忆理论、创伤记忆理论和框架理论,以内容分析法为主,研究1949—2014年间中、日、美、英四国媒体有关"南京大屠杀"及相关事件的报道,旨在描述不同国家媒介记忆的差异,分析其记忆框架,探讨形成差异的原因。研究发现:(1)各国媒介对"南京大屠杀"的记忆采用了不同的框架。中国以"创伤"为框架,围绕历史之痛和现实之伤展开记忆;日本以"质疑"为主导框架,回避自己加害方和中国受害方的身份,报道立场和情感偏向模糊、暧昧;美国和英国以"冲突"为主要框架,强调事件的新闻价值,即冲突本身以及冲突的解决。(2)不同媒介记忆框架对"南京大屠杀"意义的解读存在差异。中国将它定为国家创伤进行纪念在全球传播语境中可获得支持。(3)各国"南京大屠杀"媒介记忆框架存在相互影响的关系,主要表现为各种框架之间的竞争、对立和冲突。
According to this research,three main conclusions can be summarized:(1)Memory frame is different from country to country.China centered on trauma,in a way that emphasizing the pain of history and the grief evolved from the past to nowadays.Japan put more attention to query,avoiding its role as injuring party and China as the injured party.Thus,the standpoint and emotion presented in its report tended to be vague and evasive.The frame of conflict was frequently used in the reports both from America and Britain,which more stressed news value—the solution of the conflict as well as the conflict itself.(2)There are different understandings about the meaning of the Nanjing Massacre.It has been recognized as a fact among the four countries that the Nanjing Massacre is a serious atrocity upon the period of World War II.China commemorates the Nanjing Massacre as national trauma,which will obtain supports in the context of global communication.(3)There are mutual influences among different media memory frames,which are mainly competition,opposition and conflict.
According to this research,three main conclusions can be summarized:(1)Memory frame is different from country to country.China centered on trauma,in a way that emphasizing the pain of history and the grief evolved from the past to nowadays.Japan put more attention to query,avoiding its role as injuring party and China as the injured party.Thus,the standpoint and emotion presented in its report tended to be vague and evasive.The frame of conflict was frequently used in the reports both from America and Britain,which more stressed news value—the solution of the conflict as well as the conflict itself.(2)There are different understandings about the meaning of the Nanjing Massacre.It has been recognized as a fact among the four countries that the Nanjing Massacre is a serious atrocity upon the period of World War II.China commemorates the Nanjing Massacre as national trauma,which will obtain supports in the context of global communication.(3)There are mutual influences among different media memory frames,which are mainly competition,opposition and conflict.
引文
(1)Neiger,Mordechai,Oren Meyers,and Eyal Zandberg.On Media Memory:Collective Memory in a New Media Age.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2011,3.
(2)师彦灵:《再现、记忆、复原---欧美创伤理论研究的三个方面》,《兰州大学学报(社会科学版)》2011年第3期。
(3)(4)(5)Meek,Alen.Trauma and Media:Theories,Histories,and Images.New York:Routledge,2014,9,28,39.
(6)Pinchevski,Amit.“Archive,Media,Trauma.”In Neiger,Mordechai,Oren Meyers,and Eyal Zandberg.On Media Memory:Collective Memory in a New Media Age.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2011,253.
(7)Edy,Jill A.Troubled Pasts News and the Collective Memory of Social Unrest.Philadelphia,Pa.:Temple University Press,2006,8.
(8)Hoskins,Andrew.“Signs of the Holocaust:Exhibiting Memory in a Mediated Age.”Media,Culture&Society,25:7-22.
(9)宋旭华:《曾经的〈东南日报〉新闻如今的南京大屠杀铁证》,《中国出版》2014年第19期。
(10)经盛鸿:《谁是第一个报道南京大屠杀的新闻记者?》,《中共党史研究》2012年第3期;《第一次使用“南京大屠杀”一词的中文报刊》,《钟山风雨》2013年第5期。
(11)陈小菁:《新揭秘将铁证嵌入历史---从南京大屠杀等事件再度开发看历史新闻挖掘宣传》,《军事记者》2015年第2期。
(12)李红涛、黄顺铭:《“耻化”叙事与文化创伤的建构:〈人民日报〉南京大屠杀纪念文章(1949-2012)的内容分析》,《新闻与传播研究》2014年第1期。
(13)Coble,Parks M.“Writing about Atrocity:Wartime Accounts and Their Contemporary Uses.”Modern Asian Studies 45,no.2:379-398.
(14)Seo,Jungmin.“Politics of Memory in Korea and China:Remembering the Comfort Women and the Nanjing Massacre.”New Political Science 30,no.3(2008):372.
(15)赵静蓉:《全球化话语与历史记忆:真命题还是伪命题》,《江海学刊》2012年第4期。
(16)Penney,Matthew.“Far from Oblivion:The Nanking Massacre in Japanese Historical Writing for Childrenand Young Adults.”Holocaust and Genocide Studies 22,no.(1):25-48.
(17)Kinney,Damien.“Rediscovering a Massacre:The Filmic Legacy of Iris Chang's the Rape of Nanking.”Continuum:Journal of Media&Cultural Studies 1,no.26(2012):11-23.
(2)师彦灵:《再现、记忆、复原---欧美创伤理论研究的三个方面》,《兰州大学学报(社会科学版)》2011年第3期。
(3)(4)(5)Meek,Alen.Trauma and Media:Theories,Histories,and Images.New York:Routledge,2014,9,28,39.
(6)Pinchevski,Amit.“Archive,Media,Trauma.”In Neiger,Mordechai,Oren Meyers,and Eyal Zandberg.On Media Memory:Collective Memory in a New Media Age.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2011,253.
(7)Edy,Jill A.Troubled Pasts News and the Collective Memory of Social Unrest.Philadelphia,Pa.:Temple University Press,2006,8.
(8)Hoskins,Andrew.“Signs of the Holocaust:Exhibiting Memory in a Mediated Age.”Media,Culture&Society,25:7-22.
(9)宋旭华:《曾经的〈东南日报〉新闻如今的南京大屠杀铁证》,《中国出版》2014年第19期。
(10)经盛鸿:《谁是第一个报道南京大屠杀的新闻记者?》,《中共党史研究》2012年第3期;《第一次使用“南京大屠杀”一词的中文报刊》,《钟山风雨》2013年第5期。
(11)陈小菁:《新揭秘将铁证嵌入历史---从南京大屠杀等事件再度开发看历史新闻挖掘宣传》,《军事记者》2015年第2期。
(12)李红涛、黄顺铭:《“耻化”叙事与文化创伤的建构:〈人民日报〉南京大屠杀纪念文章(1949-2012)的内容分析》,《新闻与传播研究》2014年第1期。
(13)Coble,Parks M.“Writing about Atrocity:Wartime Accounts and Their Contemporary Uses.”Modern Asian Studies 45,no.2:379-398.
(14)Seo,Jungmin.“Politics of Memory in Korea and China:Remembering the Comfort Women and the Nanjing Massacre.”New Political Science 30,no.3(2008):372.
(15)赵静蓉:《全球化话语与历史记忆:真命题还是伪命题》,《江海学刊》2012年第4期。
(16)Penney,Matthew.“Far from Oblivion:The Nanking Massacre in Japanese Historical Writing for Childrenand Young Adults.”Holocaust and Genocide Studies 22,no.(1):25-48.
(17)Kinney,Damien.“Rediscovering a Massacre:The Filmic Legacy of Iris Chang's the Rape of Nanking.”Continuum:Journal of Media&Cultural Studies 1,no.26(2012):11-23.