Reading “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses”: On the Infinite Regress of Subject Formation in Althusser’s Theory of Interpellation

阿圖塞〈意識形態與意識形態國家機器〉一文中論及的召喚(interpellation) 概念一直是探討意識形態批判的各家學說不斷引用的經典之作，尤其是阿圖塞以警察呼喊路人為例來說明意識形態將如何把個人召喚為主體的例子更為著名。其實除了這個例子之外，阿圖塞並以「個人下跪祈禱的動作開啟了信仰之門」以及「主體與大對體的鏡像複製關係」為例來解釋意識形態的作用方式；本論文在闡釋阿圖塞的這三種例子之後將具焦討論其召喚理論引發的一個「矛盾」：如果個人要經過某種召喚才能成為意識形態下的主體，在還沒有受到召喚以前他為何會回應對體，如警察，的呼叫呢﹖如果他的確會接受召喚應聲轉頭，豈不表示他已經是個受意識形態制約的主體了﹖那麼主體的形成究竟要遞退到何處呢﹖本文一二節首先檢視如Paul Hirst, Warren Montag, Michele Barrett, Kaja Silverman 等人對此一問題的詮釋，指出這些評家的同異優缺以及他們如何選擇一簡便的方式來解決主體形成的遞退問題一一即把阿圖塞的例子看成一闡釋啟發性的比喻(a heuristic metaphor)，而不去處理此例子中時間上的矛盾；第三節將討論Judith Butler 如何獨具創見地以「前主體的臣服欲望」之說來解決此阿圖塞召喚理論引發的矛盾，由於Butler 並未深化其創見，故本文的第四節將試從拉岡派精神分析的角度解釋主體無窮遞退的問題，如Slavoj Zizek 所言，前主體認同律法的行徑可以看成個人為填補原初欠缺所做的選擇，其中充滿著各種改變的可能，因此主體雖受律法召喚卻也不必然為其所箝制。其實阿圖塞的理論之所以造成主體無窮遞退的矛盾正因他已碰觸到前主體的問題但未加以處理，藉由發掘阿圖塞理論本身潛藏的洞見，本文試圖開啟其理論在意識形態批評領域中的活力與新的可能性。In the ordinary use of the term, subject in fact means: (1)a free subjectivity, a centre of initiatives, author of and responsible for its actions; (2)a subjected being, who submits to a higher authority, and is therefore stripped of all freedom except that of freely accepting his submission. This last note gives us the meaning of this ambiguity, which is merely a reflection of the effect which produces it; the individual is interpellated as a (free) subject in order that he shall submit freely to the commandments of the Subject, i.e. in order that he shall (freely) accept his subjection, i.e. in order that he shall make the gestures and actions of his subjection "all by himself". There are no subjects except by and for their subjection