以生態博物館再現地方集體記憶之研究 ─以桃園眷村故事館為例

Abstract

眷村是臺灣特有地景,是政治性移民所形成的群居現象,並因而衍生出獨特的眷村文化樣貌。眷村的空間與人物,是筆者兒時記憶的一部分,有感改建政策實行後,眷村 徹底地改變,對往昔的思念轉變成眷村研究的動機。生態博物館概念於 1971 年在法國被 提出,它是對傳統博物館角色與功能的反思,其所注重的是博物館與地方的連結,關心 地方集體記憶與居民參與。眷村故事館本著生態博物館的理念並根據對地方認知的積累 發展出三個館所核心文化觀點,分別為:村內村外共融的精神、族群與兩性角色的照見、 落地生根的情誼。並透過物質與非物質性並用的方式,再現地方集體記憶,亦即此地之 眷村文化。而集體記憶再現的過程中居民的角色至為關鍵,因居民參與是生態博物館的 核心訴求之一,居民參與可以歸納為:展示物件的提供、支援館方所舉辦的眷村主題活 動、擔任眷村故事館的導覽員,這三個具體層面。

然而理念與執行存在著距離,眷村故事館所強調的共融精神在執行層面實難以察覺, 試圖打破「村外」與「村內」界域的理想並未在館中獲得實踐。研究發現居民的集體記憶並非齊一的,但館方未能將地方的多元觀點加以紀錄保存與回應,因此博物館內再現 的是片段、未見累積、甚至專斷的集體記憶,觀眾不易從博物館中看出整體地方文化脈 絡。居民參與是眷村故事館得以運作的關鍵,而居民對在地文化的發聲則是令眷村故事 館與其它眷村博物館有別之處,故鼓勵地方居民參與是眷村故事館永遠需面對的課題。

博物館的展示就是一種文化詮釋權力的表現。而修正權力傾斜的現象乃透過居民參 與來落實,由來自地方的發聲詮釋自身,博物館扮演的是平台角色。地方居民因為眷村 而同處集體記憶的社會框架中,但居民之間凝視歷史角度不同而建構出了各自不同的意涵。作為生態博物館,應鼓勵居民發言,並紀錄與回應這些多元性,避免均質化眷村文 化論述。而外在環境不斷變動,博物館也成為地方居民想望地方歷史的憑藉,居民在博 物館內觀照自身,人與館互相指認,建構意義,這便是生態博物館在地方存在的積極意義。Military dependents village was a unique community outline that appeared in Taiwan due to particular political circumstances. The military dependents village hence evolved its very own culture which was part of the author’s childhood memory. The policy of recontruction of military dependents village thoroughly changed the face and nature of the village. The melancholy turned into motive of this research. The Military Dependents Village Museum is operated under eco-museum concept which was considered as reflectiveness of traditional museum values and was initially proposed in France, 1971. The concern for local culture and resident participation are the beliefs of an eco-museum. Based on research of local community, the The Military Dependents Village Museum developed it’s own view of local culture which are promoting understanding between either sides of military dependents village boundry, revealing the diversity of both sexes and ethnic groups, and the solidarity of neighbors who have no biological bound. Both material and immaterial manners are adopted by the museum to represent local collective memory that means culture of military dependents village in this case. Resident participation is crucial to the museum. Residents provided objects for museum exhibition, supported the museum activities and guided the audience.

However, there is gap between idea and practice. The goal of promoting understanding between either sides of military dependents village boundry isn’t fully achieved. The division is still obvious in this research. The collective memories shared by residents are different and showed diversities, but these opinions are neither conserved nor responded by the museum. Hence the representation of local colletive memory in the museum is fragmental, inconsistent and somehow arbitrary. It’s the resident interpretation of culture makes Military Dependents Village Museum distinctive. So encouraging local community to be part of the museum is a lasting mission.

The museum proposes its power through selecting the contens of display. What the audience see in the museum is determined in advance. However, an eco-museum advocates itself to balance the contention of both parties which are museum and residents. This ambition would be achieved by encouraging residents to speak for themselves. The diversities within residents shape an eco-musem, and keeping different opinions in record is the museum’s priority. The museum thereby becomes where the residents identify themselves.