2 0 1 7年度 早稲田大学大学院文学研究科 入学試験問題

【博士課程】 専門科目 表象・メディア論コース ※解答は別紙（縦・横書）

資料解読

以下の〔A〕～（ GIの資料解読問題のうちから、ー題をえらび、その設問に答えよ。

問題〔A〕

設問 1、以下の英文資料を和訳せよ。

To take periodization first, the familiar view holds that modernity in art began with the M吋iRestoration of 1868 and a Japanese response to the "West" which relativized existingJapanese discourses over many fields. That is, such discourses were forced to lose their hitherto unquestioned or ''naturai≫ legitimacy by their constrained comparison with an external “other.”In a second period from around 1906, modern art discourses were then reconstituted in terms of greater artistic freedom and self四 expressiveness:Japans victories in its first two modern wars of 1894-95 and 1904-05 had solidified the state, popular self-consciousness, and the institutional legitimacy of a newly edu-cated professional class as interpreters of the "new”and the ぺJapanese."2This was broadly followed by a third period from after the earthquake in 1923 to the full-blown domination of all areas of social life by ultra-nationalist militarism from around 1936.

2 O 17. O 7 .19 _p_ e

ん

問題〔B〕

設間 以下の仏文資料の全文を日本語に訳しなさい。

Le sophiste est depuis les origines le frere ennemi, le jumeau implacable de la philosophie. La

philosophie aujourd'hui, prise dans son malaise historiciste, est tres faible face aux sophistes

modernes. Le plus souvent meme, elle considere les grands sophistes - car il y a des grands

sophistes - comme de grands p悩losophes.Exactement comme si nous considerions que les grands

philosophes de l'Antiquite ne sont pas Platon et Aristote, mais Gorgias et Protagoras~ These du reste

de plus en plus soutenue par des historiographes modernes de t’Antiquite.

Qui sont les sophistes modernes? Les sophistes modernes sont ceux qui, a l'ecole du grand

Wittgenstein, tiennent que la pensee est tenue dans l’alternative suivante: soit des effets de discours,

des jeux de langage, soit !'indication silencieuse, le purαmontrer》 dece qui est soustrait a la prise de

la langue. Ceux pour qui !'opposition fondamentale n'est pas entre la verite et l'erreur ou l'errance,

mais entre la parole et le silence, entre ce qui peut etre dit et ce qui est impossible a dire. Ou entre les

enonces pourvus de sens et ceux qui en sont depourvus.

A bien des egards, ce qui se presente comme la philosophie la plus contemporaine est une puissante

sophistique. Elle enterine l'enonce final du Tractatus一《Cequi ne peut se dire，辻fautle taire ≫一，

alors que la philosophie n' existe qu’a soutenir que ce qui ne peut se dire est precisement ce qu’elle

entreprend de dire.

On objectera que, dans son mouvement essentiel, le discours contemporain pretend l山 aussi

rompre avec l'historicisme, au moins sous sa forme marxiste ou humaniste; qu’辻 s'opposeaux idees

de progres et d'avant・garde; qu’il declare, avec Lyotard, que lモpoquedes grands recits est terminee.

Certes. Mais ce discours ne tire de sa recusation《pos土moderne》 qu’unesorte d’equivalence generale

des discours, une regle de virtuosite et d'obliquite. Il tente de compromettre l'idee meme de verite

dans la chute des recits historiques. Sa critique de Hegel est en realite une critique de la philosophie

elle・meme, au profit de l'art, ou du droit, ou d'une Loi immemoriale et indicible. C'est pourquoi辻faut

dire que ce discours, qui ajuste la multiplicite des registres du sens a quelque correlat silencieux,

n'est rien d'autre que la sophistique modeme. Qu'un tel discours, tout a f幻tproductif et virtuose, soit

pris pour une philosophie demontre l'incapacite du philosophe a operer aujourd'hui une ferme

delimitation fondatrice entre lui et le sophiste.

Le sophiste moderne tente de remplacer l'idee de verite par l'idee de regle. Tel est le sens le plus

profond de l'entreprise, du reste geniale, de Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein est notre Gorgias, et nous le

respectons ace titre. Deja le sophiste antique rempla9ait la verite par le mixte de la force et de la

convention. Le sophiste moderne veut opposer la force de la regle’ et plus generalement les

modalities d’autorite langagiere de la Loi, a la revelation OU a la production du vrai.

九

問題〔C〕

設問 次の英文資料を日本語に訳しなさい。

The key to the politics of the artwork essa予inBuck

is that Be吋amincasts his critique of the aesthetic tradition’the aesthetic narrow砂understoodas pertaining to the bourgeois institution of art, the ideal of“beautiful semblance," within the larger pr吋ectof the aesthetic more broadly understood as the “theory [ Lehre] of perception that the Greeks called aesthetics" (7:381), which pertains to the entire domain of human per-ception and sensation. At this point in history, Benjamin warns fellow intel-lectuals, the aesthetic can no longer be def ended in terms of the idealist values of the few that make it complicit with the suffering of the many, nor even in旬rrr

understanding of the aesthetic that takes into account the social reception of technology, the effects of sensory alienation on the conditions of experience and agenc予Atthis juncture Be吋aminlocates the historic function of film:

“to establish a balance between humans and technology" (7:375），“to make the vast technical apparatus of our time an object of human innervation" (1:445). The cinema emerges as the fore,most battleground of contemporary art and aesthetics, not because of a futurist or constructivist enthusiasm for technology, but because film is the only medium that might yet counter the catastrophic effects of humanity's (already）“miscarried [ verunglii・ckte]recep-tion of technology" that had come to a head with World War 1.::・

In Buck-Morss's reading of Benjamin, however, the historical trajectory of shock-anaesthetics-aestheticization appears less like a dialectic than an accelerating spiral or vortex of decline, culminating in a catastrophe that on砂therevolution or the Messiah could stop. The crucial issue is therefore whether there can be an imbrication of technology and the human senses that is not swallowed into this vortex of decline; whether Be吋amin'segali-

tarian’techno』 utopianpolitics could be co吋oinedwith his emphatic notion of experience/memory; wl児ethe

cerned in the project of the surrealists could be generalized into a“collec-tive bodi砂innervation，” theuniversal and public integration of body-and

image-space (Leib-und Bildraum) that had become structurally possible with technology.・ If that possibility amounts to nothing less than the revolution, troped in at once messianic and anthropological-materialist terms, its weak version is the more pragmatic option of a "general and mild politics of dis-traction" (Rose), which Benjamin appears to endorse in the artwork essay.

This second option, however, willingly puts up with the loss of experience/ memory entailed by the technological media and thus risks underwriting its anaesthetizing opposite, that is, a “new barbarism”that, as Adorno cautioned Be吋aminmore than once, comes close to identifying with the aggressor.

※Web公聞にあたり、 著作権者の要請により出典追記しております。Miriam Hansen, (ed.) Gerhard Richter, CRITICAL INQUIRY”Be吋aminand Cinema: Not a One-Way Street”25:2 (1999) pp. 306 -343, 。Universityof Chicago Press.

ヌ

問題〔D〕

設間 以下の英文を和訳しなさい。

When peopfe think of design聖日1ostbelieve it Is about problem solving. Even七he限oreexpr設ssiv記formsof d己signar記 aboutsolvlng aesthetic problems~ Faced with huge challenges such as ov母rpopulation,water‘ shortag,es, and climate change 7 designers feel an overpowering u.rge to wot主together’to ’fix them, as though they can b恐 brokをndown,. quantified, and solv詮d.. Design軍sinher倍ntop七i'mismleaves no a.ltをrnativebut it Is beむo.mingclear that many of the challenges we face today are unfixable and that the only way to overcome them is by changing our values, beliefs, attitudes, and behavior‘Ai though♀ssentiaJ most of the time, design's inbuil七optimismcan gr・eatly complicate things. first, as a form of denial that the pro bl感慨swe face are mor母seriousthan’they appear事 andsecond, by channelin.gを丹帯rgyand resources into fiddling with the world out th母rerather than七h世 Ide尋sandattitudes inside our~ hぽadsthat shape th控 worldout there ..

Rather than givi'ng up altog告th制”、’ though晶七hereare oth母rpむssibirttlesfor design: one is to u.se d恐signas a means of speculating hoi1 things coutd be-speculative design. Th'is form of d.esign thrives on fmagination品nd議1msto op.en up new perspectives on what are som色timescalled wicked problems, to er合atespaces for discussiむnand d母bateabout aiternati官官 ways oずbeing,,and to inspire and encourage people’s imaginations to flow freely，岱esignspeculations can act a.s a catalyst for coHectlv合tyr.edeflning our r悲j母tlonshfpto reaHty・.

どマ除》

As alf desTg・n to・ some extent is future oriented, w色 a「every interested in positioning design speculation in reiati.on to futuro'togy, speculative culture including literature and cin怠ma事 fineart J and radical social scienむeconcerned with changing reality rather than simply. dεscribing it or ma.intatning it.・ This space lies somewhere be七weenreality and the impossibte and to operate in it effectively, as a designer, re司uiresnew design roles事 contexts,and methods. Jt relates to 'ideas about prog,r.ess－亡hangefor the better but, of course, better means different things to different people.

γo find inspiration fo.r specutating through design we ne告dto look beyond design to the methodological playgrounds of cinema,, literature J

science, ethics, politics, and art; to explore, hybridize, borrow, and embrace the many too[s available for crafting not onty things but af'so ideas-fictional worlds, cautionary tales 1, wha七－ifscenarios, t「wughtexperiments, counter

and so on’

（注） reductio ad absurdum：帰謬法

%

問題〔E〕

設問 以下の英文資料を和訳せよ。ただし（ ）内の数字は引用作品の頁数なので訳出す

る必要はない。

The set of 4.48 Psychosis for its London premiere was deceptively simple, but in its design attempted to suggest the other states of con-sciousness that Kane was attempting to explore. The designer was Jeremy Herbert, who had worked on the ambitious stage design of Cleansed, and despite the first production of 4.48 Psychosis taking place in the much smaller J erwood Theatre Upstairs, the concept was no less ingenious. While the stage props of table and chairs were functional to the point of being anonymous, the intriguing feature th~t dominated the set was a mirror slanted at a・45 c;l.egree angle, cutting off the back of the set so也atit resembled a small attic room. The mirror’s presence meant that the auqience could simultaneously see the drama on two planes, so that they could both witness the actors play~ng in 合ontand above their heads. Audience members seated further back could also observe a vertical view of the first two rows of their fellow theatre-goers. This extreme use of per-spective was also used in Cleansed, and provided one of the more notable featgres of that production, in which the audience could ζlook down on

the characters as if they [ were J animals under experimentation'. ・ At one point in 4.48 Psychosis the actors lie on the floor in different positions, and in the reflection given out by the mirror, one critic felt they resem-bled, 'insects trapped on a flypaper or people spread-eagled at a fair-ground wall of death'.

The use of the mirror also directly commented on the different states of consciousness that the speakers inhabit in the p~ay, especially the con-cerns about.._separation of mind from body. When one of the actors says, 'Here am I /.and there is my body/ dancing on glass' (230), the mirror was able to help visualise this dissociation of selfLhooq. as the audience wit-nessed everything carried out on two separate planes: dual perspective also mimicked the state of clinical depression, where patients frequently talk of feeling as if they are trapped observers looking down on them-selves and everyday reality carrying on outside themselves. The mirror as well as the table were also used as mediums on which to realise sections of the written text into theatrical images. For instance, the set of numbers in multiples of seven (232), is visualised in performance through one of the speakers writing them on the table back to front which are then unscrambled by the mirror and reflected back to the audience. Also, at one point, the ghostly letters 京SVP'appear on the mirror, to which one of the speakers replies by launching a paper plane across the stage (214).

The mirror was also used as medium in which (and upon) different states of mind were given expression. For instance, to complement the idea that the mirror was a vehicle for the separation of mind and body, video images were projected onto it showing a window in which people pass outside. The e百ectserved as a reminder that the speakers in the play, and indeed the audience themselves were trapped behind this vista, unable to participate in the outside world.

The<!: play's ending in伍efirst-:Ifoyal Court production wえs_amemorable one, and puts into practice a comment Edward Bond made about 4.48 Psychosis, refuting the interpretation of simply seeing it as a suicide coda. Bond believes the play, 'changes 企oma painful suicide note about death and loss and waste -into a sort of treatise about living con-sciouslぉandthis is even more painful'.

メ

問題〔F〕

設間 以下の英文資料を和訳せよ。ただし（ 1 ) ( 2 ）にはそれぞれ適切な人名を補

って訳すこと。

( 1 ）’s The Order of Things (1970) opens with a discussion of a painting

by the famous Spanish painter, ( 2 ), called Lαs Meninas. It has been a topic of

considerable scholarly debate and con甘oversy.The reason I am using it here is because,

as all the critics agree, the painting itself does raise certain questions about the nature of

representation，姐d( 1 ) himself uses it to talk about these wider issues of the

subject. It is these紅 gumentswhich interest us hereヲ notthe question of whether

( 1 )'sis the 'true', correct or even definitive reading of the painting’s meaning.

That the painting has no one, fixed or final meaning is, indeed, one of ( 1 ）’s most

powerful arguments.

The painting is unique in ( 2 ) ' work. It was part of the Spanish

courtヲsroyal collection and hung in the palace room which was subsequently destroyed

by fire. It was dated ‘1656’by ( 2 ) ' successor as court painter. It was

originally called ιThe Empress with her Ladies and a Dwarf', but by the inventory of

1666, it has acquired the title of' A Portrait of the Infanta of Spain with her Ladies in

Waiting and Servants, by the Court Painter and Palace Chamberlain Diego

( 2 )'. It was subsequently called Las Meninas-'The Maids of Honour'.

Some argue that the painting shows ( 2 ) working on Las Meninas itself and

was painted with the aid of a mirror -but this now seems unlikely. The most widely

held and convincing explanation is that ( 2 ) was working on a full-length

portrait of the King and Queen, and that it is the royal couple who are reflected in the

mirror on the back wall. It is at the couple that the princess and her attendants are

looking and on them that the artist’s gaze appears to rest as he steps back from his

canvas. The reflection artfully includes the royal couple in the picture. This is

essentially the account which ( 1 ) accepts.

※Web公開にあたり、 著作権者の要請により出典追記しております。(ed.) Stuart Hall, Jessica Evans, Sean Nixon, Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, 2nd edition, 2013, SAGE Publications

与

問題〔G〕

設間 以下に示した、あるノーベル文学賞受賞者の詩を翻訳し次の間いに答えよ。

I）作者は（ ）である。

2）作品名は、（ ）である。

3）詩を日本語に翻訳し、語られている内容を 1200字以上（日本語）で解釈せよ。

※この問題は、著作権の関係により掲載ができません。

%

名科目名

この欄以外に受験番号氏名を書かないこと．

専門科目表象圃メディア論コース

総点

選択した問題番号〔 〕

ここから記入すること

（裏へ続く）

1

一一一これより先の余白には絶対に記入しないこと一一一

2