| 摘要: | 「文化產業」近年儼然成為政府振興地方經濟，促進國內旅遊的重要公共政策。然而，在這個看似熱鬧、熱門的產業背後，反應出何種「文化圖像」？ 文化工業與文化產業在字源上同屬culture industry，如今，台灣在談「文化產業」概念時，則只將焦點放置在區分「文化工業」與「文化產業」的「異」，藉以撇清「文化工業」的負面意義，然而，在觀念營造的同時卻又凸顯了資本主義的邏輯。儘管，「個性化」、「獨特性」、「在地化」、「創意化」成為與「文化工業」區隔的重要特色，但是，上述特色其實是經過包裝，以符號的方式進行生產，以商品的形式出現在市場當中，它們所體現的，仍舊是不折不扣的資本主義邏輯。對應於法蘭克福學派所批評的「文化工業」帶來的問題，在「文化產業」同樣見的到。「文化工業」並未過時，只是以不同的方式體現在不同的資本主義社會當中。 本文嘗試以鶯歌陶瓷產業和鶯歌陶瓷博物館做為分析個案，透過相關與文獻檢索深度訪談法，歸結出，現行文化產業在台灣的實際操作現況，均直接面對資本主義邏輯的挑戰。政府欲扶植轉型成為文化產業，焦點集中在「產值」與「效益」層次的思考時，文化形同形容詞被架空，未必貼近真實生活，對於產業本身也未必有太多助益。陶博館定位於帶動陶瓷產業走向精緻、藝術陶瓷的發展，然而，在「文化欣賞」的氛圍尚未形成，藝術陶瓷文化尚未走入人民日常生活時，其所舉辦的的活動也就不能免俗的越來越活動化、玩樂化。對業者而言，存亡的主要關鍵不在於如何生產出精緻、高附加價值的陶瓷，而在於市場營運利潤的壓力。兩相交會之下，陶博館與鶯歌陶瓷產業的結合並非順遂，有時更是資源、資訊不對稱而兩相角力的戰場。
In recent years , “Culture Industries” become an important policy for the government to promote the local economics and the traveling business. However, what kind of “culture image”does it reflect behind the scenario?”Culture Industry” and ”Culture Industries”are translated differently in Chinese, however, they share the same word in English. The differences lies not only in the interpreting meaning of cultural industries, which was characterized as individuality, uniqueness, locality, uniqueness and creativity, but also in the unique development of ”Culture Policy”which was promulgated by Taiwan Government for the upgrading of local economy. Although the interpretation is different, the realization of cultural industries in Taiwan ironically presented the exact meaning of ”Culture Industry”in Adorono’s prediction. Standardization, uniformity and mass production, which are the major constitutents in Adorno’s text, revived in the practical operation of cultural industries in Taiwan.In my research, I take Taipei County Yingko Ceramics Museum and Yingko ceramics industry as the comparative cases for analyzing their operational models and logics. Yingko Ceramics Museum was set up for transforming traditional ceramics industry into delicate, artistic ceramics industry. However, when the “culture appreciation” and the consumption of artistic ceramics didn’t prevail, the activities held by Yingko Ceramics Museum became entertainment-oriented. For those middle-size business owners, the most important thing is not how to make delicate, artistic ceramics, but the survival of the market competition. When the Yingko Ceramics Museum and Yingko ceramics industry meet each other, there is no happy ending, but the conflict and discord.The central government funded museum for transforming local economy into modern culture industry. What they focus on was “output value” and “benefit”. In this way, the “Culture” in “Culture industries”, is just like an adjective, which does not take cultural contents fully into consideration. The policy of promoting “Culture Industries” isolated itself from the real local economic life and capitalist way of managing museum. |
