摘要

本文以比較研究探討維吉尼亞˙吳爾芙《達洛威夫人》與麥可˙康寧漢《時時刻刻》兩本小說中的女性論述。藉由女性學者的觀點（包含吳爾芙、傅瑞丹、伊瑞葛萊的理論），論文探討二文本中的共同處與差異點。世代差異促使作者對女性的關注面向呈現不同議題。研究重點分析不同時代女性困境的複雜變化。
本論文試圖提供歷史情境的完整探討，進行分析與比較。第一章探究女性於父權體制中的從屬地位，於近年來的轉換與改變。藉由連接不同時代女性的歷史敘事 (herstory)，康寧漢試圖呈現女性的歷史及女性族譜。
第二章藉由法國女性學者伊瑞葛萊的女性動力理論 (female dynamics) 分析文本中女性本質的多樣化與複雜性。就女性流動的語言、自我、與性驅力而言，兩位作者各有其主張。第三章探究女性於家庭的地位與角色，尤其關注家庭主婦被賦予的責任與義務。以美國女權運動家傅瑞丹所提出的「市郊主婦」(the Suburban Housewife)為啟蒙，此章節分析文本中不同時代的主婦角色。從維多利亞時代天使般賢淑的妻子 ( “Angel in the House”)，到二十世紀中期的快樂家庭主婦，女性長久以來受到家庭義務的牽絆，以主婦職責作為藉口被排除於公眾事務之外。
結論發現兩位作者所關注的議題雖不同，其目的皆為女性發聲，呼籲女性應有自己的自由與空間，藉以發展女性論述。康寧漢的重讀╱重寫 (rereading / rewriting) 不僅檢視過去女性的困境，也拓展當今的女性議題。

Abstract

The thesis focuses on a comparative study of Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway and Michael Cunningham’s The Hours. With the three feminists’ (Woolf, Friedan, and Irigaray) concepts of women, the resonances and the differences in the two novels are underlined in terms of female discourses. The focus aims at women’s changing predicaments in the phallogocentric society and their varied defiance to the dominant ideology during the recent decades.
This research contains three chapters with an introduction and a conclusion. The prelude indicates that the existing comparative studies of Mrs. Dalloway and The Hours underline the intertextuality. Starting from this point, this project analyzes the analogies and discrepancies of the two novels. Chapter One begins with an examination of women’s subjugated role throughout the century. My study shows that Cunningham intends to provide a female genealogy by interconnecting women’s herstories.
In Chapter Two, Luce Irigaray’s concept of female dynamics is applied to the textual interpretation. It demonstrates that the two authors have diverse opinions when the female mobility, multiplicity, sexuality, and language are concerned. Chapter Three encompasses inquiries into women’s domestic position. The argument employs Betty Friedan’s notion of the ‘Suburban Housewife,’ and manifests the analogy of the two novelists’ ultimate keynote. They both advocate woman’s subjectivity after probing into women questions of their time respectively.
In conclusion, Cunningham reexamines the crucial problems of women issues during the century, and he recasts Woolf’s perceptions in an innovative representation. With a textual survey of the feminist issues, the intricate interrelationship between Mrs. Dalloway and The Hours is explored. This research concludes that Woolf and Cunningham insist on being the articulators for the female subject.

Works Cited

Attridge, Derek. “Molly’s flow: the writing of ‘Penelope’ and the question of women’s language.” Joyce Effects: On Language, Theory, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 93-116.
Benjamin, Walter. “The Flâneur.” Charles Baudelaire: A Lyric Poet in the Era of High Capitalism. Trans. Harry Zohn. London and New York: Verso, 1983. 35-66.
Bowlby, Rachel. “Walking, women, and writing: Virginia Woolf as flâneuse.” New Feminist Discourses: Critical Essays on Theories and Texts. Ed. Isobel Armstrong. London and New York: Routledge, 1992. 26-47.
Cixous, Hélène. “The Laugh of the Medusa.” Trans. Keith Cohen and Paula Cohen. New French Feminisms: An Anthology. Edited with an Introduction by Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron. New York: Schocken, 1981. 245-64.
Cunningham, Michael. The Hours. London: Fourth Estate, 2002.
Friedan, Betty. “The Problem That Has No Name.” The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton, 1963. 15-32.
Guth, Deborah. “Rituals of Self-Deception: Clarissa Dalloway’s Final Moment of Vision.” Twentieth Century Literature 36.1 (1990): 35-42.
Iannone, Carol. “Woolf, Women, and ‘The Hours’.” Commentary 115.4 (2003): 50-53.
Irigaray, Luce. This Sex Which Is Not One. Ithaca, New York: Cornell UP, 1985.
Juhasz, Suzanne. “Object Relations and Women’s Use of Language: Readings from British and American Psychology.” The Women and Language Debate: A Sourcebook. Ed. Camille Roman, Suzanne Juhasz, and Cristanne Miller. New Jersey: Rutgers UP, 1994. 107-18.
Lane, Christopher. “When Plagues Don’t End.” The Gay and Lesbian Review 8.1 (2001): 30-32.
Marcus, Laura. “Woolf’s feminism and feminism’s Woolf.” The Cambridge Companion to Virginia Woolf. Ed. Sue Roe and Susan Sellers. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 209-44.
Miller, Cristanne. “Who Says What to Whom?: Empirical Studies on Language and Gender.” The Women and Language Debate: a sourcebook. Ed. Camille Roman, Suzanne Juhasz, and Cristanne Miller. New Jersey: Rutgers UP, 1994. 267-79.
Moi, Toril. “Introduction.” The Kristeva Reader. Ed. Toril Moi. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986. 1-22.
---. “Introduction: Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf? Feminist readings of Woolf.” Sexual/Textual Politics: Feminist Literary Theory. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge, 2002. 1-18.
Peach, Linden. “‘National Conservatism’ and ‘Conservative Nationalism’: Mrs. Dalloway.” Virginia Woolf (Critical Issues). Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000. 88-112.
Povalyaeva, Natalia. “The Issue of Self-Identification in Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway and Cunningham’s The Hours.” Woolf Across Cultures. Ed. Natalya Reinhold. New York: Pace UP, 2004. 269-76.
Rignall, John. “Benjamin’s Flâneur and the Problem of Realism.” The Problems of Modernity: Adorno and Benjamin. Ed. Andrew Benjamin. London and New York: Routledge, 1989. 112-21.
Roman, Camille. “Female Sexual Drives, Subjectivity, and Language: The Dialogue with/beyond Freud and Lacan.” The Women and Language Debate: a sourcebook. Ed. Camille Roman, Suzanne Juhasz, and Cristanne Miller. New Jersey: Rutgers UP, 1994. 9-19.
Schiff, James. “Rewriting Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway: Homage, Sexual Identity, and the Single-Day Novel by Cunningham, Lippincott, and Lanchester.” Critique 45.4 (2004): 363-82.
Showalter, Elaine. “Beyond the Female Aesthetics: Contemporary Women Novelists.” A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Bronte to Lessing. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1999. 298-319.
Sim, Lorraine. “No ‘Ordinary Day’: The Hours, Virginia Woolf and Everyday Life.” Hecate 31.1 (2005): 60-70.
Smith, Marilyn Schwinn. “The Activist Pens of Virginia Woolf and Betty Friedan.” Woolf Across Cultures. Ed. Natalya Reinhold. New York: Pace UP, 2004. 63-76.
Spengler, Birgit. “Michael Cunningham Rewriting Virginia Woolf: Pragmatist vs. Modernist Aesthetics.” Woolf Studies Annual, Volume 10. Ed. Mark Hussey. New York: Pace UP, 2004. 51-79.
Whitworth, Michael. “Virginia Woolf and Modernism.” The Cambridge Companion to Virginia Woolf. Ed. Sue Roe and Susan Sellers. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 146-63.
Winston, Jane. “Gender and sexual identity in the modern French novel.” The Cambridge Companion to The French Novel: From 1800 to the Present. Ed. Timothy Unwin. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997. 223-41.
Wolff, Janet. “The Invisible Flâneuse: Women and the Literature of Modernity.” The Problems of Modernity: Adorno and Benjamin. Ed. Andrew Benjamin. London and New York: Routledge, 1989. 141-56.
Wood, Andelys. “Walking the Web in the Lost London of Mrs. Dalloway.” Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 36.2 (2003): 19-32.
Woolf, Virginia. “The Intellectual Status of Women.” A Woman’s Essays: Selected Essays. Vol. 1. Ed. Rachel Bowlby. London: Penguin, 1992. 30-39.
---. Mrs. Dalloway. London: Vintage, 2004.
---. A Room of One’s Own and Three Guineas. Edited with an Introduction and Notes by Morag Shiach. New York: Oxford UP, 1998.
Wyatt, Jean. “Avoiding self-definition: In defense of women’s right to merge (Julia Kristeva and Mrs. Dalloway).” Women’s Studies 13.1 (1986): 115-26.