當代英國小說家吉姆‧克雷斯 (Jim Crace) 在《阿卡迪亞》(Arcadia, 2008)這部城市小說中，以一位隱身人群的專欄作家為敘述者，從城市居民的心理為出發點描寫城市空間，並以傳統露天市場被改建為一現代化購物商場之事件為主軸，刻劃城市居民經歷生存空間遭強制改變的衝擊之後，仍然找到適應的方式和創造空間運用的可能性。本文主要採取甄克斯 (Chris Jenks) 對城市漫遊者 (flâneur) 的論述，以及情境主義的心理地圖 (psychogeography)、漂移 (dérive)、異軌 (détournement)、及景觀 (spectacle) 的理論概念，剖析克雷斯如何以都市漫遊文本，呈現人和空間的互動，凸顯城市居民和其生存空間實為一生生不息的有機體，並揭露都市空間規劃背後暗藏視覺操縱，藉以反對空間商品化和景觀化。論文第一章主要借助甄克斯的都市漫遊者論述以及情境主義的心理地圖和漂移理論，闡述小說敘述者打破心理和地理的界線，以不同的人物心理呈現一幅城市拼貼。第二章以異軌理論為出發點，闡釋此小說將阿卡迪亞的文學概念和都市公共空間議題並置，一方面解構溫室和商場中的鄉村實為自然的複製品，另一方面強調城市生命力在於多樣性以及居民與空間的互動。第三章援引情境主義的景觀概念，著重討論社會關係和城市的空間生產被資本主義塑造的景觀所滲透控制，並強調敘述者以漂移和異軌的空間實踐與其對抗之外，也刻劃了都市居民在景觀的控制之下，仍然找到新的出口，保有空間運用的自主性。 / Jim Crace’s novel Arcadia delineates a city from the perspective of human mentality by means of an incognito critical social observer. The displacement of a modernized shopping mall for a traditional open market is the most important incident that causes a great impact upon the urban people. In this thesis, I would like to use Chris Jenks’ analysis of the flâneur and situationist concepts of psychogeography, dérive, détournement, and the spectacle to analyze how Crace presents the interaction between man and space which is threatened by the visual manipulation hidden behind urban planning. He also points out that urban inhabitants and their living environment form an organic whole that will keep evolving through their mutual influence. Applying Jenks’ discussion on the flâneur and situationist concepts of psychogeography and dérive, I would first show that Crace breaks the boundary between psychology and geography to present a collage of different interpretations based upon several characters’ mentalities. Then, the construction of the new shopping mall named Arcadia brings up the juxtaposition of the topos Arcadia and the issue of urban public space. With the practice of détournement, the narrator deconstructs the countryside in the shopping mall as the duplication of nature and emphasizes that the life of the city does not reside in the spectacular sites but in diverse and mutual interactions between urban space and its inhabitants. With spatial practices of dérive and détournement, the narrator not only criticizes that both social relationship and urban space are saturated with separation caused by the spectacle, but also makes known that urban people still hold the autonomy of creating alternative spatial use even under the dominant representation of the spectacle in the city.