本篇論文的目的在於討論詹姆斯˙喬伊斯（James Joyce）的小說《尤利西斯》（Ulysses）中對女性角色的描摹與傅柯（Michel Foucault）思想中所關切的議題：論述（discourse）、知識與權力、個體主體性之間的相互作用，並且論證喬伊斯的小說充分落實及展演傅柯的理論表述。透過研究小說中女性角色以何種形貌出現在1904年的都柏林與思考他們如何被形塑成為其樣貌，我發現喬伊斯呈現出一道女性主體之光譜，在此光譜中，不同女性角色面對著論述力量的運作，映照出不同程度的個體主體性。更重要的是，喬伊斯對這些角色的處理預示了傅柯念茲在茲的獨立且自決的個體主體性能夠出現的可能。本論文的第一、二章著重討論論述的規範化（normalization）機制，憑藉規範化的技術，任何特定的言說論述得以確立合法性地位，並且於已被規範化的個體身上展現其權力效應（power-effect）。第一章論證愛爾蘭國族主義的論述展現如同傅柯理論中所探討的論述之規範化力量，控制並且充分利用小說的太陽神牛（“Oxen of the Sun”）該章中的產婦普里福伊太太（Mrs Purefoy）之馴服的身體，本章的討論說明，龐大論述的網絡中女性個體主體性的完全臣服且消匿無蹤。第二章藉由格蒂（Gerty）與二位奧蒙德飯店酒吧的女侍（Ormond barmaids）與論述言說的互動，討論個體主體性形成的過程所涉及到論述力量的影響，論述施加於此三位角色身上的既是個體化（individualization）的力量又同時發揮規範化的效果。第三章的討論落實傅柯對「真理」（truth）不證自明的真實性（truthfulness）的質疑和批判。莫莉（Molly）在小說最終章的獨語，表現出她面對論述力量宰制時足以獨立思考且批判的主體性，就此而言，喬伊斯對莫莉的處理合乎傅柯對個體獨立的主體性之期待。這樣的光譜式研究，目的並非在於塑造個體主體性的刻板典型（stereotype），而是將此一光譜視為個體主體性出現的種種可能性與可行的面貌。藉由喬伊斯小說與傅柯理論的對話，我期望《尤利西斯》中女性角色的主體性這道光譜，能夠於討論個體主體性之相關議題時，提供某種程度上可行的解決之道。 / The goal of my thesis is to argue that Joyce’s portrayal of the female characters in Ulysses fleshes out Foucault’s theoretical formulation of the interplay of discourse, power and knowledge, and individual subjectivity. Studying the appearances of the female citizens in 1904’s Dublin and how they are shaped into such appearances, I argue that Joyce’s characterization demonstrates Foucauldian distrust of the discursively elaborated truth (truthful knowledge) and anxiety about the encompassing exercise of power and discourse functioning in an individual’s sense of self and subjectivity. More importantly, Joyce envisions a spectrum of subjectivities in his delineation of these Irishwomen—the spectrum that expresses distinct degrees of subjectivities formed in different individuals in the face of various discursive practices incessantly entrenching and shaping their lives. In this spectrum, Joyce also prefigures the actualization of Foucauldian struggle for the coming about of a self-determined and autonomous subjectivity in an individual against the ubiquitous discursive dominations. Chapter One and Two focus on the normalization mechanism of discourse and the discursive power-effect achieved in the individual. In Chapter One, the discussion is to demonstrate how the discourse of Irish nationalism incorporates what Foucault theorizes about the normalizing technologies by means of which a specific discourse attains its discursive effect and exerts coercion upon the individual. The lying-in Mrs Purefoy in “Oxen of the Sun” represents the subjection and omni-disappearance of the individual’s subjectivity within the discursive network. Chapter Two stresses the simultaneously individualizing and normalizing forces of discursive power concerning the making of an individual subjectivity. With their interactive gestures and responses to discourses, Gerty and the two Ormond barmaids seem to have attained the individual identity of her own, whereas the presumable individuality of theirs is still enveloped in the process of normalization. Foucault’s critical attitude towards the “truthfulness” of the so-called truth and the neutrality of any seemingly truthful knowledge finds a counterpart in Molly’s soliloquy in “Penelope”—the finale of Ulysses. Discourse as a construct on which Foucault insists is incorporated in the interrogative attitude that Molly has towards the ostensibly neutral discursive statements. Molly’s actions and thoughts register her subversive and resistant gestures towards the imposing discursive practices. She would epitomize the possible actualization of the Foucauldian prospect of an autonomous and self-determined subjectivity taking form in the individual. From the omni-subjection of an individual to the individuality within normalization and to the coming forth of the individual’s subjectivity, my discussions of Mrs Purefoy, of Gerty and the two Ormond barmaids, and of Molly comprise a spectrum showing distinct power-effect demonstrated respectively in these women through discursive practice. My study does not intend to stereotype the result of discursive practice imposed upon these women by locating these female characters in such a spectrum of subjectivities. Rather, I see the spectrum as a multiplicity of subjectivities taking shape in distinct individuals confronted with discourse and power. In addition to sharing the similar insight with Foucault, Joyce rather has the vision, prior to Foucault’s theorizing, in which the Foucauldian anticipation of the liberation from the regime of discourse is made possible. The enormous pressure facing today’s people in the forming of subjectivity is definitely the normalizing power, the imposing discursive knowledge as truth, and the power-effect which shapes individuals’ life without being discerned. It is to be hoped that the correspondence between Joyce’s characterization and Foucault’s critical concerns could propose a practicable solution to the issue of individual subjectivity.