No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

2004年2月9日，一則來自北鄰日本的新聞吸引了筆者的目光，報導中指出，日本東京高等法院針對台灣慰安婦要求日本政府國家賠償的訴訟案進行判決，短短數秒鐘，承審法官只留下「本案全部駁回，有關判決理由和事實會在判決書面說明，一切訴訟費用由原告負擔」等短短數語即退庭離去，連讓口譯員翻譯給原告瞭解判決內容的時間都沒有，留下了一臉愕然的台灣阿嬤和在場旁聽的支援者，台灣阿嬤飽經殖民者與歲月摧殘的表情，透過越洋傳送的電視畫面令人不忍卒睹……。 判決書中但見日本法院對台灣原告過去被害的歷史與事實完全不願承認，而留下了一團疑惑。 猶記得同樣是慰安婦事件風波，5年多前，2001年2月，當日本右翼作家小林善紀的一部《台灣論》漫畫，因引用蔡焜燦、許文龍先生那些關於慰安婦的談話， 一時之間，挑動了統、獨雙方人士不同史觀「民族認同」的敏感神經，激烈的言詞交鋒、論戰持續在台灣政壇及社會上掀起不少漣漪。 統、獨雙方的敏感神經，同時也是過去執政者所列為談論禁忌的根源，這就是台灣曾經遭受日本帝國殖民統治的事實。日本帝國及其諸多的亞洲殖民地，隨著帝國在二次大戰的無條件投降，早已灰飛湮滅，但其殖民文化遺產──在被殖民者心理、精神深層之間，所遺留下的「痛苦傷痕」或「美好記憶」，直至60餘年後的今日，依然鮮明對立，相關的論者在論及「日本殖民統治的正當性」、「殖民者的歷史功過與真相」、「發動殖民戰爭的目的與責任」、「殖民受害者的賠償」、「殖民地內部民族情感的融合或撕裂」等諸問題時，常出現「咬牙切齒」或「拍案叫好」兩種截然不同的反應，儼然形成「一個日本殖民帝國，兩種評價」的分歧性詮釋，放眼曾遭日本帝國主義鐵蹄蹂躪或殖民的國家或地區，此種分歧性詮釋在台灣似乎表現的格外明顯。 而殖民地出現這種「兩種評價」的分歧詮釋原因，似乎在於殖民情境中被殖民者特有「創造性矛盾」（creative ambivalence）的複雜情感，意即它同時體現了「本土化的顛覆、抵抗策略」，以及「與統治者同化相當的模仿」的兩種過程。 對此，法國的殖民心理學家梅米（Albert Memmi）亦曾作出類似分析，他認為被殖民者可能會陷入一種兩難困境，亦即不是試圖重建殖民化所奪走的一切，就是試圖把自己變成另一種人， 但這樣的解釋與分析是否充分呢？前蘇聯馬克思主義者普列漢諾夫（Georgy Valentinovieh Plekhanov, 1857-1918）曾說過：「在歷史與現實的一團疑惑面前，不哭，也不笑，而是去理解」，在此，本文也將本著去「理解」的精神，試圖在「真假難辨」與「百家爭鳴」之間，為解開這團疑惑做些個人的嘗試與努力。

This paper examines the development of penal policy and practice in Taiwan in the early Japanese colonial era (1895-1908). The Japanese colonial government considered creation of a modern prison system in Taiwan as not only an essential part of establishing control over the island, but also in proving their colonial credentials. However the process of establishing a modern colonial penal system was a new challenge for Japanese rulers and penal policies underwent changes throughout the period of Japanese rule as they sought to adjust to the needs and realities of colonial governance. This paper seeks to answer the following questions: How did the Japanese colonial regime’s strategy of colonial governance (i.e. the new political rationality) affect the development of penal thought and techniques in Taiwan? What were the particular characteristics of the colonial prison in Taiwan and what comparisons can be made between penal systems in Qing Taiwan, Meiji Japan and colonial Taiwan? This paper will examine relevant penal philosophy, architecture and penal technologies in order to answer these questions. / This paper examines the development of penal policy and practice in Taiwan in the early Japanese colonial era (1895-1908). The Japanese colonial government considered creation of a modern prison system in Taiwan as not only an essential part of establishing control over the island, but also in proving their colonial credentials. However the process of establishing a modern colonial penal system was a new challenge for Japanese rulers and penal policies underwent changes throughout the period of Japanese rule as they sought to adjust to the needs and realities of colonial governance. This paper seeks to answer the following questions: How did the Japanese colonial regime’s strategy of colonial governance (i.e. the new political rationality) affect the development of penal thought and techniques in Taiwan? What were the particular characteristics of the colonial prison in Taiwan and what comparisons can be made between penal systems in Qing Taiwan, Meiji Japan and colonial Taiwan? This paper will examine relevant penal philosophy, architecture and penal technologies in order to answer these questions.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.