本篇論文試圖思考美學的反叛與美學如何反叛，最重要的是希望揭顯美學維持自身 一種「弱化」卻尖銳的反叛位置。論文中主要討論並串連三個面向：第一部分首先回顧 台灣解嚴後的認同政治思考對於文學創作與文學評論形成的開放與侷限；第二部分將借 助當代法國哲學家賈克．德希達（Jacques Derrida）與賈克．洪席耶（Jacques Rancière） 關於美學政治與倫理議題的思考，他們的美學思索提供了一個非常具有洞見的感知框 架，讓我們能夠藉以理解舞鶴書寫《餘生》這樣一個超越「認同書寫」的美學行動所質 疑與開創的倫理提問；第三部分則進入《餘生》這部作品，藉由這部小說文本與相關評 論，展開《餘生》一書虛構與見證並置的弔詭雙重性，以及這樣的雙重性對於認同政治 的倫理與政治思考。這樣的美學思考是一次溫柔的反叛，如此困難卻又如此重要的反叛。

This essay dwells upon what aesthetics rebels against and how aesthetics revolts. It aims to reveal that aesthetics places itself in a most self-weakening but sharp revolutionary position. The discussion will focus on three aspects. First, the essay reflects on the insight and limitation to Taiwan literature and criticism formed by the identity politics after the abolishing of Martial Law. In the second part, Jacques Derrida’s and Jacques Rancière’s thoughts on aesthetic politics and ethical issues are applied to an insightful perceptional framework. Based on this, the ethical question addressed by the aesthetic action of Wu He’s Remains of Life, which exceeds “identity writing”, can be understood. The last part of the essay analyzes Remains of Life and the relevant comments. The analysis exposes the paradoxical duality of fabrication and witness of this novel and further ponders over the ethics and identity politics of the duality. Wu He’s fictional testimony, I would say, is a difficult but important act of gentle revolt.