這篇文章希望從文學視角開展法國哲學家洪席耶筆下的跨媒介概念，進而重探他的藝術論述。對電影、攝影、造型藝術皆曾提出精彩創見的洪席耶並不格外重視媒介；他在著述中談及媒介，意義多半止於技術層次，不以媒介為藝術變革的決定性因子。本文則嘗試將媒介概念從他的藝術論中搶救回來，並且申論，洪席耶其實發展了饒富理論力度的跨媒介觀：我們若細究他討論幾大影像藝術的說法，會發現其中頗為一致的將個別創作類型之屬性皆導向文學──尤其是福樓拜這位演示了藝術知識型典範轉折之指標性人物──的做法。此外，他在討論攝影、電影的機器之眼時，事實上開發了具有積極意涵的媒介論，緊繫著他文學觀中一個關涉文學政治性的靈魂概念，「無差別」。洪席耶發表過豐富的文學論著，然國內外現有研究尚未充分關注他的文學論在其整體美學論之啟示與形構意義。本文一方面冀望整理他的跨媒介思維，另一方面亦期待藉此窺看他的文學主張於其藝術立論的關鍵位置。

This article revisits Jacques Rancière’s politics of aesthetics by broaching his conceptions of medium and, further, broaches his concepts of medium by reexamining his writings on literature. On the face of it, Rancière does not think highly of medium: for him, medium is nothing other than the material support or technicalities of an art practice and is never the primary engine in an artistic revolution. This article argues that Rancière has in fact developed illuminating propositions on mediation and intermediality. The former is instantiated in the figure of inner rupture in his account of what he calls the aesthetic regime of art, namely, the order of art practices veering away from the hierarchy-driven representative (or representational) order. The latter, his thesis on intermediality, takes hold in his claim that all arts in the aesthetic regime look to or borrow from one another as they all gesture toward breaking free from the representative regime. This article hopes to show that the true insight of these propositions can be best elucidated in his writings on literature, not least because Rancière posits the realist novel and the work of Gustave Flaubert in particular as the epitome of the aesthetic order in demonstrating an art practice of no hierarchy. On the other hand, the article will revise the superficial sense of intermediality and suggest that the arts’ referring to one another in Rancière’s politics of aesthetic in effect materializes as a departing from oneself, or what we may call extra-mediality—that is to say, the very ontology of medium lies in its taking leave of itself.