懂牠的聲音：馬來西亞人造燕屋的聲景技術與「自然文化」的非二元空間

The Sound of Swiftlets: Technologies of Soundscapes and NatureCultures around Malaysian Cubilose Houses

10.6464/TJSSTM.202010_(31).0004

郭育安(Kuo, Yu-An)；趙恩潔(Chao, En-Chieh)

金絲燕 ； 馬來西亞燕窩產業 ； 聲景 ； 非人能動性 ； 自然文化 ； Swiftlet ； Malaysian cubilose industry ； soundscape ； non-human agency ； NatureCulture

科技醫療與社會

31期（2020 / 10 / 01）

115 - 156

繁體中文

燕窩為一種中華傳統美食，儘管人類「養」燕取其窩，實為在半開放的生產空間並仰賴燕音技術誘燕，屬「半野生－半畜牧」的養殖模式。本文藉由分析燕窩生產技術中的鳥鳴錄製與播放，探討金絲燕在馬來西亞燕窩產業中的能動性，及人燕互動的「聲景」如何重構「自然－文化」空間的重要性。有效的燕屋得以從依賴技術的人造空間，漸成為不需播放燕音的「自然棲地」。金絲燕的喜好決定燕屋成敗，人燕權力關係證成了扁平本體論的特定適用之處，而非普同的應用性。同時，燕音播放在不同脈絡中被人感知為「技術」或「噪音」，均涉及多重「聲景調度地景」的能動性及人類對「文化都市中的自然」的特定想像。本文強調非人能動性與聲景的概念，解釋「聲景」如何調度人與非人行動者，創造非二元的「自然文化」空間。燕窩產業曾是檳城喬治遺產城最棘手的議題，文化遺產的論述繼續鞏固自然與文化的二元對立，忽視兩者實為動態交織的狀態。此案例顯示在空間再創造的過程中，聲景的重要性不亞於地景，應是未來跨物種研究值得關注的面向。

Cubilose (swiftlet-saliva) has been seen as a kind of traditional Chinese delicacy for hundreds of years. Despite human practices of ＂farming＂ the birds and then using birdsongs to lure them into building new nests, swiftlets remain undomesticated. Humans can only invite the birds to show up and shuffle between ＂natural habitats＂ and ＂human-made habitats.＂ This essay explores the agency of swiftlets and soundscapes in reshaping NatureCultures by analyzing the use of birdsong recordings to stimulate the human-and-bird manufacture of Malaysian cubilose houses. If successful, a cubilose house can gradually become a ＂natural habitat＂ and the broadcastings can be stopped. Largely determined by the birds' preferences, the swiftlet-human relations bespeak a kind of ＂flat ontology＂ that does not easily exist elsewhere. Meanwhile, whether humans perceive birdsongs as ＂technologies＂ or ＂noises＂ hinges upon the agency of soundscapes and people's specific imaginations towards nature in cultural cities. By highlighting non-human agency and soundscapes, this research examines how soundscapes draw and dispatch actors, both human and non-human, and create non-binary spaces of NatureCultures. We look at the tricky case of the numerous cubilose houses in urban Georgetown, Penang. The language of cultural heritage maintains a binary nature-culture opposition, which obscures the fact that the two are intimately intertwined in urban cubilose houses. In the ecosystem of the houses, soundscapes are as important as landscapes, and they can help reveal more about cross-species relations elsewhere.

1. 郭育安(2019)。世界文化遺產的地方新想像：馬來西亞燕窩產業、檳城遺產實作、人與動物的邊界地帶。地理學報，94，27-54。
   連結：
2. Bear, C.,Wilkinson, K.,Holloway, L.(2017).Visualizing human-animal-technology relations: Field notes, still photography and digital video on the robotic dairy farm.Society & Animals,25(3),225-256.
3. Bennett, A.,Rogers, I.(2014).Street music, technology and the urban soundscape.Continuum,28(4),454-464.
4. Brinkløv, S.,Fenton, M. B.,Ratcliffe, J. M.(2013).Echolocation in Oilbirds and swiftlets.Frontiers in physiology,4,123.
5. Bryant, Levi R.(2011).The Democracy of Objects.Michigan:Open Humanities Press.
6. Buller, H.(2015).Animal geographies II: methods.Progress in Human Geography,39(3),374-384.
7. Callon, Michel(ed.),Law, John(ed.),Rip, Arie(ed.)(1986).The sociology of an actor-network Mapping the dynamics of science and technology.London:Palgrave Macmillan.
8. Connolly, C.(2017).Whose landscape, whose heritage? Landscape politics of ‘swiftlet farming in a World Heritage City.Landscape Research,42(3),307-320.
9. Connolly, C.(2016).A place for everything’: Moral landscapes of ‘swiftlet farming’ in George Town, Malaysia.Geoforum,77,182-191.
10. Connolly, C.(2017).Landscape political ecologies of urban ‘swiftlet farming’ in George Town, Malaysia.Cultural Geographies,24(3),421-439.
11. Cranbrook, L.(2010).Cranbrook, L. (2010). An unfinished journey: some unresolved issues in Malaysian swiftlet research. Text to accompany a presentation made to the Malaysian Veterinary Department, April 9, 2010..
12. del Hoyo, J.(ed.),Elliott, A.(ed.),Sargatal, J.(ed.)(1999).Handbook of the Birds of the World, Vol. 5. Barn Owls to Hummingbirds.Barcelona:Lynx.
13. Escobar, Arturo(2007).The ‘Ontological Turn’ in Social Theory. A Commentary on ‘Human Geography without Scale’, by Sallie Marston, John Paul Jones II and Keith Woodward.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers,32(1),106-111.
14. Farina, A.,Pieretti, N.(2012).The soundscape ecology: A new frontier of landscape research and its application to islands and coastal systems.Journal of Marine and Island Cultures,1(1),21-26.
15. Feld, S.,Brenneis, D.(2004).Doing anthropology in sound.American Ethnologist,31(4),461-474.
16. Gibbs, L. M.(2019).Animal geographies I: Hearing the cry and extending beyond.Progress in Human Geography,1-9.
17. Haraway, D. J.(2003).The companion species manifesto: Dogs, people and significant otherness.Chicago:Prickly Paradigm Press.
18. Hobbs, J. J.(2004).Problems in the harvest of edible birds’ nests in Sarawak and Sabah, Malaysian Borneo.Biodiversity and Conservation,13(12),2209-2226.
19. Holloway, L.,Bear, C.,Morris, C.,Wilkinson, K.(2014).Animals, technologies and people in rural spaces: Introduction to a special issue on emerging geographies of animal-technology coproductions.Journal of Rural Studies,33,95-98.
20. Holloway, L.,Bear, C.,Wilkinson, K.(2014).Re-capturing bovine life: Robot - cow relationships, freedom and control in dairy farming.Journal of Rural Studies,33,131-140.
21. Ibrahim, S. H.,Teo, W. C.,Baharun, A.(2009).A study on suitable habitat for swiftlet farming.Journal of Civil Engineering, Science and Technology,1(1),1-7.
22. Kitchin, R.(ed.),Thrift, N.(ed.)(2009).Soundscapes. In: International encyclopedia of human geography.Amsterdam:Elsevier.
23. Latimer, J.,Miele, M.(2013).Naturecultures? Science, affect and the non-human.Theory, Culture & Society,30(7-8),5-31.
24. Latour, B.,余曉嵐（譯）,林文源（譯）,許全義（譯）(2012).我們從未現代過.臺北市:群學.
25. Looi, Q. H.,Omar, A. R.(2016).Swiftlets and edible bird’s nest industry in Asia.Pertanika Journal of Scholarly Research Reviews,2(1),32-48.
26. Lorimer, J.(2010).Moving image methodologies for morethan human geographies.Cultural Geographies,17(2),237-258.
27. Matless, D.(2005).Sonic geography in a nature region.Social and Cultural Geography,6(5),742-766.
28. Norhayati, M. K.,Azman, O.,Nazaimoon, W. M.(2010).Preliminary Study of the Nutritional Content of Malaysian Edible Bird’s Nest.Malaysian journal of nutrition,16(3),389-396.
29. Othman, A. K.,Lee, K. M.,Zen, H.,Zainal, W. W.,Sabri, M. F. M.(2009).Wireless sensor networks for swift bird farms monitoring.2009 International Conference on Ultra Modern Telecommunications & Workshops
30. Per Liljas (2015). How the Ancient Practice of Harvesting Edible Bird’s Nests Is Facing Some Very Modern Challenges. https://time.com/4160913/china-edible-birds-nests-malaysia-indonesia-asia/ (Retrieved: April 27, 2020).
31. Pijanowski, B. C.,Farina, A.,Gage, S. H.,Dumyahn, S. L.,Krause, B. L.(2011).What is soundscape ecology? An introduction and overview of an emerging new science.Landscape ecology,26(9),1213-1232.
32. Revill, G.(2016).How is space made in sound? Spatial mediation, critical phenomenology and the political agency of sound.Progress in Human Geography,40(2),240-256.
33. Saengkrajang, W.,Matan, N.,Matan, N.(2013).Nutritional composition of the farmed edible bird’s nest (Collocalia fuciphaga) in Thailand.Journal of food composition and analysis,31(1),41-45.
34. Sankaran, R.(2001).The status and conservation of the Ediblenest Swiftlet (Collocalia fuciphaga) in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.Biological Conservation,97(3),283-294.
35. Schafer, R. M.(1977).Our sonic environment and the soundscape: The tuning of the world.New York:Destiny Books.
36. Scott, Michael W.(2013).The Anthropology of Ontology (Religious Science?).Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute,19(4),859-872.
37. Smith, S. J.(1994).Soundscape.Area,26(3),232-240.
38. Southworth, M.(1969).The sonic environment of cities.Environment and Behavior,1,49-70.
39. Tay, K. M.,Jong, C. H.,Lim, C. P.(2015).A clustering-based failure mode and effect analysis model and its application to the edible bird nest industry.Neural Computing and Applications,26(3),551-560.
40. Thomassen, H. A.(2005).Leiden University, Institute of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences.
41. Thomassen, H. A.,Povel, G. D. E.(2006).Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of the echo clicks and social vocalizations of swiftlets (Aves: Apodidae).Biological journal of the Linnean Society,88(4),631-643.
42. Wolch, J.,Emel, J.(1995).Bringing the animals back in.Environment and Planning D-Society & Space,13(6),632-636.
43. Wood, N.(2012).Playing with ‘Scottishness’: Musical performance, non-representational thinking and the ‘doings’ of national identity.Cultural Geographies,19(2),195-215.
44. Zaini, S. N.,Zaini, H.,Sunardi, S.,Hawari, G. K.,Nizam, T. S.(2013).Application of Speech Recognition for Swiftlet Vocalizations.Proceeding of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Computer Science and ICT,Langkawi, Malaysia:
45. 郭淼澤(2008).引燕技術百萬收入.馬來西亞:Kanyin Pubblications.
46. 壹讀（2015），〈投資燕屋房產賺 2016 年第一桶金〉。https://read01.com/zh-tw/k5ngjj.html#.XqZOMYhEk2w（ 檢索日期：2020 年 04 月 27 日）。
47. 黃貴文,馬來西亞(2008).探索金絲燕養殖的奧秘.馬來西亞:優穩燕屋規劃與建設.
48. 新浪女性（2011），〈燕窩造假手法曝光：血燕多由燕子糞便熏紅 〉。http://eladies.sina.com.cn/zc/2011/0817/11151086052.shtml（檢索日期：2020 年 04 月 27 日）。
49. 蒲慕洲（編）(2000).飲食傳播與文化交流.臺北市:中華飲食文化基金會.

1. 陳柏勳(2021)。現代中國血肉有情藥品的眾生相：評Chee, Liz P. Y. (2021). Mao's Bestiary: Medicinal Animals and Modern China. Durham: Duke University Press。科技醫療與社會，33，203-211。
2. 鄭中彥,劉鎮臺,林子耘,余衡(2022)。打破觀光和動保的二元對立－從相互依存的角度看猴硐街貓議題。地理學報，102，81-100。