《超速性追緝》 (Crash) 是當代英國知名作家巴拉德 (James Graham Ballard) 1973年的作品，小說探討科技與身體的關係。現代科技為人類社會帶來的是創傷、暴力、死亡或具開放性的新身體？科技與生活的密不可分對人類社會是夢想還是夢魘？自從小說出版以來，評論者對相關問題始終爭論不休。本論文擬從後人類主義 (posthumanism) 有關身體的爭論切入，嘗試解決這些爭議。論文首先討論《超速》關於科技的曖昧呈現，以及評論家的正反兩面評價。儘管論者對許多問題的看法有所差異，但多能接受《超速》是刻劃人與機器界線混淆的後人類小說。約略地說，後人類主義可分為兩種，一種強調科技，另一種則強調文化、歷史、差異政治；前者輕視身體，後者肯定身體。基本上《超速》呈現的是去身體化的後人類景觀，小說描述撞車如何做為「超越」肉身之途徑；但本文認為此種「超越」並無法創造新身體，反而陷入了僵化的父權、資本主義機器當中。論文最後將處理《超速》此一後人類文本所涉及的美學、藝術問題：《超速》以冷調、客觀、科學語調描繪理性與夢魘完美結合的極端社會，其形式或風格一方面複製了抽象、去情感、去內心化的後現代、後人類世界，另一方面亦藉由此形式批判過分追求科技超越性 (technological transcendence) 的極端社會。巴拉德的書寫因此有其政治意涵，藉由過度「理性」 (rational) 、科學、技術性的敘述手法或語調，小說同時亦對所謂「理性」社會中的非理性層面提出警訊。《超速》表面的「不道德」 (immorality) 實則是藉由美學層次的不道德來否定世界的「不道德」，藉由「否定美學」 (negative aesthetics) 來「否定」此一社會，因此有倫理層次上的正面意涵。

Since its publication in 1973, James Graham Ballard’s Crash has received contradictory responses from readers and critics. Some regard it as repulsive, vicious, or morbid, while others celebrate it for its depiction of a posthuman condition in which human body is intermingled with modern technology. In spite of the different views among the critics, most would agree that Crash is a posthuman novel. The so-called “posthumanism” can roughly be divided into two types, i.e., disembodied posthumanism and embodied posthumanism. While the former denigrates the body as trivial and insignificant, insisting that it is abstract informational pattern rather than physical body which is crucial for the human subject, the latter regards it as a substantial and indispensable factor for the (post)human. What Crash projects is apparently a disembodied posthuman society in which people seek to “transcend” their corporeal body through car crashes. This attempt to invent new bodies and new sexualities, however, is doomed to fail because it ignores the embodied experiences, without which real “transcendence” is impossible. The last section of this paper examines the issues of art, artist, and aesthetic representation. Here I argue how the detached, objective, “scientific” way of narration not only reproduces a world devoid of human emotion, but also criticizes the postmodern/posthuman world obsessive with the technological transcendence. The “rational” prose in Crash, therefore, is both a repetition and critique of a morbidly “rational,” “scientific” society. What the novel utilizes, in other words, is a “negative aesthetics,” which negates the morbid, “immoral” world through a negative, “immoral” form of representation.