Through studying a revenge murder triggered by a land dispute in China and the subsequent trial, this article explores “narrative transformation” in a social drama and proposes an event-based model for authoritarian deliberation. It argues that an obscure murder rose to prominence because it came to be narrated as a different kind of story. Initially viewed as “a normal killing,” it was transformed to represent a “contest” between a law-and-order frame, which emphasizes individual guilt, and a righteous-revenge frame, which symbolizes wider conflicts. The article also contends that in the absence of an institutionalized issue forum, contentious events present a model for authoritarian deliberation. That is to say, deliberation is often pegged to social dramas on the “judicial periphery,” thanks to a liminal phase inviting reflexivity, and exposes elite dissent that is otherwise veiled by an interest-driven alliance. In this case study, the media engaged with other institutions in contentious performances that affirmed hidden social fault-lines but also encouraged deliberation.

本文聚焦一桩因征地纠纷引发的仇杀案（贾敬龙案）极具争议的审理过程及引发的舆论风波。通过研究媒体、法院与法学界在这个过程中的互动，文章讨论 “仇杀” 类型的社会戏剧中 “叙事转化” 的现象，探究 当代中国抗争话语对于 “复仇者”这一原型的借用及该原型与主流“法律与秩序” 话语的冲突与调和，同时提出一个以事件为依托的威权语境下的协商模型。本来默默无闻的凶杀案之所以引起广泛关注，是由于它在公共舆论场中完成了一次叙事转型：从强调个体罪与罚的 “仪式化叙事” 转化为一种 “竞争性叙事” ，而后者在 “法律与秩序” 框架与突出社会不公的 “正义复仇” 框架之间展开。通过剖析焦点案件中叙事与结构性力量的关系，以及情、理、法三者之间的联系，本文认为在建制化的协商场域缺失的威权社会，争议性司法事件为协商提供了一种可能。通常，在多元民主社会，协商的主要载体为议题主导的民主建制（如立法机构）；然而在威权社会，协商更易于发生在界定秩序与失范的社会戏剧中，也与以个案为主导的司法部门关系更为密切。社会戏剧独特的阈限区间激发了公众对于 “现实” 和 “理想的道德／法律秩序” 之间差距的反思，也放大了平时被利益联盟遮蔽的精英间的分歧。在对争议性案件的报道中，媒体与其他建制互动，而这种冲突性展演既放大了日常状态下被隐藏的社会矛盾，也将协商推向纵深。