Quantcast
Channel: 人和書 ( Men and Books)
Viewing all 6914 articles
Browse latest View live

John Kenneth Galbraith 著作

$
0
0

Via The Blue Street Journal






John Kenneth "Ken" GalbraithOC (properly /ɡælˈbrθ/ gal-brayth, but commonly/ˈɡælbrθ/ gal-brayth; 15 October 1908 – 29 April 2006) was a Canadian and, later, American economist, public official, and diplomat, and a leading proponent of 20th-centuryAmerican liberalism. His books on economic topics were bestsellers from the 1950s through the 2000s, during which time Galbraith fulfilled the role of public intellectual. Inmacro-economical terms he was a Keynesian and an institutionalist.[2]
Galbraith was a long-time Harvard faculty member and stayed with Harvard University for half a century as a professor of economics.[3] He was a prolific author and wrote four dozen books, including several novels, and published more than a thousand articles and essays on various subjects. Among his most famous works was a popular trilogy on economics, American Capitalism (1952), The Affluent Society (1958), and The New Industrial State (1967).
Galbraith was active in Democratic Party politics, serving in the administrations of Franklin D. RooseveltHarry S. TrumanJohn F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson. He served asUnited States Ambassador to India under the Kennedy administration. His prodigious literary output and outspokenness made him, arguably, "the best-known economist in the world"[4] during his lifetime.[5] Galbraith was one of few recipients both of the Medal of Freedom (1946) and the Presidential Medal of Freedom (2000) for his public service and contribution to science. The government of France made him a Commandeur de la Légion d'honneur.





自由經濟的核心是市場經濟理論:[9]

市場是人類自發性行為和自我調節的自然領域,依據人們對他人福利的貢獻而受獎勵,由此產生最大限度的自由、平等和福利。

人是自足的,擁有契約關係或責任,大多不受他人影響。人人以平等進入市場討價還價,尋找自己優勢。追求個人需要的滿足和自我利益,導致自發的秩序與自然和諧,造就社會優勢、共同利益及利他的結果。

免於政府干預的自由市場,無人能決定產量與價格,參與者皆受制於市場。無人能控制生產、價格或供給,也沒有確定的個人擁有超越其他個人的權力。每個人自願參與,每個人提供的價格與數量不同,因而保障了自由。

競爭規範行為,防止自我利益對他人的傷害。競爭是道德強制的關鍵,政府正缺乏這一點,是組織社會的手段。

自由化使市場能接管並去政治化許多分配予政府的職能與監管,就會出現非干預性的公共政策,即有限政府,人們能遵照自己的想法。


---
In 2004, the publication of an authorized biography, John Kenneth Galbraith: His Life, His Politics, His Economics[62] by a friend and fellow progressive economist Richard Parker renewed interest in Galbraith life journey and legacy.


Parker, Richard(郭路譯),2005,《加爾布雷斯傳》(John Kenneth Galbraith:His Life, His Politics, His Economics)。2009譯本,頁475。中國北京:中信出版社,2009。作者部分改寫引述文字。
----
*表示有漢憶本

*Galbraith memoir, A Life in Our *Times was published in 1981.[61] It contains discussion of his thoughts, his life, and his times.


約翰·加爾布雷思主要著作

  • 《美國資本主義:抗衡力量的概念》*(1952年)
  • 《1929年大崩盤》*(1955年)
  • 《豐裕社會》*(1958年)(《好社會:人道的記事本》加爾布雷思晚年力作,是對其名著《豐裕社會》觀念的補充修正。)
  • 《新工業國》*(1967年)
  • 《經濟學與公共目標》*(1973年)
  • 《不確定的年代》*(1976年)
  • 《一個永久開明人士的記述》(1971年)

《富裕社會》(The Affluent Society ) by John Kenneth Galbraith
葛爾布拉特著《富裕社會》(The Affluent Society by John Kenneth Galbraith, 1957) 香港:今日世界出版社,1970

由於譯文沒一個字母 所以必須參考些原書

The affluent society - Google Books

- [ 翻譯這個網頁 ]

books.google.com › Business & Economics › Economics › General
The affluent society. Front Cover · John Kenneth Galbraith · 3 Reviews. Houghton Mifflin

”Rodin,Les Mains Du Genie” 《羅丹──激情的形體思想家》/ Camille_Claudel

$
0
0



Around 1884, she started working in Rodin's workshop. Claudel became a source of inspiration, his model, his confidante and lover. She never lived with Rodin, who was reluctant to end his 20-year relationship with Rose Beuret. Knowledge of the affair agitated her family, especially her mother, who never completely agreed with Claudel's involvement in the arts.[citation needed] As a consequence, she left the family house. In 1892, after an unwanted abortion, Claudel ended the intimate aspect of her relationship with Rodin, although they saw each other regularly until 1898.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camille_Claudel





Rodin museum in Paris.

Catherine Yen 的相片。




羅丹──激情的形體思想家 ”Rodin,Les Mains Du Genie”

這本書雖然譯自法文, 不過錯誤不少 (我用英文本"校"一下)。
譬如說 Rodin 出版《法國大教堂》之後 ,Reim Cathedral 被炸 、著火, Rodin 感到很喪氣。
翻譯成 "Reim地方有人批評該書, 羅丹很火大。" (大意)
Rilke  的家書,也翻譯得走調。
編輯錯誤,也不少。



简介 · · · · · ·
  罗丹用粘土、青铜和大理石,雕塑了激情、痛苦、情思和余年,也雕塑了频繁的城市 和超越的悲剧。
  
    本书介绍了世界近代艺术泰斗罗丹,是一本内容翔实的人物传记。
  
  


本书融艺术与专业知识于一体,还有艺术家精辟的独特论述,给人以百科全书的深刻与通俗读物的亲切。本书编辑观点新颖,图片丰富精美,让读者既可配合正文同 时理解,又可单独欣赏。本书分为两大部分,彩页是正文,记史叙事,追本朔源;黑白页是文献与传记。选辑古今文章,呈现多角度认知,是爱艺术的读者的必读参 考书。

作者简介 · · · · · ·

   Helene Pinet
  1952年生。罗浮宫附属学校毕业后,即 在博物馆任职。
  1976年起负责罗丹博物馆摄影部工作。她 已发表多部作品:
  《罗丹》、《五位当代摄影家》、《罗丹的摄影师》、
   以及《雕塑家罗丹及其同时代的摄影师》等。

目录 · · · · · ·

第一章:为艺术而生
第二章:贫困岁月
第三章:“他是一切”
第四章:“简洁是时尚”
第五章:“荣誉降临”
见证与文献
图片目录与出处
索引

The Ascent of Man《文明的躍升》The Dangers of Certainty: A Lesson From Auschwitz

$
0
0

2014.8.31 發現2011年有新平裝版本上市:

A new paperback edition of Dr. Bronowski's classic history of humankind, with a foreword by Richard Dawkins
Dr. Jacob Bronowksi's classic traces the development of human society through our understanding of science. First published in 1973 to accompany the groundbreaking BBC television series, it is considered one of the first works of "popular science," illuminating the historical and social context of scientific development for a generation of readers. In his highly accessible style, Dr. Bronowski discusses human invention from the flint tool to geometry, agriculture to genetics, and from alchemy to the theory of relativity, showing how they all are expressions of our ability to understand and control nature. In this new paperback edition, The Ascent of Man inspires, influences, and informs as profoundly as ever.




"我心目中要建的是一個具有教育性的,合乎時代要求國際標準的科學博物館,在學術上要能達到大學研究院的水準,在展示上要能為社會所需要,觀眾所激賞。在此之前,我翻譯了《文明的躍升》,引起很大的迴響。因此我對從科學教育的使命與目標,都有了一定的看法。" 《築人間──漢寶德回憶錄》
布羅諾斯基《文明的躍升》給我們的啟示是:人類過去的成就雖然很重要,但它必須受到無數 ...

The Ascent of Man (1974) by Wikipedia article "Jacob Bronowski".

http://www.drbronowski.com/

The Ascent of Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ascent_of_Man
The Ascent of Man is a thirteen-part documentary television series produced by the BBC and Time-Life Films first transmitted in 1973, written and presented by ...








  1.  


http://deming.ces.clemson.edu/pub/den/archive/98.12/msg00067.html???






The personal commitment

夫 道 以 人 弘 . 教 以 文 明 . 弘 道 明 教 . 故 謂 之 弘 明 集

弘 明 裨 褊

前幾天 作 The Ascent of Man

去DEN 找出1998 我以前引過此書的說法

The personal commitment of a man to his skill, the intellectual
commitment and the emotional commitment working together as one, has
made the Ascent of Man.
 
 
 
 http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/the-dangers-of-certainty/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0#more-151682
 
 
 


The Dangers of Certainty: A Lesson From Auschwitz



The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers and other thinkers on issues both timely and timeless.
As a kid in England, I watched a lot of television. There weren’t any books in our house,  not even the Bible. TV was therefore pretty important, omnipresent actually. Of course, most of what it delivered was garbage. But in 1973, the BBC aired an extraordinary documentary series called “The Ascent of Man,” hosted by one Dr. Jacob Bronowski in 13 hour-long episodes. Each episode was what he called an “essay” and involved some exotic and elaborate locations, but the presentation was never flashy and consisted mostly of Dr. Bronowski speaking directly and deliberately to the camera.
A scientist who warned of ‘the assertion of dogma that closes the mind, and turns a nation, a civilization, into a regiment of ghosts — obedient ghosts or tortured ghosts.’
Dr. Bronowski (he was always referred to as “Dr.” and I can’t think of him with any other, more familiar, moniker) died 40 years ago this year, at the relatively young age of 66. He was a Polish-born British mathematician who wrote a number of highly-regarded books on science, but who was equally at home in the world of literature. He wrote his own poetry as well as a book on William Blake.

He was a slight, lively, lovely man. Because it was the early ’70s, some of his fashion choices were bewilderingly pastel, especially his socks, though on some occasions he sported a racy leather box jacket. He often smiled as he spoke, not out of conceit or because he lived in California (which, incidentally, he did, working at the Salk Institute in San Diego), but out of a sheer, greedy joy at explaining what he thought was important. But there was a genuine humility in his demeanor that made him utterly likeable.

“The Ascent of Man” (admittedly a little sexist now – great men abound, but there are apparently few great women), deliberately inverted the title of Darwin’s 1871 book. It was not an account of human biological evolution, but cultural evolution — from the origins of human life in the Rift Valley to the shifts from hunter/gatherer societies,  to nomadism and then settlement and civilization, from agriculture and metallurgy to the rise and fall of empires: Assyria, Egypt, Rome.

Bronowski presented everything with great gusto, but with a depth that never sacrificed clarity and which was never condescending. The tone of the programs was rigorous yet permissive, playful yet precise, and always urgent, open and exploratory. I remember in particular the programs on the trial of Galileo, Darwin’s hesitancy about publishing his theory of evolution and the dizzying consequences of Einstein’s theory of relativity. Some of it was difficult for a 13-year-old to understand, but I remember being absolutely riveted.

The ascent of man was secured through scientific creativity. But unlike many of his more glossy and glib contemporary epigones, Dr. Bronowski was never reductive in his commitment to science. Scientific activity was always linked to artistic creation. For Bronowski, science and art were two neighboring mighty rivers that flowed from a common source: the human imagination. Newton and Shakespeare, Darwin and Coleridge, Einstein and Braque: all were interdependent facets of the human mind and constituted what was best and most noble about the human adventure.

For most of the series, Dr. Bronowski’s account of human development was a relentlessly optimistic one. Then, in the 11th episode, called “Knowledge or Certainty,” the mood changed to something more somber. Let me try and recount what has stuck in my memory for all these years.

He began the show with the words, “One aim of the physical sciences has been to give an actual picture of the material world. One achievement of physics in the 20th century has been to show that such an aim is unattainable.” For Dr. Bronowski, there was no absolute knowledge and anyone who claims it — whether a scientist, a politician or a religious believer — opens the door to tragedy. All scientific information is imperfect and we have to treat it with humility. Such, for him, was the human condition.

This is the condition for what we can know, but it is also, crucially, a moral lesson. It is the lesson of 20th-century painting from Cubism onwards, but also that of quantum physics. All we can do is to push deeper and deeper into better approximations of an ever-evasive reality. The goal of complete understanding seems to recede as we approach it.

There is no God’s eye view, Dr. Bronowski insisted, and the people who claim that there is and that they possess it are not just wrong, they are morally pernicious. Errors are inextricably bound up with pursuit of human knowledge, which requires not just mathematical calculation but insight, interpretation and a personal act of judgment for which we are responsible. The emphasis on the moral responsibility of knowledge was essential for all of Dr. Bronowski’s work. The acquisition of knowledge entails a responsibility for the integrity of what we are as ethical creatures.
All knowledge, all information that passes between human beings, can be exchanged only within what we might call ‘a play of tolerance.’
Dr. Bronowski’s 11th essay took him to the ancient university city of Göttingen in Germany, to explain the genesis of Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in the hugely creative milieu that surrounded the physicist Max Born in the 1920s. Dr. Bronowski insisted that the principle of uncertainty was a misnomer, because it gives the impression that in science (and outside of it) we are always uncertain. But this is wrong. Knowledge is precise, but that precision is confined within a certain toleration of uncertainty. Heisenberg’s insight is that the electron is a particle that yields only limited information; its speed and position are confined by the tolerance of Max Planck’s quantum, the basic element of matter.

Dr. Bronowski thought that the uncertainty principle should therefore be called the principle of tolerance. Pursuing knowledge means accepting uncertainty. Heisenberg’s principle has the consequence that no physical events can ultimately be described with absolute certainty or with “zero tolerance,” as it were. The more we know, the less certain we are.

In the everyday world, we do not just accept a lack of ultimate exactitude with a melancholic shrug, but we constantly employ such inexactitude in our relations with other people. Our relations with others also require a principle of tolerance. We encounter other people across a gray area of negotiation and approximation. Such is the business of listening and the back and forth of conversation and social interaction.

For Dr. Bronowski, the moral consequence of knowledge is that we must never judge others on the basis of some absolute, God-like conception of certainty. All knowledge, all information that passes between human beings, can be exchanged only within what we might call “a play of tolerance,” whether in science, literature, politics or religion. As he eloquently put it, “Human knowledge is personal and responsible, an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty.”
The relationship between humans and nature and humans and other humans can take place only within a certain play of tolerance. Insisting on certainty, by contrast, leads ineluctably to arrogance and dogma based on ignorance.

At this point, in the final minutes of the show, the scene suddenly shifts to Auschwitz, where many members of Bronowski’s family were murdered. Then this happened. Please stay with it. This short video from the show lasts only four minutes or so.
Dr. Jacob Bronowski’s argument against certainty, made at Auschwitz for his show “The Ascent of Man.”
It is, I am sure you agree, an extraordinary and moving moment. Bronowski dips his hand into the muddy water of a pond which contained the remains of his family members and the members of countless other families. All victims of the same hatred: the hatred of the other human being. By contrast, he says — just before the camera hauntingly cuts to slow motion — “We have to touch people.”

The play of tolerance opposes the principle of monstrous certainty that is endemic to fascism and, sadly, not just fascism but all the various faces of fundamentalism. When we think we have certainty, when we aspire to the knowledge of the gods, then Auschwitz can happen and can repeat itself. Arguably, it has repeated itself in the genocidal certainties of past decades.
The pursuit of scientific knowledge is as personal an act as lifting a paintbrush or writing a poem, and they are both profoundly human. If the human condition is defined by limitedness, then this is a glorious fact because it is a moral limitedness rooted in a faith in the power of the imagination, our sense of responsibility and our acceptance of our fallibility. We always have to acknowledge that we might be mistaken. When we forget that, then we forget ourselves and the worst can happen.

In 1945, nearly three decades before “The Ascent of Man,” Dr. Bronowski  — who was a close friend of the Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, the reluctant father of the atomic bomb — visited Nagasaki to help assess the damage there. It convinced him to discontinue his work for British military research with which he had been engaged extensively during the Second World War. 
 From that time onward, he focused on the relations between science and human values. When someone said to Szilard in Bronowski’s company that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was science’s tragedy, Szilard replied firmly that this was wrong: It was a human tragedy.

Such was Dr. Bronowski’s lesson for a 13-year-old boy some 40 years ago. Being slightly old-school, I treated myself last Christmas to a DVD deluxe boxed set of “The Ascent of Man.” I am currently watching it with my 10-year-old son. Admittedly, it is not really much competition for “Candy Crush” and his sundry other video games, but he is showing an interest. Or at least he is tolerating my enthusiasm. And of course beginning to learn such toleration is the whole point.

Simon Critchley
Simon Critchley is Hans Jonas professor of philosophy at the New School for Social Research in New York and the author of several books, including “The Faith of the Faithless,” and, with Jamieson Webster, “Stay, Illusion! The Hamlet Doctrine.” He is the moderator of this series.

Henry Petroski《工程、設計與人性》(To Engineer Is Human);“牙籤: The Toothpick: Technology and Culture”,書評

$
0
0


中午,收到"經濟新潮出版公司"社長博華的贈書。7月某日,博華來訪,很巧當時我有三位高朋在座。Henry Petroski《工程、設計與人性》(To Engineer Is Human)平裝本很單薄,中文版卻將它印得有模有樣....有點驚訝:"第3章: 寓教於樂;寓教於生活"附錄是整首詩:〈副主祭的傑作〉。約16年前我公司的網站轉引了一長段....
8月初,我說:Henry Petroski 的書,都值得一讀。

我再補充一則故事。昨天我們討論一篇科幻小說的一句的翻譯。
張華兄:"我比較有興趣的事(sic)前一句,Minnesota is a human moment.不知梁兄如何翻譯?"
梁先生:
"感謝兩位提供靈感, 應該是十之八九
這篇短篇題作Human moments in world war III
我之譯:人味時刻"



Henry Petroski 的書都值得一讀。
亨利.波卓斯基Henry Petroski

  杜克大學的土木工程學教授與歷史教授。他素有「科技的桂冠詩人」美譽,專長為失效分析(failure analysis)、科技史、工程設計、日常用品的微物史。2004~2012年,他受邀擔任美國核廢料技術審查委員會的委員。他長期為《科學美國人》撰寫專欄,著作等身,獲獎無數,《工程、設計與人性》(To Engineer Is Human)是他的第一本書,被視為經典之作。

  他的著作有中譯本者包括:
  《利器》(The Evolution of Useful Things),時報,1997
  《鉛筆》(The Pencil),時報,1997
  《書架:閱讀的起點》(The Book on The Bookshelf),藍鯨,2000
  《打造世界的工程師》(Remaking the World)。新新聞,2001
  《小處著手:追求完美的設計》(Small Things Considered),時報,2004.



目錄

前言
1. 身為人
2. 失敗為成功之母
3. 寓教於樂;寓教於生活
3.5 附錄:〈副主祭的傑作〉
4. 工程做為一種假設
5. 成功就是預見失敗
6. 設計就是「從這裏到那裏」
7. 設計需要修正
8. 遲早會爆發的不定時炸彈
9. 安全係數
10. 當裂縫成為突破
11. 公車骨架與刀身
12. 插曲:水晶宮的成功故事
13. 橋梁的成敗
14. 鑑識工程與工程小說
15. 從計算尺到電腦:忘了以前是怎麼做的
16. 專家的苦惱
17. 設計的極限

結語
參考書目

前言

  雖然我們身處高科技時代,但是工程的本質,還有工程師究竟在做什麼,卻並非一般人都具備的常識。即使是大橋、巨型噴射機,或是超級電腦所賴以建造的最基本原理,對許多人來說都還是很陌生的東西。而之所以如此,部分原因在於工程做為一種人類努力的結果與經驗,還未能融入文化與思想的傳統中。此外,儘管教育工作者目前想盡辦法,要在傳統的學校課程中介紹科技的主題,好讓學生能有更好的準備,以迎接在日益科技化世界中的生活,但是要怎麼做,才最能培育科技素養,至今仍沒有共識。

  而我不僅認為,也在這裏主張,其實設計的概念不但存在我們骨子裡,也是人類天性與經驗的一部分。而且,我認為,即使沒有受過工程或科技的訓練,也能對於工程師和工程有所了解與欣賞。因此我希望,缺乏科技背景的讀者能夠來讀一讀我所寫的介紹科技的書。沒錯,這本書正是我對於「設計是什麼?」,還有「工程師究竟在做什麼?」這兩個問題的回答。

  而設計(design),也就是創造出以前沒有的東西(從無到有),正是工程(engineering)的核心,而且在整本書中都可以看到,我把設計和工程視為同義詞。本書中最顯著的例子,便是與機械和土木工程師息息相關的結構設計,因為我就是從這些領域汲取經驗的;不過,其中的基本原理,也同樣適用於其他工程學科。

  我認為,失敗或失效(failure)的概念是了解工程的關鍵(本書所談的主要是機械與結構失效),因為工程設計的首要目標,就是避免失敗。因此,那些真正發生的大災難,終究都是設計的失敗,但是從那些災難中可以學到的教訓,要比世上一切成功的機械與結構,還更能提升工程知識。的確,在一段長時間的成功後,就會有降低安全係數的壓力,因此不可避免地導致失敗。而失敗所帶來的,則是更高的安全度,以及新一輪的成功。要了解什麼是設計,還有工程師究竟在做什麼,就要了解失敗可能如何發生,以及它們如何比成功更能促進技術的提升。

  而本書中可能出現的任何錯誤,無疑都是我自己造成的,但我必須感謝那些給予我啟發和幫助的人與著作。杜克大學(Duke University)的氣氛向來有如育才搖籃,而我則盡情享受它所提供的機會,在工程學院(School of Engineering)以及三一文理學院(Trinity College of Arts and Sciences)雙方同仁攜手合作下,我投入「科學、技術與人類價值計畫」(Program in Science, Technology, and Human Values),從事工程學研究與跨學科計畫。而這些廣泛的互動,使我視野大開。

  我已發現,有許多文獻都支持我的觀點,即失敗在工程設計中所扮演的角色,而書末所列的參考書目,正是對它們的默默感謝。而我用到的一些比較不為人知的文獻,則是杜克大學不屈不撓的工程圖書館員艾瑞克.史密斯(Eric Smith)為我追查發現的。此外,我在杜克大學工學院所開的斷裂力學與疲勞(fracture mechanics and fatigue)課程,學生們所準備的結構失效個案研究學期報告,也令我獲益良多。長久以來,我那身為土木工程師的手足威廉.波卓斯基(William Petroski),除了不斷提供我有關結構失效的資訊與意見,每當我去拜訪他時,他也給我看了許多實例。

  在某些實際的安排下,我得以運用現代工具,心無旁騖地寫稿。艾伯特.奈利厄斯(Albert Nelius)始終了解,我對珀金斯圖書館(Perkins Library)單人閱覽座的需求,而我對這點心懷感激。至於我太太凱瑟琳.波卓斯基(Catherine Petroski),先是鼓勵我用她的文字處理機,後來還讓我繼續使用。我很慶幸,她白天寫作,而我則是晚上寫作,也很慶幸這台機器能左右開弓,巧妙地完成她的小說與我的非文學創作,並對我們的觀點與修改毫不厭倦。

  多年來,在幾位編輯的鼓勵下,我寫出野心愈來愈大的作品,我永遠感激他們對於拙作的興趣。而所有在《科技評論》(Technology Review)雜誌與我共事過的編輯,一直都是我活力的泉源,而其中特別要感謝的,就是欣然接受我投稿的約翰.馬提爾(John Mattill)、湯姆.柏洛茲(Tom Burroughs),還有如今在《高科技》(High Technology)的史提夫.馬可斯(Steve Marcus)。的確,主要也就是從馬可斯鼓勵我為《科技評論》寫文章開始,才發展成今天這本書。此外,我要感謝聖馬丁出版公司(St. Martin’s Press)的湯姆.鄧恩(Tom Dunne),給我這個將構想擴展成書的機會。

  猶如我的兒女凱倫(Karen)與史蒂芬(Stephen)將在本書中證實的,他們藉由問題與遊戲,讓我了解到,人人心中都有一個工程師。而我太太一開始就向我證明,沒什麼工程概念難得倒她這個主修英文的人,則是以實例讓我明白,身為作家究竟意味著什麼。

——亨利.波卓斯基
寫於北卡羅來納州達拉謨(Durham)
1984年9月

編後記

  值得記錄一下。

  就在本書發印的前幾天,我拜訪了顧問鍾漢清先生,以請教書中的問題,巧遇也在現場的毛毛蟲基金會的楊茂秀老師,還有翻譯了《挖開兔子洞:深入解讀愛麗絲漫遊奇境》的張華老師。由於張華是資深的工程師,英文底子又好,一下子就直指本書的原文書名To engineer is human,應是來自於To err is human(凡人必錯;犯錯是人之常情)。完整的句子是「To err is human, to forgive divine.」因此可以想像,作者將本書命名為To engineer is human,除了取engineer這一關鍵字之外,也企圖用engineer表達它做為動詞的「設計、策劃、處理」之意。所以作者會說,在這本書裏「工程」和「設計」幾乎是同義詞,因為工程既然是藝術也是科學,工程確實就是設計。

  很感謝張華老師的提醒,巧的是,為《挖開兔子洞》繪圖的英國插畫家約翰.田尼爾(John Tenniel),也出現在這本書中。他身為知名的政治漫畫家,對於19世紀的橋梁不斷發生坍塌事故,畫出了人們的揶揄與恐懼。

  這本書是我心目中的經典,與今日的設計書籍相比,這本書探討的是務「實」的設計,著重於安全性、材質或材料力學、結構的問題、技術史的重要性。台灣在經濟起飛時代,幾乎是由工程師打造了台灣的基礎建設,但今天,提到工程幾乎只能想到弊案,這可能提醒我們閱讀本書的必要性:工程可以是一種技術,一種失敗可能會出人命的人為工作,而它也彰顯出人性──想做出不一樣的設計,但是創新有可能失敗,因此工程師會在自負與保守之間掙扎,輾轉難眠。是人,就會犯錯,但我們還是要努力克服困難。



高雄氣爆事件,以及飛機空難,這類工程事故或許可以歸結到一些最常見的工程問題—&...
ECOCITE.PIXNET.NET|由 ECOTREND (ECOCITE) 上傳



  高雄氣爆事件,以及飛機空難,這類工程事故或許可以歸結到一些最常見的工程問題, 也就是失效(failure),以及疲勞(fatigue)。
原本,工程設計的首要目標,就是避免「失效」: 希望結構體可以依預期而運作,直到結構壽命終了為止。然而,如果管線因為金屬疲勞等原因,而產生裂縫,裂縫不斷擴大,到結構難以支撐,最嚴重的會造成斷裂,這就是工程的失敗或失效,也是工程設計上竭力要避免的情況。
高雄氣爆,應是和管線洩漏有關,而裂縫(crack)的產生,通常是工程意外的開始。
還有,環境也是決定結構安全的重要因素。你無法建一座和以往成功經驗一模一樣的橋,在同一個地方,因為即使地點不變,時間、土質、天候都會不同。因此即使是最保守的設計師,完全師法過去安全的設計,也難以完全避免意外發生。這說明了為什麼工程意外的機率要降到0是如此困難的原因。

這是Henry Petroski所著的《工程、設計與人性》(To Engineer Is Human這本書告訴我們的事。這本書就是環繞著工程失效、結構體、疲勞失效的問題,以及工程師如何與天為敵、設法克服環境與大自然的限制,設計出以前不存在的東西的努力。每當發生工程意外,或許就凸顯了這本書的重要性,但願工程師們、設計者、管理者能夠記取史上的災難教訓,繼續前進。

裂縫問題,可參考這本書的第10章「當裂縫造成突破」及第11章「公車骨架與刀身」;飛機的結構失效問題,可參考第14章的「鑑識工程與工程小說」。以下摘錄第10章「當裂縫造成突破」的部分內容:

一般認為,包括鐘、橋梁、飛機,還有其他常見的科技產物,有50%90%的結構失效都是由於裂痕擴大所引起。而在大多數狀況下,裂痕都是慢慢擴大的。唯有當裂痕大小達到結構所無法承受的地步,但仍無人察覺時,災難才會發生。因此,裂痕本身未必是災難的原因,而負責任的工程設計會事先考慮到,在設計的物品上會出現裂痕,或其他材料、做工的瑕疵。在整個產品使用期間,這些瑕疵對於結構的影響,都應該在設計當中加以計算,而工程師則可以提醒結構體的業主與操作者,要隨時謹防日益擴大的裂痕,因為計算也可能有誤差。
  好幾個世紀以來,大裂痕自發地以接近音速的速度貫穿結構體的「脆性斷裂」(brittle fracture),一直是個揮之不去的問題。而導致鋼鐵斷裂的「脆性斷裂」,則是船身瓦解、壓力槽爆裂,或是橋梁坍塌的前奏。在災難發生前,幾乎總是有「醞釀期」,這時裂痕會在疲勞的過程中,逐漸變得更長、更嚴重。卡爾.奧斯古(Carl Osgood)在專書《疲勞設計》(Fatigue Design)中,甚至大膽斷言:「由於自然力不斷在運作,每個物體都必須以某種方式回應,而一切機械與結構設計的問題都出在疲勞上。」
  在金屬微結構上,雖然有包括精心假設的例外,或是「差排」(dislocations)等等好幾種冶金理論,來解釋漸進式疲勞損壞的機制,但沒有一種解釋令人完全滿意。然而,就在冶金學家彼此討論,某塊金屬究竟是如何斷裂的精確細節時,卻不斷有人要求工程師,設計出縱使承受極度震動,還有其他種種負荷,也不會斷裂的機器與結構體。因此,工程師為了能預測裂痕擴大的速度,還有它們能擴大到什麼程度而不導致失效,都必須發展出實務方法。通常也是透過這些考量,來設定結構體預計有效使用的期限。
  數十年來,結構工程師們一直認為,疲勞過程實質上是由兩個階段構成的。在第一個階段中,細微的裂痕會在「成核點」(nucleation sites),也就是材料弱點或應力集中點產生,而在機件或結構體的整個使用期限裏,這個階段便可能佔了一半之多。隨著負載周而復始,這些裂痕也逐漸產生,而若干裂痕「合縱連橫」,形成顯著而粗大的疲勞裂痕。接著在第二個階段中,隨著負載循環持續,這裂痕也加速擴大。要是裂痕因承受的負荷而變得太大,弱化的結構體可能就再也承受不了。這時候,即使其負荷量還在設計的範圍內,裂痕卻會壓垮了最後一道防線。
  冶金學家往往憑經驗學會,如何製作成核點盡可能少,而抗裂痕擴大力盡可能強的合金。而工程師則學會加強接頭,以降低局部負荷量,同時使用具有高抗裂力,並不會產生脆性斷裂的材料。不過,由於無論是冶金學家或工程師,都只是根據以往有限的經驗,去預測在未來不確定的環境下,前所未見的新材料經使用與濫用時會有什麼樣的行為,因此,金屬疲勞的問題依舊存在。而在新設計中,即使與經驗只有些微的差異,也可能造成意外的後果。
  而了解疲勞現象和加以預防,是截然不同的兩件事。有關裂痕產生的假設,是在實驗室中理想、受控制的狀態下測試的。為了盡量提供完美的表面,你可以精心按既定的尺寸製作試樣,而載重狀態也能仔細地加以規定並監控。由於在這種狀況下,試驗結果是可以重複的,因此代表重複載重或重複應力的平滑曲線(工程師通常以字母S標示),還有相對的疲勞失效周期數(以字母N標示),都能輕易做出來。而這些S-N曲線所呈現的,正是每種材料的行為特性。當然,隨著應力降低,失效周期數便會增加,也就是結構體的「壽命」便會拉長。此外,要是負載量降到某個門檻值以下,無論歷經多少次負載周期,你都不會觀察到失效。
  這樣一來,理論上便能夠避免疲勞,但若是為了確保最高應力絕不會超過門檻值,而去設計超安全的結構體,那是不實際的。用那種方式設計的飛機可能太重,以致飛不起來;即使它飛得起來,製造對手不久也會設計出能以較低成本建造、銷售並營運的更輕機型。而在最佳設計中,疲勞與裂痕雖然必定會變本加厲,但其速度之緩慢,早在裂痕形成任何安全問題前,這個結構已可以退役了。然而這種最佳設計,構想容易做起來難。

工程、設計與人性:為什麼成功的設計,都是從失敗開始? 
To Engineer Is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design 
 亨利.波卓斯基(Henry Petroski◎著 
楊幼蘭◎譯 
2014年6月25日出版
QB1115
 


牙籤
Henry Petroski 的"小東西群眾運動",台灣翻譯了約2/3。
這篇提到晚近許多本"旁門左道"談文明的通俗名著。中
文翻譯可能有一半強。
可以把這篇當學習英文的讀物。 有空再注。

Essay

Consider the Toothpick


Illustration by Stephen Savage


Published: October 28, 2007

From time to time, society itself is called upon to intervene when someone it admires goes astray. Whether it is rehab for Lindsay Lohan or a decisive thumbs down to Michael Jordan’s ancillary baseball career, we must periodically take our brightest stars aside and read them the riot act. No, we do not want any more songs like “Dandelions Don’t Tell No Lies.” No, we do not want any more movies like “Battleship Earth.” No, we will not be requiring your services as talk-show hosts, the Messrs. Chase and Sajak.
In a loftier milieu, such intervention may now be required in the case of the redoubtable Henry Petroski. A professor of civic engineering and history at Duke University, Petroski has made quite a name for himself by publishing a series of delightful books in which he explores the history of such indispensable yet taken-for-granted devices as the pencil, the flashlight, the doorknob and the kitchen sink. These exhaustively researched, disarmingly affectionate books celebrate the genius of the quotidian, the elegance of the functional, the romance of the ubiquitous.
But now, with the publication of “The Toothpick: Technology and Culture” (Knopf, $27.95), Petroski is literally tossing in the kitchen sink he has previously only written about. Originally projected as a single chapter in an earlier book, in which the “engagingly simple device ... would serve to illustrate some basic principles of engineering” and “help reveal the inevitable interrelationships between technology and culture,” “The Toothpick” swelled into a 443-page tome that (unlike the object it concerns) fills a need that does not exist, sealing up a void whose vacuity was a source of distress to no one. It is not so much a book as a threat: If you liked “The Toothpick,” wait till you get a load of “The Grommet.” If “The Pencil” was Petroski’s Sudetenland and “The Evolution of Useful Things” his Anschluss, then “The Toothpick” can only be characterized as his invasion of Poland. And just as France and England were compelled to belatedly intervene back then, literate, sane people must now step into the breach. This thing about things has gone far enough, Mr. Petroski. Knock it off.
The very existence of “The Toothpick” is a testimony to the perils of inhabiting a permissive society, for just as the unchastised teenage shoplifter, mistaking society’s indulgence for applause, will evolve into a bloodthirsty hired killer, it is inevitable that the author of “The Pencil” will one day morph into the author of “The Toothpick.” Quite rightly, he assumes that society is simply not paying attention anymore.
“The Toothpick” is animated by the dubious proposition that the venerable mouth-cleaning device in and of itself is worthy of our consideration. Yet, as Petroski himself admits: “With a toothpick, what we see is what we’ve got — inside a toothpick is the same wood that we see on the outside.” Despite amusing anecdotes about the preposterously gauche Roman emperor Nero turning up at a feast with a silver toothpick dangling from his lips, and the novelist Sherwood Anderson fatally puncturing his liver with a toothpick buried inside an olive, none of this makes the toothpick itself any more riveting: John Wilkes Booth is interesting, not his pistol.
Asserting that “picking one’s teeth is believed to be the oldest human habit,” Petroski suggests that the toothpick may be two million years old. Be that as it may, the toothpick cannot hold a candle to the much younger fork or spoon, and finishes far out of the money behind such ingenious inventions as the laptop computer and the iPod. The toothpick is perhaps slightly more interesting than the staple, the washer and the index card, somewhat less fascinating than the screw or the bolt, but infinitely less exciting than the hydrogen bomb, the semiconductor chip or the microbe. The toothpick lacks the anthropological panache of the toupee, the bustle or the collateralized mortgage obligation, the flash and brio of the cuirass or the monstrance, the epochal influence of the stirrup, the shoelace, the ace of spades and the espresso machine, and it most assuredly cannot lay claim to the esoteric charm of the baritone saxophone and the tea cozy, much less the enduring mystery of the French maid’s flouncy apron. Petroski has mistakenly assumed that merely because he could assemble a huge amount of information about the rise and fall of the toothpick industry, such data was worth compiling in a 443-page book. Did you know that boxes of early machine-made toothpicks were labeled with “a caveat about imitators” to prevent consumers from falling prey to 19th-century gray-market toothpicks? Or that a remarkable Norwegian transplanted to Duluth once patented a toothpick dispenser “mounted on the back of a stylized metal turtle”?
Reviewers of “The Toothpick” will automatically lump Petroski’s work in with “Salt,” “Cod,” “How Soccer Explains the World,” “A History of the World in Six Glasses” and other volumes that view society through an odd prism. These books argue that without cod, salt, booze or the penalty kick, we would not be where we are today. This is true, though the same could be said about tuna, cocaine, beavers, coriander, the infield-fly rule and the “going out of business” sale. These books settle arguments no one is having. It’s like writing a book called “How Annoying Roommates Changed the World.” Yes, annoying roommates — Robespierre, Marlon Brando, Al Gore— have changed the world. So what?
Moreover, comparing “The Toothpick” to these other works is inappropriate. Books of the “How Longitude or Beer or the Irish or Something Changed Civilization” sort are mostly the work of journalists. No strangers to harmless hyperbole, these writers desperately want to close the deal but are aware that unless they keep hawking their wares, the reader may nod off. So they never stop with the balloons and the firecrackers, never stop pushing the merchandise. That’s why their books are fun to read.
“The Toothpick,” by contrast, is the work of a maddeningly sober pedant who is anything but a crowd pleaser. “It would appear that in America the use of toothpicks has become largely a matter of class,” he writes in a passage that expertly captures his infatuation with the obvious and the insignificant. “Unlike in the late 19th century, when the urbane crutch-and-toothpick brigade proudly chewed its toothpicks on the steps of fine hotels and restaurants, now it is more the rural and less educated who openly chew theirs in the parking lots, if not at the counter itself, of big-box stores and fast-food establishments.”
Where books like “Guns, Germs and Steel” or “Rats, Lice and History” examine overlooked trends or inventions and demonstrate the decisive role they have played, “The Toothpick” is basically a paean to our irrepressible friend, the toothpick. Petroski assumes that once they have overcome their initially blasé attitude, people will be mesmerized by the tale of how an inexpensive oral-particle-removing device came out of nowhere to take the world by storm. He has forgotten the hoary dictum: Never send a toothpick to do a pencil’s job.
It’s possible that “The Toothpick” is inspired satire, a deliciously subtle send-up of a genre Petroski helped to popularize. A more plausible explanation is that the author was so emboldened by the public’s giddy response to his earlier work that he decided to go for broke. If this is the case, then we, the reading public, bear the greatest responsibility for this misfortune.
There is no telling where he will strike next. But an ominous hint of his intentions is contained in the preface, where he writes: “I have never been a regular user of toothpicks, though there has always been a box or two of the little wooden things about the house. Occasionally they have come in handy for applying a dab of glue or oil to a small part, cleaning dust out of a tight crevice, plugging up an empty nail hole or two, serving as shims, testing the doneness of a batch of brownies and the like.”
If Petroski is already fulfilling one clever historian’s prophecy that as academics retreat from the world writ large, they will teach us more and more about less and less, it is safe to suppose that his next books will include such titles as these: “The Dab: A Closer Look,” “The Shim That Time Forgot: A Short History of Those Little Wooden Things” and “Dust and the West.”
All of which would be merely a warm-up for “The Doneness of Brownies.”

Joe Queenan writes for Barron’s, The Guardian, Men’s Health and The Weekly Standard.



Henry Petroski 的書評
  • An Inventive Hollywood Star

    "Hedy's Folly" chronicles important moments in the filmstar's life—from filming nude scenes for 'Ecstasy' in 1933 to devising radio-controlled torpedoes meant to foil German defenses in World War II. Henry Petroski reviews.
  • [bkrvestonia]
December 16, 2011

In his new book, Richard Rhodes, the author of acclaimed histories of the atomic and hydrogen bombs, tells the story of a 1940s Hollywood bombshell and her fascination with military-weapon design. Yet even though "Hedy's Folly" ostensibly concerns, as the subtitle has it, "the life and breakthrough inventions of Hedy Lamarr, the most beautiful woman in the world," the book is equally about the role that chance and coincidence can play in the development of technology.
Hedy Lamarr, born Hedwig Kiesler in Vienna in 1913, was the only child of Jewish parents. Emil Kiesler, a successful banker, was a doting father; her mother, Trude, a former concert pianist, was less indulgent, "concerned that such a pretty, vivacious child would grow up spoiled unless she heard criticism as well as compliments," Mr. Rhodes writes. Trude taught Hedy to play the piano, and Emil conveyed to his daughter a consuming interest in technology.
Hedy dropped out of high school at 16 to pursue an acting career in Berlin. At 18, after appearing onstage and in a few small film roles, she was cast by Czech director Gustav Machaty as the lead in "Ecstasy," a movie that contained two brief nude scenes and much sexual symbolism. Even though she was billed by her real name—the change to Hedy Lamarr would come in Hollywood—her association with a movie so daring for its time would, the author says, "both promote and plague her professional career."
The actress captured the attention of Fritz Mandl, a wealthy and powerful Austrian arms manufacturer. After she married him at age 19, her new husband tried, unsuccessfully, to buy up every print of "Ecstasy" so that no one else could ever view it again. As Mandl's wife, hosting dinner parties for his business associates, Hedy became familiar with the technology of war. Like much of this most unusual book about a Hollywood star, Mr. Rhodes relates the Austrian chapter of Lamarr's story with engaging efficiency.
As Europe in the mid-1930s was roiled by Hitler's rise, Lamarr, a Jew, resolved to flee her homeland and her marriage. Her controlling husband had Jewish roots—his father had converted to Catholicism, his wife's religion—but Mandl was also a proponent of fascism. In London, the actress met the MGM studio chief Louis B. Mayer, who signed her to a contract and insisted on a new screen name. The rest is Hollywood history—with a twist.

Hedy's Folly

By Richard Rhodes
(Doubleday, 261 pages, $26.95)
As Mr. Rhodes relates, Hedy Lamarr was hardly an intellectual, but she was a indefatigable tinkerer. Among her inventions was a sort of bouillon cube that, when dissolved in water, produced a cola-like drink. Another was an attachment for a tissue box to hold used tissues, a convenience that anyone with a bad cold can appreciate. But she also turned her attention beyond the domestic. Even as she was starring in movies such as "Boom Town" (1940), Lamarr applied her inventing talents to trying to combat German submarines preying on ships in the North Atlantic. She had an idea for radio-controlled torpedo delivery that could not be foiled by the enemy.
Enter George Antheil, an American avant-garde composer whose works were known for using unorthodox instruments such as player-pianos, airplane propellers and sirens. He also wrote music for movies and, like Lamarr, tinkered with ideas for inventions. His signature composition from the 1920s, "Ballet Mécanique," prompted him to develop a way to synchronize multiple player-pianos.
Ever scrambling to piece together an income, Antheil wrote frequently for Esquire magazine—including articles on endocrinology, particularly female hormones, that happened to catch Lamarr's attention. The actress told a friend who knew Antheil that she would like to meet him. When they were introduced at a dinner party in August 1940, she asked Antheil if he knew how she might make her breasts bigger. Mr. Rhodes reports that Antheil recalled, in his autobiography, "Bad Boy of Music," suggesting "various glandular extracts" that would help the pituitary gland, with the added benefit that "the bosoms stay up."
Antheil and Lamarr eventually moved on to talking about the war in Europe. She wondered if her knowledge of munitions and secret weapons projects from her time in Austria could help somehow. She also described an idea for a remote-controlled torpedo: A radio transmitting directions and a receiver implementing them would be synchronized so that their frequencies could be changed simultaneously in a random manner. This constant retuning would make it difficult for the enemy to jam the signals. Lamarr termed the technique "frequency hopping," a forerunner of the spread-spectrum technology that is used today in communications applications such as Wi-Fi.
Antheil lent his experience with synchronizing player pianos. The two refined the idea, then consulted with an electrical-engineering professor at the California Institute of Technology, who confirmed that the concept would work. U.S. Patent No. 2,292,387 for a "Secret Communication System" was issued to Hedy Kiesler Markey and George Antheil in 1942. (Markey was the surname of a husband she had divorced in 1940.) The frequency-hopping technology was not put to use in World War II, but it was employed in 1962 during the blockade of Cuba.
Today, when innovation is often identified as essential for revitalizing an ailing economy, politicians demand more science funding as an incentive. They would do well to note the story of Hedy Lamarr and remember that innovation comes in many forms, often from unlikely sources, who all have one thing in common: a love for ideas and an urge to find out if they'll work.
Mr. Petroski is a professor of engineering and of history at Duke University. His latest book is "An Engineer's Alphabet: Gleanings From the Softer Side of a Profession."

司馬 遼太郎 給活在二十一世紀的你們《台灣紀行》Ryotaro Shiba《司馬 遼太郎語る日本--未公開講演錄愛藏版I/II》街道をゆく(1971年9月 - 96年11月、朝日新聞社、43巻目で絶筆)

$
0
0




給活在二十一世紀的你們
/ 日本歷史小說家, 司馬遼太郎(1923-1996)

我是寫歷史小說的。原本就喜歡歷史的我,再透過雙親的教導,使我更愛歷史。當被問到歷史是什麼時,我的回答是,它是一個很大的世界,而且存在著幾億人的人生。我很幸運的是,在這世上有很多珍貴的朋友,歷史裡頭也有,他們在日常生活中,為我加油打氣,所以我有如活了兩千年以上一樣, 這就是我的人生哲學,希望能藉此與大家分享。但是,還是有令我感到孤單的事。那就是,我沒有的,僅只有你們擁有,而且還很長遠,那就是未來。因為我的生命所剩不多了。例如:我就一定看不到二十一世紀。

你們,不同。
而且正剛要迎接著燦爛的二十一世紀。如果未來如同一個街角,那我想叫住你們,應該要說什麼好呢?。○○君,我想請問你現在是在邁向什麼樣的世界?什麼樣的生活?
真想請問你們這個問題,但是很遺憾的是,在那未來的街角裡,我已經不在了!但,我可以,以學歷史的基本哲學,跟你們談談。

不管,(過去、現在、未來),空氣、水、土等都是不變的大自然。人們、動植物、甚至微生物都是仰賴大自然,才得以存活。也正因如此,大自然是永不變的價值意義。為什麼?因為,人不呼吸新鮮空氣就不能活,不喝水就會渴死。
好。
把自然作為不變價值的基準,想想人們,人是靠大自然反覆循環的存活著。在古代、中世紀裡人們更把大自然當作神來尊崇,這也不是沒有道理。歷史中的人們,更不會因為受到大自然的危害,而對大自然的力量產生懷疑,反而把它當作自己身體的一部份。但這樣的態度,在近代與現代就有了動搖。

人類總是自以為是,以為自己是世上最偉大的。談到這裡,真有點抬不起頭來。二十世紀是現代的象徵,但那僅只是減少受大自然危害而 已。可是人類絕對也不笨,反過來仔仔細細的想一想,包括我在內,人們也僅是大自然的一部份不是嗎?這樣的想法,早在古代聖賢就都想過了,十九世紀的醫學也有這樣的想法。這意味著,它是很普世的想法,而二十世紀的科學只是把它印證給人們看而已。

二十世紀末,人們從科學中知道,如同古代中世紀的神話一樣,再度對大自然的反撲感到恐懼,也因此而反省。在迎接二十一世紀的同時,大自然不應當被消滅,而是共存,而且有它更大的意義。不管中世紀的人們或在歐洲跟東洋,這樣的思想是永遠不變的。這樣的思想再進入近代後,雖有一點動搖,但在不久的將來,人們一定會反思,會用更純真的態度來面對大自然,與它共存邁向希望無窮的二十一世紀,是我對你們的期待。更把這份純真、尊崇大自然的思緒,散播給二十一世紀的人們知道,如何尊崇大自然,進而成為它的一部份。
人們總是會尊敬前世紀的種種,從這裡我想應該不會錯看對你們的期待。

好。再來談談你們。
不論什麼時代,確立自己是很重要的一件事。對自己嚴厲,對他人親切,這樣純真又聰明的你,在二十一世紀裡就顯得更重要。二十一世紀 的科學技術應該更發達了吧?但不能讓科學技術,有如被洪水般地吞沒你們,應該像河川一樣,確立流向來支配科學技術,希望你們能把科學技術引導到正確方向,使自己更確定自己。

雖是自己,但不是自我中心。人類因互助而得以永存。特別當我看到「人」這個字時,深深地被感動,斜斜的筆畫,相互支撐才能構成此字,從這裡可以知道,人是互助才能組成生活社會。原始 時代的社會較小,以家庭為中心再構成大社會。現在的國家也是社會組成的世界,人們相互幫助共存。因此互助是人們很大的道德觀,互助是感受及行動,甚至是感情的根,也可以說是感受他人的痛苦及親切。

同情。感受他人的痛苦。
親切。
都是很相像的話,也是出至於同一個根本的話。雖是同根,但並不是人的本能,所以我們必須透過訓練才能學會。訓練是很簡單的事,例 如:讓朋友快樂,感受他人的痛苦,再將這些感受作為自己做人的根本,把這個根本的情感,由心中傳達到其他民族。如果你們能有這樣的情操,我想二十一世紀將 是一個和睦相處的時代。鐮倉時代的武士們,對於互助這件事,非常重視。所以人類不管在什麼時代,都會有這樣的情操。也不分男女,沒有互助精神的人,他一定也沒什麼魅力。

再反覆一次,剛才要你們確立自己,是說對自己嚴厲,他人親切,也就是所謂的同情心。要你們訓練自己,是希望透過訓練來確立自己並 把自己訓練成為一個親切的人。如果能遵守以上約定,不論在任何時代裡,都不會愧對做為人類.。同時你們也會因此,有如有高高晴空般的心靈及用你那雙紮實的雙足,奔向無限遼闊的大地。

在這裡持續發現你心中的美,寫了此文章,當寫完此文章時,你們的未來就如盛夏的太陽一樣照亮發光著。

****

司馬遼太郎語日本--未公開講演錄愛藏版I/II》載《周刊朝日》1996.11.20/1997.7.10
此兩本雜誌的資料很有趣.譬如說早期司馬遼 太郎 參訪荷蘭等地都有很好的素描.
晚期到台南延平郡王處採用照相機.
許多講述之後採用"司馬先生之控室"方式補充說明

Definition of anteroom

noun

  • an antechamber, typically serving as a waiting room.
  • Military a large room in an officers' mess, typically adjacent to the dining room.
     
    ひかえしつ【控え室】
    〔次の間〕an anteroom; 〔待合室〕a waiting room



 司馬 遼太郎 訪台灣時聽到許多老一輩的台灣人說的日本話是早已不用的"死語".

About 20 years ago, historical novelist Ryotaro Shiba (1923-1996) visited Aomori Prefecture to write a series of travel essays titled "Kaido o Yuku" (On the highways街道をゆく(1971年9月 - 96年11月、朝日新聞社、43巻目で絶筆)). He noted, "Listening to the Tsugaru and Nanbu dialects, I sometimes feel they are poetry." I am sure this was not an idle observation of a sentimental traveler. Like well-used tools, all dialects enable their users to express themselves precisely.




 2011.11

李光耀前日正式發表新書《我一生的挑戰——新加坡雙語之路》,他在書中回顧早年推廣雙語政策的困難,並透露當年有關大陸與台灣的往事。
新書提到李登輝九四年五月在新加坡停留時,要求時任新加坡總理吳作棟代為向江澤民提議有關船運合作,但當吳作棟致函江澤民提出建議 時,江澤民並沒有接受。書中提到,李光耀同年十月在大陸與江澤民面談,江提及對李登輝同年四月接受日小說家司馬遼太郎訪問時,自比摩西要率領人民走出埃及 到許諾之地的說法非常生氣,當時江澤民情緒激動,滔滔不絕說了許久。


 2011.4
最近在書店讀到 台湾紀行發行珍藏版.....



司馬 遼太郎(しば りょうたろう、1923年大正12年)8月7日 - 1996年平成8年)2月12日)は、日本小説家。本名、福田 定一(ふくだ ていいち)。大阪府大阪市生まれ。
産経新聞社在職中、『梟の城』で直木賞を受賞。歴史小説に新風を送る。代表作に『国盗り物語』『竜馬がゆく』『坂の上の雲』などがあり、戦国・幕末・明治を扱った作品が多い。また、『街道をゆく』(60 )をはじめとするエッセイなどで活発な文明批評を行った。
『台湾紀行』(たいわんきこう)は、司馬遼太郎街道をゆく』の第40巻。
週刊朝日の1993年7月2日号から1994年3月25日号に連載された。また、週刊朝日1994年5月6 - 13日号で行われた対談も掲載されている。
単行本:1994年11月発行。朝日文庫版:1997年6月1日発行。

***
這「閱讀台灣 發現自己」,似乎與「溫故 知新」類似;而「閱讀」和「自己」等,都可能「多義」。所以,
我採用隨筆的方式,將不同層面的「閱讀 - 發現」、「台灣 - 自己」交錯表現出來。
20世紀日本大作家司馬遼太郎的作品「等身」...

除了許多精彩的「日本戰國」「明治開國」英雄傳、歷史小說之外,
還有60本「(世界)街道漫步紀」,其中的《台灣紀行》(台北:台灣東販出版社,1995

此書是受陳舜臣先生(
從此書中可知道陳舜臣的神戶方言很簡約,他又通波斯文)敦促的台灣史地文化之佳作,據吾友邱振瑞先生說,它是形塑近代日本人的「台灣觀」的少數著作之一。尤其進者,它更影響我們,即它能讓身為「無數代默默生於斯死於斯土」的我們,最感親切 。


現在有點年紀的我輩,都還記得《台灣紀行》中文本發行的1995年當時,台灣海峽因中國飛彈挑釁而戰雲密佈;我還投書《聯合報 民意論壇》等處,慷慨陳言一番。而那時候,正是「
做為台灣人的悲哀」名言「石破天驚」的時候。鍾肇政先生在該書的「代序」中說,20世紀關於台灣的兩大名言,
此為其一,另一就是當時50年前的「亞細亞的孤兒」。「代序」之尾聲選譯了《台灣紀行》的一段:「…… 走著走著,心中萌發了對台灣的愛與危機感 …… 當然而然,這個島的主人,非以此島為生死之地的、無其數的百姓們莫屬。」

不同的讀者可以從《台灣紀行》中學到許多知識。譬如說,現在快過年了,我幼年外祖父的糖廠宿舍經驗,可以幫我體會其中引葉君手記中「每當嗅到淺綠色榻榻米米的芳香時,過年就快到了」的懷舊。喜歡文字變遷的人,更可以多處了解作者的(蒙古語等)科班出身,譬如說,「寺」的漢文古義和它可能的巴里文thera
或是作者講李登輝先生之前,想起《史記 李將軍列傳》中的造詞「數奇」(命運奇特、坎坷人生等)。

我在1995年的初次閱讀它時,對其中的兩段特別注意:
「晚上,我走在商店街的騎樓(亭仔腳)。
……『這裡高了一層
……『這回低一階了。』
我們就像在走山路一樣。特別是對近視又有老花眼,
難以掌握腳下距離的內人來說,如此親切周到,真令人衷心感謝。
不用說,騎樓是屬於公共的設施。
然而,在台北的商店,私心卻總是優先的。為了自己的方便,
有的把店頭的騎樓地面加高,也有保留原狀的。
『戰前的台北,這是不可能的事。』
有一位老台北這樣讚揚(?)日本時代。
『是蔣介石先生來後,把這種人人只顧自己的惡習。』」(頁55-6)

上述這「亭仔腳」如山路之恥,終於在約2006-07年由台北市府花大錢消災,解決了(雖不滿意,還可接受)。同年我到苗栗市某扶輪社演講,我跟那些人人有車代步的朋友說,如果你走一趟縱貫公路旁的亭仔腳,你可能可以了解唐詩中「蜀道難行」的意境。當然我知道這樣說說也是沒什麼用的。或許,2
030年時,台灣各市鎮內的騎樓高度變異,可以「降低」。




Ryotaro Shiba, 72, Historical Novelist

AP
Published: February 16, 1996
Ryotaro Shiba, a writer known for his long historical novels, died on Monday after suffering from internal bleeding and lapsing into a coma two days earlier. He was 72.
Mr. Shiba started writing historical novels after World War II and won the prestigious Naoki Prize for his 1959 novel, "Fukuro no Shiro" ("The Castle of an Owl").
His best-selling books include "Ryoma ga Yuku" ("Ryoma Is Going"), about the life of Ryoma Sakamoto, a major figure in Japan's transformation from feudal military rule in the 1860's.
For the last quarter-century, Mr. Shiba's articles on his travels around Japan were printed weekly in the magazine Shukan Asahi in a series that reached 1,146 installments. He received the Government's Order of Cultural Merit in 1993.





Sherlock : a big winner for BBC’s finances;"A Study in Pink"/ The Blind Banker

$
0
0

過去也有許多傑出的福爾摩斯影集和電影,這位全世界最出名的偵探在大眾印象中都是穿著風衣、戴帽子、叼著菸斗,在大霧迷漫的倫敦中辦案。這一次福爾摩斯要走出迷霧,在21世紀登場辦案。
福爾摩斯這個辦案天才清瘦、孤僻,銳利的雙眼一眼就可以從細節解讀出線索,福爾摩斯也熟知科學辦案的方法。福爾摩斯的最佳拍檔華生醫生,是從阿富汗退役回國的軍人,一次的機緣下,華生成為福爾摩斯的室友兼夥伴,一起展開冒險。「新世紀福爾摩斯」共有三個扣人心弦的案件:
一個全身穿戴打扮粉紅色的女士被發現陳屍廢棄屋中,看起來怎麼都不可能是自殺,她已經是連續第四個神秘死亡的案件,蘇格蘭警場只能求助於唯一能解開謎題的人-福爾摩斯。
從金融中心到郊區馬戲團;城市到處出現神秘的密碼塗鴉,見到這些密碼塗鴉的人紛紛遇害,福爾摩斯和華生能及時解開密碼嗎?
福爾摩斯受邀偵查一件看似單純的案件,年輕的公務人員遭火車輾斃,豈料這是一場追逐戰的序幕,福爾摩斯必須解開五個謎題,否則就會引爆炸彈,傷及無辜,這一次福爾摩斯遇到了最強勁的對手。
「新 世紀福爾摩斯」在英國和美國同步播出,獲得大西洋兩岸媒體好評,英國衛報稱讚本劇「即使原作者柯南道爾也會讚許」,紐約時報評論「娛樂性十 足…Martin Freeman 精準地詮釋忠心但愛發牢騷的華生,是本劇的一大亮點。」劇中福爾摩斯穿的風衣引起男性觀眾熱烈詢問,這款原本已經停產的風衣,在觀眾要求下重新製造上架。
Benedict Cumberbatch 飾演福爾摩斯,1976年出生的Benedict 之前演藝重心多半是劇場,也曾演出電影如「美人心機」、「戀愛學分」和「贖罪」。他在「新世紀福爾摩斯」的演出幫助他星運大開。
飾演華生的是Martin Freeman,Martin以喜劇影集「辦公室笑雲」走紅,曾經演出過電影「愛是您愛是我」和「星際大奇航」。Martin自然散發的喜感為「新世紀福爾摩斯」增添一股輕鬆的氣氛。

第一集:粉紅色研究
一個全身穿戴打扮粉紅色的女士被發現陳屍廢棄屋中,看起來怎麼都不可能是自殺,她已經是連續第四個神秘死亡的案件,蘇格蘭警場只能求助於唯一能解開謎題的人-福爾摩斯。
第二集:銀行家之死
從金融中心到郊區馬戲團;城市到處出現神秘的密碼塗鴉,見到這些密碼塗鴉的人紛紛遇害,福爾摩斯和華生能及時解開密碼嗎?
第三集致命遊戲
福爾摩斯受邀偵查一件看似單純的案件,年輕的公務人員遭火車輾斃,豈料這是一場追逐戰的序幕,福爾摩斯必須解開五個謎題,否則就會引爆炸彈,傷及無辜,這一次福爾摩斯遇到了最強勁的對手。
"A Study in Pink" is the first episode of the television series Sherlock and first broadcast on BBC One and BBC HD on 25 July 2010. It introduces the main characters and resolves a murder mystery. It is loosely based upon the first Sherlock Holmes novel, A Study in Scarlet.[1]
The episode was written by Steven Moffat, who co-created the series. It was originally filmed as a 60-minute pilot for Sherlock, directed by Coky Giedroyc. However, the BBC decided not to transmit the pilot, but instead commissioned a series of three 90-minute episodes.[2] The story was refilmed, this time directed by Paul McGuigan. The British Board of Film Classification has rated the pilot as a 12 certificate for video and online exhibition, and it is included as an additional feature on the DVD released on 30 August 2010.[3]
Contents

Synopsis

John Watson, an ex-army doctor injured in the war in Afghanistan, meets Sherlock Holmes through a mutual friend. They become flatmates, sharing rooms at 221B Baker Street owned by landlady Mrs. Hudson.
There have been a strange series of deaths that Inspector Lestrade supposes to be serial suicides. Sherlock is consulted by Lestrade to look into the latest crime scene which is of a woman wearing an "alarming shade of pink". Before departing with Lestrade, Sherlock utters a derivation of one of his famous phrases, "The game is on." Sherlock deduces that the woman is an serial adulterer with an unhappy, decade long marriage. However, this victim, unlike others, left a note: she clawed the word "Rache" into the floor before dying. Sherlock quickly ignores the suggestion of the forensic expert, Anderson, that it's the German word for revenge and settles on "Rachel", deeming that the victim died before finishing the scrawl.
Examining the woman's clothing and accessories, Sherlock reveals that she's from out of town, intending to stay over for one night which he deduces from splashes of mud on only one leg, thrown up by the wheel of the case. However Lestrade explains that no suitcase was found in the premises. Sherlock flies off, searching for the spot where the murderer might have ditched the case. It turns out that the murderer threw it into a nearby garbage container.
Meanwhile, John receives a call from a public phone. After the subsequent conversation, a black sedan arrives, taking John to an empty warehouse. There, he meets a man claiming to be Sherlock's "arch-enemy" who proposes money in return of information about Sherlock's activities, which John refuses. The man warns John to "choose a side" and walks off.
John finds Sherlock in 221B, where he asks John to send a text message to a number which he reveals to be the fourth victim's. The two then go out for a dinner in a local Italian restaurant where it strikes Sherlock that the murderer must be someone who can stalk and approach people without raising suspicion on the streets of London. That instant, Sherlock perceives a cabbie across the street with a passenger. They give chase with Sherlock using his profound knowledge of London's streets and alleys to run into the cab via various detours and backstreets. Eventually they catch up with the cab but the passenger turns out to be a newly arrived American; a perfect alibi.
Back at Baker Street, Sherlock and John find Scotland Yard executing a drug bust, in retaliation for the fact that Sherlock withheld evidence by chasing after the suitcase himself. In a chain of deductions, he reasons that the last victim planted her mobile phone on the murderer and clawed her mail address password upon the floor, allowing the investigators to trace the GPS signal. John sees that the signal is coming from 221B at which point Mrs. Hudson tells him that there's a cabbie waiting for him downstairs. Sherlock, in a moment of epiphany, realizes the plot. It was the cabbie approaching people without suspicion and taking them to irrelevant locations where they're found dead.
Sherlock leaves his apartment, facing off the cabbie who confesses his doings, but also proclaims that he doesn't kill - instead, he speaks to his victims and they kill themselves. He challenges Sherlock to solve his puzzle instead of arresting him then and there. They drive around London and finally arrive at a school building. There, the cabbie pulls out a gun and two bottles he claims contain one harmless pill and one poisonous pill. Sherlock and the cabbie have a dialogue about motives and consequences after which Sherlock reads that the cabbie is dying. The murderer confesses that he has an aneurysm, and that his 'victims' can either take a 50/50 chance at picking the right pill and surviving or get shot by the gun. Refusing to play the pill game and calling off the cabbie's gun bluff (which in reality is a novelty cigarette lighter), Sherlock walks off, but he's challenged once again to choose a pill to see if he'd got it right.
Meanwhile, John has traced the GPS signal from the victim's phone and followed Sherlock. He perceives him to be in danger when he spots him across the building where he is about to take one of the pills. The cabbie is shot by a bullet from John piercing through a nearby window. He lies there fatally wounded as Sherlock questions him, first about whether he got the pill game right, then, realising it's not important, about his 'fan'. Upon the cabbie's reluctance to tell, Sherlock stomps on the cabbie's bullet wound and manages to get a name: "Moriarty".
Outside, Scotland Yard has surrounded the perimeter and Sherlock is treated for shock. Lestrade questions Sherlock about the shooter and he starts to make some deductions before realizing it must be John. Sherlock feigns shock to cover for John and tells Lestrade to ignore everything he has just said. Sherlock and John leave the scene but run into the man who abducted John earlier in the episode, who turns out to be Mycroft Holmes, Sherlock's elder brother, with whom he has a grudge. After a brief conversation, Sherlock and John return to Baker Street, and Mycroft instructs his secretary to increase their surveillance status.

Allusions

The episode is loosely based on A Study in Scarlet and contains allusions to other works by Arthur Conan Doyle. Tom Sutcliffe of The Independent points out, "Fans will recognise at once that the close-reading Sherlock applies to John's mobile phone is drawn from an almost identical analysis of a pocket watch. More slyly oblique is the conversion of the lost ring that Holmes uses to lure the killer in A Study in Scarlet into a lost 'ring', a mobile phone that can be used to contact the killer directly."[4]
John's reference in the final scene to having been shot in the shoulder (but developing a psychosomatic limp in the leg) refers to the fact that in the original A Study in Scarlet Watson's injury is said to be in his shoulder, but in Conan Doyle's later Holmes stories, it is said to be in his leg.
The final victim's phone is described as a "Mephone" with email and GPS capability, probably as a gentle nod to Apple's iPhone.
When Holmes sees that the fourth victim has scratched "Rache" into the floor before dying, he immediately considers both the fact that "Rache" is the German word for revenge, and that she was trying to write "Rachel" (two possibilities considered in the novel). In the novel, the word was"Rache", and "Rachel" was just a wild-goose chase for the police; in this episode, it is in fact reversed--one of the officers mentions the German explanation, and Holmes says "Don't be an idiot."

Production

The story was originally filmed as a 60-minute pilot for Sherlock, directed by Coky Giedroyc. However, when the BBC commissioned a three-part series, it ordered several changes and decided not to transmit the pilot. The Sun reported an unnamed source as saying, "The crew couldn't just re-use footage because the series is now totally different. The stories are now more intricate and detailed, so they basically had to start again."[2]
The episode was set in 2010 rather than the Victorian period and so used modern devices such as mobile phones, TX1 London cabs and nicotine patches rather than the traditional pipe and other period props.[5]

Cast

Broadcast

The first broadcast was on BBC1 at 21:00 on 25 July 2010. Viewing figures were up to 9.23 million viewers and averaged a 28.5% share of the UK audience with a high AI rating of 87.[6][7]

Reception

The episode received critical acclaim. The Guardian's Dan Martin said, "It's early days, but the first of three 90-minute movies, "A Study in Pink", is brilliantly promising. It has the finesse of Spooks but is indisputably Sherlock Holmes. The deduction sequences are ingenious, and the plot is classic Moffat intricacy. Purists will take umbrage, as purists always do."[8] However, Sam Wollaston, also for The Guardian, was concerned that some elements of the story were unexplained.[9] Tom Sutcliffe for The Independent also suggests that Holmes was "a bit slow" to connect the attributes of the killer to a London taxicab driver, but his review is otherwise positive. He wrote, "Sherlock is a triumph, witty and knowing, without ever undercutting the flair and dazzle of the original. It understands that Holmes isn't really about plot but about charisma ... Flagrantly unfaithful to the original in some respects, Sherlock is wonderfully loyal to it in every way that matters.[4]

References

  1. ^Tim Oglethorpe (23 July 2010), "Sherlock's got sexy! With nicotine papers instead of a pipe and taxis replacing hansom cabs, the new TV Holmes is a very 21st century hero", Daily Mail
  2. ^ abWightman, Catriona (27 May 2010). "BBC drops Sherlock Holmes pilot". Digital Spy. Retrieved 27 May 2010.
  3. ^"SHERLOCK - A STUDY IN PINK". BBFC. 23 July 2010. Retrieved 2010-07-26.
  4. ^ abSutcliffe, Tom (26 July 2010). "The Weekend's TV: Sherlock, Sun, BBC1 Amish: World's Squarest Teenagers, Sun, Channel 4". The Independent. Retrieved 2010-07-28.
  5. ^Sam Wollaston (26 July 2010), "Sherlock has a great new take on the characters - but what happened to the plot", The Guardian
  6. ^Mark Sweney (26 July 2010), "Sherlock Holmes more popular than Tom Cruise", The Guardian
  7. ^Paul Millar (28 July 2010), "'Sherlock' well-received by critics", Digital Spy
  8. ^Martin, Dan (23 July 2010). "Sherlock makes Sunday night TV sexy". The Guardian. Retrieved 2010-07-25.
  9. ^Wollaston, Sam (26 July 2010). "TV Review: Sherlock and Orchestra United". The Guardian. Retrieved 2010-07-26.

External links



台灣公視2011年8月/2012 年3月都播過
Sherlock is a British television series that presents a contemporary update of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes detective stories. It was created by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, and stars Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock Holmes and Martin Freeman as Doctor John Watson. After an unbroadcast pilot in 2009, the first series of three 90-minute episodes was transmitted on BBC One and BBC HD in July and August 2010, with a second series of three episodes first broadcast in January 2012. A third series has been commissioned and will reportedly air in 2013. The series has been sold to over 180 territories.
Hartswood Films produced the series for the BBC, and co-produced with WGBH Boston for its Masterpieceanthology series. Filming took place at various locations, including London, Merthyr Tydfil, Swansea, Dartmoor and Cardiff. Other cast members include Rupert Graves as DI Greg Lestrade, Andrew Scott as Jim Moriarty, Mark Gatiss as Mycroft Holmes, Una Stubbs as Mrs. Hudson, as well as Vinette Robinson and Louise Brealey playing recurring roles.
Critical reception was overwhelmingly positive and the first series won the 2011 BAFTA Television Award for Best Drama Series.[1] All six episodes have been released on DVD and Blu-ray Disc in the UK, alongside tie-in editions of some of Conan Doyle's original books. Soundtrack albums from each series have also been released.

The Blind Banker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



August 26, 2014 2:41 pm

‘Sherlock’ a big winner for BBC’s finances

The Emmy Awards 2014 - Los Angeles ...For use in UK, Ireland or Benelux countries only. BBC undated file handout photo of Martin Freeman (left) as John Watson and Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock Holmes in the BBC drama, Sherlock. The hit series scooped a hat-trick of awards at the star-spangled Emmys ceremony as its co-creator revealed plans for a special episode of the hit show. PRESS ASSOCIATION Photo. Issue date date: Tuesday August 26, 2014. Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman won gongs for actor and supporting actor in a mini-series or movie for their parts as Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson in the BBC show. The detective drama's writer, Steven Moffat, also known for his involvement in Doctor Who, picked up the award for writing in a mini-series, movie or dramatic special. See PA story. Photo credit should read: BBC/PA Wire NOTE TO EDITORS: Not for use more than 21 days after issue. You may use this picture without charge only for the purpose of publicising or reporting on current BBC programming, personnel or other BBC output or activity within 21 days of issue. Any use after that time MUST be cleared through BBC Picture Publicity. Please credit the image to the BBC and any named photographer or independent programme maker, as described in the caption.©BBC/PA
Benedict Cumberbatch, right, won the award for best actor in a miniseries, while Martin Freeman won the award for best supporting actor
In a curious twist, neither Holmes nor Watson was present to collect the record haul of seven Emmy awards won by the hit BBC series Sherlock in Los Angeles on Monday night.
However, solving the mystery of their no-show was not quite a “three pipe problem” the Deerstalker-wearing detective would normally have to solve. The critics had considered British stars of the show Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman to be outliers for the awards.

More

ON THIS TOPIC

IN UK BUSINESS

The surprise victory for them, and for a series produced on a fraction of the budget of big US TV dramas that dominate the event, highlights the financial boost that Sherlock has provided for the BBC. It said last month that the series is now its biggest selling export, licensed to 224 territories worldwide – more than any other programme.
Revealing that filming of the fourth series of Sherlock will begin in January, the head of BBC drama said he expects this series to outstrip the success of even the third, promising viewers around the world a “shocking” plot twist which was revealed to the lead actors in a secret meeting a month ago.
Winning gongs respectively for outstanding lead actor and supporting actor in a mini series or movie, Sherlock ’s co-creator Steven Moffat also picked up the best writer trophy at the 66th annual Emmy Awards. Four technical awards took the total haul to seven, one more than the night’s other big winner, the US crime drama series Breaking Bad.
The three Emmys were all in recognition of His Last Vow, the final episode from the third series, first aired on UK screens in January. A contemporary reworking of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Adventures of Charles Augustus Milverton, the society blackmailer of his 1904 tale is transformed into a treacherous newspaper magnate, Charles Augustus Magnussen, played by Lars Mikkelsen.
Steven Moffat accepts the award for Outstanding Writing for a Miniseries, Movie or a Dramatic Special for PBS "Sherlock: His Last Vow" onstage during the 66th Primetime Emmy Awards in Los Angeles, California August 25, 2014. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni (UNITED STATES - Tags: Entertainment)(EMMYS-SHOW)©Reuters
Steven Moffat accepts the award for Outstanding Writing for a Miniseries
Sherlock is our best-selling programme, and won more awards than any other programme last night at a fraction of the cost of the American shows,” said Ben Stephenson, controller of BBC drama.
He said a significant share of BBC Worldwide’s profits was driven by the export of just four programmes – SherlockDr WhoTop Gear and Dancing with the Stars (the US name for Strictly Come Dancing).
Financial results for the broadcaster’s commercial arm last month revealed that BBC Worldwide had generated profits of £174m to be returned to the BBC, an 11 per cent rise on the previous year, and equivalent to 10 per cent of the annual content funding budget for BBC TV programmes.
Conceding that Sherlock has made a “huge amount of money” for the broadcaster (the BBC will not break down specific revenues per show), Mr Stephenson was initially surprised at the rapturous reception the show received in America, where it is licensed to the channel PBS.
“In the US, the assumption is you have to make 12 or 24 episodes,” he said. “Sherlock has made nine episodes over the course of three years, yet it’s been such a big hit. Ultimately, it comes down to amazing creativity – whatever its shape or size, creativity does drive commerciality.”
Last month, it was revealed that BBC Worldwide is in talks to sell a near-50 per cent stake in its flagship BBC America channel to US television group AMC Networks – the home of Breaking Bad – as it seeks the financial power to compete with high-end drama rivals such as HBO and Netflix.
Nevertheless, Sherlock’s global success has broken many records. The BBC says the third series – where Mr Cumberbatch’s detective miraculously returns to sleuthing after seemingly plunging to his death from the roof of Bart’s Hospital at the end of series two – has received more than 70m hits on the Chinese digital platform Youku.
The DVD of the third series received the most pre-orders ever for a BBC series yet to be broadcast – at a time when the format is dying – and the final episode was the most tweeted about television programme when it was first aired on UK screens.
Fans around the world are waiting with breathless anticipation for series four, and screenwriter Mr Moffat revealed he had a “devastating” plan for the next instalment.
“We’ve practically reduced our cast to tears by telling them the plan,” he said in an interview after the awards ceremony on Monday night.
Mr Stephenson said: “This is not hyperbole.” He confirmed that the BBC will film a “special with a big twist” in January, followed by a three-part series filmed in 2015, with no fixed date for broadcast.
“Steven sat down with Martin [Freeman] and Benedict [Cumberbatch] a month ago and took them through what the plans are [for series four]. It’s impossible to guess what’s going to happen. They are being very bold and brave. There are twists and turns, as you would expect. But it is shocking.”
He said he was confident that sales of this series would eclipse the success that series three has enjoyed.
“The amazing thing about Sherlock is that every time we’ve done it, sales and ratings have gone up,” he added. “We sold to 224 countries last year, and I think that will continue to rise. Obviously there are only so many countries in the world, but maybe we’ll start selling it to the aliens next.”



路易十四時代 (Voltaire)

$
0
0









路易十四時代 Le Siècle de Louis XIV
,法國著名學者伏爾泰著,於1751年本書脫稿,而後又修訂持續達十年之久。[1],1745年—1747年,伏爾泰曾任王家史官,這給他翻閱各種資料提供了極大的方便。本書記錄了路易十四時代法國社會面貌,不僅是政治、軍事以外,財政、貿易、宗教、哲學、文藝、科學皆有涉及。現有商務印書館出版發行的漢譯世界學術名著叢書系列,譯者是吳模信、沈懷潔、梁守鏘。


  1. The Rise and Fall of Versailles (Part 1 of 3)

    Louis XIV, The Dream of a King - The symbol of France's glory, Versailles is probably the most splendid royal palace in Europe.
  2. Louis XIV: Sun King of France

    http://www.tomrichey.net/euro Mr. Richey introduces students to Louis XIV, the "Sun King" of France, and his creation of an ...
    • HD

figure




Object type
figure

Museum number

S.826

Description

Standing figure of Louis XIV, glass, flame-worked, in classical dress wearing a blue cloak and turquoise stockings, holding a sceptre standing on a large wooden pedestal..

School/style
Classical style

Date
1750-1800 (?)

Production place
Made in: Nevers
(Europe,France,Bourgogne (Burgundy),Nièvre,Nevers)

Materials
glass

Technique
gilded

Dimensions
Height: 14.5 centimetres

Bibliography
Ciappi 2006 no. 66, illus. p. 233
Tait 1991 pl.229

Subjects
king/queen

Associated names
Representation of: Louis XIV, King of France and Navarre

Acquisition name
Bequeathed by: Felix Slade

Acquisition date

1868

Department

Britain, Europe and Prehistory

Registration number

S.826

Large image
More views (4)

Image description

Image service:

Use imageRequest new photography
Recommend



再辯一次Limits to Growth ( 成長的極限 )

$
0
0


Limits to Growth was right. New research shows we're nearing collapse

Four decades after the book was published, Limit to Growth’s forecasts have been vindicated by new Australian research. Expect the early stages of global collapse to start appearing soon

Piles of crushed cars at a metal recycling site in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Piles of crushed cars at a metal recycling site in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Photograph: Alamy
The 1972 book Limits to Growth, which predicted our civilisation would probably collapse some time this century, has been criticised as doomsday fantasy since it was published. Back in 2002, self-styled environmental expert Bjorn Lomborg consigned it to the “dustbin of history”.
It doesn’t belong there. Research from the University of Melbourne has found the book’s forecasts are accurate, 40 years on. If we continue to track in line with the book’s scenario, expect the early stages of global collapse to start appearing soon.
Limits to Growth was commissioned by a think tank called the Club of Rome. Researchers working out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, including husband-and-wife team Donella and Dennis Meadows, built a computer model to track the world’s economy and environment. Called World3, this computer model was cutting edge. 
The task was very ambitious. The team tracked industrialisation, population, food, use of resources, and pollution. They modelled data up to 1970, then developed a range of scenarios out to 2100, depending on whether humanity took serious action on environmental and resource issues. If that didn’t happen, the model predicted “overshoot and collapse” – in the economy, environment and population – before 2070. This was called the “business-as-usual” scenario.
The book’s central point, much criticised since, is that “the earth is finite” and the quest for unlimited growth in population, material goods etc would eventually lead to a crash.
So were they right? We decided to check in with those scenarios after 40 years. Dr Graham Turner gathered data from the UN (its department of economic and social affairs, Unesco, the food and agriculture organisation, and the UN statistics yearbook). He also checked in with the US national oceanic and atmospheric administration, the BP statistical review, and elsewhere. That data was plotted alongside the Limits to Growth scenarios.
The results show that the world is tracking pretty closely to the Limits to Growth “business-as-usual” scenario. The data doesn’t match up with other scenarios.
These graphs show real-world data (first from the MIT work, then from our research), plotted in a solid line. The dotted line shows the Limits to Growth “business-as-usual” scenario out to 2100. Up to 2010, the data is strikingly similar to the book’s forecasts.

limits to growth
Solid line: MIT, with new research in bold. Dotted line: Limits to Growth ‘business-as-usual’ scenario.
limits to growth
Solid line: MIT, with new research in bold. Dotted line: Limits to Growth ‘business-as-usual’ scenario. Photograph: Supplied
limits to growth
Solid line: MIT, and research in bold. Dotted line: Limits to Growth ‘business-as-usual’ scenario. Photograph: Supplied

As the MIT researchers explained in 1972, under the scenario, growing population and demands for material wealth would lead to more industrial output and pollution. The graphs show this is indeed happening. Resources are being used up at a rapid rate, pollution is rising, industrial output and food per capita is rising. The population is rising quickly.
So far, Limits to Growth checks out with reality. So what happens next?
According to the book, to feed the continued growth in industrial output there must be ever-increasing use of resources. But resources become more expensive to obtain as they are used up. As more and more capital goes towards resource extraction, industrial output per capita starts to fall – in the book, from about 2015.
As pollution mounts and industrial input into agriculture falls, food production per capita falls. Health and education services are cut back, and that combines to bring about a rise in the death rate from about 2020. Global population begins to fall from about 2030, by about half a billion people per decade. Living conditions fall to levels similar to the early 1900s.
It’s essentially resource constraints that bring about global collapse in the book. However, Limits to Growth does factor in the fallout from increasing pollution, including climate change. The book warned carbon dioxide emissions would have a “climatological effect” via “warming the atmosphere”.
As the graphs show, the University of Melbourne research has not found proof of collapse as of 2010 (although growth has already stalled in some areas). But in Limits to Growth those effects only start to bite around 2015-2030.
The first stages of decline may already have started. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08 and ongoing economic malaise may be a harbinger of the fallout from resource constraints. The pursuit of material wealth contributed to unsustainable levels of debt, with suddenly higher prices for food and oil contributing to defaults - and the GFC.
The issue of peak oil is critical. Many independent researchers conclude that “easy” conventional oil production has already peaked. Even the conservative International Energy Agency has warned about peak oil.
Peak oil could be the catalyst for global collapse. Some see new fossil fuel sources like shale oil, tar sands and coal seam gas as saviours, but the issue is how fast these resources can be extracted, for how long, and at what cost. If they soak up too much capital to extract the fallout would be widespread.
Our research does not indicate that collapse of the world economy, environment and population is a certainty. Nor do we claim the future will unfold exactly as the MIT researchers predicted back in 1972. Wars could break out; so could genuine global environmental leadership. Either could dramatically affect the trajectory.
But our findings should sound an alarm bell. It seems unlikely that the quest for ever-increasing growth can continue unchecked to 2100 without causing serious negative effects – and those effects might come sooner than we think.
It may be too late to convince the world’s politicians and wealthy elites to chart a different course. So to the rest of us, maybe it’s time to think about how we protect ourselves as we head into an uncertain future.
As Limits to Growth concluded in 1972:
If the present growth trends in world population, industrialisation, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.
So far, there’s little to indicate they got that wrong.


數位公共圖書館/Internet Archive將把1400萬張古書圖片分享至Flickr公眾相簿

$
0
0

Internet Archive將把1400萬張古書圖片分享至Flickr公眾相簿計畫


Internet Archive以保存完整的網站歷史資料而聞名,保存高達4000億頁的網頁資料,最早可回溯至1996年。除此之外,該組織的19 petabytes數位資料中還包括了橫跨500年歷史的200萬本公共領域書籍,這些書籍中約含有1400萬張圖片,近日開始上傳到Flickr供外界存取,截至今日,上傳至Flickr的書籍圖片已超過260萬張。


文/陳曉莉 | 2014-09-01發表


圖片來源:


Internet Archive


以「讓全球都能存取知識」為宗旨的非營利組織「網路檔案館」(Internet Archive)宣布加入Flickr公眾相簿計畫,將在未來幾個月陸續將200萬本書籍中的1400萬張圖片上傳至Flickr,以供全球用戶存取。

1996年創立的Internet Archive主要保存各種檔案與資料,並負責將其數位化,包含網站、音樂、電影,以及屬於公共領域的書籍。

Internet Archive以保存完整的網站歷史資料而聞名,保存高達4000億頁的網頁資料,最早可回溯至1996年。除此之外,該組織的19 petabytes數位資料中還包括了500年以來的6000萬頁的數位化文本。Internet Archive表示,該組織已經數位化橫跨500年歷史的200萬本公共領域的書籍,這些書籍中約含有1400萬張圖片,而且已加上文字註解,允許使用者搜尋、檢視、點選或是閱讀這些圖片,並於近日開始將它們上傳到照片分享網站Flickr供外界存取,截至今日,上傳至Flickr的書籍圖片已超過260萬張。

這批古老書籍中的圖片饒富興味,例如若以「bird」為關鍵字進行搜尋,將看到古老時代的各種不同種類的鳥,當搜尋「telephone」時,看到的是電話的演進,或是搜尋「death」,以一窺早期對死亡的想像。

專門蒐集二十世紀內容且對醫學特別有興趣的Wellcome Library負責人Simon Chaplin表示,此舉將改革醫療遺產的收藏,並讓更多人能夠存取這些書籍。Internet Archive也認為,藉由與Flickr及其他圖書館的合作,此一老書圖片收藏將會更加有趣,未來會有更多的圖片,也會對於如何使用圖片辨識工具有更多的想法。(編譯/陳曉莉)

***** 2012
數位公共圖書館
這問題每個"國家"和社團 都該關心

請多利用
archive.org

Creating a digital public library without Google's money

  • Michael Hiltzik
  • Michael Hiltzik

Google's settlement with authors and publishers has been tossed out, shining a spotlight on copyright law. Maybe we shouldn't entrust that kind of project to a corporation anyway.


Say what you want about Google— whether you believe it invariably adheres to its motto "Don't be evil" or you suspect that its true goal is world domination — the firm's behavior certainly has a way of shining the spotlight on the most important technological issues in our lives.
These include secrecy, privacy and now, in connection with a huge legal fight in which a New York federal judge last week dealt Google a huge defeat, copyright law.
Judge Denny Chin threw a wrench into six years of litigation by tossing out a 165-page settlement reached in 2008 between Google and authors and publishers groups.
At issue was Google's plan to create a global digitized library to "unlock the wisdom" imprisoned in the world's out-of-print books, as its co-founder Sergey Brin described the project in 2009.
Like other authors and researchers, I'm conflicted about the project. On the plus side, the vision of a widely accessible digital library is a worthy one that is, for the first time in human history, technologically achievable.
On the other hand, Google was plotting to acquire effective control over millions of works whose copyrights belong to others.
The Google books case began as a narrow legal dispute but broadened out, like an umbrella unfurled in the rain, into an effort to provide a shelter for a huge, monopolistic profit-oriented corporate enterprise.
The original lawsuit dealt with Google Book Search. The company announced in 2004 that it had made searchable digital copies, or scans, of millions of books contributed by Stanford, Harvard, the University of Michigan and other institutional libraries.
Type a search term into your Web browser, and Google would display "snippets" of its scanned books displaying your term. Since many of those books were still under copyright, the Authors Guild and the Assn. of American Publishers sued Google for copyright infringement.
Google's defense was that the snippets fell under the "fair use" exemption in copyright law, a very murky provision allowing limited use of works, without permission, for comment and criticism, news reporting, scholarship and research.
Had the settlement been limited to that issue, it might have gained Chin's approval and performed a public service besides by clarifying the fair use exemption for digital indexing — for example, the judge might have set a standard for how big a snippet and how many words can be displayedwithout permission.
But the document went much further. The settlement created a safe harbor for the vast digital bookstore Google hoped to create out of a digital hoard that so far comprises about 12 million volumes, or nearly 10% of the world's published library.
The settlement would have allowed Google to continue scanning and offer access to the results for a fee.
The company was to pay $45 million into a settlement fund for authors whose copyrighted books it had already scanned without permission. But infringement wasn't an issue for many books. Google or anyone else can copy and display the text of those out of copyright, such as the works of Charles Dickens.
Books under copyright and still in print — and therefore whose rights holders are not a mystery — are subject to deals Google makes with their publishers or authors, typically allowing the display of limited chunks, such as several pages, at a time.
The sticking point was "orphan books"— those copyrighted but out of print, and whose rights holders can't be found or identified. Google executives have portrayed their effort as one that would give these forgotten or overlooked tomes a new lease on life.
The settlement required the company to fund an independent registry which would, among other things, oversee interests in yet-unclaimed works and hold payments from Google for their exploitation.
Any author, including the parents of orphaned works when and if they surfaced, could opt out of Google's digital scanning on request. But that reverses the burden of existing copyright law, which forbids use unless the owners give affirmative permission for uses of their work.
Critics observed that the deal would have given the company a huge advantage in the digital marketplace by validating its strategy of scanning books first and worrying about copyrights later.
Google digitized material the ownership of which was unclear "in calculated disregard of authors' rights," observed copyright lawyer Robert Kunstadt in testimony cited by Chin. "Its business plan was, 'So, sue me.'" Rivals who went through the tough process of tracking down owners before scanning their books thus were left in the dust.
Judge Chin concluded that rewriting copyright law is a task that belongs in the halls of Congress, not a courtroom, hinting that he couldn't have approved the settlement even if he wanted to.
But his decision places the spotlight on several questions about the digital present and future.
One is: How to advance the goal of a digital public library without Google's deep pockets?
The rejection of the Google settlement has raised the profile of a leading alternative being promoted by Robert Darnton, a Harvard history professor and director of the university library, and a long-term critic of the Google settlement.
Darnton's idea is for charitable foundations to fund a digital analogue to the Library of Congress, freely available to all citizens and accessible to anyone within reach of the Internet. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation has agreed to play a leading role.
"Now that the settlement seems to have unraveled, this looks like a serious alternative," Darnton told me.
Darnton's proposal would eliminate the problems of entrusting a major archival project to an entity whose main purpose is commercial, not scholarly. The settlement would have required Google to provide the participating university libraries with a free digital copy of its scanned out-of-print books. But it also would have allowed Google to restrict its use by faculty members to reading, printing, or downloading no more than five pages for free — and only once per person each academic term. For greater access, the institution would have had to buy a subscription.
Even a public digital library might need legal help dealing with orphan books. Chin's advice of referring the issue to Congress ignores the question of whether Congress is up to the job. As recently as 2008 a bill to fill the orphan-books gap sank without a trace in the House.
Chin's ruling may well provoke Google to pressure Congress to solve the problem so it can proceed with its own project.
But there it will face counter-lobbying by publishers, film studios and record labels. "Those content industries don't like any proposal seen as weakening copyright," says Peter Jaszi, an expert in copyright law at American University.
The Google books case now looks like a salvage operation for the dream of a digital library.
"There were many things in the settlement that were innovative and useful, and I'd be sorry to see lost," remarks Lewis Hyde, the author of "Common as Air," a recent book about copyright in the digital era.
Judge Chin's decision forces us — or allows us — to ponder the dream of a digital library without ceding our future to Google.
Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.

羅文森的7本回憶錄: 《戀戀九號宿舍》《當機會被我遇見》《令人懷念的東海歲月與良師益友》《神州行》(暫)......

$
0
0
新書*發表會:漢玉雅集場
歡迎校友"報名" (hcsimonl@gmail.com)參加
時間:9月13日,周末,早上10點~12點
地點: 台北新生南路3段88號2樓,Tel:23650127/23625776
*羅文森著《令人懷念的東海歲月與良師益友》(台北:至潔出版社,2014)。
他寫1962-66東海的一些故事。書中記三位歐洲耶穌會神父來台的教育功績,感人。



羅文森學長取得博士學位之後,投身企業界。退休之後,寫了7本的回憶錄。第2本《當機會被我遇見》(台北:健行,2009),榮獲中山學術文化基金會文藝創作獎。我有幸事先拜讀他的數本"後傳" (即將出版)。關於東海的回憶 ,讀了之後,讓我感覺又活了一次;此書年底前出版:羅文森著《令人懷念的東海歲月與良師益友》台北:至潔出版社,2014。他寫的是1962-66在東海的一些故事,書中記三位歐洲耶穌會神父來台的教育功績,可以感受是很了不起的貢獻。

還有些很奇特的巧合,羅學長服務過的美國公司,竟然是建築的勝地之一:A Corporate Paean to Frank Lloyd Wright /S.C.Johnson(庄臣)公司守護建築大師賴特傑作/A Corporate Paean to Frank Lloyd Wright /S.C.Johns


 2014.6.11
 以前游常山先生說,羅文森博士的演講絕無冷場。
約10年前我們見面時,也許是初識,他沒有表現的機會。
今天第2次見面,方桌會議有10人,也有美人在席。羅學長秉持 《當機會被我遇見》精神,表演他的語言才華,來台語歌和夜市場叫賣詞等,都很到位,更不用說用京戲台詞來贊美美人之姿。
他重視基礎語言,可以用他說的一則故事來說明。他大三時,是全班二十多人中唯一沒選"量子化學":因為他選了大三英文 ......後來的博士論文再處理量子化學的課題.......
我這次有機會讀些《當機會被我遇見》,可以了解為什麼它會榮膺中山文藝獎。不只是勵志,描述他與夫人的共同生活中的"互相拆台"等,也很老實.....

午餐聚會,基督徒梁先生多次問羅博士天主教的儀式和要求等.....。羅家是虔誠的天主教徒。羅博士說他們臺灣天主教面臨的一大危機是,由於當神父不能結婚等的規定,臺灣人當神父的,比較少,許多來自韓國,而他們對當地的人和文的了解比較有限。




"Some day it may be we shall see a new order of Jesuits, vowed not to the service of the Pope, but to the service of mankind."----Outline of History : H. G. Wells
(我們讀羅文森《令人懷念的東海歲月與良師益友》台北:至潔出版社,2014。寫1962-66的故事)中,三位歐洲耶穌會神父來台之教育功績,可以感受他們很了不起。)






《戀戀九號宿舍》


作者:羅文森
社別:九歌
出版日期:2007-09-26
作 者的父親為了工作賺錢,帶著一家大小從北京來到台灣,在高雄的九號宿舍住下來。九號宿舍聚集在高雄港務局工作的人們,這個宿舍自成一體,如同眷村一般。作 者以幽默平實的筆調書寫,當時發生在九號宿舍中的大小事情,從小朋友當時玩的遊戲尪仔標、打彈珠,學台語的種種趣事,到種香蕉、養雞,甚至是鄰居備受公婆 欺負的陳家小媳婦……,反映族群融合過程中的辛酸與荒謬。




自序:在外來與本土之間/羅文森


我們搬進九號宿舍的時候,我剛上小學一年級,民國五十一年到台中上東海大學,我離開了九號宿舍。這十二個年頭是我一生中最難忘的日子,我很早就想把這段成長的過程寫下來,由於唸書與工作佔去了我全部的時間,一直無法如願。如今我...(詳全文)


推薦序:珍惜自己的成長經驗 —因「九號宿舍」而想起 黑幼龍◎文


看完了老朋友羅文森的《戀戀九號宿舍》,真的是百感交集,也讓我想到了很多事。 九號宿舍是文森的一段成長經驗,是他的心路歷程。我們每個人也都有。但九號宿舍的特色是: 它是那麼的實在—我也是在眷區長大的。書裏的人物、場...(詳全文)


























《當機會被我遇見》


作者:羅文森
社別:健行
出版日期:2009-






請分享拚搏的經驗和心得

1. 離開臺北,展翅高飛  007

2. 我在歐柏林大學開了竅  017

3. 冷酷的老師居然會笑   025

4. 英文演講為我帶來友誼與希望  039

5. 天空飄下了第一片雪花,像她的微笑  043

6. 課業成績獲得肯定  049

7. 不眠不休的研究歲月  059

蓄志

8. 帶著嬌妻奔向模糊未來  069

9. 新婚生活只剩十美金  077

10. 兩個人一起努力,脫離窮困生活  087

11. 取得碩士學位,邁向博士之路  105

12. 到紐約繼續深造  115

13. 天大的好消息  127

起飛

14. 攀向高峰的起點  139

15. 開始我的職業生涯  151

16. 終享天倫樂,卻如此短暫  161

17. 進入國際部門,拓展視野,延伸觸角  171

18. 前進中國,完成心中的願望  183

19. 沒有人願意去荒涼的紐西蘭,我去!  191

20. 晉升亞洲地區的技術總監  199

21. 從研發部門竄起,成為台灣莊臣公司總經理  211

榮耀

22. 走馬上任 穩定軍心  219

23. 創造台灣銷售的奇蹟  235



自序:請分享拚搏的經驗和心得/羅文森


當 年我離開校園準備一展抱負時,卻值石油危機,全球經濟蕭條,我寄出了一百封求職信,連一個回音都沒有。最近發生的國際金融海嘯與當時環境相似,年輕人,甚 至管理人開始面臨失業的問題,將我們從「享受生活」拉回到「現實生活」之中。每個時代都有它艱難的背景,境遇如何發展,就決定在面對時看見的是「命運」還 是「機會」,選擇的是「畏怯」還是「拚搏」!

民 國五十七年,我口袋裏帶著借來的壹百美元,提著簡單的行囊,奔向了完全陌生的新大陸,在異地求學,娶妻,生子,就業。使我更能了解,當初父母在臺灣成家立 業的艱難與困苦。我也曾在學校的大餐廳裏掃地、端盤子,在廚房後面洗大鍋,為的是賺幾塊錢給孩子買牛奶。所不同的是,我的父母在萬分無奈的情況之下,離開 大陸,而我是滿懷希望的奔向新大陸。我的父母為了求生存來到異地,而我是為了追求更好的前途而遠渡重洋。在美國的十幾年裏,我與內人互相依靠,互相扶持, 共同奮鬥,完成了學業,建立了家庭,也打下了事業的基礎。民國六十九年底,我們回到寶島臺灣,以所學貢獻家鄉父老,也可以說是倦鳥知返吧!民國七十一年, 我晉升為美商臺灣莊臣公司的總經理,著手重建一個跨國企業。

我 不敢說我在職場上無往不利,我只能說,當機會被我遇見時,我不那麼輕易的就放手。也有很多機會是自己創造的,當年莊臣公司找人到紐西蘭去,沒有人願意去, 我自告奮勇的攜家帶眷搬去南半球工作。紐西蘭給了我一個拓廣研究領域的機會,為我打下了很好的基礎,也造就了很多其他的機會。

民 國九十二年,我退休了,在多個國際公司擔任顧問,以我的經驗為他們解決疑難、提升盈收。現在我把在海外的求學,成家,立業與漂泊的過程,一點一滴的寫下 來,衷心的希望,有跟我類似經驗的人,看了以後,可以會心的一笑。也把我在職場上一路拚搏的過程寫下來,希望正在走這條路的人,可以由我的經驗裏學到一點 東西,少走一點冤枉路,在機會來臨時,知道如何毫不猶疑地抓住它。我很慶幸這一段路沒有白走,還有一些值得回憶的東西,就請您與我一起分享吧!

羅文森 民國九十八年三月










羅文森


東 海大學化學系畢業後,赴美取得歐柏林大學碩士、紐約州立大學物理化學博士。後進入跨國企業莊臣公司研發部門,晉升為亞洲地區技術總監、台灣莊臣公司總經 理,創造驚人的營業額。曾任派德大藥廠臺灣分公司總經理,美商華納蘭茂集團公司台灣公司總裁,美國華生製藥公司亞洲地區總裁等。成立羅氏顧問公司,以其專 業及成功實戰經驗為企業作管理諮詢,並為機關團體作深入演講,成果斐然。著有《戀戀九號宿舍》。羅博士還有「人生行旅」的文學回憶書稿﹐厚厚五本書稿的質量﹐期待各界有慧眼的出版家來探詢出版意願。





2014.4.23 讀5天前來羅學長mailed 的電子檔;羅文森《懷念大學歲月 與我的良師益友》2012

不知道該說什麼,喜的是它補足了東海的一些迷底----我接觸的教徒,都是新教的,而羅先生的這本回憶錄的主導力,則是天主教-耶穌會的善牧堂的三位神父;羅先生也提到許多師友,不過大半不像神父們的刻畫之深入、感人.......

能夠將大學生活寫成書的,可不多見,而作者記的,卻是很獨特的。





2014.5.28

锺同学:谢谢你的来信,也很感谢您给我的批评与建议。其实我已经写好了五本书:
大学四年
神州行 (写我在大陆建立美国Watson Pharmaceuticals的十年经验)
我们身边的蓝海(分成大陆篇,台湾篇,国际篇,企业成功的例证)
令人怀念的公司(庄臣公司的管理与待人的方法)
生活化学(日常生活的基本化学知识,以过去几年台湾与大陆发生的化学问题如毒品油,毒奶粉,毒淀粉,等等为基础)










我們的父親來東海大學.......(60年代與70年代)

(我們每人都有類似的故事。 "我們對於作者父親帶她上東海入學,到了文學院,研究佈告欄上的東西,來了解中文學系等的描寫,都印象深刻。"讀《長歌行過美麗島:寫給年輕的你 》(唐香燕) :我聽見了,我看見了。我寫下來了。)/


(《戀戀九號宿舍》的折頁廣告是九歌同年出版的《飄著細雪的下午》(作者:趙民德,台北:九歌,2007)也是作者跟父親的故事......飄著細雪的下午: quod erat faciendum)

朋友,今天羅文森 (1942~ ;1964級東海化學)學長來訪。他在九歌出版2本:《戀戀九號宿舍》2007、《當機會被我遇見》 (2009,中山文藝獎,獎金25萬)。

羅學長很了不起,我稍微聽過他服務於企業的30年工作史和故事,有些也很感人的,這些以後再談;我說的了不起,指他退休之後,為自己訂一生活目標清單,譬如說,每年學多少齣京戲;高爾夫球要達80桿;.....這由他說才精彩。

當然他最大目標之一是將生活的經驗和專業知識寫出來。他的手頭上還有5-6本書稿已完成,包括將自己的書翻譯成英文,給自己的子女看......

我有幸讀他的《大學四年》,真是 先睹為快。我提出許多增補與修改之建議。今天我跟他說,對身為東海學弟的我而言,非常感謝他的《大學四年》,因為書中的主角,三位耶穌會神父的故事,根本 就是我們的大學生活經驗之外----。

我在1971-75,經常散步到中港路旁的小小天主教堂,因為都是weekdays,完全沒見過書中的許多故事。所以 說,《大學四年》在這方面,讓我再活一次---我跟羅學長說,我的一位同學陳浩斌,也跟耶穌會和新竹的語文教學中心密切相關.....2009年我出書,有篇記中港路故事,再去東海附近巡禮一番,只有兩處變化較小:第7宿舍以及天主教堂---它最讓我感動。.....不過羅學長說,近年稍有擴建。

我要談他父親與我父親。很巧,他們分別在我們大一時,到東海找兒子的故事。


我父親來自一個天主教家庭,......後來他覺得自己的個性不太適合於當神父,就去念河北工學院了。

羅學長今天送我一本《戀戀九號宿舍》(25坪,一家9口。最感動人的是,羅學長會準備濕毛巾,迎接坐交通車回家的父親......),我只看後面的近10 頁,讓我最衝擊的是,他父親在57歲時就過世,不過他這一輩子的行事,經常會想到他父親會怎麼想,他經常知道父親在天之靈一定同意他的做事或決策,經常容 光煥發。

《戀戀九號宿舍》有羅學長沒考上成大,父親的不平與安慰他東海是好學校,學費雖然比公立大學貴3-4倍,籌錢是身為父母的事.....

Dr. Collins上第一堂課的時候,就告訴我們,我們需要買一本化學詞典,我們所學的化學方面的詞彙都在那本詞典裡,我們會一生受用無窮。當天晚上寫家信回家的時候,我就告訴我爸爸,老師要我們買這本化學辭典,大度山上又沒有書店,我只有等有機會到台中去買了。

“爸爸,我只是隨便說一說,您怎麼就把書給我買來了哪?”爸爸接著說:

“由你信上的口氣,聽起來這本書很重要。我也可以想像開始念英文原文,沒有一個詞典,很多意思是看不明白的。我念電機工程的時候,也經過這個階段。其實我昨天 在高雄找了好幾個書局,才找到這本化學辭典。今天早上坐第一班北上的火車到台中來,由於昨天辦公室裏事情很多,開了一整天的會,一上車我就睡着了,睜開眼 一看,台中已經過了,我就在新竹下了車,又買了一張到台中的票,等南下的列車。上了車,我又睡着了,睜開眼一看,已經到了斗南。我乾脆下火車,出了火車 站,找到公路局車站,買了一張直達台中的車票,到了台中,坐上到東海的公路局汽車,所以才這麼晚到。”



我家住台中,所以故事沒有上述的戲劇性(有點O. Henry的小說味道)。父親在1971年冬天,為我買件冬衣,帶來大肚山的第7宿舍給我。我當時有點不好意思,還怪他多此一舉......。







補記:

我對父親跑來東海,睡在兒子的宿舍之現象,很有興趣。因為這種父子之間的交情,一定不錯。2013年11月,我有一則記錄:

1971年秋、冬,我見過室友鍾寶衡的父母、徐海偉的父親等來訪。我爸爸也送來寒衣。四十來年之後,一位大二轉學清華的系友說,那年他爸爸喜歡從宜蘭到山上玩,就住在第七棟樓下某室……。


這次讀羅文森學長的《戀戀九號宿舍》,更妙:


「我念了四年大學,爸爸最少來了二十趟。到了學校,他睡床,我睡地上。他跟我的室友們,天南地北地暢談,猶如知己。當初我並不覺得什麼,後來我跟我孩子的朋友們,頂多只是寒暄而已.......」(頁208)。

同頁其實有上文作者爸爸第一次 造訪東海的說法,採取直敘方式,不像上文的對話戲劇法。關於那本辭典,作者說「結果我是我們班上唯一擁有這本化學詞典的人。」







補記:

我對父親跑來東海,睡在兒子的宿舍之現象,很有興趣。因為這種父子之間的交情,一定不錯。2013年11月,我有一則記錄:


1971年秋、冬,我見過室友鍾寶衡的父母、徐海偉的父親等來訪。我爸爸也送來寒衣。四十來年之後,一位大二轉學清華的系友說,那年他爸爸喜歡從宜蘭到山上玩,就住在第七棟樓下某室……。


這次讀羅文森學長的《戀戀九號宿舍》,更妙:

「我念了四年大學,爸爸最少來了二十趟。到了學校,他睡床,我睡地上。他跟我的室友們,天南地北地暢談,猶如知己。當初我並不覺得什麼,後來我跟我孩子的朋友們,頂多只是寒暄而已.......」(頁208)。

同頁,有上文作者爸爸第一次 造訪東海的說法。採取直敘方式,不像上文的對話戲劇法。關於那本辭典,作者說「結果我是我們班上唯一擁有這本化學詞典的人。」


今天讀校友總會安排訪院士的消息,化學系的最多,可能有3個校友。此系是東海最有才華的。鄧學長那兒有該系50周年的專集,下次當借閱。

蔡珠兒《種地書》 (2012)

$
0
0






  • 台灣的一老大單位的月刊:《新活水》2014.9 (55)

    為台灣文學朗讀:在雲吞城市裏的紅燜廚娘: 蔡珠兒,pp.12-15  / 劉小玲

  • http://www.gacc.org.tw/magazine/month-75.html


在我的Gmail, "蔡珠兒 "只出現在2006年、2013年。
2013年楊索出版《惡之幸福》,由於我跟她不會太見外,沒有明說此書甚好,只說, 蔡珠兒寫的推薦序的文字功夫,真不是蓋的。然後,偶爾朋友會轉些 蔡珠兒FB的文章過來。
記得楊索轉/記 蔡珠兒的先生汪浩的博士論文的擴增版,我還沒讀過該書,就對蔣介石之所以在中國的評價升等,因為在莫名其妙的歷史際會下,讓蔣沒跟"兩個中國"站在一起......總之,這種歷史看法,說明我也很關心中華民國與美國的關係史。

前天,參加汪浩博士的新書發表座談會,第一次見到這對夫婦及其互動。還買了:
 蔡珠兒 《種地書》(台北:有鹿,2012 版權頁說經1年兩個月,印了4刷)
這本書的《逃兵自白書》是篇西方的"懺悔錄"類,最可以了解蔡珠兒過去近25年的心路。

_


2006  (這本小說我精讀英文本)
《法國中尉的女人》內容簡介 
當代後設小說大師最膾炙人口的不朽代表作!
所有文學書迷渴求已久經典中的經典!
2005年諾貝爾文學獎得主品特親自改編成電影劇本!
榮獲麥米倫銀筆獎、W. H. 史密斯文學獎!
英國讀者票選為20世紀最受歡迎的15大小說!
知名譯者彭倩文重新翻譯,全新版本更具閱讀價值!
郝譽翔 導讀
朱天心‧南方朔‧陳文茜‧楊照‧蔡珠兒‧蔡詩萍‧駱以軍‧鍾文音‧韓良露等20位名家一致強力推薦!

----
 地中海風味料理    編者◎伊麗莎白.大衛  譯者◎黃芳田 
  謝忠道  美食作家好味推薦
-----
朴葉
【蔡珠兒】

----
一頓喝三碗 

蔡珠兒  (20060909) 

*****2013


本周跑了幾回永和。屋外的風與景總是很七月---據說,最好的解暑品不是喝冰水,是讀周公的詩:
「自鱈魚底淚眼裡走出來的七月啊
  
淡淡的,藍藍的,高高的。」(周夢蝶《還魂草七月》)---轉引FB

現在,頂尖商學院教授都在想什麼?:你不知道的管理學現況與真相

$
0
0

現在,頂尖商學院教授都在想什麼?:你不知道的管理學現況與真相

世界の経営学者はいま何を考えているのか―知られざるビジネスの知のフロンティア

會知道世界管理學者現在在想什麼 - 未知的經營知識前沿

內容簡介

◎跟著MBA名校教授,走在管理學的最前線◎

  美國頂尖商學院沒人研究彼得‧杜拉克?!
  麥可‧波特的理論已經過時了?!
  哈佛、史丹佛、華頓商學院、MIT史隆管理學院……
  來自美國管理學界最前線的第一手觀察報告,
  世界管理學的真實現況與研究,
  不僅顛覆你的常識,更超乎你想像的引人入勝!


  作者是活躍於美國商學院最前線的日本學者,他先是為日本的「杜拉克熱潮」驚訝不已,進而發現日本人對管理學不僅有所誤解,甚至對於目前最新、最重要的管理學知識幾乎一無所知!這種現象相當值得台灣警惕與借鏡。以下這些管理學現況與最新知識,你都知道嗎?

  美國管理學者幾乎不讀杜拉克

  只靠波特的競爭策略,絕對打不贏激烈的競爭生存戰
  ——因為波特所謂的競爭,其實是「不競爭」

  企業成功的關鍵,不再是維持長期競爭優勢,而是創造出一個個「暫時性的優勢」

  創新,需要左右開弓的經營之道
  ——小心!愈成功的企業,愈容易陷入創新停滯

  投資的不確定性愈高,商機愈大!
  ——懂得運用「實質選擇權」,一方面大幅降低風險,一方面抓住任何一個可能獲利的機會

  了解並善用三種社群網絡,就能縱橫情場、職場、商場,從此無往不利

  1. 社會資本
  2. 關係性的社群網絡
  3. 結構型的社群網絡

  例:「找工作靠的是點頭之交,而不是知心好友」——關係性的社群網絡

  「管理學」不是一門高高在上的學問,而是每個現代人必備的知識。小至個人、家庭與公司,大至社會、國家與全球,處處可見「管理」,時時需要「管理」。因此,本書除了破除社會大眾對於管理學的誤解與迷思,也以淺顯易懂的文字,告訴你頂尖商學院的管理學者現在正在研究、關注,乃至爭論的主題,並逐一闡明競爭策略、創新、組織學習、社群網絡、企業購併、全球管理、國際創業、實質選擇權、新創公司……等學界與業界都相當重視的議題。

  管理學不斷持續進化中,藉由本書,你將能檢視自己的「管理學知識」有沒有同步更新,順便檢驗一直深信不疑的管理學常識,是不早就是已經過時了呢?

名人推薦

  國立政治大學講座教授 司徒達賢
  國立交通大學經營管理研究所教授 楊千
  BCG 台北辦公室合夥人兼董事總經理 徐瑞廷

  ◎專文推薦◎

  ★日本亞馬遜4.5顆星好評,超過100名讀者推薦
  ★《哈佛商業評論》日文版讀者票選「2013年最佳商管書」第3名
  ★日本Diamond週刊「2013年最佳經濟類書籍」第3名
 

作者介紹

作者簡介

入山章榮(Akie Iriyama)


  紐約州立大學水牛城分校商學院副教授。1996年慶應義塾大學經濟系畢業,1998年取得同校經濟學碩士學位之後,進入三菱總合研究所,負責汽車業與國內外政府機關的調查及顧問工作。2003年前往美國匹茲堡大學商學院進修,2008年取得博士學位,並進入紐約州立大學水牛城分校商學院任教,專長為策略管理與國際企業管理,目前擔任日本早稻田大學商學院副教授。

譯者簡介

楚見晴


  文字工人,樂在筆耕。北海道大學國際傳播媒體研究所碩士,輔仁大學日文系學士。
 

目錄

推薦序
管理學的定位——值得深刻反思的議題     司徒達賢
當管理理論遇上企業實戰                 徐瑞庭
揭開商管教授的神祕面紗                 楊千

前言:寫給正在閱讀本書的你

Part 1 這才是當今世界的管理學
第1章 管理學的三大誤解
第2章 管理學和喝酒閒聊有何不同?
第3章 管理學沒有教科書?!

Part 2 世界管理學知識的最前線
第4章 只靠麥可‧波特的策略理論已經落伍了
競爭策略最前線,「攻守兼備」才是王道
第5章 如何提高組織的記憶力
組織學習的關鍵在於交換記憶
第6章 不上當的智慧
避免落入管理效果「立竿見影」的陷阱
第7章    創新需要「左右開弓的管理」
在創新管理的最前線,管理學者致力於解決什麼問題?
第8章    管理學的三種社群(一)
世界管理學的一大潮流——網絡理論
第9章    管理學的三種社群(二)
世界管理學的一大潮流——網絡理論
第10章    日本人真的是集體主義嗎?這對做生意有幫助嗎?
全球化經營的民族性指數與意義
第11章 國際創業潮歷久不衰的原因
全球最夯的國際創業新趨勢
第12章 不確定的時代,如何擬定事業計畫?
策略管理最先進的理論之一:實質選擇權
第13章 收購金額為何總是偏高?
超越財務理論、重視「人性」思考的購併研究
第14章 大企業投資新創公司,所求為何?
企業風險投資研究給日本的啟發
第15章 資源基礎理論是管理理論嗎?
從傑伊‧巴尼引發的論戰,思考「管理理論的條件」

Part 3 管理學有未來嗎? 
第16章 管理學真的有用嗎?
第17章 不論如何,管理學依然持續進化中

後記:寫給讀完本書的你
參考文獻
中英名詞對照

Henry Kissinger 談的外交有多大:《論中國》(On China)《World Order》

$
0
0
亨利﹒基辛格寫道,作為當今時代基礎的秩序概念處於危機之中。
http://cn.wsj.com/big5/20140901/opn161836.
亨利﹒基辛格

比亞正處在內戰之中,原教旨主義軍隊正在建立一個跨敘利亞和伊拉克的自封的伊斯蘭教王國,而阿富汗年輕的民主政權正瀕臨癱瘓。除這些麻煩外,美國還面臨與俄羅斯關系重現緊張的問題,同時還要處理與中國的關系,而中國既承諾與美國合作,又在公開指責美國。作為當今時代基礎的秩序概念處於危機之中。

長期以來,對國際秩序的探索幾乎完全是由西方社會的概念來定義的。二戰後的幾十年來,經濟實力和民族自信心都增強的美國開始承擔起國際領導者的責任,並為國際秩序增添了一個新的維度。作為一個在自由和代議民主制的明確理念上建立起來的國家,美國將自身的崛起與自由民主的傳播等同起來,並認定這些因素能夠帶來公正和永久和平。歐洲實現秩序的傳統做法是認定民眾和國家有與生俱來的競爭性,為遏制彼此之間相互沖突的目標所帶來的影響,歐洲依靠力量均衡以及開明政治家協同努力。美國盛行的觀點認為,民眾具有內在理性,而且總是傾向於作出和平妥協,並尊重常識。因此,傳播民主就成為國際秩序的首要目標。自由市場會提升個體地位、使社會富足並用相互的經濟依存來取代傳統的國際競爭。

為建立國際秩序所做的這一努力已經在很多方面開花結果。世界多數地方都建立了大量的獨立主權國家。民主以及參與式治理的光芒雖然還沒有照耀到世界各個角落,但也已成為一個共同願望。

從1948年到世紀之交在人類的歷史長河中只是一個小小片段,人們在這一時期初步建立了以美國理想主義、傳統的歐洲國家理念和權力平衡為主的全球秩序。但世界上還有很多地區從未認同西方的秩序概念,只是勉強默認而已。這些持保留意見者如今不再選擇沉默,烏克蘭危機以及南中國海(South China Sea, 中國稱南海)問題便是証明。由西方建立並稱頌的秩序目前正處於一個十字路口。


首先,國家這個概念(即參與國際生活的基本正式單位)本身已經面臨著多種壓力。歐洲已經開始超越國家界限、並主要以軟實力規則為依據制訂對外政策。然而值得懷疑的是,對從戰略概念衍生出來的合法性的認可能否維持國際秩序?歐洲尚未對自身賦予國家屬性,所以導致歐洲內部出現權力真空,而在其邊界也出現了權力失衡。與此同時,中東部分地區也在相互鬥爭中陷入了宗派林立的局面,其背後的宗教武裝和勢力肆意突破邊界,侵犯主權,產生了一些自己的領土無法做主的失敗國家。


亞洲面臨的挑戰與歐洲恰恰相反:亞洲的力量均勢並非建立一致認可的合法性理念之上,這會將一些分歧推到對抗的邊緣。

國際經濟與表面上管理它的政治機構之間的沖突還會削弱維護國際秩序所必需的共同使命感。經濟體系已經變得全球化,而世界的政治結構仍以國家為基礎。經濟全球化本質上忽視國界。外交政策雖然力爭使各國就其在國際秩序上相互沖突的訴求或理想達成和解,但肯定了國界的存在。

這一發展催生了數十年的持續經濟增長,期間爆發強度似乎不斷升級的周期性金融危機:上世紀80年代在拉美,1997年在亞洲,1998年在俄羅斯,2001年和2007年在美國,2010年後在歐洲。贏家對這一體系沒有什麼反對意見。但輸家(比如歐盟南部成員國等陷入結構性設計失誤的國家)尋求通過一些否定或至少阻礙全球經濟體系運轉的方案來解決自己的問題。

國際秩序因此面臨一種自相矛盾的局面:它的繁榮取決於全球化的成功,但全球化過程引發的政治反應常常有悖於其初衷。

當前國際秩序再一次崩潰將意味著,大國間就最重要的問題進行協商並展開合作的有效機制並不復存在。眼下全球舉行多邊論壇的次數超過了歷史上任何一個時期,在這樣一種背景下,上述批評聽起來似乎有點不合時宜。然而,這類會議的性質和召開頻率妨礙了長期策略的細化。在這類會議中,最好的情況是,與會者圍繞懸而未決的技術問題開展討論,最壞情況是,會議變成一種類似“社交媒體”活動的新峰會形式。當代的國際規則和規范架構若要保証其影響力,那就不能僅僅通過聯合聲明來確認,而必須作為一種共同信守的東西來培育。

內部結構和治理方式的各異形成了不同的勢力范圍,國際秩序崩潰帶來的懲罰與其說是引發國家間的大戰(盡管在某些地區仍存在這一可能),不如說是這些勢力范圍的演化。在邊界區域,面對其他一些被認為不具備正當性的實體,每個勢力范圍掌控者都有可能忍不住去測試自己的實力。相比國家間的鬥爭,地區間的對抗可能更容易讓國家衰弱。

當前對國際秩序的追求需要我們有一個具有連貫性的策略,在不同地區內部建立一套秩序概念,並把這些區域性秩序關聯起來。這些目標不一定是自我調和的:一場激進運動的勝利可能會給一個地區帶來秩序,同時也可能為未來的動盪埋下伏筆。一國憑借武力在某個地區建立統治地位,即便從表面上看帶來了秩序,也可能讓全球其他地區爆發一場危機。

建立這樣一個世界秩序既可以作為我們的希望,也應當是我們的靈感來源:每個國家都能肯定個人的尊嚴和參與式治理,並根據已達成的規則展開國際合作。然而實現這一目標需要經歷一系列中間階段。

若要在21世紀的世界秩序演變中扮演一個負責任的角色,美國必須準備好回答如下一系列問題:我們尋求(若有必要則獨自)避免什麼事情的發生(無論它怎樣發生)?我們尋求實現什麼(即使得不到任何多邊支持)?在得到一方盟友支持的前提下,我們將尋求實現或避免什麼?我們不應當參與什麼(即使被一個多邊組織或一個盟友呼吁參與)?我們尋求發展的價值觀的本質是什麼?以及這些價值觀的實踐在多大程度上取決於具體形勢?

對美國而言,回答這些問題將需要在兩個看似矛盾的層面上進行思考。在頌揚普世價值的同時,也需要重視其他地區的歷史、文化以及安全理念的現實情況。盡管數十年的艱難歷史給我們帶來了教訓,但美國必須始終銘記自己的獨特本質。歷史不會眷顧那些為尋找捷徑而放棄了自我身份的國家。但如果沒有全面的地緣政治策略,歷史也不會確保最崇高的信念必將成功。

(基辛格博士曾在尼克森(Richard Nixon)和福特(Gerald Ford)政府期間擔任國家安全顧問。本文改編自他即將於9月9日發布的新書《World Order》,由企鵝出版社(Penguin Press)出版。)
2014年 09月 01日 16:09

基辛格談國際新秩序的建立



林博文專欄-季辛吉90歲 還在搞外交

2013-05-01 01:23
中國時報
【本報訊】
     季辛吉(美聯社)
     季辛吉(美聯社)

          二十世紀七○年代前半段的國際外交,被兩個美國人所操控,這兩個人就是尼克森和季辛吉。尼克森於今年一月九日度過百歲冥誕(一九九四年辭世,享壽八十 一),他的兩個女兒和一些老部屬曾在華府五月花飯店舉行紀念會,老季亦與會。季辛吉則將於五月二十七日歡度九十大壽,近代美國有三個長壽的外交與國防專 才,他們是活了一○一歲的圍堵政策創發人喬治.肯楠、享年九十四歲的前駐蘇聯大使哈里曼、終年九十三歲的越戰時代國防部長麥納瑪拉。中共老外交家黃華亦活 了九十七歲。外交戰場壓力大,不亞於真槍實彈的沙場,辦外交而又能克享高壽,則是兼具家族長壽基因和堅強抗壓本質的明證。

         季辛吉是個愛熱鬧、熱中名利的老政客,早在四月中旬即開始慶祝他的九十歲生日。耶魯大學邀他談論外交問題並祝賀他的巨著《外交》出版二十 周年;老季的崇拜者羅伯特.卡普蘭則在五月號的《大西洋》雜誌(以前是月刊,現已改成雙月刊)上撰文對老季歌功頌德一番。卡普蘭是有點名氣的右翼外交兼戰 略記者,前年曾被《外交政策》雜誌選為全球一百名戰略思想家之一。卡氏在《大西洋》的題目是:〈政治家:為季辛吉辯護〉,右翼記者為右翼老外交家隱惡揚 善,當然無足為奇。

         當年和季辛吉一道在國際外交舞台上呼風喚雨的人,幾乎都已不在人世,唯獨剩下老季一個人獨享尊榮。事實上,老季健康不佳,從兩眼到雙腳都有毛病,亦動過心臟搭橋手術。今年年初曾在康乃狄克州寓所跌跤,送到紐約哥大附設醫院掛急診,所幸無大礙,很快就出院。出院後又很快地應一家跨國大企業之請坐專機飛往北京「關說」,北京領導人照例接機。

         這已是老季自一九七一年夏天裝肚子痛,祕密從巴基斯坦首次飛赴北京以來,將近六十次的「朝貢」之行。老季離開政壇後即在曼哈頓開設「季辛 吉顧問公司」,專門為跨國企業安排商機和排難解紛,要老季打幾通電話,收數萬美元;請他出國一趟,除了提供專機,要另付十幾萬美元酬金,中國是他的最大主 顧。

         老季是個有名的貪婪之徒,對權力和名利的爭奪從不後人,亦從不手軟。因此,不少評論家痛批他的外交思想和政策,只有強權的權力分配而無人 權或法治的道德底線;而他下台後利用其聲望所從事的國際關說活動,更展露其長袖善舞和貪得無厭的特質。老季說過一句至今仍常被引用的名言:「權力是種終極春藥」;他對《國家地理》雜誌的記者說,世人不要只記得他這句話,而忘了他做過和說過很多別的事。

         沒有疑問的,季辛吉是美國近代外交史上的一棵長青樹,也是唯一一個能夠活學活用其豐碩的學養、絕頂聰明的頭腦、一流的外交技巧和個人魅力 的務實外交家。他在四月十二日對一群耶魯學生演講時表示,從事外交工作,沒有所謂現實主義或理想主義之分,他強調辦外交不能存有這種抽象觀念。發明圍堵政 策的肯楠,前半生只做過駐蘇聯和南斯拉夫大使,以及國務院政策規畫局局長,晚年則在普林斯頓潛心著述。他的圍堵觀念,左右美國二戰後外交政策達數十年之久,那天在耶魯訪談老季的就是當今美國學界數一數二的耶魯冷戰史專家、《肯楠傳》(去年獲普立茲傳記獎)作者約翰.陸易士.蓋迪斯。

         前年撰寫蘋果電腦創辦人賈伯斯傳的前《時代》周刊總編輯華特.艾薩克生,二十一年前曾寫了一本不錯的《季辛吉傳》,對「名滿天下,謗亦隨 之」的老季褒貶有加,老季很不高興,後來授權牛津出身的右翼史家奈爾.佛格森為他立傳。季辛吉的外交政策最具永恆成就的首推打開北京的竹幕,但這也是尼克 森的創意,老季只是漂亮地執行談判。到後來尼克森為水門事件所困時,竟也開始嫉妒老季的成就。

         季辛吉對越戰和智利政變的處理,過大於功,因促成越戰暫時停火而獲諾貝爾和平獎,乃荒天下之大唐。利用中情局以暴力推翻智利左翼總統阿葉德,而使智利陷入長期右翼獨裁恐怖統治,更是老季和老尼的大汙點。

         季辛吉十五歲時隨同父母離開德國、移民美國,從哈佛博士到哈佛教授,從白宮國安助理再到國務卿,而成為全球最知名的元老外交家。季辛吉真正是一個把自己的長處發揮到極點的人間稀品!



    Henry Kissinger
    此君的顧問公司一直是中共偏愛對象


    基辛格論中國

    John Dominis/Time & Life Pictures — Getty Images
    1971-1972年的尼克松-基辛格中國之行其實很順利:基辛格、尼克松、國家安全委員會的約翰·H·霍爾德里奇與周恩來總理,1972年。

    亨利·基辛格(Henry Kissinger)不但是前往共產中國的第一位官方美國特使,而且40年來,先後50餘次往返其間,覆蓋雙邊各達7任元首。外交上,他享有特權;而在88歲高齡之際,他在《論中國》(On China)一書中,回顧反思自己精彩的歷程。
    以華盛頓與北京現在相互理解的程度看,可謂不錯了,因為基辛格一直在儘力為雙方調停,察言觀色,從隱晦的笑話到發脾氣,無所不包。在每一個危急關 頭,他都力求提出一些“戰略觀念”,以此度過充滿衝突、雙方不滿與恐懼的歷史階段。無論是作為尼克松總統的國家安全顧問,還是尼克松與傑拉德·福特的國務 卿,抑或自1977年起,作為私人特別居間人,基辛格一直毫不動搖,致力於消除中國因美國干涉其內政而產生的那種在他看來尚屬正當的憤慨,以及美國因中國 對民族、宗教與政治異見者殘酷鎮壓而生的反感。
    在他對中美關係磕磕絆絆的回顧中,令人意外的是,受到大事宣揚的1971-1972年的尼克松-基辛格中國之行,其實挺順利的。“考慮到時代的需 要,中國與美國找到途徑走到一起勢所必然。”他寫道,“這遲早會發生的,不管雙方兩國的領導人是誰。”兩國都已疲於戰爭(越戰、中蘇邊境衝突)與國內的矛 盾衝突(尼克松治下的反戰抗議,毛澤東治下的文化大革命)。兩國都決意對抗蘇聯的挑釁,因此得以很快成為同道。面對莫斯科的威脅,兩國領導人放下在越南與 台灣上的衝突,停止各自例行的譴責——不管是譴責國際帝國主義還是共產主義。雙方認定敵人的敵人就是朋友, 而十多年裡,這一條頗有成效。

    可時代不同了。中國終於脫離了毛澤東將革命進行到底的瘋狂教條,擺脫了中央計劃經濟這一無用的靈丹妙藥;中國成為了一個工業強國。蘇聯及其帝國倒塌 了。而美國,雖覺得自己高高在上,但也開始帶着傳教士一般的熱情推銷民主,儘管美國對外國石油、商品與信貸的依賴已經到了危險的地步。權力平衡發生根本變 替,使中國與美國成為兩個相互依賴的經濟巨頭,但卻並未使兩國建立包羅萬象的戰略夥伴關係規劃。

    正是為了展示有這種規劃的需要,基辛格檢視了中美關係的風風雨雨,甚至走進中國古代歷史以明確這個民族的性格(他發現這個例子很合適:中國人喜歡下 圍棋,一種耗時的包圍遊戲,而我們下國際象棋,尋求對中心的掌控與完勝)。基辛格參考了大量新近的學術研究成果以及自己北京之行的筆記,以此讚美毛澤東的 幾位繼任者的務實。他說,他們樂於待在已經恢復的歷史邊界內,願意等待時機與台灣和平統一,最為堅定地繼續他們的高經濟增長並消除中國依然普遍的貧困現 象。他對美國是否有能力繼續保持穩定的外交政策則不太有信心,指出“民主過渡這一漫無休止的心理表演”其實是在不斷邀請其他國家在我們身上“兩面下注”。

    正如基辛格的研究者所熟知的,他長期以來認為,民主對國家治理而言是一個負擔 ——無論是美國國內民主的喧鬧,還是我們對其他國家民主化的鼓動,莫不如此。
    他再次想起20世紀70年代在任時的痛苦,當時他認為,越戰期間美國的抗議活動可能會誤導毛澤東相信,一場“真正的世界革命”就在眼前。他認為,尼 克松在水門事件中的“毀滅”、國會不再支持越戰、對總統戰時權力的新約束與情報機密的“大量外流”,所有這一切累加起來有損於與中國的准聯盟,使美國在對 付蘇聯問題上顯得軟弱無力。他高興的是,吉米·卡特並未讓人權問題影響與中國的關係,而羅納德·里根開朗的性格克服了他在與北京打交道時“幾乎難以理喻的 矛盾”,即便是在他提倡台灣獨立這一設想的時候。

    當然,對這種 准聯盟最為嚴厲的考驗是1989年天安門事件中對民運的殘酷鎮壓。那場暴力鎮壓也考驗了基辛格對於在外交關係中主張美國價值觀的容忍度。

    回想起來,他認為一切取決於局勢:“有些對人權的侵犯行為實在令人震驚,”他寫道,“根本無法想像繼續保持關係會有何益處;譬如,柬埔寨的紅色高 棉,盧旺達的種族滅絕。因為公開施壓要麼演變為改朝換代,要麼就是退位,這種做法很難用於那些與之繼續保持關係對美國安全頗為重要的國家。在與中國的關係 上,尤其如此,對於西方社會對中國令人屈辱的干預,這個國家有着太多記憶 。”

    因此,基辛格很是讚賞喬治·H·W·布殊總統的做法,他“熟練而又優雅”地行走在“鋼絲”上,一方面在天安門事件後通過制裁懲罰中國,同時又通過私 人信函向特使表達歉意。基辛格注意到,比爾·克林頓總統一度想施壓,但他明智地變得溫和時,卻並不受人感激;中國人“並不將撤銷單邊威脅視為讓步,而且他 們對任何有關干涉他們內政的口風,都極為敏感。”而喬治·W·布殊,儘管也有他的“自由議程”,卻獲得了基辛格的讚揚,因其通過“合理平衡戰略重點”,克 服了“美國傳教與務實兩種路徑之間的歷史矛盾” 。

    如果美國將其對民主管治的偏好作為在其它中國問題上取得進展的主要條件,基辛格的結論是,“勢必陷入僵局”。那些為傳播美國價值觀念而戰鬥的人值得 尊敬。“但外交政策必須明確目標與手段的界限,而如果所採用的手段逾越了國際框架或對國家安全至關重要的關係的容忍度,就必須做出選擇。”這一選擇,他堅 持認為,“不容迴避”,儘管他自己也試圖打迴避的擦邊球 :“美國辯論最好的結局是將兩種路徑結合起來:讓理想主義者認識到,執行原則需要時間,因此有時需要根據時勢做出調整;讓‘現實主義者’接受,價值觀念有 其自身的現實且必須融入到可行的政策中去。”

    不過,在最後,基辛格還是為國家安全至上投了贊成票。這本著作中不時有對美國價值觀的稱讚,以及對人類尊嚴的承諾與義務,這可能有時真的會使我們的 政策超越對國家利益的考量。事實上,在《論中國》出版後,這樣的事真的發生了,奧巴馬總統冒險插手利比亞。基辛格或許感到驚訝的是,這一人道主義干預以及 在利比亞改朝換代的企圖,並未促使中國在聯合國行使否決權。然而,如今是在亞洲而不是歐洲,他認為,“主權至高無上,”而一切“來自外部”的改變中國國內 結構的企圖“勢必引發巨大的始料不及的後果” 。此外,正如他在華盛頓實施現實主義政治時所堅持的,和平事業也是一個道德追求。

    基辛格的經驗與忠告這一中心主題必須從他在《論中國》中有時不着邊際、大多熟悉的故事講述中提煉出來。只是在書末他才討論了未來中美關係這一基本問題:沒有了共同的敵手來約束他們,世界上的兩個大國靠什麼來保持和平,促進雙方的合作與信任?

    基辛格回答這一問題的方式是回顧歷史,那是英國外交部一位高級官員艾爾·克勞(Eyre Crowe)1907年寫的一份備忘錄。克勞認為,“(德國)盡己所能建立一支強大的海軍”,是符合德國的利益的,而這本身就會導致與英帝國的“客觀”衝 突,不管德國的外交官說或做了什麼。如今在美國,基辛格注意到,有一個“克勞思想流派”(Crowe school of thought),該派視中國的崛起“與美國在太平洋的地位不相容”,因此最好採取先發制人的敵對政策。他感受到兩國社會的焦慮在增大,他也擔心那些聲稱 中國的民主是信任關係前提的美國人會加劇這種焦慮。他警告說,隱含的下一次冷戰會阻止兩國的進步,並使兩國“分解為本身自會成為事實的預言中”,而在現實 中,雙方主要的競爭更有可能是經濟而非軍事上的。

    沉湎於自己對外交體系建構的習慣性偏好,基辛格堅持認為,兩個大國的共同利益應該有可能“共同進化”到“一個更為全面的框架”。他展望,英明的領導 人建立一個“太平洋共同體”(Pacific community),類似於美國與歐洲建立的大西洋共同體。所有亞洲國家就可加入這一體系,這一體系當被視為聯合的事業而非中美兩大敵對集團的競爭。而 太平洋兩岸的領導人有責任去“建立磋商與相互尊重的傳統”,從而使共同的世界秩序“體現各國的抱負”。

    這確是基辛格首次北京之行的使命所在。他雖然沒有這麼說,卻是將這個希望寄托在了那些與他分享相似觀點的國家身上。
    Max Frankel是《紐約時報》前執行主編,報道了尼克松―基辛格1972年的中國之行。
    本文最初發表於2011年5月15日。
    翻譯:王曉元
    Henry Kissinger was not only the first official American emissary to Communist China, he persisted in his brokerage with more than 50 trips over four decades, spanning the careers of seven leaders on each side. Diplomatically speaking, he owns the franchise; and with “On China,” as he approaches 88, he reflects on his remarkable run.
    To the degree that Washington and Beijing now understand each other, it is in good measure because Kissinger has been assiduously translating for both sides, discerning meaning in everything from elliptical jokes to temper tantrums. At every juncture, he has been striving to find “strategic concepts” that could be made to prevail over a history of conflict, mutual grievance and fear. As President Nixon’s national security adviser, then secretary of state for Nixon and Gerald Ford, and since 1977 as a private interlocutor extraordinaire, Kissinger has been unwaveringly committed to surmounting what he considers the legitimate Chinese resentment of American interference in their internal affairs and Americans’ distaste for China’s brutal suppression of ethnic, religious and political dissent.
    The surprise buried in his lumbering review of Sino-American relations is that the much ballyhooed Nixon-Kissinger journeys to China in 1971-72 turned out to have been the easy part. “That China and the United States would find a way to come together was inevitable given the necessities of the time,” he writes. “It would have happened sooner or later whatever the leadership in either country.” Both nations were exhausted from war (Vietnam, clashes on the Soviet border) and domestic strife (antiwar protests in Nixon’s case, the Cultural Revolution in Mao’s). Both were determined to resist Soviet advances and so could quickly agree to make common cause. The menace of Moscow took the leaders’ minds off confrontations in Vietnam and Taiwan and quelled their ritual denunciations, whether of international imperialism or Communism. They decided that the adversary of my adversary was my pal, and for more than a decade that was fruitfully that.
    But that was a different time. China finally escaped from Mao Zedong’s mad doctrine of perpetual revolution and from the enfeebling nostrums of central planning; it became an industrial powerhouse. The Soviet Union and its empire collapsed. And the United States, feeling supreme, began promoting democracy with missionary zeal even as it grew dangerously addicted to foreign oil, goods and credit. The radical shift in the balance of power turned China and the United States into mutually dependent economic giants, but it left them without an overarching strategic design of partnership.
    It is to demonstrate the need for such a design that Kissinger reviews the ups and downs of Sino-American relations, reaching even into ancient Chinese history to define national characteristics. (He finds it apt that the Chinese like to play “wei qi,” or “go,” a protracted game of encirclement while we play chess, looking for control of the center and total victory.) Kissinger draws heavily on much recent scholarship and on notes of his trips to Beijing to celebrate the pragmatism of Mao’s successors. He says they are content to remain within their restored historic frontiers, willing to await a peaceful reunion with Taiwan, and most determined to continue their remarkable economic growth and to eradicate China’s still widespread poverty. He is less confident about America’s capacity to sustain a steady foreign policy, noting that “the perpetual psychodrama of democratic transitions” is a constant invitation to other nations to “hedge their bets” on us.
    As students of Kissinger well know, he has long considered democracy to be a burden on statecraft — both the clamor of democracy within the United States and our agitations for democracy in other lands.
    He recalls yet again his agonies in office in the 1970s, when he thought that American demonstrations during the Vietnam War could have misled Mao into believing that a “genuine world revolution” was at hand. He argues that the “destruction” of Nixon in the Watergate crisis, the withdrawal of Congressional support for Vietnam, new curbs on presidential war powers and the “hemorrhaging” of intelligence secrets all combined to undermine the quasi alliance with China, making America appear ineffectual against the Soviets. He is glad that Jimmy Carter did not let his human rights concerns upset relations with China and that Ronald Reagan’s cheerful personality overcame the “almost incomprehensible contradictions” of his dealings with Beijing even as he promoted the idea of an independent Taiwan.
    The severest test of the quasi alliance, of course, was the brutal suppression of democratic strivings in Tiananmen Square in 1989. That violent crackdown also tested Kissinger’s tolerance for the assertion of American values in foreign relations.
    Looking back, he believes everything depends on circumstances: “There are instances of violations of human rights so egregious,” he writes, “that it is impossible to conceive of benefit in a continuing relationship; for example, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and the genocide in Rwanda. Since public pressure shades either into regime change or a kind of abdication, it is difficult to apply to countries with which a continuous relationship is important for American security. This is especially the case with China, so imbued with the memory of humiliating intervention by Western societies.”
    And so Kissinger admires the way President George H. W. Bush, “with skill and elegance,” walked the “tightrope” of punishing China with sanctions after Tiananmen while simultaneously apologizing with private letters and special emissaries. President Bill Clinton tried applying pressure for a time, Kissinger notes, but was shown no gratitude when he wisely relented; the Chinese “did not view the removal of a unilateral threat as a concession, and they were extraordinarily touchy regarding any hint of intervention in their domestic affairs.” And President George W. Bush, despite his “freedom agenda,” earns Kissinger’s praise for overcoming “the historic ambivalence between America’s missionary and pragmatic approaches,” by means of “a sensible balance of strategic priorities.”
    If America’s preference for democratic governance is made the main condition for progress on other issues with China, Kissinger concludes, “deadlock is inevitable.” Those who battle to spread American values deserve respect. “But foreign policy must define means as well as objectives, and if the means employed grow beyond the tolerance of the international framework or of a relationship considered essential for national security, a choice must be made.” That choice “cannot be fudged,” he insists, even as he attempts to protect his flanks with a fudge of his own: “The best outcome in the American debate would be to combine the two approaches: for the idealists to recognize that principles need to be implemented over time and hence must be occasionally adjusted to circumstance; and for the ‘realists’ to accept that values have their own reality and must be built into operational policies.”
    Still, in the end, Kissinger votes for national security über alles. Scattered through his history are tributes to American values and commitments to human dignity, which may indeed sometimes drive our policies beyond calculations of the national interest. Exactly that happened, in fact, after “On China” went to press, when President Obama ventured into Libya. Kissinger was perhaps surprised when that humanitarian intervention and bid for regime change failed to evoke a Chinese veto at the United Nations. But in Asia now more than Europe, he argues, “sovereignty is considered paramount,” and any attempt “from the outside” to alter China’s domestic structure “is likely to involve vast unintended consequences.” Besides, as he used to insist while practicing realpolitik in Washington, the cause of peace is also a moral pursuit.
    This central theme of Kissinger’s experience and counsel must be distilled from the sometimes ­meandering and largely familiar history he tells in “On China.” Only in its last pages does he discuss the essential question of future Sino-American relations: With no common enemy to bind them, what will keep the peace and promote collaboration and trust between the world’s major ­powers?
    Kissinger addresses this question by looking to the past, a memorandum written by a senior official of the British Foreign Office, Eyre Crowe, in 1907. Crowe argued that it was in Germany’s interest to “build as powerful a navy as she can afford” and that this would itself lead to “objective” conflict with the British Empire, no matter what German diplomats said or did. There is today a “Crowe school of thought” in the United States, Kissinger observes, which sees China’s rise “as incompatible with America’s position in the Pacific” and therefore best met with pre-emptively hostile policies. He perceives growing anxieties in both societies and fears they are exacerbated by Americans who claim that democracy in China is a prerequisite for a trusting relationship. He warns that the implied next cold war would arrest progress in both nations and cause them to “analyze themselves into self-fulfilling prophecies” when in reality their main competition is more likely to be economic than military.
    Indulging his habitual preference for diplomatic architecture, Kissinger insists that the common interests the two powers share should make possible a “co-evolution” to “a more comprehensive ­framework.” He envisions wise leaders creating a “Pacific community” comparable to the Atlantic community that America has achieved with Europe. All Asian nations would then participate in a system perceived as a joint endeavor rather than a contest of rival Chinese and American blocs. And leaders on both Pacific coasts would be obliged to “establish a tradition of consultation and mutual respect,” making a shared world order “an expression of parallel national aspirations.”
    That was indeed the mission of the very first Kissinger journey to Beijing. And while he does not quite say so, he invests his hopes in a concert of nations represented, of course, by multiple Kissingers.
    Max Frankel, a former executive editor of The Times, covered the Nixon-Kissinger journey to China in 1972.
    ----
    2004/10
    周日回台北了,傍晚去「舊香居 龍泉店」書店
    Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger/Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison/The Gardens of William Morris
    之所以要買大外交Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger),因為中文本沒索引,無法查核翻譯或刪編(據云)。

    讀BBC:「據俄通社報道,俄羅斯石油巨子LUKoil本月開始將向中國輸出原油,以彌補俄國尤科斯石油公司未能夠履行向中國輸出石油的合約。」


    兩三則感想。一是:曾考慮過oil giants是否要像陸翻譯成「石油巨子」。二:陸重新出版石油風雲」(The Prize--- 這本書,台北的時報多年前出版過),昨天BBC:「《華郵》:中國伊朗新結盟」……在在顯示石油的國際戰略衝突、價值。(陸的許多外交,都讓我想起大外交DIPLOMACY by Henry Kissinger )的結論數頁 談美國之國家visions 和 interests……) 三,最重要的,我們的文化界與俄國的關係。


    昨天讀高莽先生的《枯立木》(北京:東方出版社,2003),許多文章相當感人【高莽先生為俄文翻譯家和(漫)畫家】。我讀了這本處處是「死亡與文藝不朽」的散文集,也感受到昔日讀舊俄小說等特有的東西、氛圍。




    大外交Diplomacy


     大外交 這是季辛吉最受爭議、可能也是一生最重要的一部著作,他以自己的闡述方式,縱觀外交歷史以及他曾協商過的國際領袖,揭露外交藝術之道,告訴讀 者,均勢是如何造就我們的世界。季辛吉直言不諱,認定美國人由於國大勢強,國土獨霸一方,在理想主義和誤解世局的情況下,執行特異的外交政策,要世界按照 美國人的意思運轉。季辛吉宏觀三百年來的外交史實,從利希留主教締造的第一個國際體系開始,一直談到我們目前所處的新世局,詳細闡述了現代外交局面是如何 從戰爭與和平的力量均衡中,經過嘗試與經驗而造就,他也解釋了美國何以幾經大禍,卻作者簡介季辛吉出生於德國,1938年移居美國,1943歸化為美國 籍,隨後進入美國陸軍服役,46年退役。1950年以最優等成績畢業於哈佛大學,54至69年間,一直擔任該校教授,52至69年間,同時出任哈佛國際事 務研究會的董事。1973年9月22日就任美國第56任國務卿,1977年卸任;1973年獲得諾貝爾和平獎,1977年獲得象徵美國國民最高榮譽的總統 自由勳章,1986年獲得自由勳章。




    Henry Kissinger on China


    John Dominis/Time & Life Pictures — Getty Images
    The easy part: Kissinger, Nixon, Secretary of State William P. Rogers and Prime Minister Zhou Enlai in 1972.

    Henry Kissinger was not only the first official American emissary to Communist China, he persisted in his brokerage with more than 50 trips over four decades, spanning the careers of seven leaders on each side. Diplomatically speaking, he owns the franchise; and with “On China,” as he approaches 88, he reflects on his remarkable run.

    ON CHINA

    By Henry Kissinger
    Illustrated. 586 pp. The Penguin Press. $36.
    To the degree that Washington and Beijing now understand each other, it is in good measure because Kissinger has been assiduously translating for both sides, discerning meaning in everything from elliptical jokes to temper tantrums. At every juncture, he has been striving to find “strategic concepts” that could be made to prevail over a history of conflict, mutual grievance and fear. As President Nixon’s national security adviser, then secretary of state for Nixon and Gerald Ford, and since 1977 as a private interlocutor extraordinaire, Kissinger has been unwaveringly committed to surmounting what he considers the legitimate Chinese resentment of American interference in their internal affairs and Americans’ distaste for China’s brutal suppression of ethnic, religious and political dissent.
    The surprise buried in his lumbering review of Sino-American relations is that the much ballyhooed Nixon-Kissinger journeys to China in 1971-72 turned out to have been the easy part. “That China and the United States would find a way to come together was inevitable given the necessities of the time,” he writes. “It would have happened sooner or later whatever the leadership in either country.” Both nations were exhausted from war (Vietnam, clashes on the Soviet border) and domestic strife (antiwar protests in Nixon’s case, the Cultural Revolution in Mao’s). Both were determined to resist Soviet advances and so could quickly agree to make common cause. The menace of Moscow took the leaders’ minds off confrontations in Vietnam and Taiwan and quelled their ritual denunciations, whether of international imperialism or Communism. They decided that the adversary of my adversary was my pal, and for more than a decade that was fruitfully that.
    But that was a different time. China finally escaped from Mao Zedong’s mad doctrine of perpetual revolution and from the enfeebling nostrums of central planning; it became an industrial powerhouse. The Soviet Union and its empire collapsed. And the United States, feeling supreme, began promoting democracy with missionary zeal even as it grew dangerously addicted to foreign oil, goods and credit. The radical shift in the balance of power turned China and the United States into mutually dependent economic giants, but it left them without an overarching strategic design of partnership.
    It is to demonstrate the need for such a design that Kissinger reviews the ups and downs of Sino-American relations, reaching even into ancient Chinese history to define national characteristics. (He finds it apt that the Chinese like to play “wei qi,” or “go,” a protracted game of encirclement while we play chess, looking for control of the center and total victory.) Kissinger draws heavily on much recent scholarship and on notes of his trips to Beijing to celebrate the pragmatism of Mao’s successors. He says they are content to remain within their restored historic frontiers, willing to await a peaceful reunion with Taiwan, and most determined to continue their remarkable economic growth and to eradicate China’s still widespread poverty. He is less confident about America’s capacity to sustain a steady foreign policy, noting that “the perpetual psychodrama of democratic transitions” is a constant invitation to other nations to “hedge their bets” on us.
    As students of Kissinger well know, he has long considered democracy to be a burden on statecraft — both the clamor of democracy within the United States and our agitations for democracy in other lands.
    He recalls yet again his agonies in office in the 1970s, when he thought that American demonstrations during the Vietnam War could have misled Mao into believing that a “genuine world revolution” was at hand. He argues that the “destruction” of Nixon in the Watergate crisis, the withdrawal of Congressional support for Vietnam, new curbs on presidential war powers and the “hemorrhaging” of intelligence secrets all combined to undermine the quasi alliance with China, making America appear ineffectual against the Soviets. He is glad that Jimmy Carter did not let his human rights concerns upset relations with China and that Ronald Reagan’s cheerful personality overcame the “almost incomprehensible contradictions” of his dealings with Beijing even as he promoted the idea of an independent Taiwan.
    The severest test of the quasi alliance, of course, was the brutal suppression of democratic strivings in Tiananmen Square in 1989. That violent crackdown also tested Kissinger’s tolerance for the assertion of American values in foreign relations.
    Looking back, he believes everything depends on circumstances: “There are instances of violations of human rights so egregious,” he writes, “that it is impossible to conceive of benefit in a continuing relationship; for example, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and the genocide in Rwanda. Since public pressure shades either into regime change or a kind of abdication, it is difficult to apply to countries with which a continuous relationship is important for American security. This is especially the case with China, so imbued with the memory of humiliating intervention by Western societies.”
    And so Kissinger admires the way President George H. W. Bush, “with skill and elegance,” walked the “tightrope” of punishing China with sanctions after Tiananmen while simultaneously apologizing with private letters and special emissaries. President Bill Clinton tried applying pressure for a time, Kissinger notes, but was shown no gratitude when he wisely relented; the Chinese “did not view the removal of a unilateral threat as a concession, and they were extraordinarily touchy regarding any hint of intervention in their domestic affairs.” And President George W. Bush, despite his “freedom agenda,” earns Kissinger’s praise for overcoming “the historic ambivalence between America’s missionary and pragmatic approaches,” by means of “a sensible balance of strategic priorities.”
    If America’s preference for democratic governance is made the main condition for progress on other issues with China, Kissinger concludes, “deadlock is inevitable.” Those who battle to spread American values deserve respect. “But foreign policy must define means as well as objectives, and if the means employed grow beyond the tolerance of the international framework or of a relationship considered essential for national security, a choice must be made.” That choice “cannot be fudged,” he insists, even as he attempts to protect his flanks with a fudge of his own: “The best outcome in the American debate would be to combine the two approaches: for the idealists to recognize that principles need to be implemented over time and hence must be occasionally adjusted to circumstance; and for the ‘realists’ to accept that values have their own reality and must be built into operational policies.”
    Still, in the end, Kissinger votes for national security über alles. Scattered through his history are tributes to American values and commitments to human dignity, which may indeed sometimes drive our policies beyond calculations of the national interest. Exactly that happened, in fact, after “On China” went to press, when President Obama ventured into Libya. Kissinger was perhaps surprised when that humanitarian intervention and bid for regime change failed to evoke a Chinese veto at the United Nations. But in Asia now more than Europe, he argues, “sovereignty is considered paramount,” and any attempt “from the outside” to alter China’s domestic structure “is likely to involve vast unintended consequences.” Besides, as he used to insist while practicing realpolitik in Washington, the cause of peace is also a moral pursuit.
    This central theme of Kissinger’s experience and counsel must be distilled from the sometimes ­meandering and largely familiar history he tells in “On China.” Only in its last pages does he discuss the essential question of future Sino-American relations: With no common enemy to bind them, what will keep the peace and promote collaboration and trust between the world’s major ­powers?
    Kissinger addresses this question by looking to the past, a memorandum written by a senior official of the British Foreign Office, Eyre Crowe, in 1907. Crowe argued that it was in Germany’s interest to “build as powerful a navy as she can afford” and that this would itself lead to “objective” conflict with the British Empire, no matter what German diplomats said or did. There is today a “Crowe school of thought” in the United States, Kissinger observes, which sees China’s rise “as incompatible with America’s position in the Pacific” and therefore best met with pre-emptively hostile policies. He perceives growing anxieties in both societies and fears they are exacerbated by Americans who claim that democracy in China is a prerequisite for a trusting relationship. He warns that the implied next cold war would arrest progress in both nations and cause them to “analyze themselves into self-fulfilling prophecies” when in reality their main competition is more likely to be economic than military.
    Indulging his habitual preference for diplomatic architecture, Kissinger insists that the common interests the two powers share should make possible a “co-evolution” to “a more comprehensive ­framework.” He envisions wise leaders creating a “Pacific community” comparable to the Atlantic community that America has achieved with Europe. All Asian nations would then participate in a system perceived as a joint endeavor rather than a contest of rival Chinese and American blocs. And leaders on both Pacific coasts would be obliged to “establish a tradition of consultation and mutual respect,” making a shared world order “an expression of parallel national aspirations.”
    That was indeed the mission of the very first Kissinger journey to Beijing. And while he does not quite say so, he invests his hopes in a concert of nations represented, of course, by multiple Kissingers.
    Max Frankel, a former executive editor of The Times, covered the Nixon-Kissinger journey to China in 1972.

    ****

    America and China

    No go

    The Western politician who understands China best tries to explain it—but doesn’t quite succeed

    On China. By Henry Kissinger. Penguin Press; 586 pages; $36. Allen Lane; £30. Buy from Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk
    CHINESE and American leaders have been sniping at each other in public again. This month Hillary Clinton, America’s secretary of state, discussing political reform, told the Atlantic magazine that China’s leaders were “trying to stop history, which is a fool’s errand”. This may have been what provoked Wang Qishan, a Chinese deputy prime minister, to tell a television interviewer that Americans were “simple” (perhaps “innocent” conveys the Chinese word better), and have trouble understanding China, “because it is an ancient civilisation, and we are of the Oriental culture.”
    Mr Wang will applaud Henry Kissinger’s latest work, a distillation of more than 40 years of involvement with China and its leaders, and an unabashedly Orientalist affirmation of the otherness of the country. The most riveting chapters deal with Mr Kissinger’s leading roles in the Nixon administration as it established links with Mao Zedong’s China. The well-known story bears retelling by a central protagonist who made his first, secret trip in July 1971, pleading illness to take a few days out of his official schedule while on a visit to Pakistan. President Richard Nixon’s own trip in 1972, which had been initiated by Mr Kissinger, was indeed a “week that changed the world”, as China and America ganged up to deter Soviet expansionism.
    Mr Kissinger’s encounters with the urbane, conciliatory prime minister, Zhou Enlai, and the elliptical, moody Mao—and indeed with every senior Chinese leader since—make gripping reading. Some of Mao’s allusively poetic dialogue, in particular, is beyond parody: “At the approach of the rain and the wind the swallows are busy.” The panoramic authority with which the Chinese leaders (and their interlocutor) dissect the world is breathtaking.
    But Mr Kissinger is not telling all. He recounts how, in the years beforehand, more than 100 exploratory meetings in Warsaw had made no progress because of Taiwan, which America still recognised as “the Republic of China”. It is not clear when or why America abandoned its notion that China should commit itself to peaceful reunification as a precondition for a presidential visit. China has never renounced the threat of invasion.
    Nor does Mr Kissinger explain the thinking behind the communiqué signed after Nixon’s first visit, in which America acknowledged “that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China.” Large numbers of people in Taiwan have never maintained any such thing. But for China’s leaders, and, it seems Mr Kissinger himself, public opinion anywhere outside the United States is not really a factor when the geopolitical stakes are so high.
    Before Mr Kissinger himself enters the narrative, the reader is offered 200 pages of history of modern China and its foreign relations. Most of this is uncontentious and well told. But it is marred by three related flaws. The first is Mr Kissinger’s insight that Chinese strategists think like players of wei qi or Go, which means that, in the long term, they wish to avoid encirclement. Westerners are chess-players, tacticians aiming to get rid of their opponents’ pieces “in a series of head-on clashes”, he writes. “Chess produces single-mindedness; wei qi generates strategic flexibility.”
    This conceit has been used by other authors. It appears every few pages here like a nervous tic. Even before Mr Kissinger joins the game, the metaphor is pulled into service to analyse, among other things, Chinese policy in the Korean war, the Taiwan Strait crises of the 1950s (where, of course, “both sides were playing by wei qi rules”), the 1962 war with India (“wei qi in the Himalayas”). Later he describes events in Indochina as “a quadripartite game of wei qi”, just at the time when genocide was under way in Cambodia.
    Second, the picture of Chinese foreign policy, as formulated by cool, calculating, master strategists playing wei qi, makes it appear more coherent, consistent and effective than it has been. China’s involvement in the Korean war, for example, led, in Mr Kissinger’s phrase, to “two years of war and 20 years of isolation”, hardly a goal for China—or a wei qi triumph.
    Third, Mr Kissinger gives little weight to the fact that Mao, Zhou and the others were in fact communists. In power they soon replicated some of the forms of an imperial court, and China’s history always mattered more to them than “Das Kapital”. But one cannot ignore the influence of Mao’s adaptation of Marxist ideology on his foreign policy, let alone the importance to domestic politics of the Leninist structures imposed on the Chinese Communist Party in the 1920s, which still wears well.
    In a rare admission of a blunder, Mr Kissinger recounts the only time he saw Zhou lose his serenity—at a banquet in Beijing in November 1973 when Mr Kissinger said that China had remained “essentially Confucian in its belief in a single, universal, generally applicable truth”. Communism, he suggested, had established Marxism as the content of that truth.
    This was an extraordinary gaffe. Zhou was under indirect attack by Mao’s cronies through a campaign criticising Confucius. But his reaction also illustrates the prickliness of Chinese leaders when foreigners presume to pronounce on the eternal verities of Chinese culture.
    If even the venerable Mr Kissinger can be caught out, what hope for American statesmen far less familiar with China? The problems that have beset relations since he left the stage are not surprising. His book describes the important role he played as an intermediary in trying to resolve the worst crisis—after the Beijing massacre of 1989. Shortly afterwards, the collapse of the Soviet Union deprived the relationship of its “defining shared purpose”.
    Since then, America’s relations with China have been marked by a startling increase in economic interdependence, but not by any onset of mutual trust. Mr Kissinger notes that in the post-1989 era, China’s foreign-policy posture has been “closer to Bismarck’s than Mao’s”. It has, you could say, taken up chess.
    In his closing chapter Mr Kissinger finally turns to the big question: does China’s astonishingly rapid rise condemn it to inevitable conflict with America? He notes the similarities with the rise of Germany a century ago and the inevitable threat it posed to the British empire. America and China, too, could easily fall into a cycle of escalating tension that would be hard to break. Optimistically, Mr Kissinger insists that “were history confined to the mechanical repetition of the past, no transformation would ever have occurred.” But on how to avoid such repetition, he is disappointingly vague.

    孫康宜《孫康宜自選集:古典文學的現代觀》上海譯文出版社,2013

    $
    0
    0
    6天前貼這,只有林先生按讚。其實孫教授在這本書的文章中,許多地方有創意。這些都呈現做為學者的孫教授。且先不談中國文學主題,她在教學生幾本古典的應用來解決2008年的金融風暴,是個相當有創意的"教學" (當然這主題是夠複雜的).....她從主編劍橋中國文學史的過程,告訴我們洋書出版的嚴格質量管理,相當寶貴的.....


    孫康宜《孫康宜自選集:古典文學的現代觀》上海譯文出版社,2013


    孫康宜Kang-Sun Chang 生在北京,後隨父母遷台,1968年移民美國。曾任普林斯頓大學葛思德東亞圖書館館長,現為耶魯大學首任MaIcolm G.Chace'56東亞語言文學講座教授。著有英文學術專著多種。已出版的中文著作有《文學經典的挑戰》、《詞與文類》(李奭學譯)、《抒情與描寫:六朝詩歌概論》(鍾振振譯)、《陳子龍柳如是詩詞情緣》(李爽學譯) 、《我看美國精神》、《親歷耶魯》、《走出白色恐怖》、《曲人鴻爪》(張充和口述)、《古色今香:張充和題字選集》(編註)等。
    執教於美國耶魯大學的孫康宜教授多年來一直兼顧中國古典文學的教學與研究,在該領域的中英文文本之間遊弋已久。她與蘇源熙(Haun Saussy)率先主編中國古代女作家詩詞及相關評論的大部頭英譯選集,又與宇文所安(Stephen Owen)領銜主編出版了巨著《劍橋中國文學史》。本書所收的十多篇學術論文涉及孫教授在編譯選集、撰述新史過程中個人的心得洞見、邊緣論題和最新探索的生荒領域,其中對文學史的分期問題、明清文學中一向被忽視的作家和作品以及中國古代女性作者的地位問題等,均做了饒有趣味的探討。另外,本書還收入專題演講一篇以及訪談錄數篇,其耐人咀嚼之處,別開戶牖之境。

    孫康宜自選集:古典文學的現代觀


    內容簡介

    所收的十三篇學術論文,即孫教授編譯選集, 撰述新史過程中個人的心得洞見、邊緣論題和最新探索的生荒領域,對文學史的分期問題,明清文學中一向被忽視的作家和作品,特別是明清才女,均作出饒有興味的探討。

    另外十三篇源於美國課堂教學的短文特別論及古典名著的英譯文本及相關的讀者反應,這些用英文向美國學生講解英譯中國古典文學的一席談,如今又譯成中文呈獻給中國讀者,翻來覆去中蹭出的意味自有其耐人咀嚼之處,別開戶牖之境。

    目錄

    自序 補白的工作 2010
    第一輯 當前歐美漢學的發展趨勢及其影響
    (1)漢學研究與全球化
    (2)《劍橋中國文學史》簡介——以下卷(1375—2008)為例
    (3)從比較的角度看性別研究與全球化
    (4)耶魯學生談孫子、老子與庄子對今日金融危機的啟示

    第二輯 舊領域中的新開拓
    (5)傳統女性道德力量的反思
    (6)重寫明初文學:從高壓到盛世
    (7)台閣體、復古派和蘇州文學的關系與比較
    (8)中晚明之交文學新探
    (9)文章憎命達:再議瞿佑及其《剪燈新話》的遭遇
    (10)走向邊緣的「通變」:楊慎的文學思想初探
    (11)錢謙益及其歷史定位
    (12)介紹一部有關袁枚的漢學巨作:J·D·施米特,《隨園:袁枚的生平、文學思想與詩歌創作》
    (13)寫作的焦慮:龔自珍艷情詩中的自注

    第三輯 在傳統向現代的轉折點上
    (14)金天翮與蘇州的詩史傳統
    (15)台灣「第一才子」呂赫若的中國文化政治情懷
    (16)1949年以來的海外昆曲——從著名曲家張充和說起

    第四輯 專題演講與談話錄
    (17)談談我的學思歷程:專題演講 (增訂)
    (18)重寫中國文學史
    (19)有關《金瓶梅》與《紅樓夢》的七個問題
    (20)美國漢學研究中的性別研究
    (21)跨越中西文學的邊界

    附錄 兼談歷史
    (22)試論1333—1341年元史闡釋的諸問題
    (23)介紹一位新一代的歷史學者

    《魯迅研究月刊》部分;「臺大農業推廣通訊雙月刊」

    $
    0
    0
    敬啟者:
    本會發行之「臺大農業推廣通訊雙月刊」第105期已出刊,歡迎連結下載該期內容閱讀!
    http://www.bioagri.ntu.edu.tw/extcom/sub_title/public/data/ntuaeN/ntuaeN_No_105.pdf
    =========================================
    ※本期目錄:
    COVER STORY 封面故事
    FOCUS 焦點
     臺大校園驚見荔枝椿象蹤跡
    ACTIVITY REPORT 活動現場
     本會協助辦理 103 年度學生暑期農業經營見習行前講習紀實
     「2014食糧 ╳ 生產 ╳ 消費」特展專題報導
    GLOBAL SHORTWAVE 國際短波
    NTUCAE NEWS 推新聞
     新竹縣農會與本會合作辦理《農業推廣簡報製作》課程
    PRESENTATION 成果展示
     晚餐的前世今生─認識產銷履歷
     梨騷,光鮮外表下的美麗與哀愁
    CONSULTATION 技術諮詢
     新北市八里區農會農業技術諮詢座談會紀實
     新北市平溪區農會農業技術諮詢座談會紀實
    ※本會自民國100年起不再印行、寄送「臺大農業推廣通訊雙月刊」紙本,改以電子版方式刊載於本會網站。本會歷年來發行的「臺大農業推廣通訊雙月刊」內容,您亦可於「本會全球資訊網/農業出版品/通訊雙月刊」點閱參考。


    故鄉山水畫:魯迅、周策縱

    魯迅日記1913年2月15日:.....又包蝶仙(包公超--hc)作山水一枚,乃轉乞所得者,晴窗批覽,方彿見故鄉矣。
    (《魯迅研究月刊》2002.3, 封底)

    hc:周作人有文描寫魯迅的家鄉.....


    周策縱
    1958年2月寫“自題山水畫”詩:

    水闊山深老屋荒,
    魚龍寂寞晚風涼,
    模糊畫稿都依夢,
    仔細端詳似故鄉。


    ******
    2014.8.13  NTU 拾: 《魯迅研究月刊》

    1993: 11, 12
    1994: 2,3,4, 8, 9,10,12
    1995: 1,2, 5,8,12
    1996:1,2,8,10
    1997: 1,2,10,11
    1998: 1,2, 3, 4,6, 7,
    1999:5,
    2000: 3,4,5-12
    2001: 1,2,9
    2002: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12
    2003: 1,7,9,10,11,
    2004:2,3,5, 6, 7,10, 
    2005   1, 3,6, 10, 11, 





    《魯迅研究月刊》是由魯迅博物館編輯發行的月刊,是魯迅研究“全天候”式的刊物。
    中文名:《魯迅研究月刊》 類別:學術期刊
    語種:中文 主辦單位:魯迅博物館編輯
    創刊時間:1980年出版週期:月刊
    國內刊號:CN11-2722/I 國際刊號:ISSN1003-0638
    定價:全年零售價60元/年每期零售價5.00元/期


    《魯迅研究月刊》 - 簡介
    雜誌名稱:《魯迅研究月刊》月刊
    全年零售價:60元/年每期零售價:5.00元/期主辦單位:魯迅博物館編輯出版魯迅研究月刊編輯部國際標準刊號:ISSN1003-0638國內統一刊號:CN11-2722/I 國外發行代號:M1083聯合徵定代號:LD112722 報刊版式16開






    《中國畫人傳》/ 支那(しな)画人伝: 横川毅一郎/ 《南田畫跋》

    $
    0
    0
    中國畫人傳
    本書作者為日人橫川毅一郎先生,他出身於書香門第,父親為「漢詩人」,自幼身濡目染,知曉許多中國文人畫家的軼事與風雅生活,而欲引起同好之共鳴,遂將文 獻資料溶入流暢的小說筆法,為十位畫家的生涯及畫作細膩的詮釋。書中詳述王維與安祿山的關係、趙子昂與管夫人的舉案齊眉、風流天子徽宗如何因畫而失去了江 山、顧愷之又如何被稱為三絕一才絕、畫絕、痴絕?……
    倪雲林
    岱宗密雪圖
    王時敏
    王石谷
    吳歷
    惲南田


    《南田畫跋》張曼華校注,濟南山東畫報,2012

    清代惲壽平

      又名《甌香館畫跋》。畫跋。清代惲 壽平。三卷。1878年。為著者題跋的片言短語匯集,提出繪畫以“高逸”為最高境界,云“郭恕先遠山數峰,勝小李將軍寸馬豆人千万”,“吳道子鬥日之力, 勝李思訓百日之功”。又云:“畫以簡貴,如尚之簡入微,則洗盡塵滓,獨存孤迥,煙鬟翠黛,斂容而退矣”。提出了“攝情”說,“筆墨本無情,不可使筆墨者無情;作畫面攝情,不可使鑒畫者不生情”。主張學古而變,變而又筆下有古,“隨意涉趣,不必古人有此,然云西丹邱直向端出入”,“不同之同,不似之似”。

    講述了惲壽平對古法的學習是非常系統全面的,而且最終形成了自己獨到的觀念。他處處自比滕昌,學習他以寫生為第一位的做法,自稱「南田灌花人」;「予在北堂閑居,灌花蒔番,涉趣幽艷,玩樂秋容,資我吟哺。庶幾自比於滕勝華,隱隱間有萬象在旁,對此忘飢,可以無悶矣。」在創作實踐中解決了如何變古法為我法的難題。
     

    目錄

    南田畫跋
    題畫贈王季子
    雪圖
    題月季小幀
    題石谷,叔明小幀
    題叔明畫
    題牡丹
    題畫
    ......
    畫竹
    題畫
    題圖
    題扇
    《嘯園叢書》本所無,而《畫論叢刊》本中輯錄之畫跋
    主要參考書目
    壽平
    注音一式 ㄩㄣˋ ㄕㄡˋ ㄆ|ㄥˊ
    漢語拼音 yn shu p注音二式 yn shu png
    人名。(西元1633~1690)名格,字壽平,以字行,一字正叔,號南田,別署白雲外史、雲溪外史,亦稱東園客,清江蘇武進人。初畫山水,後畫花卉,尤擅長畫沒骨花卉,清潤明麗,自成一格,有「派」之稱。詩文亦清麗,著有甌香館集。


    莊伯和先生的譯筆亦雅緻貼切,耐人尋味。
    横川毅一郎 よこかわ-きいちろう

    1895-1973 大正-昭和時代美術評論家。
    明治28年2月28日生まれ。「やまと新聞」「国民新聞」記者をへて,大正14年雑誌「中央美術」編集長。東洋美術,日本美術の評論活動従事。のち新京芸術学院教授などをつとめた。昭和48年5月20日死去。78歳。長野県出身東京美術学校(現東京芸大)中退著作に「支那(しな)画人伝」など。
    ****

    此書未見過

    Journals 1889-1949 (André Gide)《紀德日記卷選》/Henri Frédéric Amiel

    $
    0
    0
    一次覺醒: 這幾年有幾次動念翻譯:Journals 1889-1949 (André Gide):   詹宏志有一小本漢譯本(台北遠景) 也是有英文本的刪節. 前天拿到  李玉民《紀德文集‧日記卷》廣東:花城,2002,513頁  選集1888-1909,法國文學等注解不錯----今天比較英譯  發現英文本也刪掉許多
    李是法國文學專家 (當然Gide很博學  李的英國文學的注解就很弱) 他說不定採全譯.....

    我比較1904年末.(整年英文版5頁. 《紀德文集‧日記卷》在讀了尼采《通信集》讓他感覺平衡了許多 (李譯:恢復精神狀況)....之後李譯本省略5-6行--紀德記沿途所共讀的四本書---英文版都有注解...... 《紀德文集‧日記卷》還有一缺點是人名全用漢字.很不方便還原 譬如說1904年到到Sorrento拜訪神祕 (李:莫測高深)的Vollmoeller* (給Drouin的信中有詳述) (英頁76/《紀德文集‧日記卷》頁348)....


    *Karl Gustav Vollmöller, usually written Vollmoeller (May 7, 1878 – October 18, 1948) was a German playwright and screenwriter.
    He is most famous for two works, the screenplay for the celebrated 1930German film Der Blaue Engel (The Blue Angel), which made a star of Marlene Dietrich, and the elaborate religious spectacle-pantomime Das Mirakel (The Miracle), which he wrote in collaboration with Max Reinhardt, the famous director, and in which he cast his own wife Maria Carmi in the leading role. "The Miracle" retold an old legend about a nun in the Middle Ages who runs away from her convent with a knight, and subsequently has several mystical adventures, eventually leading to her being accused of witchcraft. During her absence, the statue of the Virgin Mary in the convent's chapel comes to life and takes the nun's place in the convent until her safe return. The play opened in Germany in 1911 and subsequently in London and on Broadway in 1924. Filmed twice as a silent movie, it was filmed once again in a much-altered version (with dialogue) in widescreen and Technicolor in 1959.

    Vollmöller, Karl, 1878-1948

     
    這是翻譯。最好不要重譯
      不要假內行的一例Journals 1889-1949 (André Gide)/Henri Frédéric Ami...

    1909.7.4(40歲) .......不存在籠統的智慧,人只有做這事,做那事的聰明,聰明只應當表現在所做的事情上

    類似的說法 雪萊20歲的一首詩就說過--那年他到愛爾蘭 才知道貧民之慘狀比英倫的10倍差........

    *****

    昨天晚上睡前讀物是紀德(1869-1951) 的一輩子日記 選集 Journals 1889-1949
    因為我買的廉價的企鵝版,書已經開始分解了。
    1918年2月, 對同性戀的分類、分析和自白。pp. 316-317

    pp. 312-13

    l'invitation au voyage

    Uploaded on Apr 10, 2007
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDRpmM9ttMI


    A invitation to travel. Animation film by david gautier from a famous french poem of Charles Baudelaire
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDRpmM9ttMI


    Là, tout n'est qu'ordre et beauté,
    Luxe, calme et volupté.
    幾種英譯
    http://fleursdumal.org/poem/148

    There all is order and beauty,
    Luxury, peace, and pleasure.
    — William Aggeler, The Flowers of Evil (Fresno, CA: Academy Library Guild, 1954)

    Gide 要寫本美學,各章名:
    1. Order (logic, reasonable disposition of the parts);
    2. Beauty (line,dash, profile of the work);
    3. Luxury (disciplined richness);
    4. Calm (tranquillization of the tumult);
    5. Voluptuousness (sensuality, adorable charm of attractiveness).

    1. 秩序(邏輯,部分的合理配置); 
    2,美(線,虛線,作品概要); 
    3,奢侈( 有紀律的豐富); 
    4,平靜(騷動安神); 
    5,艷麗(淫蕩,可愛魅力)。


    (1933年4月10日  頁559)
    …We are entering a serious epoch.

    他引蒙田的話:「人變老還可接受的,如果我們只向改善邁步:
    它卻像醉漢跌破跌撞撞,東倒西歪,昏迷,不測。」
      《惡之華‧仇敵》末段
    痛苦啊!「時間」蠶食生命,
    它咬住我們的心,像刀般利,
    這「仇敵」吸我們的血而肥壯!




    有人預言,紀德的日記就可以讓他不朽了,
    英文本有刪節,不過 ,很不錯。

    詹宏志有一小本漢譯本(台北遠景) 也是有刪節。
     李玉民《紀德文集‧日記卷》廣東:花城,2002513 選集1888-1909。法國文學等注解不錯。

    1. Journals: 1889-1913

      books.google.com/books?isbn=0252069293 - 翻譯這個網頁
      André Gide - 2000 - ‎預覽 - ‎其他版本
      This volume contains a new foreword by Richard Howard.
    Justin O'Brien 翻譯,1947年Alfed Knopf版,2000伊里諾大學再版。4百多頁。


    ---
    GoogleBooks很保守 ,沒什麼意思 。譬如說 有 ""在此書籍中,有 5 頁符合 Shakespeare",顯示3頁的小部份,隨便一字 lugubrious (p.240) 卻找不到。

    Journals 1889-1949

    封面

    ***
    紀德是讀 19 世紀的身後出版的日記大家Henri Frédéric Amiel 的作品而決定寫自己的日記

    Henri Frédéric Amiel 的巨大日記
    (該『日記』(「ひそかな日記」1839年-1881年、17,000頁)

    尚無漢譯,除了梁宗岱先生翻譯過一篇約200字的散文詩。


    台大圖書館的日文翻譯
    1
    勾選
    一般印刷資料
    アミエルの日記 / [アミエル(Henri Frederic Amiel)著]; 河野與一訳
    東京都 : 岩波書店, 昭和47[1972]改譯第一刷


    No one has rated this material說明
    館藏地 索書號 條碼 狀態 說明
    總圖2F密集書庫784.28 4411 3167 1972 v.2 [鄰近架位館藏]2244302 可流通
    總圖2F密集書庫784.28 4411 3167 1972 v.3 2244303 可流通
    總圖2F密集書庫784.28 4411 3167 1972 v.4 2244304 可流通
    2
    勾選
    一般印刷資料
    アミエルの日記 / [アミエル(Henri Frederic Amiel)著]; 河野與一訳
    東京市 : 岩波, 昭和10[1935]






    Henri-Frédéric Amiel
    Henri Frédéric Amiel (28 September 1821 – 11 May 1881) was a Swiss philosopher, poet and critic.
    Born in Geneva in 1821, he was descended from a Huguenot family driven to Switzerland by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes.[1]
    After losing his parents at an early age, Amiel travelled widely, became intimate with the intellectual leaders of Europe, and made a special study of German philosophy in Berlin. In 1849 he was appointed professor of aesthetics at the academy of Geneva, and in 1854 became professor of moral philosophy. These appointments, conferred by the democratic party, deprived him of the support of the aristocratic party, which comprised nearly all the culture of the city.
    This isolation inspired the one book by which Amiel is still known, the Journal Intime ("Private Journal"), which, published after his death, obtained a European reputation. It was translated into English by Mary A. Ward at the instigation of Mark Pattison.
    Although second-rate as regards productive power, Amiel's mind was of no inferior quality, and his Journal gained a sympathy that the author had failed to obtain in his life. In addition to the Journal, he produced several volumes of poetry and wrote studies on Erasmus, Madame de Stael and other writers. He died in Geneva.



     2010
     安德烈·紀德《日記 1942-1949年》花城出版社的《纪德文集》

      花城出版社的《纪德文集》分五卷,有《散文卷》、《传记卷》、《日记卷》、《游记卷》、《文论卷》。这五卷中,有五分之三的篇章是首次翻译介绍给我国读者的。这样,纪德的作品除晚年的日记、通信外,基本上全部呈现给了中国读者。

    安 德烈·保尔·吉约姆·纪德(1867-1951),是法国二十世纪最活跃、最重要的作家之一。花城出版社《纪德文集》的编者和译者(散文卷、日记卷), 首都师大的李玉民教授向记者介绍,纪德是个少有的最不容易捉摸的作家,他的一生和他的作品所构成的世界,就是一座现代迷宫。变化和否定,贯穿纪德的一生和 他的全部作品。纪德是在人生探索、文学创新两方面都给后人留下最多启示的作家。
    李教授说,每次重读纪德的作品都有新发现,他的作品是让人思考、让人参与的作品。
    北 京大学罗芃教授认为,在相当长的时间里,纪德被看作文学的“颠覆者”,更糟糕的是他还背上了道德“颠覆者”的恶名。这种双重“颠覆者”的身份一度曾使纪 德很有点“声名狼藉”。有人嘲笑他的作品形式不伦不类,有人声色俱厉地谴责他伤风败俗,当然也有人双管齐下,从两个方面作了否定和抨击。如今,纪德伟大作 家的地位已经毋庸置疑,历史已经下了结论,但是对他在小说革命方面所做的试验性探索究竟应该如何评价,仍旧是可以讨论的问题,而他对传统思想道德的叛逆和 颠覆,情况更为复杂,还有许多问题值得探讨。《纪德文集》的出版,为我国读者和外国文学研究者在这方面的工作创造了条件。

    安德烈·紀德年表- 維基百科,自由的百科全書

    出版《與保羅·克洛岱爾通信集》。 1950年12月13日,劇本《梵蒂岡的地窖》在法蘭西喜劇院首演。出版《日記 1942-1949年》。 1951年2月19日,安德烈·紀德因肺炎在巴黎病逝 ...


    *遠景出版社**紀德日記 1889-1914**紀德**民國70年



    紀德文集--日記卷
    作者 : (法)紀德著,李玉民譯
    頁數 :266
    開本 : 32開
    出版社 : 花城出版社
    出版日期 : 2002-1-1

    相關圖書特色及評論內容簡介本書目錄作者介紹


     特色及評論
    他 整慗一生,就是長長一系列的介入與解除介入的過程。也一貫忠於的惟一教條,就是拒絕接受任何教條。從這時起一直到他漫長生命中盡頭,他始終宣揚的,便是他 既從歌德那裏受到啟迪的明智。除了他引以為憾的短期介入政治之外,人想做一名藝術家。也就是要給思想提供一個完美的形式,做一個以此為惟一職業的人。作者 角色是修建一處住所;而佔據這個住所的,則是讀者。紀德便是這樣的人。
                              ——莫洛亞
      紀德總是和他力圖征服的一代生活在一起。青春是富有感染力的,這位青年的宗師便保留一些青春的新鮮活力。青年在紀德身上尋找自己,他們也往往能找到自己。
                              ——莫洛亞
      紀德在世一天,法國便還有一種文學生活,一種思想交流的生活,一種始終坦率的爭論……而他的死結束了最能激勵心智的時代。
                              ——莫裏亞克


     內容簡介
    本書是法國著名作家紀德的日記作品集,安德烈·紀德是法國家喻戶曉的著名作家,1947年諾貝爾文學獎得主。紀德是法國小說流派承上啟下的作家之一,他的小說打破了以巴爾扎克為首的法國小說傳統創作手法,也沒有法國現代小說那麼“前衛”。
    本書是法國著名作家紀德的自傳作品,安德烈·紀德是法國家喻戶曉的著名作家,1947年諾貝爾文學獎得主。紀德是法國小說流派承上啟下的作家之一,他的小說打破了以巴爾扎克為首的法國小說傳統創作手法,也沒有法國現代小說那麼“前衛”。
    一、二十世紀法國重量級作家安德烈·紀德逝世五十週年即將來臨之際,花城出版社和人民文學出版社都計劃出版紀德的文集,經過磋商,決定採取鬆散的分工協作的方式,同時推出《紀德文集》。
     二、《紀德文集》分為五卷,計有《散文卷》、《傳記卷》、《日記卷》、《遊記卷》、《文論卷》,各自成篇,可分可合。這五卷中,有五分這三的篇章,是首次翻譯介紹給我國讀者的。
       三、五卷本所選的《人間食糧》,被視為“新世紀病”,“不安的一代人聖經”;《訪蘇聯歸來》所引起的軒然大波,早已超出了事件本身的意義;《如果種子不 死》,作者自述至二十六歲結婚前夕的生活,記錄了他爭取自由的緩慢而艱巨的歷程;文論中的《陀思妥斯夫斯基》,即論文又論人,《想像的採訪》則縱橫捭闔, 別開生面,都有許多真知灼見;他的日記,從1887年他十四歲寫起,直到1950年他逝世前為止,包含了他所有作品的基因,是研究他的作品和傳奇一生的極 珍貴而特殊的資料,堪稱他最少雕飾的“自傳”。


     本書目錄

     總序:紀德的寫作狀態
    一八八七年
    一八八八年
    一八八九年
    一八九○年
    一八九一年
    一八九二年
    一八九三年
    一八九四年
    散頁
    一八九五年
    一八九五——八九六年旅途散頁
    一八九七年
    一八九八年
    一八九九年
    散頁(一八九七年至一九○○年)
    一九○一年
    一九○二年
    一九○三年
    一九○四年
    一九○五年
    一九○六年
    一九○七年
    一九○八年
    一九○九年
     作者介紹
    紀 德(AndreGide,1869-1951),法國著名作家。父親是清教徒,法學教授,母親出身於大資本家家庭。紀德10歲喪父,因體弱多病,沒有完成 正規的中等教育。1909年與友人創辦《新法蘭西評論》,對現代法國文學產生巨大影響。1947年獲諾貝爾文學獎。主要小說和散文作品有:《人間食 糧》(1897)、《背德者》(1902)、《窄門》(1909)、《田園交響樂》(1919)、《偽幣製造者》(1925)、《剛果之 行》(1927)、《查德歸來》(1928)、《訪蘇聯歸來》(1936)等。另有文學評論集《借題發揮集》、《偶感集》等,自傳《如果種子不死》、《日 記》等。







    轉型台灣 余紀忠文教基金會

    $
    0
    0
    本書為余紀忠文教基金會2012~2013演講的摘要。

    轉型台灣:從心動到行動
    作者: 余紀忠文教基金會
    出版社:余紀忠文教基金會
    出版日期:2013

      關於未來,我們做得還不夠
      台灣面對一九四九年以來最艱困的挑戰
      領導菁英要面對  施政需在關鍵時刻做好該做的事
      各領域凝聚公民力量  為台灣找出路
      一個國家不論是在常態的經營運作下,或是在面對困境的時候,都需要有一套良好的基礎運作機制。
      任何社會都必須具備這樣的機制來因應各項問題,才不會臨陣慌潰,也才能在常態時推動國家總體發展往好的方向走。
      有完整的規劃、定期審視、檢討缺失、發揮執行效率,需要有清楚的哲學思維,作為上位原則、作為檢討以及重建的基礎。

      面對台灣真相:
      現階段的台灣是一個在追求知識熱情上有所欠缺的時代,甚至是一個知識凋零的時代!
      當許多國家透過模仿走向自主創新之時,台灣卻相對地在創新的努力上明顯不足!
      當許多國家在進行轉型工程之時,台灣卻轉型停滯!

      當代各領域的公共知識分子  慎思審度的建言
      台灣在「文明轉型」中的新文化思考──金耀基
      合理的現代社會,多元文化與價值塑造──王汎森
      台灣要志氣,領導扛責,知識轉型──南方朔
      檢視「國土規劃」—以新思維面對氣候變遷──李鴻源
      整合「公民農業小革命」—台灣在地意義──李丁讚
      和公民媒體,輪流說故事──何榮幸
      集體學習,減少差異、衝突,走向實在──錢永祥
      台灣總體經濟發展瓶頸與挑戰──華而誠
      未來經濟發展的規劃與契機──施顏祥
      服務業是開國之鎖──陳添枝
      重重險阻中打開出路──馬 凱
      經濟效率與財政永續,應動態均衡──何志欽
      改進財政法案品質,落實穩健財政──曾巨威
      兩稅合一非潮流應改革──陳聽安
      從租稅結構性改革著手──蘇建榮
      對待不公平紅線,避免社會沉淪──周德宇
      置入債務預警,落實財政紀律──林建甫
      重新評估不合時宜的政策──林世昌
      地方首長重視公債法修正,應甚於財劃法修正──徐仁輝
      抗爭無益大局,自助方能脫困──林恭正
      服務業出口,重人才品牌,生活化──陳添枝
      突破重圍、減少管制、全力輔導──管中閔
      新生活概念,走出綠色經濟──葉俊榮
      文明是堅持,公共行政入生活──毛治國
      綠色經濟回歸土地上──黃萬翔
      服務要有心—環保、節能、愛地球──鄭崇華
      珍惜文化特色,勿暴飲暴食──嚴長壽
      醫療產業引入雲端,服務朝向國際──黃榮村
      醫療衛生產業化,提供市場留住人才──蘇 喜
      強化醫療品質,系統服務輸出──胡勝正
      全面檢視醫療產業政策,承擔社會安全所需──詹啟賢
      醫療產業化不得空窗,老年長照必需本土系統──林萬億
      應視醫療為一項產業──洪奇昌
      資訊時代主戰場在全球,速連線──余範英
      製造服務結合,創新整案輸出──史欽泰
      掌握智慧化服務,進入數位匯流趨勢──呂學錦
      網路世代賺國外錢,研發創新中小企業打通路──張善政
      未來媒體是一場運動,已經開始──陳浩

      「余紀忠文教基金會」以播種者自我期許與自我要求,自在一九九九年跨世紀之交至今,策畫一系列的研討會,衷心期盼台灣在被國際社會評價為「亞洲四小龍」的良好基礎上,能夠帶動台灣整體質量的全面提升,迎接新世紀的來臨。

      為台灣找出路  活出台灣價值
     

    作者介紹

    籌備委員
    余範英、黃榮村、王汎森、薛琦、陳添枝、朱雲漢、葉俊榮、林聖芬   
     

    目錄

    [序]啟動台灣轉型關鍵 從心動到行動

    [第一篇]文化的現代化
    引言──王健壯
    台灣在「文明轉型」中的新文化思考──金耀基
    合理的現代社會,多元文化與價值塑造──王汎森
    對談──王健壯、金耀基、王汎森

    [第二篇]台灣必須面對的真相
    台灣要志氣,領導扛責,知識轉型──南方朔
    對談──王健壯、余範英、南方朔
    檢視「國土規劃」—以新思維面對氣候變遷──李鴻源
    整合「公民農業小革命」—台灣在地意義──李丁讚
    和公民媒體,輪流說故事──何榮幸
    集體學習,減少差異、衝突,走向實在──錢永祥

    [第三篇]台灣內外在的經濟發展規劃與契機
    台灣總體經濟發展瓶頸與挑戰──華而誠
    未來經濟發展的規劃與契機──施顏祥
    服務業是開國之鎖──陳添枝
    重重險阻中打開出路──馬 凱

    [第四篇]財政重國家發展與公平正義
    經濟效率與財政永續,應動態均衡──何志欽
    改進財政法案品質,落實穩健財政──曾巨威
    兩稅合一非潮流應改革──陳聽安
    從租稅結構性改革著手──蘇建榮
    對待不公平紅線,避免社會沉淪──周德宇
    置入債務預警,落實財政紀律──林建甫
    重新評估不合時宜的政策──林世昌
    地方首長重視公債法修正,應甚於財劃法修正──徐仁輝
    抗爭無益大局,自助方能脫困──林恭正

    [第五篇]帶動經濟轉型 重塑服務DNA
    服務業出口,重人才品牌、生活化──陳添枝
    突破重圍、減少管制、全力輔導──管中閔
    新生活概念,走出綠色經濟──葉俊榮
    文明是堅持,公共行政入生活──毛治國
    綠色經濟回歸土地上──黃萬翔
    服務業要有心—環保、節能、愛地球──鄭崇華
    珍惜文化特色,勿暴飲暴食──嚴長壽
    醫療產業引入雲端,服務朝向國際──黃榮村
    醫療衛生產業化,提供市場留住人才──蘇 喜
    強化醫療品質,系統服務輸出──胡勝正
    全面檢視醫療產業政策,承擔社會安全所需──詹啟賢
    醫療產業化不得空窗,老年長照必需本土系統──林萬億
    應視醫療為一項產業──洪奇昌
    資訊時代主戰場在全球,速連線──余範英
    製造服務結合,創新整案輸出──史欽泰
    掌握智慧化服務,進入數位匯流趨勢──呂學錦
    網路世代賺國外錢,研發創新中小企業打通路──張善政
    未來媒體是一場運動,已經開始──陳浩

    [後記]
     



    啟動台灣轉型關鍵-從心動到行動


      今天,在全球化、資訊化與在地化之下,近代文明的歷史共業在時空壓縮下,許多牽扯複雜、糾葛的問題與面向急速地呈現,台灣也不免身歷其境。
      
      許多問題是跨越國界的,氣候變遷不僅帶來天災,如日本福島的複合性災害,更帶動了核能運用的反思,也牽涉到政經發展的思維模式,都市人口的過度集中,牽涉人口流動與社經結構、生態環境、水與能源的消耗、短缺。往日的經濟發展供需模式,在市場急速全球化下,資本、商品、服務、勞動力等要素的快速流動。面對全球化下的國際資本流量遠大於貿易商品流量,金融強權的擴張與整飭在演變中,被挑戰的世界經濟組織,許多新興的共同市場與多邊貿易協定因此相繼崛起,世界經濟的遊戲規則在改變中。
      
      往日的台灣經濟發展經驗,由農村經濟、小型加工業,到建立進口替代工業、資訊產業的起飛,現今這賴以維生的小康基礎,已不能不做快速因應,以全球思考正視問題的嚴重性。
      
      更甚者,台灣近年由於國內政黨競爭未見改善,社會充斥負面情緒,政府治理未能彰顯,台灣在亞洲四小龍逐漸被邊緣化。最近南韓媒體報導,將台灣列為新興國家發展的失敗案例做深入研究。先機盡失,時間已不站在我們這一邊,是該奮發向上、痛定思痛的「轉型時刻」了。
      
     「余紀忠文教基金會」以播種者自我期許與自我要求,自一九九九年跨世紀之交至今,策畫一系列的研討會,衷心期盼台灣在被國際社會評價為「亞洲四小龍」的良好基礎上,能夠帶動台灣整體質量的全面提升,迎接新世紀的來臨。今天再站出來,一本初衷繼續余紀忠先生辦報的精神,面對時代、社會的動盪,反思近數十年的台灣發展,檢視過往歷史刻畫的痕跡、留下的產物,與民眾對話,讓我們面對台灣在累積了太多需要溝通與協調的問題後,思索應該怎麼走下去?
      
      於余紀忠先生逝世十周年推出以「實在年代—迎向永續」為主題的系列演講,將今日知識分子、學者與社會群體,在實踐中、生活裡互動的磋商、折衝、整合,延伸到當前社會文化中心的各個面向;希望藉由行動與實踐,脫離虛假、找到核心、走出務實,並探討實在年代下的台灣,如何整備迎向永續。
      
      面對台灣今日的社會環境與自然現象的變遷,花費將近兩年的工夫,做追蹤、研討和整理,並將以上系列演講、座談會等與建言,集結在這本書中。
      
      我們希望能收攏一些這個時代中可依靠的資源、可因循的架構,找出癥結與做法,在無法改變全球化的衝擊、大陸崛起的現實下,迎向時代的大轉變。
      
      我們相信唯有不斷規劃、演進、整合,精進知識力與行動力;同時,年輕人參與其中,年紀大的不放棄,將經驗與活力結合,做宏觀與長期的規劃,設定時間表與步驟,一起去面對、去克服、去創新;更需要在文化的差異上做溝通,貧富的差距上重視均衡,面對實在的問題,要結合各種實在的行動力量。唯有人與人之間相互包容、尊重的行為與態度,方能學習進步,勇敢的面對與因應這時代的處境。
    余紀忠文教基金會 2013年11月
    後記

      《轉型台灣──從心動到行動》一書我們收集三場「實在年代」系列演講、一場大師對談,整合與成大社會科學院共同舉辦的「租稅財政研討會」,連續兩週四場「實在年代—服務經濟轉型系列」,並節錄「實在年代」〈經濟篇〉集結成冊,只為能將這些珍貴的經驗與箴言,化為步向「心動到行動」的基石。
      
      第一篇「文化的現代化」:一場大師對談,由金耀基院士與王汎森院士分別就近百年文明的進程中,隨着全球化、資訊化的衝擊,台灣所面臨的不只是東亞競合、大陸崛起。今日的台灣雖聚集了相當豐厚的文化與學術資產的底蘊,但不常見文化議題的審度深論。反省近數十年的台灣發展,檢視過往歷史刻畫的痕跡,留下的產物、背景、權力、文化、社會,無論對中華文化的變遷、延續與發展,或是在西方制度方法影響下的文化走向,都缺乏對話、思辨,認真面對人生價值與文明秩序大論述。
      
      金耀基院士—藉由檢視過往的論述模式,闡釋現代文明體系的性格與風貌,追尋中國的文明秩序;王汎森院士—重視學術自由、獨立的學風傳承,強調人文科技對話,面對全球變遷,提醒包容的文化主體性。
      
      第二篇「台灣必須面對的真相」:由南方朔剖析台灣思想觀念需要突破、轉型,世代知識與菁英領導怎樣面對轉型? 國家領導在時代的責任與前瞻?李鴻源針對國內居住環境的現象,美麗的寶島在氣候變遷下的衝擊應有何作為及反思?縱觀台灣社會力的變遷,需整合公民社會的潛力。資訊時代媒體角色的定位又是什麼?錢永祥、李丁讚、何榮幸藉由學術論辯做社會關懷與追蹤的問題闡述,將今日公民權益、利益團體在重建與深化社會力下的拉鋸面貌,一一呈現。
      
      第三篇「台灣內外在的經濟發展規劃與契機」:我們收納「實在年代」中的經濟四篇。華而誠提示經濟發展的瓶頸與現實;施顏祥對經濟規劃的契機的把握與期待;馬凱強調為有效行動,在先機已失下,不得不加緊殺出血路、打開局面。
      
      第四篇「財政重國家發展與公平正義」:是成功大學何志欽副校長的總策畫,在全球化下各國財政情勢多不樂觀的嚴重失衡,貧富差距擴大、所得分配不均,連帶弱化了支持經濟發展、建立公平社會的能量。本諸相同理念基金會共同規劃研討,特邀陳聽安老師談財政負擔、租稅改革癥結,林建甫等學者就中央地方財政紀律與公債法、政府組織再造與新六都的財政現象做尋根治本的剖析。
      
      第五篇「帶動經濟轉型,重塑服務DNA」:內容為尋找台灣經濟轉型動能。洛桑管理學院報告指出:「台灣的發展是結構轉型問題」。服務業是主導國家經濟轉型的關鍵,台灣去年服務業產值占GDP六八.七一%,服務業就業人數占五八.六%,但綜觀勞動、資本、研發甚至國際競爭力等指標,卻沒有相對成長,薪資水準及個人產值低,亟需體檢、突圍。陳添枝老師掌舵下管中閔、毛治國、詹啟賢、呂學錦等擔負重任的產、官、學,皆為經濟轉型長久忽略的服務業,找尋促進服務業產值與品質的提升,鋪陳前景、人才培育、建立服務DNA深入探討。在深入探討醫療、社福、綠色經濟、資訊服務後,由於時值國內金融政策開放不足,原想邀聚的座談,就金融服務做有效的診斷與建言未得實現,實為遺憾。
      
      以上陳述是兩年來的座談、研討及資料整理的彙總與心得,不足地方還有很多,僅供關懷台灣何去何從的有心人參閱、起步行動!

    伊能嘉矩Ino Kanori 《臺灣文化志》台灣踏查日記 方豪糾正;伊能嘉矩:臺灣歷史民族誌的展開

    $
    0
    0

    在台大的行政院原住民族委員會圖書館

    看到'柳田國南本棚" (日本:大空社 1997)的1-3本為的伊能嘉矩《臺灣文化志》


    台灣文化志[修訂版]上中下卷




    內容簡介

    國史館臺灣文獻館館長序

    《臺灣文化志》 原書全三冊,為日治時期學者伊能嘉矩研究臺灣歷史之名著。伊能氏於一八九五年十一月來臺,年方29歲,至一九二五年九月以59歲之齡在鄉里岩手縣遠野町辭 世,前後30年埋首臺灣歷史文化之研究,本書即為其心血結晶。據說他曾交代他的夫人,如果家中失火,唯一要做的事是將《臺灣文化志》手稿拖到屋外,其珍視 程度可見一斑。
    原書以日本文言文書寫,非一般人所能解讀。在本館前身臺灣省文獻委員會時期,便採納各方意見進行原書之中文翻譯,由當時文獻會同仁 多人分段翻譯,分工合作完成中譯本,分上、中、下三冊,於一九八五年八月付梓出版。其分工係當時省文獻會江主任委員慶林、劉副主任委員寧顏、程委員大學、 陳委員壬癸、黃委員有興、王編纂世慶、黃組長耀東、黃組員連財、吳組員家憲等負責翻譯;郭編纂嘉雄、莫編纂光華、吳編纂政恒、陳編纂文達、簡秘書俊耀、呂 組長武烈、吳主任俊雄、林主任永根、何辦事員綉英等協助;謝委員浩、鄭委員喜夫檢尋書中徵引我國文獻舊籍之原文,並潤飾語句與加注校按再加審查;經逐字逐 句核校日文,有疑義者由有關人員再三參酌始予定稿。《臺灣文化志》一書內容豐富,堪稱為日治時期臺灣研究之代表作,亦為研究臺灣歷史之重要參考資料。
    光 陰荏苒,距本書中譯本初版已倏歷二十餘載,近年來對於臺灣歷史之研究與考證已蔚為顯學。鑑於本書中譯本之庫存量所剩無多,又初版時迫於時限僅以一年時間完 成翻譯,付梓倉促,校誤疏失,在所難免,有重新校訂出版之必要。為方便各界取得及利用本書,於謝前館長任內遂有授權民間廠商合作出版校訂版之議,故於二 ○○八年八月即依據採購法公開徵得台灣書房出版有限公司,負責五年內校訂版之編輯、設計、印製、發行、銷售等,未來亦因應市場需求發行電子書版本,以利讀 者搜尋運用。校訂版基本的校正工作,分別由本館資深研究員陳文添、徐國章及許錫慶三位先生負責,他們均在其本身繁忙的工作之外,放棄休息,自行加班,如期 完成。惟限於時間,僅對中譯本初版之明顯疏漏處加以訂正,未能全部重新翻譯。本館為更求審慎,特商請曾參與初版校按的前省文獻會委員鄭喜夫先生擔任校訂版 之總校,而另一位資深研究員黃得峰先生配合其工作,共同比對日文原文與中文譯文,反復推敲而後加以修訂,並澈底增刪校改全書按註。相信這些工作對於讀者不 無助益。值得一提的是,四位資深研究員同仁和已退休的鄭先生都是完全義務幫忙,甚為可感。不過,在伊能氏這部全書150萬言煌煌巨著的中譯本校訂版,一定 難免仍有可再改進之處,敬請讀者們不吝惠予指正,無任欣幸,無任感禱!
    「凡走過,必留下足跡」,身為日本人的伊能氏以30年的歲月從事臺灣歷史文 化研究,並為後人留下珍貴的《臺灣文化志》一書,誠屬難能可貴。而本館職司臺灣歷史文獻業務,希望能提供臺灣歷史研究者正確而便利之參考資料,此部《臺灣 文化志》中譯本校訂版自籌印、授權合作出版、譯稿校正、發行問世,乃至未來規劃推出電子書等,即是基於此一理念,並將持續不斷地推動臺灣歷史研究,以建構 一個完善的研究平臺,此即是出版本書的最大意義所在。爰於本書付梓之際,謹以為序。
    國史館臺灣文獻館館長 林金田 謹識

    作者介紹

    伊能嘉矩

    原著 伊能嘉矩
    生於日本岩手縣遠野,從小就在祖父的身邊學習漢學。
    1886年,伊能進入岩手縣立師範學校,因鼓動學潮而遭校方退學;之後,他前往東京自修苦讀,並且開始接觸、從事新聞工作。
      臺灣被納入日本版圖後,伊能以陸軍雇員的名義來臺,展開長達十年的臺灣人類學調查研究。30歲時,開始進行臺灣全島的探查旅行,他走訪各地,留下豐富的田野筆記和研究資料。這不僅使他成為臺灣原住民研究的開創者,更為後人提供了研究臺灣文化不可或缺的原始資料。
      1906年,伊能辭去總督府的職務回到故鄉。回鄉之後被隔海委託擔任臺灣史料與蕃族調查編纂的工作,更埋首於清代臺灣史頂峰之作《臺灣文化志》的寫作。
      1925年,伊能在臺灣所感染的瘧疾復發,以59歲之齡逝世。一生著作與臺灣相關的有十餘種,論文更多達千篇,被譽為是「臺灣學的先驅」。


    關於編譯
      《臺灣文化志》由日本人板澤武雄教授及小谷達吉等依據伊能嘉矩研究臺灣歷史文化的遺稿及資料編輯發行,實為日人治臺時期,臺灣研究之代表作。全書分上、中、下三卷刊行,約一百五十餘萬言,目前研究臺灣早期歷史的國人,仍以這本書當作重要的參考文獻。
       這本書最初以日本文言文體呈現,由當時省文獻會汲取各方建議,經多人通力合作分段翻譯,而成初版中譯本,距今已二十餘載。今國史館臺灣文獻館將本書重新 修訂,比對日文原文與初版譯文,反復推敲、潤色字句,澈底增刪、校改全書校按,並檢尋書中徵引我國舊文獻之原文,又經逐字逐句校日文,有疑義者由有關人員 再次參酌予以定稿,期待能減少原書及翻譯過程中的失誤至最低,並且提高《臺灣文化志》的參考價值。
    伊能嘉矩傾注畢生心力,赴各地田野調查,訪問當地耆老、首長,蒐集舊籍中的相關記載補充比對,結合實地調查與文字資料撰寫完成,公認為清代臺灣史的鉅著。此版本經國史館臺灣文獻館將錯誤或缺漏處重新校正。
    伊能嘉矩傾注畢生心力成臺灣史之巨著,此版本由國史館臺灣文獻館編譯、重新校正而成。
    ---
    日期:1925/9/30
    「台灣文化志」作者伊能嘉矩病逝,享年59歲
    《台灣研究》在日據時期,雖然不少是統治階級為著「知己知彼」而整理、編集,但是從傳世的不少日本學者所著有關台灣的書籍觀之,可說成績豐碩,而且我們也必需承認這些嘔心瀝血之作的永恆價值;伊能嘉矩是其中可歌可頌的人物之一。
    伊能嘉矩,字朋卿,又字梅陰,號蕉鹿夢,堂號為梅月堂;生於 1867 年(日慶應 3 年 5 月 9 日),日本盛岡市遠野町人。世代書香,小時候從祖父學習漢學;19 歲遊學東京,入斯文黌及二松學舍,後被推薦進入岩平縣立師範學校,因明治 22年 2 月 11 日,憲法公布之日,發生了宿舍騷動事件,他被指為是主謀人物,遭受退學。失學後,投身報界,開始記者生涯,曾擔任東京每日新聞社助理編輯及日本新聞編輯 長。
    1895 年,日人佔據台灣,當年 11 月,他以陸軍省雇員名義來台,任職於台灣總督府;1900 年,「台灣慣習研究會」成立,共設委員 33 人,由兒玉總督、後藤新平民政長官分任正、副會頭(長),伊能嘉矩等人被指名為幹事,擔任調查工作,該會曾刊行《台灣慣習記事》;1922 年,第一任文官總督田健治郎設置「史料編篡委員會」,他與上直法郎、尾崎秀真被聘為囑託。
    伊能嘉矩於1905 年,因祖父年邁而返日,留台計 10 年。他對台灣史的研究,成就非凡;他鑒於1626 年到1642 年之間,西班牙人佔據北台灣的事蹟,史料不多,隨從一位曾來台灣的西班牙傳教士研究:為了研究清廷治台的歷史,他更從劉銘傳的幕僚李少函研修清朝會典、律 例。伊能嘉矩更摹繪稀覯的圖書、文書作為大部分的台灣史料初稿。其重要的著作有:《台灣文化志》三卷、《台灣志》二卷、《台灣蕃政志》、《台灣城志,台灣 行政區志》、《領台始末》、《台灣巡撫劉銘傳》、《台灣新年表》、《大日本地名辭書》(台灣之部)、《理蕃志稿》……等等。
    伊能嘉矩於 1925 年今日病逝,享年 59 歲。他的台灣研究著作,本本鉅構,難怪黃得時說:「從事台灣研究的學者專家之中,在本地人方面,我最尊敬而佩服的是連雅堂先生,在日本人方面,就是這位伊能嘉矩氏。」
    ◎歷史台灣內容節錄自莊永明先生著《台灣紀事(上)(下)》一書(時報出版社出版),著作權屬莊永明先生所有,非經同意請勿任意轉載。

    ---
    维基百科,自由的百科全书
    日本語
    日語寫法
    日語原文伊能 嘉矩
    假名いのう かのり
    平文式羅馬字Inō Kanori
    伊能嘉矩いのう かのり,1867年5月9日-1925年9月30日),日本人類學家,出生在今日本岩手縣遠野市東館町,從小就在祖父的嚴厲督促下熟讀四書五經1885年東京遊學,1886年1月結婚(1888年離婚),12月開始學習英語1887年岩手師範學校1889年2月11日與菊池房松、鵜飼悅彌、里見朝佑結盟鼓動(鬧學潮)而被退學。同年10月進入每日新聞社接任編輯。1893年加入「東京人類學會」,1894年12月與文學博士鳥居龍藏創辦「人類學講習會」。1895年4月加入「朝鮮支那語協會」學習國官話、朝鮮語文及北海道土人倭奴語,11月以陸軍省雇員身分來到台灣,任職於總督府民政局,並在其所設的「台灣土語講習所」學習台語,同時研究泰雅語、自修馬來語1897年11月至蘭嶼,與鳥居龍藏相遇。將台灣原住民分成8類(泰雅阿美布農賽夏排灣、漂馬(即卑南)、平埔),打破以往籠統的生熟番劃分,而其中平埔族再分成十族(馬卡道、西拉雅、魯羅阿、貓霧涑、阿里坤、巴布蘭、巴則海、道卡斯、凱達格蘭噶瑪蘭),堪稱是台灣原住民分類的第一人。1898年4月任「蕃政研究」調查員,發表《台灣土番開發狀況》。1900年臨時台灣舊慣調查會成立,任命伊能為幹事(兒玉源太郎為會長)。1901年9月再婚,1904年4月以《台灣蕃政志》向東京大學申請博士學位(1907年撤回)。1906年為照顧年邁的祖父並專心著述請辭一切職務。1925年因在所染瘧疾復發,9月30日,死於岩手縣盛岡

    [編輯]伊能著作

    • 伊能嘉矩、粟野傳之丞,1900,台灣蕃人事情。台北:台灣總督府民政局文書課。
    • 伊能嘉矩,1902,台灣志,卷一、卷二。東京:文學社。
    • ______,1904a,台灣蕃政志。台北:台灣總督府民政部殖產局。
    • ______,1904b,領台始末。台北:台灣日日新報社。
    • ______,1909,大日本地名辭書續編第三:台灣。東京:富山房。
    • ______,1911,台灣總督府理蕃誌稿,第一編。台北:台灣總督府民政部蕃務本署。
    • ______,1928a,台灣文化誌,卷上。東京:刀江書院。
    • ______,1928b,台灣文化誌,卷中。東京:刀江書院。
    • ______,1928c,台灣文化誌,卷下。東京:刀江書院。
    • ______,1992,伊能嘉矩の臺灣踏查日記。台北:台灣風俗文物出版社(日文)

    [編輯]伊能著作中文譯本

    • 伊能嘉矩,1957,台灣番政志,溫吉編譯。台北:台灣省文獻會。
    • ______,1985,台灣文化誌,江慶林等譯。台中:台灣省文獻會。
    • ______,1996a,台灣踏查日記(上),楊南郡譯註。台北:遠流。
    • ______,1996b,台灣踏查日記(下),楊南郡譯註。台北:遠流。
    • ______,1996c,平埔族調查旅行:伊能嘉矩台灣通信選集,楊南郡譯註。遠流。

    [編輯]外部連結

    *****

    伊 能嘉矩,一個以台灣研究為終身志業的名字。在台灣任職的十年期間,從繁華的府城到荒涼的山區,從漢人的歷史遺蹟到原住民的偏僻部落,處處看得到他的踏查足 跡。本書為伊能嘉矩歷次踏查途中所撰寫的私人日記,包括全島教育巡查期間的逐日見聞,以及歸國後舊地重遊的記事。書中披露跋山涉水的艱辛、險遭殺身之禍的 始末,病倒異鄉客棧的辛酸,乃至重遊台灣的喜悅──百年前台灣風土人情躍然紙上,歷歷在目。本書由譯註者楊南郡先生根據日記手稿原件,參照其它文獻譯註成 書。



    作者介紹
    日本岩手縣遠野市人。早年就讀岩手縣師範學校,因抗爭風波遭校方退學 後,即自修苦讀,卓然自立。一八九五年底自願前往甫收歸日本版圖的台灣,矢志從事原住民教育工作。在台期間,歷任總督府雇員、山地事務調查員、囑託等職, 利用公私之便,從事台灣研究,早期以台灣北部平埔族原住民為研究對象,一八九七年五月起開始一百九十二天的全島視察旅行,其後又多次進行局部的調查旅行, 在此期間跋山涉水,歷經種種艱難危險,獲得豐富翔實的田野資料,使得伊能 氏成為台灣族群研究的開創者。一九○六年,辭職返鄉後,仍孜孜於台灣及故鄉 遠野的鄉土研究。一九二五年,由於早年在台踏查所感染的瘧疾復發,不幸以五十九歲英年逝世。伊能氏一生著作等身,與台灣相關著作計有《台灣文化志》、《台 灣蕃政志》、《台灣蕃人事情復命書》、《台灣年表》、《領台十年史》等十餘種;其他相關論文粗估約有七百餘篇,散見於當時報刊、雜誌之中,被學界尊崇為開 展「台灣學」的先驅。
    譯者介紹
    台灣省台南縣人,一九五五年畢業於台大外文系。在工作之餘,從事登山、台灣南島諸語族文化、史蹟古道、遺址探勘研究,長達三十年之久。現專事譯述寫作,參與並指導大學登山社團從事區域踏勘與研究工作。本書榮獲順益原住民博物館一九九四年獎助譯作。著述:
    (一)《合歡越嶺古道調查報告》(分東、西段兩本,一九八六及一九九○年出版)。
    (二)《八通關古道調查研究報告》(分東、西段兩本,一九八七及一九八八年出版)。
    (三)《雪霸國家公園登山步道系統調查研究報告》(一九九一年出版)。
    (四)《與子偕行》(報導文學,與徐如林合著,一 九九三年出版)。
    (五)《台灣百年前的足跡》(一九九六年出版)。
    (六)《尋訪月亮的腳印》(一九九六年出版)。


    目錄
    總序 劉斌雄
    序文一 張炎憲
    序文二 洪敏麟
    譯者序
    凡例
    第一篇 巡台日乘
    〈巡台日乘〉解題
    明治三十年(一八九七)五月
    明治三十年(一八九七)六月
    明治三十年(一八九七)七月
    明治三十年(一八九七)八月
    明治三十年(一八九七)九月
    明治三十年(一八九七)十月
    明治三十年(一八九七)十一月
    明治三十年(一八九七)十二月
    第二篇 東瀛遊記
    〈東瀛遊記〉解題
    小序
    〈南遊日乘〉
    一九○○年伊能嘉矩南台灣踏查路線示意圖
    〈南遊日乘〉解題
    明治三十三年(一九○○)七月
    明治三十三年(一九○○)八月
    明治三十三年(一九○○)九月
    〈澎湖踏查〉
    〈澎湖踏查〉解題
    明治三十三年(一九○○)十二月
    明治三十四年(一九○一)一月
    第三篇 遊台日草
    〈遊台日草〉解題
    明治四十二年(一九○九)九月
    明治四十二年(一九○九)十月
    明治四十二年(一九○九)十一月
    第四篇 南游日乘
    〈南游日乘〉解題
    明治四十五年(一九一二)五月
    明治四十五年(一九一二)六月
    附錄
    附錄一 里程換算表
    附錄二 伊能嘉矩年譜
    附錄三 伊能嘉矩有關台灣著作目錄
    附圖
    一八九七年伊能嘉矩、 粟野傳之丞台灣巡察路線示意圖






    精采試閱
    二十八日在鳳山調查台灣南部烏鬼蕃的事蹟,多半承盧德嘉氏幫忙。烏鬼 蕃是什麼蕃人呢?《續修台灣縣志》有如下記載:烏鬼,蕃國名,紅毛奴也。其人遍體純黑,入水不沈,走海面如平地。《鳳山縣采訪冊》則說:「烏鬼蕃,頷下生 鰓,如魚鰓然,能伏海中數日。」口碑中的遺跡有兩處,一個在舊鳳山縣東北方的烏鬼埔山,另一個在小琉球島。《鳳山縣采訪冊》又說:烏鬼埔山.在觀音里,縣 北三十八里,……相傳紅毛時,為烏鬼聚居於此,今遺址尚存。樵採者常掘地得瑪瑙珠、奇石諸寶。蓋荷蘭時所埋也。石洞,在天臺澳尾(小琉球)相傳舊時烏鬼番 聚族而居,….‥後泉州人乘夜放火盡燔斃之,今其洞尚存。東港人洪占春應我的查詢,提筆寫下答語:小琉球嶼,前有烏鬼蕃穴居於其地。今遺址在天台澳,現存 穴內有白螺盤,蓋烏鬼蕃所遺也。其他關於烏鬼蕃的記載,見於《重修台灣縣志》.烏鬼橋,在永康里,紅毛時烏鬼所築,後圯,里眾重建。.烏鬼井,在鎮北坊, 水源極盛,雖旱不竭。……先是,紅毛今烏鬼鑿井,砌以箖茶,亦名箖荼井。今改甃磚甓。舟人需水,咸取汲焉。烏鬼蕃是什麼樣的人類呢?這是有待今後研究的一 個課題。現在只從上面引用的地方志史料,作一個歸納, (一)烏鬼蕃皮膚黑而下巴有怪異的特徵 (無法知道下巴的突起物是身體的一部分,或是從體外加裝的飾物?)烏鬼蕃天生習慣於海中活動。(二)烏鬼蕃分布於南起小琉球島,北至台南的區域,以鳳山為 中心分布,相傳現在仍有遺跡。(三)相傳烏鬼蕃所留下的東西,是瑪腦珠、奇石、各種寶石及白螺盤。(四)烏鬼蕃曾經被荷蘭人當奴隸役使過。(五)烏鬼蕃曾 經被漢人焚殺。
    有了上面的歸納事現在仍有以下的疑問,「烏鬼蕃是膚色呈黑的人類,曾經有意或無意間移住於小琉球島,其中,部 分的烏鬼蕃在三百年前被荷蘭人帶到台灣本烏來當奴隸役使;部分留在小琉球島的烏鬼蕃是在二百年前遭受漢人虐殺,終於滅族的嗎?」「從小琉球島向台灣島西南 部移動的平埔族「Siraiya小群」〔西拉族〕,是因為遭受烏鬼蕃驅逐的嗎?因為荷蘭人據台的時候,這些小琉球島上的平埔族才逐漸遷到台來,直到漢人占 據小琉球島的時候,這一批平埔族已經開始漸漸消失了。」文獻上查過了烏鬼蕃的事蹟後,雇用人力車從鳳山出發。剛從西門出城不到數町處,暴雨沛然,烈風愈 驟,行路上滿溢的泥水淹沒了車輪,再用力拖拉也無法移動,我在車上拼命勉勵車伕,強拉之下車體突然橫倒於泥漿中。幸而人員沒有淹死,但上半身全濕,雨勢更 加驟急,人車再次顛倒於泥水中。我對車伕連續大喊「細膩!」,車伕也連續哀叫「艱苦!」,無論是車上的人或拉車的人,衣服盡濕,行李也泡濕了.也來不及收 拾、整理,只是憂慮著不要再三重蹈覆轍而已。中午時分,好不容易抵達連雅寮〔漁村,今高堆市苓雅區〕,一到碼頭,但見激浪跳岸,舟伕都說沒有辦法操舟,不 得已跑到一所古廟避雨休息。不久雨變小了,風勢也稍微收斂了,雇用一隻舢板小舟到對岸的旗後〔高雄市旗津〕。小舟行駛時被巨浪所阻,操槳極難,幾乎花了半 小時才到對岸。剛才在人力車上泡濕了下半身,現在在小舟上又將上半身給海水打濕了,全身都泡在水裡。我費盡力氣上到一個客棧,忽然瘴氣發作,感覺全身倦 怠,終日倒臥在病床上養護,外面的風雨依舊未息。(參見本書第462-465頁)



    附方豪先生的後記
     
      今年五月,臺灣省文獻委員會刊行胡適之先生的父親鐵花先生有關臺灣的兩種遺著:一種是臺灣日記,一種是臺灣稟啟存稿,彙刊為「臺灣紀錄兩 種」。在光緒二十年正月初二日、初五、初六日和三月初一日的日記中,我發現鐵花先生還寫過「臺東州採訪修志冊,」而這本採訪冊就列在當時纂修的臺灣通志 (稿本)卷十九和卷二十。於是我在八月十日公論報的臺灣風土第一四一期發表了一篇「胡鐵花先生與臺東州採訪修志冊」,並寄給胡先生一份。在那篇文中我糾正 了伊能嘉矩《臺灣文化志》中對這本採訪冊撰人推測的錯誤;我介紹了採訪冊的內容;我也列舉了冊中關於鐵花先生本人的事蹟;我又認定通志卷二十七臺東昭忠祠所附 「文武員弁勇丁名冊」也是鐵花先生所擬的;最後我說明在通志其他卷內,還有轉載臺東州採訪冊的地方。稍後,我又託學生鈔了一份「臺東州採訪修志冊」和「文 武員弁勇丁名冊」,一併寄給胡先生。胡先生讀到我的短文,收到採訪冊鈔本,非常高興,他寫信告訴我他身邊還有他父親的文集鈔本,不過不是自己編的,內有 「記臺灣臺東州疆域道里表地方情形並書後」一篇,共二千五百餘字,其中書後佔七百五十字,和採訪冊的建置沿革相同,更足證明採訪冊是他父親的遺稿。胡先生 把他父親的那篇遺文鈔了一份,用採訪冊仔細校了一遍,然後寄給我,要我作一序或跋,送大陸雜誌發表。可是我收到後,發現有些疑問,同時我又參考了光緒五年 夏獻綸的臺灣輿圖並說,於是我把鐵花先生的遺文和胡先生的校語,重鈔一份,再寄到紐約;胡先生又校改了幾處,再寄回給我。因著航空事業的進步,為這篇文 字,我們信件來回了六、七次,這篇文稿也在中美間飛行了幾次,然後才決定付印。付印前我又不放心臺大所藏的傳鈔本臺灣通志,再借省立臺北圖書館的鈔本來校 閱,結果又發現採訪冊原本有兩處和集本相同,而是臺大傳鈔本鈔錯了。

      臺灣省文獻委員會刊印「臺灣紀錄兩種」時,如把稟啟存稿依照日子,印在當天的日記後,豈不更便於稽考?我曾舉一例告訴胡先生。日記卷一、光緒十八年四 月初五日日記,有一句說:「城中及城外無安靶處」,羅爾綱先生在「及」字下註說:「綱按及字疑為云字」,大約羅先生以為城中不能安靶,所以有此註;但若一 查同年同月初九日的申報文件,記初五日巡閱鳳山軍營說:「因城內外無空地可作操場,是以點名而未校靶。」此處所說「城內外」和日記所說「城中及城外」完全 符合。胡先生第一次回信,對於把稟啟存稿依照日子印在當天的日記後,說:「此意我完全贊同。」又說:「先生所舉『及』字一例最確。」第二次回信說:「先人 臺灣紀錄,我依照先生指示,用印本剪貼,重編為臺灣日記與稟啟三卷。」因為鐵花先生自編年譜,到四十一歲為止,胡先生近來正在替他父親續編年譜,主要的步 驟,是先把他父親的詩文稟啟編入日記。所以在給我的信中說:「最近我校讀先父臺灣遺著兩種,即將日記所記稟啟各件的月日,注在稟啟無月日各件之下。」又 說:「可惜稟啟存稿不完全,詩文又多無月日,當先考訂詩文各件的年月日,然後儘可能選擇材料為年譜之用。」在這裡我們可以看出流寓海外的胡先生,是怎樣的 不忘他已故的父親、不忘臺灣和他一貫的治史方法;我們也可以看到他父親是怎樣的能在五、六十年前,便很詳細的注意到臺灣東部的地理情形和它的重要性。四十 年十一月二十二日方豪謹跋。

    *****
    http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%81%A0%E9%87%8E%E5%B8%82
    遠野物語(とおのものがたり)是柳田國男1910年明治43年)發表的傳說集。日本民俗學的名著。柳田國男整理岩手縣遠野町(現・遠野市)出身的佐佐木喜善所說的遠野民話。內容描述天狗河童座敷童子山人神隱、死者等相關的傳說,全119話。之後又發表續編『遠野物語拾遺』,全299話。
    此書周作人先生介紹過
    遠野物語研究(創刊平成八年度) 是的遠野物語研究所 出版的 第3號 特集 伊能嘉矩の世界 (1999年3月)


    伊能嘉矩:臺灣歷史民族誌的展開

    Ino Kanori and the Emergence of Historical Ethnography in Taiwan


      「學者、文人、著作家、奇才」,這是日本統治臺灣初期,在臺日人對伊能嘉矩的稱讚;歷來臺灣學者稱他是臺灣歷史研究的「金字塔」、「巨峰」、「奠基者」。別號「臺史公」的伊能嘉矩,來自日本東北鄉村遠野,隨著近代日本帝國的擴張,來到臺灣,一步步展開其臺灣研究的踏查足跡。

      伊能嘉矩集官員、人類學家、民俗學家、歷史學家與記者的身分於一身,本書即為其代表性傳記,是在帝國研究、概念史、人類學、以及東亞史等各領域之中極受矚目的新作。

      本書透過對伊能嘉矩作品的分析,呈現他的一生及其所屬時代。更透過伊能嘉矩,追蹤當代臺灣歷史文化建構的殖民印跡。誠如作者所言,「回到伊能嘉矩的時代,是為了重新在當下透過伊能嘉矩看到我們這個時代」。

      全書內容主要為伊能嘉矩的生平傳記,以及針對其作品及其學術思想研究的評論。書中附上百幅珍貴圖片,及表格、年譜、著作目錄等資料。

      在生平傳記方面,作者陳偉智以其多年來對伊能嘉矩的研究,根據許多一手史料及《伊能嘉矩先生小傳》、「伊能嘉矩與臺灣研究」展覽資料等豐富資源,介紹伊能嘉矩的人生經歷。在明治維新前一年誕生的伊能,其人生軌跡也隨著近代日本的展開與擴張,而有不同階段的發展。隨著近代日本發展,伊能嘉矩從遠野到東京,再到臺灣,然後再回到遠野;在帝國中心的東京、內國鄉村遠野,以及海外擴張所獲的殖民地臺灣,展開其人生與知識探索的旅程。馬關條約之後,伊能嘉矩於1895年動身來臺。在臺灣,伊能以臺灣總督府下層官員的身分,展開其「臺灣人類學」的研究計畫。他從事全島原住民調查,並出版臺灣歷史研究專著,成為臺灣研究的知識權威。

      在研究評論方面,作者藉由伊能的手稿、臺灣原住民歷史民族誌《臺灣蕃人事情》、臺灣歷史書寫作品《臺灣志》、《臺灣文化志》等,分析伊能的臺灣人類學構想、歷史文化理論以及各種學術思想。

      歷史學家楊雲萍曾言:「臺灣研究的都市」的任一曲巷小路,沒有一處沒有伊能嘉矩的「日影」的映照,這句話充分說明了伊能嘉矩在臺灣研究領域的重要地位。在殖民地時代曾經是臺灣通的伊能嘉矩,是臺灣研究近代知識生產的先行者。在戰後,伊能仍然繼續以或顯或隱的形式出現。換言之,雖然伊能嘉矩在來臺十年後離開臺灣返回日本,並於1925年去世,但就其影響而言,伊能嘉矩其實從未離開臺灣。

    名家推薦

      吳密察(國立臺灣大學歷史學系兼任教授)
      胡家瑜(國立臺灣大學人類學系教授)
      張隆志(中央研究院臺灣史研究所副研究員、國立清華大學人文社會學院學士班主任)
      費德廉(Douglas L. Fix,美國里德學院歷史系教授)
      Paul D. Barclay(美國拉法葉學院歷史系副教授)
      松田京子(日本南山大學人文學部日本文化學科教授)
      聯合推薦                                                     

      本書以綿密的文獻檔案史料與民族誌資料解讀為基礎,全面檢視「臺史公」伊能嘉矩在田野文獻、族群分類及歷史研究上的先驅性貢獻及時代脈絡。作者結合學術史及後殖民研究的雙重視角,詳細剖析伊能臺灣研究的跨國網絡與知識系譜,進而解明日本殖民地學術的文化政治意涵。並從公共歷史的觀點,深入觀察解嚴以來關於伊能的各種紀念出版與展示活動,從而對其臺灣研究業績提出嶄新的解釋和評價。
      從遠野到臺灣、從文獻到田野、從歷史到當代,本書不但是提供讀者迄今關於伊能最完整而深刻的學術傳記,更為臺灣史學史及後殖民史學,提供了細緻而動人的研究範例。──張隆志(中研院臺灣史研究所副研究員、國立清華大學人文社會學院學士班主任)

      《伊能嘉矩:臺灣歷史民族誌的展開》的出版讓我們看到年輕學者陳偉智近年來所下的功夫與努力。與前人的研究相較,作者在本書不但介紹這位早期「臺灣通」──伊能嘉矩的人生經歷和學術旅程,也運用其對後殖民理論之深厚理解來批判伊能歷史文化理論內涵的政治性。若想了解伊能嘉矩之雙重知識脈絡、時代背景或研究方法,本書是必讀的好作品。
      作者另外的貢獻乃是讓讀者更了解自己的歷史想像(包括臺灣或原住民主體、現今的族群分類範疇、基本空間單元等)有多少還依賴著伊能嘉矩百年前所建構的殖民論述。正如作者在書尾所言,「回到伊能嘉矩的時代,是為了重新在當下透過伊能嘉矩看到我們這個時代」。──費德廉(Douglas L. Fix,美國里德學院歷史系教授)

      本書是討論兼具官員、人類學家、民俗學家、歷史學家以及記者身分的伊能嘉矩之代表性傳記,是帝國研究、概念史、人類學、以及東亞史等各領域之中受到歡迎的一本新作。這本傑出的研究著作是基於仔細的、領域廣泛的第一手史料研究,而且它提出了更大的問題:包括制度化的知識以及社會界線的本質、民族以及種族間的關係。在這本書的許多優點之中,作者廣泛性的研究平衡了同情的以及批判的觀點,描繪出伊能的制度性、文學的、以及組織的臺灣原住民研究,揭示了其複雜以及重層的計畫。本書也說明了伊能如何成功扮演原住民文化報導者、日本官員、田野探查者,以及學者的多重角色,以發展其種族分類與歷史論述,至今仍影響臺灣與日本的政治與學術。伊能嘉矩模糊了官僚與學界、學術與新聞學、以及理論與實務的界線,不僅在他所屬的時代取得了成就,並且持續地影響了後來。簡單來說,伊能嘉矩的故事闡述了在帝國的年代中,現代社會學知識的政治基礎。──Paul D. Barclay(美國拉法葉學院歷史系副教授)

      伊能嘉矩於日本殖民統治初期渡臺,主要以人類學以及文獻史學的方法詳細地調查有關臺灣的「文化」,並遺留下相當多的研究成果。在思考殖民地支配與學術的關連性,以及有關臺灣「文化」在20世紀前半的論述空間之方面,考察伊能臺灣研究的方法,是特別重要的課題。關於這樣的主題,本書作者陳偉智長年來以銳利的問題意識、並陸續發表了優秀的研究。這本書為其集大成的研究成果,全書貫穿了審慎的方法論、細心的資料分析,以及簡單易懂的敘述。擁有這些特色的本書,在逼近伊能嘉矩臺灣研究的全貌的同時,也見到了其影響的廣袤,本書的出版很令人期待。──松田京子(日本南山大學人文學部日本文化學科教授)
     

    作者介紹

    作者簡介

    陳偉智


      美國紐約大學(NYU)歷史系博士候選人,臺大國際學程兼任講師,曾任宜蘭文獻委員會委員、國立宜蘭大學講師、紐約大學講師。專攻臺灣近代史、歷史與社會理論、歷史人類學以及人類學史。曾發表〈知識與權力:伊能嘉矩與臺灣原住民研究〉、〈田代安定與《臺東殖民地預查報文》〉、〈自然史、人類學與臺灣近代「種族」知識的建構〉、〈「患ったのは時代の病」――鶏籠生とその周辺〉、〈顏智在臺灣:1920年代臺灣反殖民運動的國際主義契機〉、〈戰爭、文化與世界史:從吳新榮〈獻給決戰〉一詩探討新時間空間化的論述系譜〉等論文。共編著《伊能嘉矩與臺灣研究特展專刊》、《田代安定宜蘭調查史料研究》。
     

    目錄

    圖輯
    「臺灣研究先行者」序言
    前言

    第一章遠野與臺灣:從鄉村到殖民地
      一、從遠野到東京
      二、從東京到臺灣
      三、從臺灣回到遠野
      四、位處帝國邊緣,以及再生

    第二章重層的知識網絡:「臺灣人類學」的構想
      一、殖民遭逢的再現:平野秋夫與伊能嘉矩
      二、人類學家的登臺:田代安定、伊能嘉矩與鳥居龍藏
      三、東京人類學會與臺灣人類學會
      四、臺灣人類學會的「人類的理學研究」
      五、臺灣原住民研究的展開
      六、臺灣漢人的調查構想與展開

    第三章族群分類知識的形成:殖民地人類學與《臺灣蕃人事情》
     一、人群分類知識的建構
    (一)生與熟
    (二)平埔蕃的課題
    (三)全島蕃人調查的登場
    (四)修正與再現
     二、族群分類知識的科學性宣稱
     三、伊能人類學的延續

    第四章歷史知識的建構:臺灣史研究的展開
    一、渡南觀光:來臺初期的臺灣史筆記
    二、臺灣在世界之中
    三、地理歷史教科書編纂
    四、臺灣全志的登場

    第五章方法、田野、理論:伊能嘉矩的歷史文化理論
    一、伊能的田野現場
    (一)媒介:伊能的語言能力
    (二)田野中的社會關係
    二、殖民地人類學的田野、理論與權力
    (一)分析方法與知識建構
    (二)伊能的文化理論
    (三)描述的與比較的民族誌
    (四)從「人的人類」到「國的人類」
    (五)公共歷史
    (六)國族主義、進化主義與「異己」研究

    第六章影響與再生:殖民閱讀與後殖民挪用
    一、影響
    二、正典化
    三、挪用與再生
    四、公共歷史中的伊能嘉矩

    結論
    一、殖民地歷史民族誌的展開
    二、「我們要前進」:伊能再踏查

    後記
    註解
    附錄一  伊能嘉矩臺灣研究書籍著作目錄
    附錄二  戰後伊能嘉矩臺灣研究書籍與論文:翻譯與復刻 1945-2013
    附錄三  伊能嘉矩年譜
    參考書目

    前言(摘錄)
      
      記得有人說:在「小說都市」的任一曲巷小路,沒有一處沒有LeoTolstoy的「日影」的映照。假使我們學了某氏的口吻,可以說:「臺灣研究的都市」的任一曲巷小路,沒有一處沒有伊能嘉矩的「日影」的映照。――楊雲萍1949
      
      在臺灣研究的領域中,不論是否從事歷史研究或是人類學研究,大概沒有不知道伊能嘉矩(1867-1925)的人吧。甚至,在學院的專門知識或是學術論文專著之外,屬於公共歷史學或是大眾歷史學的一般社會文化知識場域,在電視媒體的紀錄片中、在教科書或通俗歷史讀物裡,乃至博物館展覽或是較有規劃的觀光旅遊中心,最近十幾年以來,也常常可以看到伊能嘉矩出現在這些媒介上。
      
      如同歷史學家楊雲萍於1949年所寫的評論所預示的,「『臺灣研究的都市』的任一曲巷小路,沒有一處沒有伊能嘉矩的『日影』的映照」。不只戰前的殖民地時代、戰後初期乃至今日;不論是學院裡的臺灣研究,或是社會中的公共歷史,來自日本東北岩手縣丘陵群山中鄉村遠野的伊能嘉矩,在百年前曾經是日本帝國南方殖民地的臺灣,留下了顯著的印跡。
      
      透過重新閱讀伊能嘉矩,探索伊能嘉矩的臺灣研究的知識建構層位,追蹤這些印跡形成的線索,能有助於我們了解這位影響了日後臺灣研究發展的伊能嘉矩其人其學之外,更希望透過對籠罩臺灣研究伊能嘉矩日影折射的解析,進一步了解其反景顯影當時的歷史脈絡與知識生成條件,以及後來持續映照著不同時期的知識生產狀況。
      
      伊能嘉矩一方面是作為學者的歷史人物,其人生的足跡,交織著重層的知識與制度的網絡,更與近代日本的展開,特別是帝國的擴張息息相關。其臺灣研究的知識生產,既是時代的產物,同時也參與了其所身處的時代。另方面,伊能嘉矩一生事業之所關注,其足跡與人生履歷,使得在近代日本內國的與帝國範圍內的兩個周緣地域,亦即遠野與臺灣,重疊在一起。透過他的經歷,我們看到了近代日本在帝國邊界內外空間上的展開與疊合,使得伊能嘉矩本人變成一個饒富象徵與實質意義生產場所,其生前與死後,皆在這兩個帝國的周緣地帶,產生了各種漣漪。
      
      遠野在戰前因日本民俗學大家柳田國男的《遠野物語》而著名,戰後更因此成為日本的「民間傳說的故鄉」(民話の里),被戰後日本文化民族主義形塑成在民間傳說與日常生活中保存了日本文化本真性(culturalauthenticity)的場所。伊能在遠野──不論是否透過柳田國男的襯托──以鄉土史研究先行者的身分被記得,成為遠野的歷史代表人物之一。在臺灣,在殖民地時代曾經是臺灣通的伊能嘉矩,其作品成為近代知識生產中劃定「臺灣研究」範圍與定義研究議題的先行者。在戰後,伊能仍然繼續以或顯或隱的形式被閱讀、被引用、被翻譯、被展示,甚至被抄襲。換言之,雖然伊能嘉矩在來臺十年之後離開臺灣返回日本,並於1925年去世,但就其影響而言,伊能嘉矩或許從未離開臺灣。
      
      1980年代臺灣民主化之後,臺灣研究獲得了市民權,成為臺灣社會重建歷史意識的資源。重新回顧近代史,殖民地時期的歷史,既成為歷史記憶重建的資源,也成為當時臺灣社會再出發的起點。1990年代,伊能嘉矩的許多作品在臺灣翻譯出版,而其戰前已出版的作品,也陸續再版刊行。一百年之後,伊能再度在臺灣登場,不再是百年前近代日本帝國擴張浪潮上的一波紋,而是臺灣民主化之後,重新追尋自己身分時的挪用資源。「臺灣研究」在伊能嘉矩手中,曾經作為客觀化的研究對象而被定義,百年之後,則是主客對調,不管是透過伊能追尋曾經失落的歷史,或是以批判的眼光檢討伊能的文化理論建構基礎概念,伊能嘉矩成為臺灣自我定義的主體化過程中,所挪用或者轉化的資源。從客體到主體,在伊能嘉矩與臺灣研究之間,從十九世紀末到二十世紀末,一世紀之間,主客交換。如果百年前曾經踏查臺灣的伊能嘉矩,如歷史學家楊雲萍所言的,影響了臺灣研究的每一個角落。百年後我們對伊能的再踏查,更是一種隨著臺灣的歷史發展民主化之後,臺灣歷史知識本身也同樣經歷了民主化之後的一種再重構。在伊能嘉矩作為臺灣研究的先行者消逝之後,臺灣研究仍站在伊能嘉矩的肩膀上,或繼承、或批判,不斷地繼續前進。
      
      本書介紹並討論伊能嘉矩的臺灣研究,並檢討其知識生產的方法、建構的理論,以及分析其作品在不同時期的傳播與挪用。在介紹本書各章內容大要之前,先回顧歷來的伊能嘉矩研究史。
      
      以下分為兩個部分:生平傳記以及研究評論。在生平傳記的部分,從1928年《臺灣文化志》上卷書前,伊能嘉矩弟子板澤武雄的〈伊能先生小傳〉開始,1939年板澤於伊能逝世十五週年祭時編輯出版《伊能嘉矩先生小傳》,板澤的傳記就成為認識伊能行誼的重要資料。1990年代遠野鄉土史家荻野馨根據伊能的日記、作品以及手稿,整理了詳細的傳記以及年譜資料。伊能的傳記研究,主要由其門生與遠野的地方史研究者、社會教育機構出版推廣,從1920年代以來,實際上是與遠野的愛鄉心之鄉土認同建構息息相關。而這些資料,也為後來臺灣在介紹或是研究伊能嘉矩時提供了重要的生平資訊。從日治末期、戰後初期直到1990年代臺灣史獲得市民權的時代,主要是透過板澤武雄或是荻野馨的傳記資料來介紹或是重新認識伊能嘉矩。本文在探討伊能嘉矩的學術旅程時,主要也仰賴這些傳記資料。在伊能的傳記中,我們認識了其生平與成就,而進一步了解其所身處的時代與其所建構的知識,其內容與性質,則有賴於歷來的各種對伊能的研究評論。
      
      對伊能的研究評論,大概可以分為三類:屬於作品內部評論的(1)內容的評價;(2)研究成果性質的討論,以及屬於外部的(3)伊能及其研究的歷史環境與政治脈絡。
      
      (1)內容的評價方面。伊能生前,東京人類學會長坪井正五郎教授即曾讚揚伊能對東京人類學會的貢獻,東京人類學會在五十週年紀念時也將伊能列為有功者之一。柳田國男則指出伊能的臺灣民族誌給當時逐漸以自然科學為主(體質與考古)的東京人類學會,增補了民族學領域(廣義人類學)。不過伊能在日本統治初期的田野調查,在1910年代遭到有長期臺灣原住民田野經驗的森丑之助猛烈而率直的批評,並徹底修正伊能建立的原住民族群分類範圍。只不過,森批評了田野與知識內容,卻也同意伊能對「分類」的基礎概念以及普遍的演化人類學的比較架構。伊能也同時在「人類學」與「歷史學」的臺灣研究學術領域中,建立了其先行者的角色。之後不論是日治中末期,或是戰後日本人類學界的評價,大致上也都以「先行者」來定位伊能嘉矩。至於「歷史學」,則從日治時期楊雲萍開始至今,伊能嘉矩一直被視為是近代歷史學的臺灣研究的開端。
      
      (2)研究成果性質的討論。伊能的臺灣研究在日治時期似乎是從整體的臺灣研究來評價的,人類學被認為是伊能的方法。伊能自己似乎並沒有很強烈的學科界線認同,或許這也內含了某種後來稱之為「區域研究」的跨學科方法。伊能自己甚至認為「民族誌」(伊能用語為「土俗學」[ethnography])與「歷史」之間的界線只是現在與過去之間不同研究對象的任意畫分而已。戰後則逐漸發展成作為人類學家的伊能嘉矩以及作為歷史學家的伊能嘉矩的兩種形象,而這大概也與伊能的作品在戰後臺灣的接受史,以及不同學科知識對其前史的繼承與發展的不同有關。作為歷史學者的伊能嘉矩,在戰後的討論中,除了有針對其史料運用問題的討論外,其臺灣歷史像的建構,也有一些針對具體研究子題的批評。作為人類學者的伊能嘉矩,則是以臺灣原住民民族誌研究的先行者,在學術史的回顧上被討論,到晚近才有將伊能的「科學」還原回當時演化人類學普遍性的比較民族誌理論加以討論。
      
      (3)伊能及其研究的歷史環境與政治脈絡。雖然戰後臺灣對伊能嘉矩的評價中,有從民族觀點立場發出的批評,但似乎更映照出類似批評所在的時代氛圍,以及戰後臺灣籠罩在中國民族主義文化政治的知識生產環境。真正將伊能嘉矩放在其所身處的歷史環境,討論伊能的學知與十九世紀末日本帝國擴張、社會思想,以及文化政治的時空條件之間互涉關係的研究,直到1990年代隨著一波全球後殖民思潮的影響,才逐漸在日本與臺灣出現。伊能嘉矩除了作為重新討論帝國與知識生產之間關係的實證個案之外,透過對伊能的人類學與歷史學知識建構,及其後續的影響的分析,也可以進一步作為討論殖民主義的文化政治與歷史主體建構之間的共構關係與挪用現象。
      
      本書希望能在上述所整理三個歷來的伊能嘉矩研究史基礎上,介紹伊能嘉矩其人其學的歷史,以及透過伊能嘉矩,不論其是否在場,所呈現的時代歷史。最後是關於本書的副標題「臺灣殖民地歷史民族誌的展開」,希望能充分表達伊能臺灣研究的知識形式。伊能曾經對於「土俗」與「歷史」,寫下這樣的話語:
      
      土俗解明現在,歷史則訴說過去。現在與過去,是一條連續線的兩極,歷史是以前的土俗,而土俗則是未來的歷史。現在與過去的限界,只是意味著時間的經過而已。而現用與非現用之間的區別,除了僅僅橫亙其間的事情之外,完全沒有一定的境界線。
      
      對伊能嘉矩而言,民族誌與歷史本來就沒有一定的分界線,而其問題意識與作品更可以看成是用歷史的眼光來看現在的民族誌現象,同時以人類學的比較民族誌精神來研究過去的歷史。伊能的「歷史」概念與「民族誌」想像,是實證歷史學的客觀歷史與演化論人類學理論的比較民族誌的結合,其知識形式是一種歷史民族誌。 

    Ian McEwan: By the Book:the law versus religious belief; The Soloist

    $
    0
    0

     伊恩·麥克伊旺CBEFRSAFRSL(Ian McEwan,1948年6月21日)是一位知名英國小說家作家,第一本短篇小說集《最初的愛情,最後的儀式》即獲得1975年的毛姆獎,曾經以小說《阿姆斯特丹》獲得布克獎的肯定。
      English

    作品在台灣的出版

    • 朱乃長/譯,《無辜者》,業強出版,1995年。
    • 範文美/譯,《贖罪:有關偽證與良心折磨的故事》,正中書局,2002年。
    • 胡依嘉/譯,《彼得的白日夢》,小知堂出版,2002年。
    • 張讓/譯,《初戀異想》,商周出版,2003年。
    • 嚴韻/譯,《持續的愛》,天培文化,2005年。
    • 王文倩/譯,《愛無可忍》,天培文化,2006年。
    • 夏欣茁/譯,《星期六》,天培文化,2007年。
    • 喬萊特(Joe Wright)/導演,《贖罪》,台北市得利影視,2007年。
    • 韓中玥/譯,《卻西爾海灘》,商周出版,2008年。
    • 何穎怡/譯,《阿姆斯特丹》,商周出版,2008年。
    • 韓中玥/譯,《水泥花園》,商周出版,2008年。
    • 趙丕慧/譯,《贖罪》,大田出版,2009年。

    麥克尤恩訪談:最美的閱讀是達致「無我」


    《贖罪》(Atonement)以及最新出版的《甜齒》(Sweet Tooth)的作者認為,最美好的閱讀體驗,是達到“無我”的境界。
    今年你讀過的最好的書是什麼?
    斯蒂芬·塞德利(Stephen Sedley)的《灰燼與火花》(Ashes and Sparks)。 塞德利是英國上訴法院的高級法官,去年退休。這本散文集里的文章涉及個人和國家的一系列問題。就像一位評論員說的,他屬於英國傳統上那種“激進的不墨守成規的人”——這個書名取自17世紀平均派(Leveller)的一本小冊子。但是,如果你對法律沒有任何興趣,你也可以純粹出於智性的愉悅去讀它,這是本 細膩的、精心調和的散文,有辛辣的幽默,巧妙的引用,以及對歷史的驚人解讀。文筆好得連小說家都羨慕。
    你讀的上一本真正偉大的書是什麼?
    濫用大詞已經削弱了“偉大”這個詞的分量,所以我們要慎用。去年,我重讀了《哈姆雷特》(Hamlet)。我認為那個劇本是一座歷史的豐碑——它描 繪了一個完全醒悟了的、懷有疑心的人,他的內心活動完全袒露在我們面前,供我們思考。即使如此,我還是非常不敬地在想:後兩幕好像不如前三幕那麼精彩,哈姆雷特從英國回來之後,那種生死攸關的緊張氣氛好像消失了。我最近重讀的另一本書是喬伊斯的《逝者》(The Dead),這本書我讀了很多遍。它應該被看作是一部中篇小說,一部完美的中篇小說,跟《都柏林人》(Dubliners)這部小說集里的其他小說完全不 同。一年一度的冬季聚會;之後在旅館房間里夫妻二人的誤會與坦白;雪花飄落,睡意朦朧,對死亡的思考——我願意用《逝者》的最後十幾頁與《尤利西斯》中的任何十幾頁相交換。通常,小說都會枝枝蔓蔓,不可能完美。它也不需要完美,也不想完美。詩歌則可以達到完美的境地,讓你一個詞兒都不想改,但是在極少數情 況下,中篇小說也能達到這種境地。
    有沒有哪種文學體裁是你特別喜歡的?
    中篇小說。見上述。
    你讀詩嗎?
    我們家裡的書架上有很多詩集,但是仍然需要花些力氣,才能從對現實的尋常敘述中跳出來,享受隱藏在你周圍的寧靜——集中注意力,哪怕只要三四分鐘。 也許最美好的閱讀體驗,是達到“無我”的境界。完全沉浸在其中,幾乎忘記了自己的存在。我上一次在讀詩時有這種體驗,是在伊麗莎白·畢曉普 (Elizabeth Bishop)的巴西故居的起居室里。我站在角落,遠離眾人的交談,讀着《窗下:黑金城》(Under the Window: Ouro Preto)。窗外的大街以前是供驢子和農民過往的偏僻大道。畢夏普坐在窗下,聽着過往的人說的隻言片語,寫在她的詩中,包括那行非常美麗的詩句:“媽媽 給我梳頭的時候,有點疼。”如今還是那條大街,傳來的卻是轟隆隆的車輪聲——震得房子都在搖晃。我讀完這首詩的時候,朋友們和主人們都已離開了。這種從一 首詩中“返回”到現實的感覺,到底該稱作什麼呢?一種更輕鬆、更溫柔、更宏大的感覺——然後慢慢褪去,但是永遠不會完全消失。
    你還記得第一本讓你大哭的書嗎?
    羅納德·韋爾奇(Ronald Welch)的《金屬護手》(The Gauntlet)。當時我10歲,生病住院,所以有一整天的時間讀這部精彩的兒童歷史小說。書里的主人公彼得好像做夢一樣,回到了600年前中世紀後期 的一座威爾士城堡里。然後經歷了很多驚險的奇遇,參加了很多次戰鬥,還多次放鷹捕獵。最後彼得回到了現代,城堡變成了小說開頭提到的那一堆可怕的廢墟,所 有那些場景和他結識的親愛的小夥伴們都不見了。“他們的骨頭可能已經化成了安靜的蘭福倫教堂庭院里的塵土。”當時這對我來說是全新的概念:時間吞噬我們所 愛的人,把他們變成了塵土;這讓我傷心了好一會兒。但是那個童書小推車上的其他書都不行。第二天我把《金屬護手》又看了一遍。
    如果你可以要求美國總統讀一本書,你會選哪本?
    我不會用政策建議來煩擾總統,或者讓他再看一篇說美國已病入膏肓的短視論文。為了能從整體上給他帶來裨益,我會讓他沉浸在詩歌里。我認為最適合他的是詹姆斯·芬頓(James Fenton) 的作品。他的《詩選》就可以。他的詩歌主題廣泛,風格多樣。其中對衝突深入、睿智的思考(“那些被情勢推入戰爭的人”),可能會讓這位軍隊最高指揮官有所 啟發;《尖叫的男人的歌謠》(The Ballad of the Shrieking Man)中充滿想像力的狂暴,對無理性的人心是一種最佳的度量。裡面還有關於製造事端和野蠻暴政的詩。還有一首可愛的慰問詩,是關於死亡的——《致安德 魯·伍德》(For Andrew Wood)。(“死去的和活着的朋友之間/可能有一個約定”)也有情詩,這些甜蜜、迷人、渴慕的情詩,甚至能(但很可能不會)融化共和黨政敵的心。“我讓 你難堪了嗎?”其中一首詩的倒數第二行這樣問道。
    如果你能與一位作家會面,包括過世的和還活着的,你會選誰?你想從他/她那裡知道什麼?
    對不起,我的答案可能平淡無奇,但是每當我看着一部莎士比亞話劇落幕,即使那部話劇只能算上中等水平,我也會因為我永遠都無法認識這個人或者任何擁 有如此溫暖人心的智慧的人,而感到有些悲傷。我想知道什麼?他的那些小道傳聞,他的情人們,他的宗教信仰(如果有的話),他在倫敦銀街的那段日子,他對 17世紀的英國和政權的看法——17世紀對他來說是新世紀,就像21世紀對我們來說是新世紀一樣。還有他為什麼要退隱到斯特拉特福特。不斷有莎士比亞傳記 出版,莎士比亞與各種機構的往來,我們也知道得很多。那時的英國已經具備現代國家的雛形,十分看重文獻紀錄。但這個隱逸的人一直躲着我們,除非能從某個古 老的閣樓上一個腐爛的箱子里找到一本裴皮斯(Pepys,英國日記作家——譯註)式的日記,否則我們永遠無法了解他。從歷史的角度看,那是不可能的。他已 經遠去了。
    你是否給哪位作家寫過“讀者來信”?他/她回信了嗎?
    同行寫來表示欣賞的信,對我來說是一種極大的鼓舞。(比正面的書評還鼓舞人心。我已經不再看書評了。)當然我偶爾會寫這樣的信。我應該就查蒂·史密斯(Zadie Smith)的《NW》給她寫封信。我的上一封這樣的信是寫給克萊爾·托馬林(Claire Tomalin)的,是關於她寫的狄更斯傳記
    你還記得你收到的最好的讀者來信嗎?它為什麼這麼特別?
    一位意大利讀者寫信告訴我,他是怎樣認識他妻子的。她在公交車上讀我的一本書,而他剛剛看完那本書。他們就開始交談,開始約會。他們現在有三個孩子。我想知道有多少人是因為父母對圖書的喜愛,才得以來到這個人世的。
    你最喜歡自己寫的哪本書?
    目前,我把自己剛寫的《甜齒》排到了《贖罪》之前。
    如果你能變成一個文學人物,你想變成誰?
    我不喜歡機場、長途飛行、以及安檢和入境的長隊,所以我想變成莎士比亞筆下的小精靈帕克,它吹噓說自己能“在40分鐘內繞地球一周”。那樣的話,從倫敦到紐約大概只需要5分鐘。
    你接下來打算讀什麼書?
    我正在看一本關於伊朗和核武器的紙質書——《無情的穆拉》(Mullahs Without Mercy),作者是傑弗里·羅伯森(Geoffrey Robertson),他是英國的一位知名人權律師。這本書介紹了殘暴的革命神權政體的歷史,其中包括一個極少被拿出來討論的事件,就是1988年大規模 處決共產黨員和無神論者囚犯的事。我們不應該讓一個如此無視生命的國家擁有炸彈,另外也包括其他40來個虎視眈眈的國家。
    但是轟炸伊朗並不是解決辦法。羅伯森想通過設立國際人權法來解決這個問題。設計、獲取核武器應該是違反人權的,更別提使用核武器了。那五個大國需要 履行條約規定的義務,開始啟動逐步銷毀核武器的進程。在危急的形勢下,羅伯森指出了一條樂觀的道路。如果我們能將擁有達姆彈定為非法,能讓實行種族滅絕的 暴君接受審判,全球無核化就有了實質性的轉機。
    本文最初發表於2012年12月9日。
    翻譯:王艷

    Ian McEwan: By the Book


    The author of “Atonement” and, most recently, “Sweet Tooth,” believes the greatest reading pleasure has “an element of self-annihilation.”
    What’s the best book you’ve read so far this year? 


    Stephen Sedley’s “Ashes and Sparks.” Sedley was a senior judge in our court of appeal until last year and in this collection of essays he writes on a range of issues that concern the individual and the state. He belongs, as one commentator noted, to the English tradition of radical nonconformism — the title is taken from a 17th-century Leveller pamphlet. But you could have no interest in the law and read his book for pure intellectual delight, for the exquisite, finely balanced prose, the prickly humor, the knack of artful quotation and an astonishing historical grasp. A novelist could be jealous.
    And what was the last truly great book you read?
    Epithet inflation has diminished “great” somewhat so we have to be careful. Last year I reread “Hamlet.” I believe the play really did represent a world historical moment — when there leapt into being a sustained depiction of a fully realized and doubting human being whose inner life is turned outward for our consideration. Even then, I blasphemously wondered whether the last two acts were as great as the first three. Is some vital tension lost when Hamlet returns from England? Another recent encounter has been Joyce’s “The Dead,” which I’ve read many times. It needs to be considered as a novella, the perfect novella, entirely separate from the rest of “Dubliners.” An annual winter party; afterwards, a scene of marital misunderstanding and revelation in a hotel room; a closing reflection on mortality as sleep closes in and snow begins to fall — I’d swap the last dozen pages of “The Dead” for any dozen in “Ulysses.” As a form, the novel sprawls and can never be perfect. It doesn’t need to be, it doesn’t want to be. A poem can achieve perfection — not a word you’d want to change — and in rare instances a novella can too.
    Do you have a favorite literary genre?
    The novella. See above.
    Do you read poetry?
    We have many shelves of poetry at home, but still, it takes an effort to step out of the daily narrative of existence, draw that neglected cloak of stillness around you — and concentrate, if only for three or four minutes. Perhaps the greatest reading pleasure has an element of self-annihilation. To be so engrossed that you barely know you exist. I last felt that in relation to a poem while in the sitting room of Elizabeth Bishop’s old home in rural Brazil. I stood in a corner, apart from the general conversation, and read “Under the Window: Ouro Preto.” The street outside was once an obscure thoroughfare for donkeys and peasants. Bishop reports overheard lines as people pass by her window, including the beautifully noted “When my mother combs my hair it hurts.” That same street now is filled with thunderous traffic — it fairly shakes the house. When I finished the poem I found that my friends and our hosts had left the room. What is it precisely, that feeling of “returning” from a poem? Something is lighter, softer, larger — then it fades, but never completely.
    Do you remember the first book that made you cry?
    It was “The Gauntlet,” by Ronald Welch. I was 10 years old and in hospital, so I had time to read this wonderful historical novel for children in a day. Its hero, Peter, is transported in a dreamlike state back 600 years to a late medieval Welsh castle. Many adventures and battles and much falconry ensue. When at last Peter returns to the present, the castle is the awesome ruin it was in the opening pages, and all the scenes and the dear friends he has made have vanished. “Their bones must have crumbled into dust in the quiet churchyard of Llanferon.” It was a new idea to me then, time obliterating loved ones and turning them to dust — and I was stricken for a while. But no other novel on the children’s book trolley would do. The next day I read “The Gauntlet” again.
    If you could require the president to read one book, what would it be? 
    I wouldn’t trouble the president with advice, or with one more transient treatise on America’s supposed terminal decline. For the sake of the general good, I’d have him absorbed in poetry. What would suit him well, I believe, is the work of James Fenton. His “Selected” would be fine. The range of subject matter and tone is immense. The long, wise reflections on conflict (“Those whom geography condemns to war”) would be instructive to a commander in chief, and the imaginative frenzy of “The Ballad of the Shrieking Man” would give him the best available measure of the irrational human heart. There are poems of mischief and wild misrule. A lovely consolatory poem about death is there, “For Andrew Wood.” (“And there might be a pact between/ Dead friends and living friends.”) And there are the love poems — love songs really, filled with a sweet, teasing, wistful lyricism that could even (but probably won’t) melt the heart of a Republican contender. “Am I embarrassing you?” one such poem asks in its penultimate line.
    If you could meet any writer, dead or alive, who would it be? What would you want to know? 
    I apologize for being obvious, but every time I watch the curtain come down on even a halfway decent production of a Shakespeare play I feel a little sorrowful that I’ll never know the man, or any man of such warm intelligence. What would I want to know? His gossip, his lovers, his religion (if any), the Silver Street days, his thoughts on England and power in the 17th century — as young then as the 21st is for us. And why he’s retiring to Stratford. The biographies keep coming, and there’s a great deal we know about Shakespeare’s interactions with institutions of various kinds. England was already a proto-modern state that kept diligent records. But the private man eludes us and always will until some rotting trunk in an ancient attic yields a Pepys-like journal. But that’s historically impossible. He’s gone.
    Have you ever written a fan letter to an author? Did he or she write back?
    In my experience an appreciative letter from a fellow writer means a lot. (More than a review. I’ve stopped reading reviews.) So of course I write them occasionally. I owe Zadie Smith one for “NW.” The last I wrote was to Claire Tomalin about her biography of Dickens.
    Do you remember the best fan letter you ever received? What made it special?
    An Italian reader wrote to describe how he met his wife. She was on a bus, reading one of my books, one that he himself had just finished. They started talking, they started meeting. They now have three children. I wonder how many people owe their existence to their parents’ love of books.
    Of the books you’ve written, which is your favorite?
    At the moment I put my latest, “Sweet Tooth,” just ahead of “Atonement.”
    If you could be any character from literature, who would it be? 
    I don’t much like airports, long flights and lines for passport control and immigration, so I’d like to take on the form of Shakespeare’s Puck, who boasts of being able to “put a girdle round the earth in 40 minutes.” That would put London to New York at around five minutes.
    What do you plan to read next? 
    I’m well into a book in typescript about Iran and nuclear weapons, “Mullahs Without Mercy” by Geoffrey Robertson, a well-known human rights lawyer here in England. It gives a history of the murderous revolutionary theocracy, including an account of the rarely discussed mass execution of imprisoned communists and atheists in 1988. We do not want a country so careless of life to have the bomb, nor do we want the 40 or so other countries waiting in the wings to have it.
    But bombing Iran is not a solution. Robertson wants to bring international human rights law to bear on the problem. It should be a violation of rights to design or procure, let alone use, a nuclear weapon. The big five need to stand by their treaty obligations and set about the process of steady disarmament. Out of a dire situation, Roberston argues a case for optimism. If we can outlaw the dum-dum bullet, if we can put tyrants on trial for genocide, we can get serious about a nuclear weapon-free world.

    HBO 2010/9/19

    The Soloist
    • Director:Joe Wright
    • AMG Rating:starstarstar
    • Genre: Drama
    • Movie Type: Docudrama
    • Themes: Men's Friendship, Unlikely Friendships, Members of the Press
    • Main Cast: Jamie Foxx, Robert Downey, Jr., Catherine Keener, Tom Hollander, Lisa Gay Hamilton
    • Release Year: 2008
    • Country: US
    • Run Time: 109 minutes
    • MPAA Rating: PG13

    Plot

    Academy Award-nominated Atonement director Joe Wright teams with screenwriter Susannah Grant to tell the true-life story of Nathaniel Ayers, a former cello prodigy whose bouts with schizophrenia landed him on the streets after two years of schooling at Juilliard. Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) is a disenchanted journalist stuck in a dead-end job. His marriage to a fellow journalist having recently come to an end, Steve is wandering through Los Angeles' Skid Row when he notices a bedraggled figure playing a two-stringed violin. The figure in question is Ayers (Jamie Foxx), a man whose promising career in music was cut short due to a debilitating bout with mental illness. The more Lopez learns about Ayers, the greater his respect grows for the troubled soul. How could a man with such remarkable talent wind up living on the streets, and not be performing on-stage with a symphony orchestra? Later, as Lopez embarks on a quixotic quest to help Ayers pull his life together and launch a career in music, he gradually comes to realize that it is not Ayers whose life is being transformed, but his own. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

    Review

    When The Soloist was originally intended to be a 2008 Oscar hopeful, the initial advertising campaign made it look like a cross between Shine and A Beautiful Mind. And the setup certainly smacks of Oscar bait: Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.), recovering from an especially nasty bike accident, meets the homeless Nathaniel Anthony Ayers (Jamie Foxx) during a walk through the park. Because Nathaniel plays a violin with just two strings -- and plays it rather well -- he catches Steve's eye, and Steve, always on the lookout for a story, strikes up a conversation. When the obviously mentally ill Nathaniel mentions that he went to Juilliard, Steve decides to investigate the man's life, and discovers that the onetime cello prodigy suffered a schizophrenic breakdown while he was at the school, leading to a life on the street. Steve proceeds to write a column about Nathaniel, and the overwhelmingly positive response to the story prompts the gift of a cello from a reader. After delivering the present to Nathaniel, Steve slowly finds himself, almost against his nature, trying to make life better for the man.

    This kind of movie quickly falls apart if the actors overplay the inherent sadness of the situation, and thankfully the stellar cast never makes that mistake. Although he's become more famous for performances in blockbusters like Iron Man and Tropic Thunder, Robert Downey Jr. hasn't lost an ounce of his dramatic chops. He makes Steve selfish and prickly, but also so charming and funny that you understand why his subjects trust him with their life stories. You can also see why his ex-wife (Catherine Keener), who is now his boss, stays close to him even though she left their marriage. Steve begins asking himself why he cares so much about what happens to Nathaniel, questioning his own motivations -- is it really an ongoing act of selfless goodness, or is he just doing it for his career? Steve doesn't find a satisfying answer, until realizing that this new friendship offers the chance for him to become a better person.

    As the catalyst for Steve's change, Jamie Foxx pulls off a disciplined, subtle performance. Foxx isn't interested in earning our pity -- a choice that undermines so many actors playing mentally ill characters. You never question the debilitating nature of Nathaniel's disorder, but you also never question that he's able to take care of himself to the best of his ability, surviving -- however miserably -- in L.A.'s large homeless community. Both he and Downey avoid obvious melodramatic choices, and in doing so they create unfailingly honest portraits of complicated people.

    Now this all may sound like the kind of trite and sappy "feel-good" story that gives Hollywood a bad name. But director Joe Wright and screenwriter Susannah Grant maintain an emotionally controlled tone that keeps the film from sliding into goopy melodrama. They make sure Steve, not Nathaniel, is the center of the story, and by focusing more on the man who wants to help than the man who needs help, they've created a unique movie rather than just another example of cookie-cutter Oscar bait. ~ Perry Seibert, Rovi

    Cast

    Rachael Harris - Leslie; Stephen Root - Curt Reynolds; Nelsan Ellis - David Carter; Jena Malone - Lab Technician


    *****

    Ian McEwan: the law versus religious belief

    The conjoined twins who would die without medical intervention, a boy who refused blood transfusions on religious grounds … The novelist on the stories from the family courts that inspired his latest book
     Podcast: Ian McEwan on The Children Act
     Video: Ian McEwan on religion in the 21st century
     Video: Ian McEwan on Ashya King
    Ian McEwan
    'The family division is rooted in the same ground as fiction, where all of life’s vital interests lie'… Ian McEwan. Photograph: Karen Robinson
    Some years ago I found myself at dinner with a handful of judges – abench is the collective noun. They were talking shop, and I was politely resisting the urge to take notes. The conversation was exotic in content, rather familiar in form. There was a fair amount of banter, of chuckling and teasing as they recalled certain of each other's judgments. They quoted well-turned phrases and fondly remembered ingenious conclusions. Clearly, they read each other closely. They may have been a little harder on the judgments of those not present. How easily, I thought at the time, this bench could be mistaken for a group of novelists discussing each other's work, reserving harsher strictures for those foolish enough to be absent.
    1. The Children Act
    2. by Ian McEwan
    1. Tell us what you think: Star-rate and review this book
    At one point, our host, Sir Alan Ward, an appeal court judge, wanting to settle some mild disagreement, got up and reached from a shelf a bound volume of his own judgments. An hour later, when we had left the table for coffee, that book lay open on my lap. It was the prose that struck me first. Clean, precise, delicious. Serious, of course, compassionate at points, but lurking within its intelligence was something like humour, or wit, derived perhaps from its godly distance, which in turn reminded me of a novelist's omniscience. I continued to note the parallels between our professions, for these judgments were like short stories, or novellas; the background to some dispute or dilemma crisply summarised, characters drawn with quick strokes, the story distributed across several points of view and, towards its end, some sympathy extended towards those whom, ultimately, the narrative would not favour.
    These were not cases in the criminal courts, where it must be decided beyond reasonable doubt whether a man is a villain or the unlucky victim of the Crown Prosecution Service. Nothing so black and white, nothing sonoir or pulp. These stories were in the family division, where much of ordinary life's serious interests lie: love and marriage, and then the end of both, fortunes querulously divided, the bitterly contested destinies of children, parental cruelty and neglect, deathbed issues, medicine and disease, religious or moral disputes complicating matrimonial breakdown.
    The choices for a judge are often limited to the lesser harm rather than the greater good. When mother and father cannot agree, the court reluctantly assumes the role of the "judicial reasonable parent". Here, in my lap, were realistically conceived characters moving through plausible, riveting situations, raising complex ethical questions. If these judgments had been fiction, they would have belonged in the tradition of moral exploration that includes Jane Austen, Leo Tolstoy, George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad.
    Then I came across an arresting sentence. It was in the opening paragraphs of a judgment in the court of appeal in 2000 concerning baby conjoined twins. Untreated, both would die. Separated, the weaker must perish, for it had a failing heart, virtually no brain and "no lungs to cry with". Only its healthier sibling kept it alive by way of their shared circulatory system. And slowly, the weak baby was sapping the strength of the strong. The hospital wanted to operate to save the viable child, but surgery would involve deliberately killing its twin by severing an aorta. The parents objected for religious reasons: God gave life; only God could take it away. Public interest was intense.
    On the face of it, a simple moral premise: one rescued and flourishing child is better than two dead. But how was the law to sanction murder, and set aside the insistence of the parents, endorsed by the then Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, that both children should be left to die?
    Alan WardAppeal court judge Sir Alan Ward. Photograph: Johnny Green/PA
    In his introductory remarks Ward had offered a reminder to the general public: "This court is a court of law, not of morals, and our task has been to find, and our duty is then to apply, the relevant principles of law to the situation before us – a situation which is unique."
    What is lawful is not always identical to what is right. Sometimes it falls to a judge to align the two. Ward's judgment runs to more than 80 closely typed pages. It is beautifully written, delicate and humane, philosophically astute, ethically sensitive and scholarly, with a wide range of historical and legal references.
    The best of judgments, as I was to discover, are similarly endowed. They form a neglected subgenre of our literature, read in their entirety by almost no one except law students – and fellow judges. And in the family division particularly, they present a hoard of personal drama and moral complexity. They are on fiction's terrain, even though they are bound, unlike the fortunate novelist, to a world of real people and must deliver a verdict.
    But as we all know, verdicts, indeed the whole system, can also be asinine – tough, even tragic, for its innocent victims, grimly fascinating for the novelist. For the obvious is true, the law is human and flawed. Just like newspapers or medicine or the internet, it embodies all that is brilliant and awful about humankind.
    One of the sorriest and most sustained judicial errors in modern times was in the case of Sally Clark, the solicitor, two of whose children died of cot death. She was charged with their murder. The jury appeared impressed by some breathtaking statistical nonsense from one medical witness. Various other experts disagreed with each other profoundly about the causes of death, but the court showed no appropriate caution and she was found guilty. The tabloids "monstered" her, in jail she was horribly bullied, her appeal was turned down. By her second appeal it was apparent that a pathologist had withheld vital evidence about a fatal bacterial infection in one of Clark's children and finally she was released. But by then a few years had passed and the ordeal had broken her. A bereaved mother, brave and decent, harried by the legal system like a figure in a Kafka story, persecuted like Job, she lost her life to depression and drink.
    Sally Clark Solicitor Sally Clark with her husband outside the high court. She was freed after her conviction for the murder of her two baby sons was ruled unsafe by the court of appeal. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian
    The Guildford Four and Maguire Seven, the Birmingham Six … a brief search on the internet will show that the list of less famous victims of miscarriages of justice in the courts is vast. And these are only the cases that have been successfully appealed. Then there are those that attract baffling lenience: a cyclist who rode extremely fast on the pavement and killed a 17-year-old pedestrian was ordered to pay a fine, and avoided jail. Or the punishment is weirdly harsh: a young man of my close acquaintance was caught by CCTV cameras on the edge of a pub brawl. He hurt no one, though he did manage to receive a split lip. On a "joint enterprise" basis, he was punished for offences committed by others, and for which the police hadn't even charged him. He is currently serving a two and half year sentence. And he was lucky – the prosecution was pushing for five to nine years. When I showed the case to a recently retired and very senior member of the judiciary, he was dismissive: "Not even worth a suspended sentence."
    My young friend was often locked in his cell 23 hours a day in the Isis prison at Thamesmead, an institution that boasts "a broad-based curriculum that supports academic achievement, vocational training" etc. He lost his freedom for the grievous bodily harm the court accepted he did not inflict. Other mitigating factors, including previous wrongful imprisonment, were not addressed in the summing up. Had he been listed to appear before another judge, he might be enjoying the company of his partner and their baby, who was born just before he was sent down. As Kurt Vonnegut might have murmured as my friend was led away, so it goes.
    Despite sentencing guidelines, there can be no consistency in the courts, unless everyone stands before the same even-tempered judge, as at the Day of Judgment. Perhaps this was always part of Christianity's appeal. Until that last trump, down here in the earthly courts brilliance and fairness must live alongside dull injustice. In the criminal courts neither jury nor judge are permitted to conclude that something might have happened. It either did or did not. Mistakes therefore are wired into the system. In the family division judges often make moral choices. Lord Hoffmann put the best face on it when he wrote, "These are value judgments on which reasonable people may differ. Since judges are also people, this means that some degree of diversity in their application of values is inevitable."
    It follows that the judge and his or her character, moral sense, background, mood swings and attention span (one judge was recently reported to have fallen asleep while hearing evidence) have great consequence for the destinies of those who come before them. But the vast and rich fiction that has grown up around the law has been mostly fascinated by criminals and their victims, and the criminals' antagonists in the form of cops, private eyes and attorneys. Crime fiction as a genre has such sustained and wide popularity that it has become, inevitably, sclerotic with conventions. Fictional crime victims (of rape, of murder) are most often very beautiful young women. The investigating cop is expected to have a deeply flawed character and a disastrous private life. One follows less often, in fiction or on TV, the happily married detective of steady temperament pursuing the killer of a fat old geezer with bad breath.
    Judges have not entirely escaped fictional invention. Apart from God himself and Judge Dredd (both so careless of due process) one eminent figure is Lewis Carroll's Queen of Hearts, whose multiple sentences of instant beheading are quietly reversed by her husband, the king, though he becomes less lenient and far more erratic as judge at the trial of the Knave of Hearts. As John Mortimer's Rumpole famously noted, a court is a blunt instrument to get at the truth.
    Just as religion and religious passion and disputes have pervaded domestic and international politics to an extent we could not have predicted 20 years ago, so they have vigorously entered, or re-entered, the private realm, and therefore the family courts. In the case of the conjoined twins, Ward ruled against the parents and for the hospital. But it was, as the nice legal term has it, "an anxious question". The operation went ahead, the weaker baby died (or, as the then Archbishop of Westminster might have put it, was judicially murdered), while its sibling underwent extensive reconstructive surgery and flourished.
    This was a high-profile case. Elsewhere, the family law reports are littered with routine disputes over the religious upbringing of children. Divorcing parents find themselves with irreconcilable differences over which "truth" their children are to be raised in. A Jehovah's Witness mother, opposed to Christmas celebrations because of their pagan origins, withdraws her child from the school nativity play on religious grounds. Her estranged Anglican husband objects. A Saudi father wants to remove his daughter from the jurisdiction to his homeland, where she will be brought up in his Muslim faith. The mother, a Catholic, brings a court action – but too late. An orthodox Hasidic father wants his children raised within his close community, without access to TV, the internet, pop music and fashion, and to leave school at 16. His less devout Jewish ex-wife will fight him to the end for the souls of their children.
    Complex issue of religious freedom and child welfare bring these cases to the high court and beyond, to the court of appeal. Reluctantly, at a snail's pace, the law gets involved in the minutiae of daily arrangements – the sort of arrangements that couples in love could settle in seconds. Judgments in the family division tend to genuflect politely before the religious devotion of the parties, before arriving at decisions on non-religious grounds. Inevitably, there are differences in moral perspectives. Is this life less important than the afterlife? The law doesn't think so. Does God abhor homosexuality and abortion? Parliament has decided these issues and the courts must fulfil its will. Is it right to punish those who reject their own religion? The criminal courts must punish the punishers.
    After a judge has heard out the warring parties and comes to settle the destinies of the children, the guiding principle will be the opening lines of the Children Act, 1989. "When a court determines any question with respect to … the upbringing of a child … the child's welfare shall be the court's paramount consideration." If this sounds like a tautology, it's a useful one; the needs and interests of the parents or their gods are secondary to the interests of the child. If the act raises the question of what a definition of welfare should be, then a judge ought to be able to provide one in the role of "judicial reasonable parent".
    Three years after my supper with that bench of judges, Ward told me of a Jehovah's Witness case he had once presided over. At the time he was doing his turn as duty judge, ready at the end of a phone, nights and weekends, to deal with emergency applications to the court. One came late in the evening from a hospital looking for permission to transfuse a Jehovah's Witness teenager against his and his parents' wishes. The boy was suffering from a form of leukaemia that was relatively easy to cure. The drugs the doctors wanted to use would compromise his already declining blood count. The medical staff were fiercely opposed to losing a patient they thought they could cure. The matter was urgent. Within a short time, the various parties, their representatives and expert witnesses assembled in the Royal Courts of Justice to present evidence and argument to the judge.
    The Royal Courts of JusticeThe Royal Courts of Justice in London, which houses the court of appeal. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
    A considerable distance in worldviews between secular law and supernatural belief is exposed in cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusion, especially where a child is concerned. And in this context, a child is anyone under 18. In law, the closer he gets to that age, the more his wishes have to be taken into account. Here is another anxious question. To refuse medical treatment for oneself is understood in law to be a fundamental right. A doctor who treats a patient against his will is committing criminal assault.
    For Jehovah's Witnesses, the matter is simpler, though fraught with sacrifice and pain. The Bible is the word of God. His interdictions against blood transfusion are set out in Genesis, Leviticus and Acts. If the religion's Governing Body in Brooklyn ("the slaves") did not advise the worldwide followers ("the other sheep") against transfusion until 1945, it's because God prefers to reveal his wishes gradually and obliquely. As one Witness pointed out recently on my doorstep, the truth about blood was always waiting to be discovered. To the glib assertion that transfusion was not a feature of iron age therapies, any other sheep will be able to cite one of the relevant verses: "Only flesh with its life, its blood, you must not eat." (Genesis 9:4). Pointless, it turns out, arguing over the verb.
    In the case of the five-year-old Ashya King, the knowledge that his parents were Jehovah's Witnesses may just possibly have prompted the confused, overheated responses of the Southampton hospital and police, and the CPS. The religion does not forbid its members sophisticated medical treatment and, as far as we know, in this sad and tangled affair blood transfusion is not at issue.
    Ashya King's ParentsBrett and Naghmeh King, parents of five year old Ashya King, hold a press conference in Seville, Spain. Photograph: Denis Doyle/Getty Images
    But when it is, the matter often comes before a judge as a matter of life and death. Hospitals need a rapid decision. Even if the "child" is within a week of his 18th birthday, has his parents' backing, clearly knows his own mind and would rather die than be transfused, the act directs the court to the only proper decision. The paramount consideration is clear: no child's welfare is served by being martyred for his religion.
    Many hospitals have devised elaborate means to accommodate the faithful with "bloodless surgery". Some Witnesses are prepared to trim by accepting their own recycled blood or certain blood products. But tragedies occur. The law exists to set and live by boundaries. One moment past its 18th birthday, the child is no more and is beyond the court's protection.
    To embrace death, or allow one's child to die, for a questionable reading of certain biblical dietary restrictions will seem to most a pointless pursuit of grief. To die for one's beliefs is not always noble, and sincerity is not necessarily a virtue. For an extreme example, recall the 9/11 attackers, and all the gullible, murderous suicide bombers that followed. Most of us, even Christians, now struggle to understand those 16th-century martyrs who chose to be burned at the stake rather than yield on finer points of Protestant or Catholic dogma.
    We prefer to think we are remote and well defended from such sacrifice. But there are always exceptions we might make, as long as we are brave enough. Some scales of moral value, some sacrifices, are superior, more meaningful, than others. We honour the parent who drowns while rescuing a child, as we do the men and women who gave their lives liberating Europe from Nazi barbarity. That in turn summons the complicating memory of the many Jehovah's Witnesses who were rounded up in the Third Reich's death camps and offered their freedom if they would renounce their pacifism. They always chose to die.
    Back in the days when Ward was hearing his blood transfusion case, it was still possible for him to make a minor a ward of court. At some point in the proceedings he decided to go and meet his ward in person – a clear instance of the personality of the judge determining the course of a case. He suspended proceedings, crossed London in a taxi, met the loving, anxious parents, then sat at the boy's hospital bedside for an hour. Among many other things, they talked about football, which was the lad's passion. Later that evening, the judge returned to the Courts of Justice to give his decision. He "set aside" his ward's and the parents' articulately expressed refusal of a blood transfusion and ruled for the hospital. The child's welfare was his paramount consideration.
    blood donorSome Jehovah's Witnesses are prepared to accept certain blood products. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian
    Months later, Ward took the boy (now in good health) and his father to a football match, which they watched from the directors' box. The young man was able to meet his football heroes. The gleam of joy in his eyes, his excitement at being alive, was a sight the judge would never forget. The court's decision was vindicated. But the story did not end there. A few years later the young Witness was readmitted to hospital and needed another blood transfusion. By then, he was old enough to make an independent decision. He refused treatment and died for his beliefs.
    Contemplating this tragedy one can only guess at the sorrow, the parents' thwarted love, the powerful sense of destiny they shared with their son, and all the defeated arguments of the court, the desolation of the nursing staff – and the waste. The character of the judge, who was so compassionately and rationally intent on a good outcome, seemed inseparable from the story. When I heard it, I remembered my earlier impression – the family division is rooted in the same ground as fiction, where all of life's vital interests lie. With the luxury of withholding judgment, a novel could interpose itself here, reinvent the characters and circumstances, and begin to investigate an encounter between love and belief, between the secular spirit of the law and sincerely held faith.
    • The Children Act by Ian McEwan is published by Jonathan Cape. To order a copy for £13.59 with free UK p&p call Guardian book service on 0330 333 6846 or go to guardianbookshop.co.uk.
    Viewing all 6914 articles
    Browse latest View live