最后一枪：解读的真正意义——与社会遭遇，需要有准备的头脑

• 

  王熊daddy (2017年底遭受豆瓣网暴的替罪羊) 组长 楼主 2016-05-25 14:27:46

  Frye, "Literature and Free speech" in Educated Imagination 　　弗莱：《想象力的修养》之《文学与言论自由》 　　[page 147] 　　Too often the study of literature, or even the study of language, is thought of as a kind of elegant accomplishment, a matter of talking good grammar or keeping up with one’s reading. I’m trying to show that the subject is a little more serious than that. I don’t see how the study of language and literature can be separated from the question of free speech, which we all know is fundamental to our society. The area of ordinary speech, as I see it, is a battleground between two forms of social speech, the speech of a mob and the speech of a free society. One stands for cliché, ready-made idea and automatic babble, and it leads us inevitably from illusion into hysteria. There can be no free speech in a mob: free speech is one thing a mob can’t stand. You notice that the people who allow their fear of Communism to become hystericaleventually get to screaming that every sane man they see is a Communist. Free speech, again, has nothing to do with grousing or saying that the country’s in a mess and that all politicians are liars and cheats, and so on and so on. Grousing never gets any further than clichés of this kind, and the sort of vague cynicism they express is the attitude of somebody who’s looking for a mob to join. 　文学的学习，乃至语言的学习往往被视为一项高雅的造诣——关于谈论好的文法抑或跟上自己的阅读。我想说明的是问题要比这个稍严重。我不知道语言和文学的学习如何能与言论自由的问题分离开来——我们都知道它对我们的社会至关重要。在我看来，日常话语的领域是两种社会话语（一群乌合之众的和一个自由社会的话语）之间的战场。一个代表了陈词滥调、陈旧的观念和无意识的胡言乱语，而且导致我们不可避免地从幻觉转入歇斯底里。一群乌合之众中是不可能有言论自由的：乌合之众无法容忍言论自由。你会注意到那些把自己对共产主义的畏惧之情发展成歇斯底里的人们最终会尖声惊叫：他们所见到的每一个神志清醒的人都是共产主义分子。此外，言论自由与埋怨或说社会是一团糟、所有的政治家全都是撒谎精和大骗子等等诸如此类是无关的。埋怨绝不比这类陈词滥调更前进一步，他们所表达的那种含混不清的犬儒主义是针对一些人的态度——一些寻求一群乌合之众然后加入其中的人。

  删除 |

  赞 回复
• 

  王熊daddy (2017年底遭受豆瓣网暴的替罪羊) 组长 楼主 2016-05-25 14:28:22

  George Orwell 　　Politics and the English Language, 1946 乔治•奥威尔：《政治与英语》，1946。 　　… 　　A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers. 　　 一个人是嗜酒缘于他觉得自己是一个失败者，然后因为酗酒他失败得越发彻底。在一定程度上这与发生在英语语言学上的现象一摸一样，它之所以会变得丑陋不堪与漏洞百出是因为我们的思维是愚蠢的，语言的散漫性使我们更轻易地产生愚蠢的思维。重点是这一过程是可逆的。近代英语，尤其是书面英语，充斥着被模仿所传播的、可通过下苦功夫而避开的恶习。若想摆脱这些习惯我们需要更加清晰地思考，思考清晰是迈向政治革新的首要步骤——为了使对抗劣质英语的战斗不是琐屑无聊的，也不仅仅是职业作家的专业性考量。 … 　　Orthodoxy, of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets, leading articles, manifestos, White Papers and the speeches of under-secretaries do, of course, vary from party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost never finds in them a fresh, vivid, home-made turn of speech. When one watches tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases—bestial atrocities, iron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder—one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the light catches the speaker’s spectacles and turns them into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind them. And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some distance towards turning himself into a machine. The appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved as it would be if he were choosing his words for himself. If the speech he is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church. And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favorable to political conformity. 任何所谓的正统观念，不管具体嘴脸如何，所需要的都是一种死气沉沉的、模仿的风格。政治术语出现于宣传小册、主要文章和宣言之中，白皮书和副部长们的演讲中也有（当然，术语会因党派的不同而不同），但它们是完全一样的，因为我们基本永远不会从中发现新鲜、生动的口吻。当我们对讲台上机械重复的熟悉的短语关注厌烦的时候——野蛮的暴行、铁蹄、血污的暴政、世界的自由人民、肩并肩地站在一起——我们通常会产生好奇之感：我们看到的并不是一个大活人，而是某种人模子。当光线打到演讲者的眼睛上，并把他们变成后面仿佛没有眼睛的空白唱片时，这种感觉常会突然变强。这并非一种完全想象。一个使用这类措词的演讲者已经朝着把自己变为机器的方向走近了一些。相称的噪音从他的喉咙里发出来，但是他的头脑并没有受到他为自己挑选的词语所造成的应有影响。如果他所做的演讲是他一再习惯了的，那么他或许对自己所说的几乎毫无意识，就像一个在教堂里应唱圣歌的人。这种把意识缩减之后的状态，如果不得不保留一些的话，至少是有利于政治上的一致性的。 　　… 　　The inflated style is itself a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink. 　　 夸张的风格是其自身的一种委婉说法。大量拉丁词汇像轻柔的雪花一般，覆盖在事实上面，模糊了轮廓，掩饰了细节。清晰语言的最大敌人是不真诚。当一个人的真实目的与其公开宣称的目的之间有差距的时候，他本能地转向长字和用滥的习语，正如一条喷射墨汁的乌贼。 　　… 　　You see, he “feels impelled” to write—feels, presumably, that he has something new to say—and yet his words, like cavalry horses answering the bugle, group themselves automatically into the familiar dreary pattern. This invasion of one’s mind by ready-made phrases (lay the foundations, achieve a radical transformation) can only be prevented if one is constantly on guard against them, and every such phrase anaesthetizes a portion of one’s brain. 　　 你看，他“感觉被驱使着”去写——大概感觉他有一些新东西要说——可是他的字，就像骑兵队的战马回应军号一样，自我机械地组合成熟悉的、单调枯燥的样式。陈旧的语句对思维的侵入（“奠定了坚实的基础”啦，“实现了彻底的转变”啦），只能通过一个人时时刻刻地警惕他们而被阻止。每一个这样的语句，都会麻痹一个人思维中的一部分。 　　… 　　Political language—and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists—is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. One cannot change this all in a moment, but one can at least change one’s own habits, and from time to time one can even, if one jeers loudly enough, send some worn-out and useless phrase—some jackboot, Achilles’ heel, hotbed, melting pot, acid test, veritable inferno or other lump of verbal refuse—into the dustbin where it belongs. 政治话语——以及不同程度上对于所有的政治党派都适用，从保守主义者到无政府主义着——有计划地使谎言听起来是真实的、使杀戮变得高尚，并无中生有地炮制坚实的外表。我们不能立马改变这些，但我们至少可以改变自己的习惯，并且时不时地，如果嘲讽得足够响亮的话，可以把一些陈腐无用的语句——铁靴政策、阿喀琉斯的脚后跟、温床、坩埚、严峻的考验、名副其实的地狱，或其他的成块的词语垃圾——送进它们所属于的垃圾箱里。

  删除 |

  赞 回复
• 

  王熊daddy (2017年底遭受豆瓣网暴的替罪羊) 组长 楼主 2016-05-25 14:29:40

  The Publicity Image 廣告影像

  。。。Publicity persuades us of such a transformation by showing us people who have apparently been transformed and are, as a result, enviable. The state of being envied is what constitutes glamour. And publicity is the process of manufacturing glamour. 要説服我們進行這樣的改造，廣告讓我們看見顯然是改造過的人，作爲結果他們如此可羡。被嫉羡的狀態是魅力的構成。而廣告就是生産魅力。

  。。。It is important here not to confuse publicity with the pleasure or benefits to be enjoyed from the things it advertises. Publicity is effective precisely because it feeds upon the real. Clothes, food, cars, cosmetics, baths, sunshine are real things to be enjoyed in themselves. Publicity begins by working on a natural appetite for pleasure. But it cannot offer the real object of pleasure and there is no convincing substitute for a pleasure in that pleasure’s own terms. The more convincingly publicity conveys the pleasure of bathing in a warm, distant sea, the more the spectator-buyer will become aware that he is hundreds of miles away from that sea and the more remote the chance of bathing in it will seem to him. This is why publicity can never really afford to be about the product or opportunity it is proposing to the buyer who is not yet enjoying it. Publicity is never a celebration of a pleasure-in-itself. Publicity is always about the future buyer. It offers him an image of himself made glamorous by the product or opportunity it is trying to sell. The image then makes him envious of himself as he might be. Yet what makes this self-which-he-might-be enviable? The envy of others. Publicity is about social relations, not objects. Its promise is not of pleasure, but of happiness: happiness as judged from the outside by others. The happiness of being envied is glamour. 在此，重要的是不能將廣告和它宣傳的產品帶來的愉悅或便利相混淆。廣告的有效性完全在於它從現實中吸取養料。衣服、食物、汽車、化妝品、沐浴和陽光是可享受的實物。廣告首先作用于對愉悅的自然渴求。但它既無法提供真實的物品也沒有能夠代替這種愉悅的相同愉悅。廣告越是可信地傳達了浸在遙遠而溫暖的海洋中的愉悅，觀客-買者就越能意識到那片海遙不可及，越能明白對他來説身在其中的機會是多麽渺茫。所以廣告不可能真正關於向還未享受到其中樂趣的買者宣傳的產品或者機會。廣告從來都不是對愉悅本體的歌頌。廣告從來都是關於未來的買者。它向他提供他自己富有魅力的影像，這種魅力由它想賣出去的產品或機會製造。這影像讓他嫉妒自己的可能性。而在這種可能性中，到底什麽是可羡的呢？他人的嫉妒。廣告關於社交，而非物件。它承諾的不是愉悅，而是幸福：外部由他人評判的幸福。這種被嫉羡的幸福就是魅力。

  。。。One could put this another way: the publicity image steals her love of herself as she is, and offers it back to her for the price of the product. 換句話說：廣告偷走了她對自己本身的愛，又重新以產品的價格向她出售。

  。。。Publicity is, in essence, nostalgic. It has to sell the past to the future. It cannot itself supply the standards of its own claims. And so all its references to quality are bound to be retrospective and traditional. It would lack both confidence and credibility if it used a strictly contemporary language. Publicity needs to turn to its own advantage the traditional education of the average spectator-buyer. What he has learnt at school of history, mythology, poetry can be used in the manufacturing of glamour. Cigars can be sold in the name of a King, underwear in connection with the Sphinx, a new car by reference to the status of a country house. 廣告本質上是懷舊。它必須將過去賣給將來。它本身不能滿足它自己聲稱的標準。因此它所有對質量的涉及注定是回顧的、傳統的。要是它使用嚴格的當代語言，它就會變得缺乏信心和可信度。廣告需要求助於一位普通觀客-買者的傳統教育。他在學校學到的歷史、神話和詩歌都能被用於製造魅力。雪茄以一位國王的名號出售，内衣和斯芬克斯聯係在一起，新品種的汽車則借助于鄉村別墅的地位。

  。。。The purpose of publicity is to make the spectator marginally dissatisfied with his present way of life. Not with the way of life of society, but with his own within it. It suggests that if he buys what it is offering, his life will become better. It offers him an improved alternative to what he is. 廣告的目的是使觀客在有限程度上對其現今的生活方式感覺到不滿。並非對整個社會生活的不滿，而是對他自己在其中的生活不滿。它暗示如果他買了它提供的物品，他的人生就會變得更好。它為他提供他自己的改良版本。

  。。。For publicity the present is by definintion insufficient. The oil painting was thought of as a permanent record. One of the pleasures a painting gave to its owner was the thought that it would convey the image of his present to the future of his descendants. Thus the oil painting was naturally painted in the present tense. The painter painted what was before him, either in reality or in imagination. The publicity image which is ephemeral uses only the future tense. With this you will become desirable. In these surroundings all your relationships will become happy and radiant. 對廣告而言，當前的时间，被定義为“不足”。油畫曾被認爲是永久的紀錄。一副繪畫給它的主人帶來的愉悅，包括了它將把他現在的影像傳達給將來後代這一想法。於是油畫自然是以現在時被繪畫的。畫家描畫他面前的事物，可以根據現實也可以縱情想象。朝生暮死的廣告影象只運用將來時。擁有了這個你就會被渴望。在這些環境中你所有的人際關係都會變得幸福美滿。

  Publicity speaks in the future tense and yet the achievement of this future is endlessly deferred. How then does publicity remain credible—or credible enough to exert the influence it does? It remains credible because the truthfulness of publicity is judged, not by the real fulfillment of its promises, but by the relevance of its fantasies to those of the spectator-buyer. Its essential application is not to reality but to day-dreams. 廣告用將來時說話，然而這將來的到達被無限延遲。那麽廣告又如何保持可信——或者足夠可信來以此施加影響？它保持可信是因爲廣告的真實程度總在被檢驗，並非因爲它的承諾真正得以實現，卻因爲它的幻想和觀客-買者的幻想息息相關。它的本質應用並非現實，而是白日夢。

  To understand this better we must go back to the notion of glamour. 爲了更好地理解這一觀點，我們必須回到魅力的概念。

  ……

  Glamour cannot exist without personal social envy being a common and widespread emotion. The industrial society which has moved towards democracy and then stopped half way is the ideal society for generating such an emotion. The pursuit of individual happiness has been acknowledged as a universal right. Yet the existing social conditions make the individual feel powerless. He lives in the contradiction between what he is and what he would like to be. Either he then becomes fully conscious of the contradiction and its courses, and so joins the political struggle for a full democracy which entails, amongst other things, the overthrow of capitalism; or else he lives, continually subject to an envy which, compounded with his sense of powerlessness, dissolves into recurrent day-dreams. 如果社交中的嫉妒沒有成為一種普遍而廣泛的情感，魅力就不可能存在。工業社會逐步走向民主卻又半途而廢，它正是產生這種情感的理想處所。對個人幸福的追求被認爲是普遍的權利。然而現存的社會條件使人感到無力。他生活在他是什麽和他希望成爲什麽的衝突之中。要不就在那時完全清醒地意識到矛盾及其根源，並投身于為完全的民主而奮鬥的政治運動，其中包括對資本主義的推翻；要不他繼續生活，繼續承受一份與他的無力感相混合的嫉妒，溶解于循環往復的白日夢中。

  It is this which makes it possible to understand why publicity remains credible. The gap between what publicity actually offers and the future it promises, corresponds with the gap between what the spectator-buyer feels himself to be and what he would like to be. The two gaps become one; and instead of the single gap being bridged by action or lived experience, it is filled with glamorous day-dreams. 於是我們也就能夠明白，爲何廣告能保持可信。廣告實際上提供的東西和它承諾的未來之間的鴻溝，與觀客-買者對自己的看法和他所希望成爲的人之間的鴻溝有所對應。兩條鴻溝成爲了一條，其上並未架起行動或生活經驗的橋梁，卻被魅力的白日夢所填滿。

  The process is often reinforced by working conditions. 這一過程經常為工作條件所強化。

  The interminable present of meaningless working hours is “balanced” by a dreamt future in which imaginary activity replaces the passivity of the moment. In his or her day-dreams the passive worker becomes the active consumer. The working self envies the consuming self. 冗長的充斥無意義工作時間的當下為夢想中的將來所“平衡”，此中想象力的活動取代了這一時刻的被動。在他或她的白日夢裏，消極的工人成爲了積極的消費者。工作的自我嫉妒著消費的自我。

  No two dreams are the same. Some are instantaneous, others prolonged. The dream is always personal to the dreamer. Publicity does not manufacture the dream. All that it does is to propose to each one of us that we are not yet enviable—yet could be. 沒有兩個夢是相同的。有些稍縱即逝，有些揮之不去。夢對夢者而言永遠私密。廣告並不生産夢。它不過是向我們每一個人提議我們尚不足羡——卻有此可能。

  删除 |

  赞 回复

你的回复

回复请先 登录 , 或 注册