2017年7月21日 星期五

the Canzoniere By Petrarch



Petrarch, for example, used the eclogue form to inveigh against the bad government of specific popes and rulers.

From Petrarch and Boccaccio onwards pastoral became a recognized form for expressing political and ecclesiastical controversy and eulogy.


From 2004: Hugo Estenssoro explores the enduring relevance of Petrarch, the first modern man.

On April 8, 1341, at his own instigation, the poet Francesco Petrarch was crowned with laurels in a lavish ceremony held in the Roman Capitol.
WWW.THE-TLS.CO.UK





#OnThisDay in 1304 Petrarch was born at Arezzo, the son of a notary who was expelled from Florence. The family migrated to Avignon in 1312. Here, in 1327, Petrarch first saw the woman who inspired his love poetry. He calls her Laura; her true identity is unknown. Until 1353 Petrarch's life was centered on Provence, but he made extended visits to Italy, on the first of which, in 1341, he was crowned poet laureate in Rome, for him the most memorable episode of his life. From 1353 onward he resided in Italy, though he traveled widely, both on his own account and at the instance of his patrons. He died in Arquà in the Euganean Hills near Padua.
"I find no peace, and I am not at war,
I fear and hope, and burn and I am ice." -Canzoniere no. 134


Francesco Petrarca, commonly anglicized as Petrarch, was an Italian scholar and poet in Renaissance Italy, who was one of the earliest humanists. His rediscovery of Cicero's letters is often credited with initiating the 14th-century Renaissance.Wikipedia
BornJuly 20, 1304, Arezzo, Italy

Five great enemies of peace inhabit with us — avarice, ambition, envy, anger and pride; if these were to be banished, we should infallibly enjoy perpetual peace.
Rarely do great beauty and great virtue dwell together.
To be able to say how much you love is to love but little.

2017年7月19日 星期三

轉載:端傳媒獨家:劉曉波7月5日最後手稿全文披露,送給劉霞的最後禮物;廖亦武序【劉曉波-劉霞詩選】

https://theinitium.com/article/20170714-mainland-liuxiaobo/
廣場
獨家:劉曉波7月5日最後手稿全文披露,送給劉霞的最後禮物

「6月27日,我收到來自曉波的一條語音:『這麼長時間都沒見了,不用擔心我,我這是鐵蛋坯子,這麼多事兒都經過了,這點事兒不算事兒,我一定好好的,堅持到底,為劉霞……』說到『為劉霞』三個字,他忽然哽咽,說不下去。」
端傳媒記者 張潔平 發自香港2017-07-14

圖:端傳媒設計部
評論 15 收藏
分享文章



2017年7月5日,在病床上被嚴密監控的劉曉波寫下三頁手稿。這篇手稿,是他給劉霞好友完成的「作業」──給劉霞將要出版的攝影集做序。因為身體虛弱,手稿的字跡並不容易辨認。在官方的病情通報上,這一天,劉曉波「腹水明顯增加、肝功能惡化」。

中國官方通報,劉曉波6月7日因為「右上腹痛伴發熱2周」保外就醫,住進位於瀋陽的中國醫科大學附屬第一醫院,並確診為肝癌晚期至終末期。7月13日,瀋陽市司法局網站公布通知,劉曉波因「多臟器官衰竭」,搶救無效死亡。官方沒有公布確切的死亡時間。在醫院附近等待的朋友、仰慕者、紀念者,除了在猜測中模糊看到殯儀車開出醫院,並沒有任何一點告別的機會。

這篇序言,可能是劉曉波留下的最後長文,也是他留給劉霞的最後禮物。而劉霞的這本攝影集,同樣是以劉曉波命名:她自己起名叫《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》(Accompanying Liu Xiaobo)。



在攝影集的英文版序言中,著名漢學家林培瑞說,書名實在是過謙之詞:「不論在生活還是藝術上,她和曉波都彼此滋養、啟示、激發。『愛令人合二為一』聽起來很陳詞濫調,但在劉霞與曉波的故事裏,它如此真實。劉霞的攝影與曉波的詩在同一個惡魔的陰影中掙扎,又在共同的智慧與靈光中生長。兩人肩並肩面對、體會、憂心忡忡。」

這本兩人最後的合作作品,目前正在同時籌備多語言版本,面世時間待定。

端傳媒獲劉霞好友G授權,公布劉曉波手稿文本及原稿照片如下。手稿背後的故事,也以G的採訪口述方式,隨信附上。劉霞《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》一書中的作者肖像。
劉曉波最後手稿原文

我的讚美也許是難以饒恕的毒藥:

昏暗的台燈,你送給我的第一台破舊的電腦,也許是奔騰586。

那間簡陋的屋,讓我們常常讓愛的凝視太過擁擠,

你一定讀過我那首描述蝦米(我妻)蠻橫的短詩,她去為我煮粥,要求在360秒內寫出世界上最崩潰的讚美詩。

昏暗的台燈,簡陋的小屋,已經脱皮的茶几,與蝦米蠻橫的命令,融合得如同石頭和星星第一次相遇時的驚詫,天衣無縫的相交。

從此以後,讚美成了我一生的宿命,或者北極熊享受茫茫白雪中冬眠的本能。

一隻鳥又一隻鳥穿過我的目光,抓住一個人的審美後,就將終生在他的生命裏穿行,蝦米的詩出自冰與黑的交匯,如同她的攝影拍下了詩的黑與白。瘋狂與面對苦難的平靜,慘烈的小娃們在胸膛的敞開中向煙幕放散,披着黑紗的木頭人也許來自見證耶穌復活的寡婦,或《麥克白》中的女巫。不,不,都不是,那是蝦米筆下獨一無二的曠野孤枝,是灰暗的地平線中一朵染滿沙塵的白百合,──獻給亡靈。

蝦米的畫從第一幅完成,就成了永遠不會完成的命運悲愴。最遺憾的是至今,我仍然未能為蝦米為辦一次《詩·畫·攝影──黑與白的糾纏》的聯展。

冰一樣激烈的愛,黑一樣遙遠的愛,或許,我庸俗而廉價的讚美,才是對這份(在)詩意、畫風和影像的褻瀆,請G原諒。

G:拖了若干天,才有氣力完成你的作業。

2017.7.52017年7月5日,已被確診肝癌終末期的劉曉波應劉霞好友之邀,為劉霞即將出版的攝影集《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》親筆寫下的序言,很可能是劉曉波留下最後的文章。當時劉曉波身體虛弱,字跡不易辨認。劉曉波親筆信 。劉曉波親筆信 。劉曉波最後日子裏在筆記本上畫的線畫,筆記本上印有Our Story Begins。繪圖:劉曉波
劉霞好友G在接受端傳媒不具名採訪時,披露手稿背後的故事

得知曉波病重後,我不信,我堅持要聽到他的聲音。

6月27日,我收到來自曉波的一條語音:「G啊,這麼長時間都沒見了,不用擔心我,我這是鐵蛋坯子,這麼多事兒都經過了,這點事兒不算事兒,我一定好好的,堅持到底,為劉霞……」

開頭時還是當年一起玩樂時打趣的口氣,說到「為劉霞」三個字,他忽然哽咽,說不下去。

隨後,我收到兩段文字,其中說:「曉波最懷念的時光就是你和劉霞喝得微醺,他在旁邊倒酒,開瓶,伺候着的時光,不知啥時還能有(拳頭+哭)。」

我知道,最後的日子快到了。

我是做編輯的,數年前曾和同行編過一遍劉霞攝影集,我們試圖表現劉霞攝影的幽暗深邃的氣氛(mood),以及勢不可當的力度,我們還特別請林培瑞(Perry Link)教授撰寫了長篇導言,讀到的人無不低迴讚歎,可惜這個項目因一些原因擱置。近年再提起時,我們又想,不如等曉波出來時再出,也就兩三年的事兒,別冷落了這個老婆崇拜者──在劉霞的女性朋友圈裏,曉波是個不折不扣的「傻瓜大情種」。文章是老婆的好,老婆是自己的好。

以我之天真,絕對想不到會等不到那一天。

聽到曉波的聲音,我承認了一切皆有可能。

我找出劉霞攝影集的文件。

我把當年設計的書的樣章發給曉波看。我要讓他看到劉霞的中英文自述、作者像,尤其看到書名。書名是:《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》(Accompanying Liu Xiaobo)。圖:《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》

這個書名是當年劉霞自己起的,是我在電話裏問,她在電話裏脱口而出的。

脱口而出不奇怪,因為劉霞開始攝影,直接緣起就是曉波第二次入獄(據說是勞教,對我來說一回事),那時候迎面而來的問題就是,下面的日子怎麼過。還是弟弟劉暉,給劉霞買了台萊卡相機。貴,貴也買了。從此劉霞開始攝影。開始連焦距都對不好,但一拍就震撼人心。劉霞有首寫給弟弟44歲生日的詩,裏面有一句是「做我的弟弟很辛苦吧」,我一看眼睛就濕。

跟曉波「約稿」是7月2日凌晨。那天夜裏我來回來去看劉霞的照片,之前剛跟設計師討論過如何重新設計這本書。我直接給曉波布置了「作業」,讓他談劉霞的攝影、劉霞的畫、劉霞的詩。

7月3日,我換着法兒重申了一遍「作業」。

我得到了回覆:「抽空給你寫作業呢」。

我不時發點東西「催稿」,我知道接收的人理解。

我發給曉波看的照片不多,只有八張,七張是他看過的,一看再看那種,最後一張是他可能沒看過的,是這次進去後,劉霞拍攝的一組自己用廚房裏的錫箔紙捏出來的靜物中的一幅。說是靜物,卻像風暴一樣狂野,說是風暴,又像化石一樣沉重寧靜。劉霞拍攝的一組自己用廚房裏的錫箔紙捏出來的靜物中的一幅。劉霞2014年攝影作品

從外界反應看,曉波的病情似乎在加速度。

我想到減輕曉波負擔的辦法,建議他用語音口述,我來筆錄。

得到回覆:「老爺說,說話中氣不足,還是慢慢寫吧」。

還不見稿子回,我再發:「自由寫幾句、隨意說幾句,G幫你編輯」。

得到回覆:「他現在說話困難,嘴裏乾,澀(哭符)」。多了個哭符,一個非凡淡定的人也開始哭了。

我說:「隨便寫,一兩句(哭符)」

得到回覆:「寫不少了,還準備接着寫呢」。

我回:「了不起,大情種(哭符)」。

……

7月9日,我收到一組照片,一幅線畫和三頁手跡,手跡結尾一句是:「G,拖了若干天,才有氣力完成你的作業」。標記日期是7月5日。

線畫沒有解釋,不需要解釋。從類似卧在病床的角度勾出的一個男人和一個女人,還能怎麼解釋。哀莫哀兮生別離,樂莫樂兮心相惜──從前我以為有古人這兩句話,夠了,現在懂得,有比深淵更深的苦樂。

曉波最後的日子裏,我沒有吝嗇對他的讚美。當年一起玩時都是調侃他,這次不,我認真告訴他,他最高的成就不是反專制,而是反男權,因為專制不過是以百年計的事,而男權是以千年計的事,這其中的深刻關聯懂都沒幾個人懂,不要說做。我讓他挨個數數中國歷史上的人物,只有他超越了男權,成了一個偉大的女性主義者。

據說,曉波聽到我讚美的反應是「羞澀」。

這期間,我的語音和短信大多是給接收人和曉波的,全程都是微信,坦坦然然大大方方,沒有秘密渠道,沒有神秘中間人,赤日蒼穹之下,我們克制地享盡了最後一寸友情的歡愉。

十幾天前,我們還曾這麼聊天:

「他什麼狀態?還貧嗎?」

「頭腦清醒,愛撒嬌。」

「你相信奇蹟嗎?」

「相信。」

十幾天前,曉波還有心力唸叨我兒子:

「當年你的大胖兒子D在曉波家和他耍,現在他想抱都抱不動了吧……」(D去夏令營前還在問:曉波叔叔好點了沒有?)

十幾天前,我還這樣給劉霞發短信:

「蝦米:像一棵樹一樣站立是好的,但你已經太辛苦,有資格趁傻瓜在,躺會兒、渾會兒、撒嬌會兒,成全她做個徹底的老婆迷。這可比做鬥士偉大得多。」

樹的說法來自劉霞的一首詩:

為什麼畫樹?

喜歡她站立的姿勢。

做樹活一輩子很累吧?

累也要站着。

這期間,劉霞一直像樹一樣沉默。

十幾天前,我和劉霞的另一位女友X相約,去我們最喜歡的衣服店,請北京最好的設計師L為劉霞設計了一件美得不行的黑紗袍。袍子趕製出來後,寄到另一位女友H處轉。既然人間如此驚人的願力都留不住這個大情種,送行路上,總得讓劉霞穿得像樣點吧……

經過這一場,我再不敢說我不相信愛情了。

──
《我陪伴劉曉波的方式》劉霞攝影作品選集,選取了劉霞的數十幀攝影作品,包括早期的醜娃娃系列,後來的絲綢系列、木頭疙瘩系列,以及近期的孤獨星球系列的主要作品。早期作品曾參加過各種展覽,近年作品是新作。此書數年前準備,因故未出版,原打算曉波出獄時出版,現擬近期出版。劉霞委託女友負責所有語種的版權,目前女友已委託紐約資深圖書代理人 Peter Bernstein 先生代理全球各語種版本出版事宜。
《一隻鳥又一隻鳥》──劉霞

我們

在很早以前

就常常說起那隻鳥

不知道來自哪裏的鳥

我們興致勃勃

它給我們帶來了笑聲



冬天的一個晚上

是晚上,它真的來了

我們睡得很沉

誰也沒有看見它

就在有太陽的早晨

我們看見它留在玻璃上的

小小的影子

它印在那裡

好久不肯離去



我們討厭冬天了

討厭冬天長長的睡眠

我們想讓紅色的燈

長久地亮着

告訴那隻鳥

我們在等待



院裡的葡萄

又爬滿架子了

窗子不再關上

我們仍然記得那隻鳥

只是不再談起它



一個星期天

天陰沉伔的,沒有雨

我們一起出門了

去時裝店給我買了一件新衣服

天黑下來的時候,又去

那個人很多的餛飩舖子

一人吃了兩大碗餛飩

回來的路上

我們不吭聲了

心裏覺得有點不舒服



到家了

院子裡那盞燈忽明忽暗

一串青青的葡萄落在台階上

我們同時止住了步子

望了望天

又趕緊低下了頭

它來過了

可我們不敢說

只是在心裏想着

生怕它永遠不再來了



門終於開了

紅色的光神秘地鋪開

在有格子的紙上

你寫不出字了

我想試一試新衣服

卻怎麼也解不開釦子



它又來過了



1983年5月
《無題》──劉霞

這是一棵樹嗎?

這是我 一個人

這是冬天的樹嗎?

它一年四季都是這個樣

葉子呢?

葉子在視線以外

為什麼畫樹呢?

喜歡它站立的姿勢

做樹活一輩子很累吧?

累也要站着

沒有人來陪伴你嗎?

有鳥兒啊

看不到鳥呀

聽那翅膀飛舞的聲音

在樹上畫鳥會很好看吧?

我又老又瞎看不到了

你根本不會畫鳥吧?

是的 我不會

你是棵又老又笨的樹

我是

2013年12月12日劉曉波




*****























-------
Yiwu Liao 新增了 3 張相片
二千年,刘晓波刘霞诗合集首次由香港夏菲爾出版社推出,我應邀作序如下;同時,曉波也為我的地下詩集《古拉格情歌》作序。
往事歷歷在目,痛徹心扉。如果當時,曉波能聽進去一些我序中說的話,就好了。


----
這天夜裡,我與曉波劉霞一起吃罷飯,回到忠忠家,已將近十點。坐下來繼續讀他倆的詩集,眼皮一陣陣跳。按中國民間“左眼跳財,右眼跳災”的說法,或好或歹,這肯定預兆著什麼。我不曉得其它的六四反革命咋樣,總之一種惶惶不安的感覺從十年前我在大慘案之夜朗誦《大屠殺》起,就已切入骨頭,成為一種生理反應。自由會在一瞬間被剝奪嗎?明年這個時候,我會坐在這兒讀詩嗎?我與劉霞做了15年的朋友,所能記起的,就是笑。笑得幾近白痴。劉霞常常捏住她的尖下巴說:“不能再笑了!他媽這弱智!”可還是抗不住。

我與劉霞的共同點是:學歷低,自學而沒成才;不同點是:她貪酒,我貪吃。不曉得這種女人嫁給劉曉波後,還傻笑不?

我不能樣寫下去,否則曉波就要吃醋了。我發覺自從他第三次出獄後,就喜歡吃些不著邊際的醋。共產黨的監獄真是醋缸,在裡面泡過的人,想女人想得特狠,連曉波這樣天下聞名的風雲人物,也被馴得感情專一,九死不悔。他在《承擔——給苦難中的妻子》裡寫道:
  進入墳墓前
別忘了用骨灰給我寫信
別忘了留下陰間的地址
僅這三句,就把90年代所有的詩人給滅了。在這種所謂的愛情詩上空,瀰漫著成百上千死難者的亡靈,曉波背負著亡靈在愛、在恨、在祈禱。我覺得這樣的詩同樣可以寫於納粹集中營或俄國十二月黨人的流放途中,就像“奧斯維辛之後寫詩是野蠻的”,適合八九後的中國國情。恕我冒犯,連諾貝爾文學獎的多次候選人北島同志也沒寫出這種直接摧毀人的生存勇氣的詩句。北島沒坐過牢,所以他創作於70年代末的獄中情詩是“讓牆壁來封住我的嘴唇吧/讓鐵條來分割我的天空吧”——這種被紅色教科書記載過的模式化的叛逆姿態傾倒了國際漢學界,卻蒙不過有一點監獄常識的普通反革命的眼睛。

當然,讀者可以看出,曉波在我心中地位很重要,他的道義、良知,他對自己的反省及苛責,我覺得已超出同時代的絕大多數知識精英。但是,過於超前的人,他注定付出的代價是,喪失正常而健康的日常生活。作為朋友,我不能贊成他在獄中渡過自己的生日時,用這樣的詩句“虐待”在外面苦撐苦熬的老婆:
  白色的藥片由腦漿製成
毒死我們的愛……
  不要為我的傷口寫詩
如果你有足夠的殘忍
就撒上一把梭角鋒利的鹽
讓我在清醒的灼痛中
把未完成的犧牲完成……
活著多不容易啊,做劉曉波的老婆多不容易啊。我希望劉霞笑,希望劉霞活得別過於“精神化”,俗一點,同勞動人民的趣味近一點。雖然這世上沒啥好玩好樂的,雖然有時你覺得僅僅是一種面具,但是你可以藉此縮藏起貓的爪牙。高更說:“毒藥之外還有解毒藥”,於是他含笑吞下了砒霜。笑是休息。笑一笑,十年少,這也是一種歷史悠久的體育項目,在電視裡在聯歡晚會上,在酒桌和各種社交場合,從高官、巨賈、明星到老百姓,都笑口常開。越沒安全感越要笑呵,他媽的,競爭到底吧。

也有笑不出來的時候,警察從家中抓走了曉波,一去三年,我還以為會流放到黑龍江。直到忠忠找到劉霞,一起從北京打來電話,劉霞說了句:“他們不讓我見……”就從頭哭到尾。我什麼話也說不出。是的,丈夫失踪了,一個妻子內心的歡笑永遠失去了,可往後的日子,她還得笑下去。

劉曉波,你永遠記住,那一剎那失語的暈眩,使這本情詩失去了重量。你勇敢,你要和這個混帳社會玩命,你要以坐牢減輕殉道者的負罪感,就光棍一條豎在天地間,別要老婆,別要朋友,甚至別要父母兄弟。專制政權就是瞅准了人的種種弱點,對症下藥,才維持了這麼多年,你一個文人,沒槍沒炮,攥著對空拳同它幹,絕對沒戲。除非你是從石頭縫裡蹦出來,誰吞了你,你就噎死他個狗日的。

我常常覺得,真正的大苦難是無法言說的,血流成河與內心低泣孰輕孰重?舍生取義與守護家園孰輕孰重?讀了丁子霖先生數年蒐集的155名死傷者名單及家屬證詞,最令我心碎的是普通人的生命被肆無忌憚地剝奪,他們都不是精英,他們或許只想擁有世俗的幸福生活,我們這些自視甚高的學者、詩人曾經忽視和嘲弄這種螞蟻般碌碌無為的生活。但是,他們死了!像狄蘭•托馬斯說的“盲目的心靈被擊碎”。為什麼每一次慘案,付出代價的都是弱者?

曉波處於兩難之中,他習慣用一種殉道者的情感,一種極端的理想震撼自己的妻子,他寫道:“把我也作為/你活下去的悲慘理由。”類似的詩句比比皆是:
  也許,做你的囚徒
會永遠不見天日
但我相信黑暗是我的宿命……
  一把抖動的提琴
為遠方而斷裂
這麼深的疼痛
只為了感動遠方……
  你從一個得不到新衣裳的女孩
長成了往返於探監路上的妻子……
太沉重了,壓得人喘不過氣,劉霞說她只能選擇這種愛,這種力不從心的活法。但願曉波僅僅在詩中如此。因為無論是丁子霖還是劉曉波,都把見證普通冤魂作為活下去的理由,那麼,退守和重建家園,嘗試過一種平凡的健康的日子,難道就不是另一種“捨生取義”嗎?
劉霞在《一九八九年六月二日•給曉波》裡寫道:“和眾人一起仰視你/使我很疲倦。”我也很疲倦。曉波,是時候了,寫完這本詩,就從時代的風雲變幻中,回到普通人的生命中來,體會一下中國百姓是怎樣活著、熬​​著、忍著,怎樣死去,一次慘案又是怎樣把他們變成我們的精神財富。你在精英圈里呆得太久了,在高處呆得太久了。你應該摔下來,進入廖鬍子和忠忠。他們弱點很多,惡習很致命,但他們有溫暖的手,至少不會坑你害你,與你爭什麼高低短長。

來吧,曉波,給我們講講你童年的故事,那時你又窮又壞,欺人打架,卻為了一條心愛的小狗恨自己的父親。動蕩的臭哄哄的夜,被攆出家門的流浪兒羔羊般擠在一塊取暖,這難道不是我們共同的失樂園嗎?在一望無際的社會潰瘍裡,我們只能拾起最初的情感,拍掉歲月灰塵,憑藉它“好死不如賴活”。別人的賴活只是賴活,你劉曉波的“賴活”卻需要最大的勇氣。埃利蒂斯說:“高飛的鳥兒減輕我們的負擔。”

昏寫至此,想起還沒談劉霞的詩。我愚鈍得過火,這麼些年,印象最深刻的依舊是《一隻鳥又一隻鳥》,80年代辦《中國》,鄒進寫過比原詩晦澀若干倍的詩評。我在牢裡接到劉霞婚變的信,還慌了手腳,像哄孩子一樣,以許願朗誦這首詩去寬她的心:
  我們看到它
留在玻璃上的小小的影子
它印在那裡好久不肯離去……
我恍惚記得劉霞有過一篇小說,寫一個女孩用她的小手沿當街櫥窗“走路”,陽光折射之中,小手印就逐漸變成了小麻雀。在追求復雜的80年代,出了名的女詩人都像母老虎一樣,成天在男人堆裡攪渾水,如此單純的寫作動因,太不起眼了。我沒料到這隻手戲中的麻雀飛了這麼久,乃至我在收審所犯人的手影中,還能辨認出它。那是一面牆,當朝陽從囚籠上方的鐵柵投入,犯人們的手影節目就開始了。其中有一位小偷,會做十幾種鳥兒飛翔的姿式,贏得大伙的低聲喝彩。後來,其它手影都被淘汰了,只有小偷一人在地板上橫躺著,玩著“鳥”,嘴裡還嘰嘰喳喳的。太陽上升,光影也從牆上拔高,玩鳥人就由躺到跪,到站,最後舉著雙手也夠不著光影,鳥也就失踪了。這是宿命,變鳥的女孩終於成了囚徒劉曉波的老婆。牋?她的詩齡比劉曉波長兩倍,所以能夠用一次次探監的耐心一點點磨礪語言,使之逐漸透射出內在的寒光:

  每年的陰曆七月十五
河上會佈滿河燈
卻招不回你的靈魂……
  駛向集中營的那列火車
嗚咽地碾過我的身體
我卻拉不住你的手……


這些在劉霞詩中俯首可拾的句子,都能作為曉波操練詩藝的樣本,因為在它們的背後,有一種無所不在的憐憫和愛,這些在黑夜裡讓人細細咀嚼的酸東西只能源於母性。它包容,以溫暖的羊水消釋階級社會留在曉波靈魂內的天生的毒素。

這種女人適合與猛虎為伴。
這種女人適合與孤客為伴。
她面對別人的悲劇,自己卻無處求援。
在詩歌娼妓氾濫成災的上個世紀中國,詩圈外的劉霞是倖存下來的唯一的女詩人。

2000年春節•北京五棵松

2017年7月17日 星期一

Simon Leys writing on Liu Xiaobo(2012): Pierre Ryckmans(1935-2014); Exposed Mao’s Hard Line. Chinese Shadows by Simon Leys


Simon Leys writing on Liu Xiaobo in The New York Review of Books in 2012.

All thinking people wish now to obtain at least some basic understanding of the deeper dynamics that underlie this sudden and stupendous metamorphosis: What are its true nature and significance? To what extent is…
NYBOOKS.COM


------

2016  最驚訝的是2周前NYT的訃聞:Pierre Ryckmans, 78, Dies; Exposed Mao’s Hard Line.. Chinese Shadows by Simon Leys.
Wikipedia 的著作清單。臺大圖書館幾乎只有3~5% 著作有收藏。"唐獎"其實應該弄完整的漢學圖書館。

Bibliography[edit]
Shitao's Les propos sur la peinture du moine Citrouille-amère (translation and comments, 1970)
La vie et l'oeuvre de Su Renshan, rebelle, peintre et fou (1971).
Les habits neufs du président Mao (The chairman's New Clothes: Mao and the Cultural Revolution, 1971)
Chinese Shadows, (1974) 我再翻閱,前15頁查英文字典的是我嗎?
中國大陸的陰影 / Ryckmans, Pierre撰 ; 金開鑫譯
台北市 : 黎明, 民66[1977]
Images brisées (1976)
Human Rights in China (1979) 此書在臺大圖書館已遺失
中國大陸沒有人權 / 李斯(Simon Leys)撰 ; 聯合報編譯組譯
台北市 : 聯合報社, 民70[1981]
Broken Images: Essays on Chinese Culture and Politics (trans. Steve Cox, London: Allison & Busby, 1981)
Orwell, ou l'horreur de la politique (1984)
La forêt en feu: Essais sur la culture et la politique chinoises (The Burning Forest: Essays on Chinese Culture and Politics) (1987)1985

Contents

Ricci in China
35
Orientalism and Sinology
95
The Mosquitos Speech







La Mort de Napoléon (The Death of Napoleon, 1986)
""The Chinese Attitude Towards the Past" (Forty Seventh Morrison Lecture, 16 July 1986), China Heritage Quarterly 14 (June 2008).
L'humeur, l'honneur, l'horreur: Essais sur la culture et la politique chinoises (1991)
Analects of Confucius (translation, 1997)
Essais sur la Chine (Laffont, 1998, coll. "Bouquins")
L'Ange et le Cachalot (1998)
The Angel and the Octopus (collected essays 1983–1998, published February 1999) ISBN 1-875989-44-7
Protée et autres essais (2001; awarded the 2001 Prix Renaudot de l'Essai)
Deux années sur le gaillard d'avant (2002)
Les Naufragés du Batavia (The Wreck of the Batavia: A True Story, 2003, was awarded the Prix Guizot)
La mer dans la littérature française (Plon, 2003)
Lu Xun's La mauvaise herbe (French translation)
Other People's Thoughts – Idiosyncratically compiled by Simon Leys for the amusement of idle readers (Black Inc., 2007)

‘A book is a mirror; if an ape looks into it, an apostle is hardly likely to look out.’ –G. C. Lichtenberg
‘The desire to go into politics is usually indicative of some sort of personality disorder, and it is precisely those who want power most that should be kept furthest from it.’ –Arthur Koestler
‘Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.’ –Thoreau
In this wonderfully entertaining collection of quotations, Simon Leys gathers insights and bons mots from a motley group of great artists, wits and thinkers. Topics range from ambition and adventure to youth, sex, time, toads, wine, faith and friendship.
Wise, witty and delightfully unpredictable, Other People’s Thoughts is for anyone who has ever rifled through a friend’s bookshelves or snuck a peak over a reading stranger’s shoulder. In this wide-ranging miscellany, we are given free rein to explore the nooks and crannies of one man’s mental library. By turns profound, whimsical and subversive, the result is a book-lover’s delight.




The Hall of Uselessness: Selected (sic) Essays (Black Inc, 2011)

The Hall of UselessnessCollected Essays: Collected Essays

Front Cover
Black Inc.Dec 12, 2014 - Australian essays - 586 pages
Simon Leys' cultural and political commentary has long been legendary for its profundity and acerbic wit. In The Hall of Uselessness his most significant essays are finally gathered together, on subjects ranging from China to Orwell, from Quixotism to the sea. Leys feuds with Christopher Hitchens, ponders the popularity of Victor Hugo and analyses whether Nabokov's unfinished novel should ever have been published. He dissects Mao's Cultural Revolution and the Khmer Rouge, and discusses Waugh, Simenon and Confucius. He considers Chinese art, culture and politics, the joys and difficulties of lit.




http://hcbooks.blogspot.tw/2011/05/chinese-shadows-by-simon-leys.html
約30年前,我讀過Simon的書。很了不起的中國透視力和筆力......

Pierre Ryckmans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Ryckmans
Pierre Ryckmans (born 28 September 1935, in Brussels, Belgium), who also uses the pen-name Simon Leys, is a writer, sinologist, essayist and literary critic.

Simon Leys | New York Review Books

www.nybooks.com/books/authors/simon-leys/
Simon Leys is the pen name of Pierre Ryckmans, who was born in Belgium and settled in Australia in 1970. He taught Chinese literature at the Australian ...


Chinese Shadows [Hardcover] Simon Leys
(Author)

  • Hardcover: 220 pages
  • Publisher: Viking Adult; 1st U.S. edition (September 15, 1977)
  • Language: English
(Opera Omnia is a project to record the complete works (in Latin: opera omnia))
這是一本了解文革和現代中國的傑作 ( 我用Penguin 1978版)
看他在書末對 韓素英 、 C. P. Snow和費正清的一語道破其弱點,就可知其功力 (書中說,
魯迅先生的《阿Q正傳》 說明革命的不可能, 以及一些當時法文刊物對中國的幽默)......


In response to:
Chinese Shadows from the May 26, 1977 issue
To the Editors:
I am shocked by your recent articles on Vietnam and China, the likes of which one might expect to appear in Commentary or the Readers Digest. Apparently it is intellectually chic again to be anti-communist, especially in regard to third world countries.
The authors of both pieces had profound personal biases against their subjects. One of your readers has already pointed this out in reference to the Vietnamese piece (NYR, May 12). I shall therefore focus on Simon Leys’s China pieces (NYR, May 26 and June 9).
There is a proclivity among European intellectuals going as far back at least as Hegel to see China in terms of oriental despotism. It does not matter whether it is contemporary or historical China—it is all the same, there is always that terrible oriental despotism that the Chinese cannot escape. The most articulate of the twentieth-century European exponents of this point of view was Etienne Balazs. In a brilliant series of essays he argued that the Chinese had chances to escape oriental despotism through the Sung dynasty (end 1368). After that it has been all down hill. The weight of the past is such that contemporary China can in no way escape it—any revolution is a false one. Usually this view is derivative, as it was in Balazs’s case, of his own disillusionment with European politics and the left in particular. At bottom the Oriental Despotism view of China is Europe-centered. The genuine social and political revolution must come first in the West. Since it has not happened in the West, it is preposterous to talk of genuine revolution in such a place as China.
I shall be specific on three points.
1) Walls, the walls that Leys mourns so bitterly. Is it not just possible that city walls symbolize the oppression of the past to most Chinese? Both Chiang Kai-shek and the Japanese hid behind these walls for decades—used as bulwarks against the guerrillas in the countryside. It was their custom also to put the ordinary inmates of these marvelously walled cities up against these walls and shoot them for some crime real or imagined. The heads of dissenters were displayed on these wonderful walls. And then there was the squatter housing squashed up against Mr. Leys’s walls.
2) Wang Shi-wei, the dissident who was shot in Yenan in 1947. True enough Wang was shot in Yenan in 1947 and Mao afterwards talked about it. What Leys fails to say is that Mao considered the execution a serious error which should not be repeated. In China, as elsewhere (even Europe), dissidents are persecuted, but they are rarely executed. In the 1950s we executed the Rosenbergs and today we publicly regret it. Eisenhower advocated executing American communists and we are embarrassed. Does this mean that Stalinist purges are the rule in either China or the US?
Perhaps your readers would be interested in Mao’s full statement in 1962 about Wang Shi-wei’s execution:
There was another man called Wang Shi-wei who was a secret agent working for the Kuomintang. When he was in Yenan, he wrote a book called The Wild Lily, in which he attacked the revolution and slandered the Communist Party. Afterwards he was arrested and executed. That incident happened at the time when the army was on the march, and the security organs themselves made the decision to execute him; the decision did not come from the Center. We have often made criticisms on this very matter; we thought that he shouldn’t have been executed. If he was a secret agent and wrote articles to attack us and refused to reform till death, why not leave him there or let him go and do labor? It isn’t good to kill people. We should arrest and execute as few people as possible. If we arrest people and execute people at the drop of the hat, the end result would be that everybody would fear for themselves and nobody would dare to speak. In such an atmosphere there wouldn’t be much democracy. [from “On Democratic Centralism” in Stuart Schram, ed., Chairman Mao Talks to the People (Pantheon, 1974), pp. 184-185]
3) It is well known that the diplomatic community in China lives an isolated existence and receives formal and bureaucratic treatment from the Chinese. The ordinary visitor is received in a much more friendly, relaxed manner—and often sees much more than the cloistered diplomat like Leys did. There are other foreigners living in China as well. Teachers, students, “experts,” and writers have a much less isolated existence and often a rather integrated life among the Chinese people. Has Mr. Leys ever met Sid Engst, Jim Veneris, Israel Epstein, and others like them in China? Their perspective on the foreigner in China is rather different than Mr. Leys’s, although not without problems and barriers (see for example the excellent book by David and Nancy Milton, The Wind Will Not Subside [1976], which revolves around the foreign community in Beijing).
No doubt Mr. Leys knows all this and that is what angers. His rigid preconceptions about the nature of past and present Chinese society and politics force a level of dishonesty which is unworthy of The New York Review….
Stephen R. MacKinnon
Tempe, Arizona
Simon Leys replies:
Mr. MacKinnon’s criticism bears on four questions. Let us discuss them in succession:
—Concerning Balazs: Etienne Balazs was a great scholar and an admirable man. That Mr. MacKinnon in reading my modest little essays should be induced to compare me with him fills me with a mixture of confusion and pride. (I doubt however if Mr. MacKinnon did understand Balazs’s writings any better than mine.)
—Concerning city walls: In underlining the fact that walls can symbolize oppression and that it was therefore right to pull them down, Mr. MacKinnon raises a very interesting point. Come to think of it—is it not a shame that, in a revolutionary capital such as Peking, quite a number of other (far worse) symbols of oppression are still allowed to stand: the Imperial Palace, the Summer Palace, etc.? Actually, in this respect, too many countries are still badly in need of a big clean-up: the London Tower, the Louvre, the Escorial, the Vatican, the pyramids of Egypt, etc., etc., are all awaiting the revolutionary intervention of Mr. MacKinnon’s pickaxe. If he intends to devote his energy to such a worthy cause, he has, without doubt, a most busy career ahead of him.
—Mao’s quotation concerning Wang Shih-wei: three points
  1. Mao deplored the execution of Wang Shih-wei.” Nixon too deplored his “plumbers” initiatives at Watergate. Great leaders are so often done a disservice by clumsy underlings!
  2. Mao opposes random killings.” This in fact was the only point on which Mao significantly departed from Stalin’s doctrine. Mao always agreed with the principle of Stalinist purges; only, to his more sophisticated taste, their methods appeared rather crude, messy, and wasteful. Mao eventually developed his own theory of the efficient way of disposing of opponents—which is expressed quite clearly in the fifth volume of his Selected Works recently published in Peking: executions should not be too few (otherwise people do not realize that you really mean business); they should not be too many (not to create waste and chaos). Actually before the launching of some mass-movements, quotas were issued by the Maoist authorities, indicating how many executions would be required in the cities, how many in the countryside, etc. This ensured a smooth, rational, orderly development of the purges. Some people see in this method a great improvement by comparison with Stalin’s ways. I suppose it might be so—at least from Big Brother’s point of view.
  3. Mao said that Wang Shih-wei was a secret agent working for the Kuomintang.” And Stalin said that Trotsky was a secret agent working for the Nazis. Later on it was also said that Liu Shao-ch’i was a secret agent working for the Americans. And that Lin Piao was a secret agent working for the Soviet Union. And now we have just learned that Madame Mao had been working for Chiang Kai-shek. Why not? After all there are always people ready to believe these things—Mr. MacKinnon, for instance.
—Other foreigners living in China: I do have a wide circle of acquaintances who have been, or are still, working in China in various capacities. I do also keep in close touch with a number of Chinese friends, former citizens of the People’s Republic, who know Chinese realities from the inside, a thousand times better than either Mr. MacKinnon or myself will ever do. If it had not been for the advice and encouragement I received from those persons who kept telling me that I was right on target, I would never have felt confident enough to publish these subjective impressions of China. On one point, however, I agree with Mr. MacKinnon: I too think it most unlikely that a person living in Peking, and being employed by the Chinese government, would ever express publicly his agreement with my views (though I know some who do so in private).



訃告

揭露「文化大革命」本質的漢學家去世

皮埃爾·李克曼曾使用筆名西蒙·萊斯,1955年上學時首次到中國旅行。了解到「文化大革命」的情況後,他對中國的浪漫化觀點消散了。
William West/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
皮埃爾·李克曼曾使用筆名西蒙·萊斯,1955年上學時首次到中國旅行。了解到「文化大革命」的情況後,他對中國的浪漫化觀點消散了。
比利時出生的中國學學者皮埃爾·李克曼(Pierre Ryckmans)曾質疑西方在20世紀60年代將毛澤東浪漫化的觀點,並率先將毛髮起的「文化大革命」描述為混亂和破壞的景象。周一(8月11日——譯註)他於澳大利亞悉尼家中逝世,享年78歲。
他的女兒詹尼·李克曼(Jeanne Ryckmans)宣布死因是癌症。
  • 檢視大圖1966年6月,穿紅衛兵服裝的年輕學生揮舞着毛澤東語錄「紅寶書」,在北京遊行,慶祝「文化大革命」的開始。
    Jean Vincent/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
    1966年6月,穿紅衛兵服裝的年輕學生揮舞着毛澤東語錄「紅寶書」,在北京遊行,慶祝「文化大革命」的開始。
李克曼以其筆名西蒙·萊斯(Simon Leys)更加廣為人知。1955年,19歲的他與比利時的同學們一起到中國旅遊,從此便愛上了這個國家。期間更是受到周恩來總理的接見。毛澤東發起「大躍進」所導致的饑荒人禍,乃至始於1966年,止於1976年毛澤東去世的「文化大革命」都還是後話。在當時,新中國有很多值得讚美之處。
但是對於一個西方人來說,留在中華人民共和國學習中國藝術、文化和文學是不可能的,於是他去了台灣,在那裡遇到了未來的妻子張涵芳(音譯)。後來他也曾在新加坡和香港定居。
20世紀60年代末,香港仍然是英國的殖民地,在那裡,李克曼開始關注越過香港邊境的混亂,閱讀中國官方媒體關於「文化大革命」的報道,和逃離中國大陸的人交談,他們原來都曾是毛澤東的支持者。
許多西方知識分子對毛澤東懷有浪漫主義觀點,認為他雖然有缺點,但卻是進步的,是人民大眾的捍衛者,李克曼漸漸發現,這些浪漫的觀點和「文化大革命」的殘酷性完全是互相抵觸的。「文化大革命」力圖抹殺中國文化傳統與西方資本主義的影響,代之以正統的毛主義。這個運動導致了大清洗,強制的國內流放與不同政治派別的互相打擊。這促使李克曼開始涉足政治評論領域。
「1966年之前,中國政治根本沒有引起我的關注,我對中國的一切都有好感,我充滿信心地把這種好感也延伸到了毛主義政權上面,並沒特別多想,」李克曼在他以筆名出版的《中國的陰影》(Chinese Shadows)中寫道,該書於1974年以法語首次出版。「但是我從香港這個有利的位置從始至終地觀察了』文化大革命』,這迫使我從舒服的無知中脫離出來。」
他的第一本書《主席的新裝》(The Chairman』s New Clothes)也是用法文出版,那是1971年,一年後,他定居澳大利亞,因為著名中國文學學者柳存仁將在澳大利亞國立大學教書。李克曼以筆名西蒙·萊斯出版了這本書,掩蓋真實身份是為了防止被中國拒之門外。
1972年,他為比利時大使館擔任文化隨員工作,回到中國呆了六個月。看到這座城市的古建築遺產遭到破壞,他大為震驚。
在《中國的陰影》中,他寫到自己瘋狂地尋找這座城市最宏偉的巨大城門,他覺得它們本應被保留,儘管他知道這座城市的城牆從20世紀50年代開始就已經在進行拆除了。城門不見了。「確切地說,北京城門的拆除是一種褻瀆;充滿戲劇性的不是官方拆除了它們,而是始終不解他們究竟為什麼要拆除它們,」他寫道。
他發現,「文化大革命」破壞了中國文化與文明之美,卻沒有摧毀文化中應當被去除的東西——暴虐與專制。
前澳大利亞總理陸克文(Kevin Rudd)曾是李克曼的學生,在一次電話採訪中,他說李克曼是「20世紀六七十年代第一個揭露』文化大革命』中文化褻瀆真相的西方漢學家,他剝除了其上的政治虛飾,暴露出它的真正本質:由毛澤東領導的一場中共內部醜陋而暴力的政治鬥爭」。
陸克文還說:「當時的漢學家們大都迷戀『文化大革命』早期的浪漫色彩,因此嚴厲地指責他。」
諷刺的是,陸克文說,毛澤東死後,中國領導人開始否定「文化大革命」。許多老北京令人欣喜的東西又回來了,比如食品小攤和夏日街頭的舞蹈,人們開始欣賞古典藝術、文學,乃至曾遭受毛主義者中傷的古典學者孔子。李克曼曾把孔子的語錄《論語》譯成英文。
但李克曼並沒有隨着時間的流逝而改變。「讓皮埃爾接受中國自『改革開放』以來這些真實的、可持續和積極的變化是很困難的,」陸克文說。
李克曼的連襟、同樣也是漢學家的任格瑞(Richard Rigby)說,李克曼不僅是漢學家,也是令人敬畏的歐洲學者,他曾在比利時獲得法學與藝術的博士學位。他說,李克曼的演講博採東西方之長。
「他可以將一幅中國國畫,或奧威爾(Orwell)寫的什麼東西以及蒙田(Montaigne)的散文結合起來,成為一個連貫的整體,」任格瑞說。
李克曼還寫過長篇小說《拿破崙之死》(The Death of Napoleon),書中想像了這位被罷黜的君王從聖海倫島流放地逃回法國的經歷。1986年在法國首版,1992年出版了英文版,小說家佩尼洛普·菲茨傑拉德(Penelope Fitzgerald)曾為《紐約時報》書評版撰文,稱之為「一本非同尋常的書」,2002年,它被改編為電影,由伊恩·霍爾姆(Ian Holm)和休·博內威利(Hugh Bonneville)主演。
李克曼經常為《紐約書評》(The New York Review of Books)、《世界報》(Le Monde)和其他期刊撰稿,並獲得多項文學獎。
他於1935年9月28日出生於布魯塞爾,除了女兒,他在世的親人還包括妻子與兒子馬克(Marc)、艾蒂安(Etienne)和路易(Louis),以及兩個孫輩。
他曾在悉尼大學教書,晚年在寫作和玩帆船中度過。他的文集《無用堂文存》(The Hall of Uselessness)於2011年出版,探討從堂·吉訶德到孔子在內的各種話題。
在《中國的陰影》一書中,李克曼寫道,儘管毛和他的扈從們終將離場,權威統治會出現一個不可避免的放鬆時期,但共產主義統治的基本特點不會改變。
「在不同時期對共產主義中國的各種描述中,人們可以發現區別,」他寫道。「如果這些描述都是發自良心,有洞察力的,它們呈現出來的東西要比短暫的新聞真實更多,各種改良都是量變,而不是質變——它們只是角度上的變化調整,而不是基本方向的改變。」
本文最初發表於2014年8月15日。
傅才德(Michael Forsythe)是《紐約時報》記者。
翻譯:董楠

Pierre Ryckmans, 78, Dies; Exposed Mao’s Hard Line

Pierre Ryckmans, who used the pen name Simon Leys, first traveled to China as a student in 1955. His once romantic view of China dissipated when he learned of the Cultural Revolution.
Pierre Ryckmans, a Belgian-born scholar of China who challenged a romanticized Western view of Mao Zedong in the 1960s with his early portrayal of Mao’s Cultural Revolution as chaotic and destructive, died on Monday at his home in Sydney, Australia. He was 78.
His daughter, Jeanne Ryckmans, said the cause was cancer.
  • 檢視大圖Young students in the Red Guard waved copies of the “Little Red Book,” a collection of quotations by Mao, at a parade in Beijing in June 1966 to celebrate the start of the Cultural Revolution.
    Jean Vincent/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
    Young students in the Red Guard waved copies of the “Little Red Book,” a collection of quotations by Mao, at a parade in Beijing in June 1966 to celebrate the start of the Cultural Revolution.
Mr. Ryckmans, who was better known by his pen name, Simon Leys, fell in love with China at the age of 19 while touring the country with fellow Belgian students in 1955. One highlight was an audience with Prime Minister Zhou Enlai. The man-made famine of Mao’s Great Leap Forward and his Cultural Revolution, which began in 1966 and ended about the time of Mao’s death, in 1976, were still in the future. There was much to be admired in the new China.
Yet pursuing his studies of Chinese art, culture and literature in the People’s Republic itself was not an option for a Westerner, so he settled in Taiwan, where he met his future wife, Han-fang Chang. He also lived in Singapore and Hong Kong.
It was in Hong Kong during the late 1960s, when it was still a British colony, that Mr. Ryckmans (pronounced RICK-mans) began to follow the turmoil just across the frontier, reading accounts in the official Chinese press about the Cultural Revolution and talking to former Mao supporters who had escaped it.
He began to find that the romantic view of Mao harbored by many Western intellectuals — as a progressive if flawed champion of the masses — was completely at odds with the cruelties of the Cultural Revolution, which sought to eradicate Chinese cultural traditions and Western capitalist influences and replace it with a Maoist orthodoxy. The movement led to purges, forced internal exiles and whipsaw shifts in the political winds, and it compelled Mr. Ryckmans to step into the arena of political commentary.
“Until 1966 Chinese politics did not loom large in my preoccupations, and I confidently extended to the Maoist regime the same sympathy I felt for all things Chinese, without giving it more specific thought,” Mr. Ryckmans wrote under his pseudonym in “Chinese Shadows,” which was first published in French in 1974. “But the Cultural Revolution, which I observed from beginning to end from the vantage point of Hong Kong, forced me out of this comfortable ignorance.”
His first account, “The Chairman’s New Clothes,” was also published in French, in 1971, a year after he had settled in Australia, lured by an eminent Chinese literary scholar, Liu Cunren, to teach at Australian National University. Mr. Ryckmans wrote the book under the name Simon Leys to disguise his identity so that he would not be banned from China.
He returned to China in 1972 on a six-month assignment as a cultural attaché for the Belgian Embassy in Beijing. The wanton destruction of the city’s ancient architectural heritage shocked him.
In “Chinese Shadows,” he wrote of his frantic search for some of the most magnificent of the city’s huge gates, which he assumed had been preserved, even though he knew that the city walls had been taken apart starting in the 1950s. The gates were gone. “The destruction of the gates of Peking is, properly speaking, a sacrilege; and what makes it dramatic is not that the authorities had them pulled down but that they remain unable to understand why they pulled them down,” he wrote.
The Cultural Revolution, he found, had destroyed the beauty of Chinese culture and civilization without destroying what needed to be exorcised: the tyranny of arbitrary rule.
In a telephone interview, Kevin Rudd, a former prime minister of Australia and a former student of Mr. Ryckmans, called him “the first of the Western Sinologists of the ’60s and ’70s to expose the truth of the cultural desecration that occurred during the Cultural Revolution, ripping away the political veneer from it all and exposing it for what it was: an ugly, violent, internal political struggle within the Chinese Communist Party led by Mao.”
Mr. Rudd added, “He was excoriated at the time by Sinologists who had been captured by the romance which many felt for the Cultural Revolution in the early days.”
The irony, Mr. Rudd said, is that the Chinese leadership moved to repudiate the Cultural Revolution after Mao’s death. Many of the delights of old Beijing — the food stalls, the street dancing on a summer’s evening — did indeed return, as did an appreciation for classical art, literature and, finally, the classical scholar Confucius, who had been vilified by the Maoists. Mr. Ryckmans translated, into English, the “Analects,” the collection of sayings attributed to Confucius.
Yet he did not change with the times. “It was difficult to get Pierre to accept that real, sustainable and positive changes had occurred in the China of the period of ‘reform and opening,’ ” Mr. Rudd said.
More than a Sinologist, Mr. Ryckmans was also a formidable European man of letters, earning doctorates in law and art in Belgium, said Richard Rigby, a China scholar and Mr. Ryckmans’s brother-in-law. His lectures, he added, brought the best of both worlds together.
“He could look at a Chinese painting or maybe something by Orwell and essays by Montaigne and put them all together into a coherent whole,” Mr. Rigby said.
Mr. Ryckmans also wrote a novel, “The Death of Napoleon,” which imagines the deposed emperor escaping from exile on St. Helena and making his way back to France. First published in France in 1986 and then in English in 1992, it was hailed as “an extraordinary book” by the novelist Penelope Fitzgerald, writing in The New York Times Book Review, and adapted into a film, with Ian Holm and Hugh Bonneville, in 2002.
Mr. Ryckmans was a frequent contributor to The New York Review of Books, Le Monde and other periodicals and the recipient of several literary prizes.
He was born on Sept. 28, 1935, in Brussels. Besides his daughter, he is survived by his wife; his sons Marc, Etienne and Louis; and two grandchildren.
He also taught at the University of Sydney and spent his later years writing and sailing. A collection of his essays, “The Hall of Uselessness,” discussing topics as far-ranging as “Don Quixote” and Confucius, was published in 2011.
In “Chinese Shadows,” Mr. Ryckmans wrote that even though Mao and his acolytes would leave the scene, and there would be an inevitable relaxation of authoritarian rule, the fundamental characteristics of Communist rule would not change.
“Among various descriptions of Communist China made at different times, one may note differences,” he wrote, “yet if these descriptions have been made conscientiously and perceptively, they will show more than ephemeral journalistic truths, for modifications will be in quantity, never in quality — variations in amplitude, not changes in basic orientation.”

No Enemies, No Hatred 兩本《劉曉波傳》“刘晓波不会用流亡换出狱” Perry Link on Mo Yan

   

No Enemies, No Hatred

Selected Essays and Poems

Liu Xiaobo

Edited by Perry Link

Tienchi Martin-Liao

Liu Xia

Foreword by Vaclav Havel

  • A Wall Street Journal Book of the Year, 2011
When the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded on December 10, 2010, its recipient, Liu Xiaobo, was in Jinzhou Prison, serving an eleven-year sentence for what Beijing called “incitement to subvert state power.” In Oslo, actress Liv Ullmann read a long statement the activist had prepared for his 2009 trial. It read in part: “I stand by the convictions I expressed in my ‘June Second Hunger Strike Declaration’ twenty years ago—I have no enemies and no hatred. None of the police who monitored, arrested, and interrogated me, none of the prosecutors who indicted me, and none of the judges who judged me are my enemies.”
That statement is one of the pieces in this book, which includes writings spanning two decades, providing insight into all aspects of Chinese life. These works not only chronicle a leading dissident’s struggle against tyranny but enrich the record of universal longing for freedom and dignity. Liu speaks pragmatically, yet with deep-seated passion, about peasant land disputes, the Han Chinese in Tibet, child slavery, the CCP’s Olympic strategy, the Internet in China, the contemporary craze for Confucius, and the Tiananmen massacre. Also presented are poems written for his wife, Liu Xia, public documents, and a foreword by Václav Havel.
This collection is an aid to reflection for Western readers who might take for granted the values Liu has dedicated his life to achieving for his homeland.

 

  • Foreword by Václav Havel
  • Introduction by Perry Link
  • Part I. Politics with Chinese Characteristics
    • Listen Carefully to the Voices of the Tiananmen Mothers: Reading the Unedited Interview Transcripts of Family Members Bereaved by the Massacre
      • Poem: Your Seventeen Years
      • Poem: Standing amid the Execrations of Time
    • To Change a Regime by Changing a Society
    • The Land Manifestos of Chinese Farmers
    • Xidan Democracy Wall and China’s Enlightenment
    • The Spiritual Landscape of the Urban Young in Post-Totalitarian China
      • Poem: What One Can Bear
      • Poem: A Knife Slid into the World
    • Bellicose and Thuggish: The Roots of Chinese “Patriotism” at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century
    • State Ownership of Land Is the Authorities’ Magic Wand for Forced Eviction
    • A Deeper Look into Why Child Slavery in China’s “Black Kilns” Could Happen
    • The Significance of the “Weng’an Incident”
  • Part II. Culture and Society
    • Epilogue to Chinese Politics and China’s Modern Intellectuals
    • On Living with Dignity in China
      • Poem: Looking Up at Jesus
    • Elegy to Lin Zhao, Lone Voice of Chinese Freedom
    • Ba Jin: The Limp White Flag
      • Poem: Alone in Winter
      • Poem: Van Gogh and You
    • The Erotic Carnival in Recent Chinese History
      • Poem: Your Lifelong Prisoner
    • From Wang Shuo’s Wicked Satire to Hu Ge’s Egao: Political Humor in a Post-Totalitarian Dictatorship
    • Yesterday’s Stray Dog Becomes Today’s Guard Dog
      • Poem: My Puppy’s Death
    • Long Live the Internet
    • Imprisoning People for Words and the Power of Public Opinion
  • Part III. China and the World
    • Behind the “China Miracle”
    • Behind The Rise of the Great Powers
      • Poem: To St. Augustine
      • Poem: Hats Off to Kant
    • The Communist Party’s “Olympic Gold Medal Syndrome”
    • Hong Kong Ten Years after the Handover
    • So Long as Han Chinese Have No Freedom, Tibetans Will Have No Autonomy
      • Poem: One Morning
      • Poem: Distance
    • Obama’s Election, the Republican Factor, and a Proposal for China
  • Part IV. Documents
    • The June Second Hunger Strike Declaration
      • Poem: You • Ghosts • The Defeated
    • A Letter to Liao Yiwu
      • Poem: Feet So Cold, So Small
    • Using Truth to Undermine a System Built on Lies: Statement of Thanks in Accepting the Outstanding Democracy Activist Award
    • Charter 08
    • My Self-Defense
    • I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement
    • The Criminal Verdict: Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court Criminal Judgment No. 3901 (2009)
  • Bibliography
  • Acknowledgments
  • Index

 

 *****

13 December 2012

Perry Link on Mo Yan

Mo YanThe Chinese writer Mo Yan accepted the Nobel prize in literature this week in Stockholm, offering remarks that further fanned the flames of controversy surrounding his selection. After being dismissed by Salman Rushdie as a “patsy of the régime” for his failure to support the release of jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, and having his Nobel selection decried by Chinese artist and agitator Ai Weiwei as “an insult to humanity and to literature,” the author defended censorship as necessary, likening it to airport security checks.
Few observers could fail to note the contrasting responses to Mo Yan’s honor this year and to Liu Xiaobo’s in 2010, when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Whereas in 2010 the Chinese government denounced and boycotted the award, this time the state has proudly received the honor, even announcing plans to spend $110 million making Mo Yan’s home village a “Culture Experience Zone.”
Some of the Chinese people, on the other hand, evince a response less warm. In a long consideration of Mo Yan’s work and Nobel recognition, Perry Link quotes the satirist Wang Xiaohong imagining Alfred Nobel’s distress:
Two years ago my people gave a prize to a Chinese, and in doing so offended the Chinese government. Today they gave another prize to a Chinese, and in doing so offended the Chinese people. My goodness. The whole of China offended in only two years.
Link, a co-editor of No Enemies, No Hatred, our recent volume of Liu Xiaobo’s writings, and author of a forthcoming inquiry into the workings of the Chinese language, An Anatomy of Chinese, outlines a series of recent statements and actions which have contributed to wide disappointment in Mo Yan’s politics. For his part, Mo Yan asks that his writing be allowed to exist apart from his extratextual political positioning. While acknowledging the complications of any such compartmentalization, Link points to the larger question of “how and to what extent a writer’s immersion in, and adjustment to, an authoritarian political regime affects what he or she writes.”
Link notes Mo Yan’s focus on society’s downtrodden, the “poor farmers who are bullied and bankrupted by local officials,” but contrasts his attention paid with that of dissident writers like Liu Xiaobo and Zheng Yi. “Liu and Zheng,” Link writes, “denounce the entire authoritarian system, including the people at the highest levels. Mo Yan and other inside-the-system writers blame local bullies and leave the top out of the picture.”
Link also highlights Mo Yan’s libidinous “black humor,” the characteristic most often lauded by his supporters, but points to such writing’s usefulness to the regime for its obscuring of the past and its function as a “safety valve.” Link cites Liu Xiaobo’s 2004 article “The Erotic Carnival in Recent Chinese History,” excerpted here from No Enemies, No Hatred:
In the years since the Tiananmen massacre, the rampant materialism of the power elite’s moves to privatize wealth has given rise in China to a consumer culture that has grown ever more hedonistic, superficial, and vulgar, and the social function of this materialism has been to bolster the dictatorial political order. Sarcasm in the entertainment world has turned into a kind of spiritual massage that numbs people’s consciences and paralyzes their memories; incessant propaganda about “the state drawing close to the people” reinforces the notion that the government is the savior of the people—who accordingly are its servants. Meanwhile an erotic carnival of products in commercial culture invite entry, real or fantasized, into a world of mistresses, prostitutes, adultery, one-night stands, and other forms of sexual abandon. The craze for political revolution in decades past has now turned into a craze for money and sex.
[…]
In this situation, sexual indulgence becomes a handy partner for a dictatorship that is trying to stay on top of a society of rising prosperity. Chinese people were so repressed during the Mao era, sexually and otherwise, that when ideas about freedom trickled in from the outside, many of them had great appeal. But while ideas about political freedom—speech, assembly, elections, and so on—could have led to a liberation in the Chinese people of humanity’s best qualities, and could have brought dignity to individuals, the idea of sexual freedom did not support political democracy so much as it harked back to traditions of sexual abandon in China’s imperial times. It siphoned interest in freedom toward thoughts of concubinage, elegant prostitution, and the bedroom arts as they are celebrated in premodern pornography. This has been just fine with today’s dictators. It fits with the moral rot and political gangsterism that years of hypocrisy have generated, and it diverts the thirst for freedom into a politically innocuous direction.
Link ends his piece by granting the unusual path chosen by Liu Xiaobo, and admitting the impropriety of spectators who “enjoy the comfort of distance” demanding that Mo Yan risk all to follow it. “But it would be even more wrong,” he concludes, “to mistake the clear difference between the two.” Or, put glibly, not all subversion is subversive.

“刘晓波不会用流亡换出狱”

刘晓波获诺贝尔和平奖已经两年,他的妻子刘霞依然被中国当局软禁。英国媒体近日曝出,当局向刘霞施压以迫使刘晓波流亡,多位人士认为,刘晓波不会接受当局附条件的“自由”。
This undated image provided by Voice of America shows Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo who won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize Friday Oct. 8, 2010. (AP Photo/voanews.com)
(德国之声中文网)英国BBC英文报道,在刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖两周年之际,与刘晓波家庭关系密切的消息人士称,中国当局正在向刘晓波妻子刘霞施加压 力,以迫使刘晓波流亡国外;消息人士还透露刘霞在贴身的两位女警的监视和多位便衣警察监视住宅的情况下,受到极大的"精神折磨"。
据刘霞好友、中国独立评论人莫之许向德国之声表示,报道中基本是事实,但已经是很久前传出的消息,但从刘霞家人及朋友、刘晓波弟弟等渠道都没有传出最新消息,因此不能确定当局目前针对刘晓波的进一步行动。他亦认为中国政府无理由限制刘霞自由,这也有损其"大国"形象。
另据来自"中国网"消息,10月9日中国国务院新闻办《中国的司法改革》白皮书发布会上,中央司法体制改革领导小组办公室负责人姜伟平在回答英国《金融时报》记者,关于中国政府是依据什么法律或制度来软禁刘霞的问题时,该官员表示对刘霞的软禁是依据中国法律认定。
In this Sept. 28, 2010 photo, Liu Xia, wife of Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo speaks during an interview in Beijing, China. When the police came for Liu Xiaobo that night nearly two years ago, they didn't tell the dissident-author the reason for taking him away. The line in the detention order for "motive" was blank. But everyone in Liu's dark Beijing apartment knew exactly why. Liu was hours from releasing a call for peaceful political reform in China that would represent the democracy movement's most comprehensive demand ever _ and that would earn Liu multiple nominations for this year's Nobel Peace Prize. (AP Photo/Andy Wong) 刘霞
"他们是用哪条法律对刘晓波判刑、对刘霞软禁?"
正被北京警方软禁的维权人士胡佳向德国之声透露在一个多月前的一个晚上,通过特殊方式让刘霞打开窗帘向外凝望,胡佳站在刘霞家的楼外,用智能手机的灯闪、 及轻声呼唤刘晓波和刘霞家人对其的昵称"傻瓜,胡佳",尽力使刘霞能够看到自己,因为不能惊动监禁警察,双方没有语言交流:"她还是光头的样子,戴着眼 镜,那种氛围让我感到她是特别孤独无助的。因为声音比较低,我并不确定她是否听清楚了这些话,如果她能听清楚,她就能明白我是去找他的,我希望这种探望, 尽管我们不能够相互说一句完整的话,但是让她知道有朋友在时刻关注她的状态,为她的自由在行动。"

“刘晓波不会用流亡换出狱”(音频)

曾任中共前总书记赵紫阳秘书、中国知名民主人士鲍彤向德国之声表示,他已经有两年无法与刘霞会面,很担忧她的处境,同时他也对中国当局 对刘晓波判刑和软禁刘霞再次提出质询:"他们是用哪条法律呢?如果中国政府准备依法治国,就应该把自己的法律条文向全世界宣布。他们根据什么法律把《零八 宪章》宣布为'颠覆中国政权'?刘晓波不管境况如何,毕竟是经过所谓法院审判,对刘霞软禁是根据哪条法律,不说清楚,只说根据中国的法律,这是搪塞,说中 国有自己的法律这就是说不准备依法治国,因为中国的法律就是没有法律。我希望再有媒体记者问的时候,中国发言人应该有点进步。"
一直呼吁中国当局释放刘晓波、恢复刘霞自由的独立中文笔会会长廖天琪在接受德国之声采访时认为,刘霞当前处境也让中国当局大失形象的同时感到更加棘手: "中国独裁政府没有变通办法,走到一个死巷也必须走下去,如果新的执政者没有一个办法把刘霞释放,以此为指标我们不要对新的执政者进行政改、平反六四等抱 有希望。"
FILE -- In this Sept. 28, 2010 file photo, Liu Xia, wife of Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, speaks during an interview in Beijing, China. Liu Xia, the wife of Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, said in a Twitter message that she had been under house arrest since Friday Oct. 8, 2010. (AP Photo/Andy Wong/file) 刘霞的摄影作品
"刘晓波曾表示态度:不会流亡"
鲍彤也表示因为无法联系到刘霞,对中国当局对刘晓波是否采取强迫流亡行动尚不得而知,但他早前和刘晓波、刘霞都曾谈起是选择在中国还是在海外生活的话题,他认为刘晓波不会选择流亡:"他过去曾表示过这样一个态度,如果让他流亡,他不会。"
廖天琪透露,确实在前段时间经由一些渠道听闻,中国当局想让刘晓波流亡,刘晓波拒绝接受这种附条件的自由,廖天琪坚信刘晓波即使在狱中,这种坚守其实也是 推动一种有力量的行动:"如果用出国当作出狱的条件,我想他不会答应的。刘晓波他现在已经成为一个精神符号,不止是一个政治犯或异议人士,确实也代表中国 一部分知识群体的良心、道德、责任。他不会接受政府的收买或开恩而离开监狱,这也表示他们不会屈服于权力的。"
但廖天琪和胡佳都对中国当局有可能为达成迫使刘晓波流亡,而加大对刘霞的施压表示忧虑,胡佳说:"刘晓波现在唯一要权衡的就是会给刘霞带来多大的压力。"
 ***Das Pressebild darf nur in Zusammenhang mit einer Berichterstattung über die Ausstellung verwendet werden***
This Tuesday, Feb. 7 2012 photo shows 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo holding a doll in a detail of a photograph by his wife, Chinese artist Liu Xia on display at during a preview of "The Silent Strength of Liu Xia" exhibit at The Italian Academy in New York. The photos were spirited out of China just before Liu was placed under house arrest after her husband, imprisoned in 2009 for urging democratic reform, won the Nobel. Her works are censored in her native country. The exhibition opens Thursday, Feb. 9, 2012. (Foto:Mary Altaffer/AP/dapd) 2010年诺贝尔和平奖颁奖仪式上特为刘晓波设置的"空椅子"
"我们的存在就是一种抗议"
胡佳表示透过刘晓波早前作品已明其志,既成为中国变革和观察和见证者,胡佳认为中共将刘晓波关在狱中,也承担了世界范围内的巨大压力,如果释放,又担心刘 晓波接下来会推动《零八宪章》进入实施阶段、促成国际社会和中国民间、知识界的联动,以推动中国的宪政民主等,因此中共应该愿意将刘晓波流亡海外,割断其 与中国的联结:"当局在这方面其实很恐惧,他们不希望中国出现哪怕软禁中的昂山素季一样的人物,他们把这个风险预估得很高。"
胡佳引用昂山素季"我们的存在就是一种抗议", 认为刘晓波会有和昂山素季、曼德拉等人一致的选择:"对于刘晓波来说,他作为诺贝尔平奖获得者在中国监狱的存在,就等于在中共脸上浓墨重彩的写下'侵犯人 权的凶手',也反衬中共的丑陋,这三年多来晓波在看守所或监狱,他会知道在这个国家坚守会有什么样的价值,如果出去的话对他的理想的实现就会弱很多。"
而鲍彤、廖天琪、胡佳都认为,释放刘晓波和恢复刘霞的自由,是中国政府如果重建公信力或意图改革最直接和容易达成的一种方式。
作者:吴雨
责编:洪沙

 
余杰《劉曉波傳》即將在台灣出版 我取得清樣一讀......201?

2017

【讀書好】讀劉曉波傳

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/supplement/special/art/20170714/20088387

Yu Jie, 余杰, a Dissident Chinese Writer Continues H...





*****鄧小平說,中國最大的失敗是教育

世煜兄和慧玲女在幾年前介紹中國的異議份子余杰先生,還帶我去去家濃厚豬肉的台菜餐廳。余杰(1973-)先生是劉曉(1955-)先生的隔代知音。我後來都默默注意余先生的被當局修理和反抗,幸虧德國之音和紐約時報等都會報導他們的奮鬥。

其實,劉曉波先生在台灣出版的著作至少五本,不過,劉曉波先生即使得到諾貝爾和平獎,他的書不像2000年諾貝爾文學獎般暢銷。

劉曉波先生在電話中向余杰先生說:「你引用了一句鄧小平的話,鄧小平說,中國最大的失敗是教育,這句話引用不當,你知道鄧小平是在什麼情況下說的嗎?是在89年,他說教育的失誤是指沒有加強思想政治教育,他嫌當局對於大學生的洗腦不夠,你連背景都不清楚就在電視上亂說……。」(余杰《我無罪:劉曉波傳》台北版,2012,約頁261)兩本《劉曉波傳》

 ----余英時序

余杰《我無罪:劉曉波傳》台北版,2012 


余杰寫劉曉波的傳記,真可以說是天作之合:一方面劉曉波不可能找到比余杰更出色當行的作傳人;另一方面,余杰也不可能找到比劉曉波更能使他全心投入的寫傳對象。關於這一點,後文還會作進一層的解釋,暫止於此。現在讓我對這部傳記作一高度概括性的介紹,以為讀者理解之一助。
我認為本書有三個最值得注意的特色:
第一,本書並非孤立地呈現劉曉波個人的生活和思想,而是將它置於整個歷史變動的大脈絡之中。正因為如此,他的精神成長和發展才段落分明地展示了出來。從十一歲到二十一歲(一九六六至一九七六年)是他在精神上啟蒙和奠基的階段,但恰好處於「文革」時期。「文革」雖是中國人的普遍災難,卻意外成為劉曉波的一種福祉,使他在一段時間之內自由自在,不受任何精神上的束縛。這一點點自由的幼苗不斷在他心靈中茁壯,終於成為今天我們所認識的劉曉波。難怪他後來要說:「我非常感謝『文化大革命』。」
從一九七七到一九八九年則是劉曉波生命史上第二個重要階段。在這一階段中,他一方面完成了中國文學的專業研究,取得了博士學位(一九八八年),另一方面他的自由精神已沛然莫之能禦,自八○年代初開始,便衝出了文學專業的領域,而馳騁在思想和文化這一更廣闊的世界中。但是我們同時也必須記住:這一段時期,由於胡耀邦、趙紫陽兩人主持黨和政,思想、文化界出現了一個短暫的相對寬鬆的局面。本書在敍事過程中便隱隱約約地將這一獨特的歷史背景透露了出來。例如提到劉曉波在一九八八年應邀赴挪威講學,作者寫道:
那時「反自由化」運動經趙紫陽的抵制逐漸淡化,北師大的「小氣候」相對寬鬆,他得以順利出國講學。
從一九八九年天安門運動到二○一○年獲得諾貝爾和平獎則是曉波生命史上的第三階段,本書敍事主要聚焦於此。全書共八章,自第三章以下都是屬於第三階段,因此記錄十分詳盡。在這六章的長篇敍述中,曉波個人在這二十年中的一切遭遇更是和歷史脈絡緊密相連的。所以近二十年來中國的政治、社會動態也隨著曉波的一言一行清晰地呈現了出來。自一九八九年以來,由於東歐和前蘇聯先後發生了驚天動地的變化,「亡黨」的恐懼成為中共一黨專政的主旋律。我們只要稍稍回顧一下中共在過去二十年中怎樣時輕時重地懲罰曉波,這一點便顯露無遺了。無論是短期監禁、在家軟禁、或「勞動教養」,都和他的言行對於政權所構成的威脅一一相應。換句話說,對政權的威脅越大,懲罰也越重。毫無疑問,曉波在二○○八年底所推出的《零八憲章》構成了對「一黨專政」的最大威脅,因為這可以引發初稍後在中東進行得如火如荼的「茉莉花革命」。明乎此,則曉波為什麼在《憲章》發表前夕(二○○八年十二月八日)被祕密拘禁,並在一年之後(二○○九年十二月二十六日)以「煽動顛覆國家政權罪」判刑十一年,便完全可以理解了。
第二,本書記述曉波的思想和價值觀念,相當詳盡,我們稍加推導,便能看到他的心靈發展的整體過程。這是本書一個很重要的貢獻。前面提到曉波精神進程的三個階段,現在我要進一步指出:這三個階段是一種內在理路的展開,由低而高,逐層拓廣。他在第一階段所獲得高度自由為他在第二、第三階段的思想發展提供了基本動力。徐友漁曾以「思想徹底」作為曉波的主要「特徵」,我完全同意。但是我要下一轉語,這一特色正是他的自由精神的呈露。他的少年和青年時期是在「停課鬧革命」、「上山下鄉」中度過的,所以他沒有受到長期而有系統的意識形態的束縛,而且很早便形成了向權威挑戰的心態。此外他和同時少年一輩相比,還有一個很獨特的人生經驗,即一九六九至一九七三這幾年,他隨父親到內蒙古科爾沁右翼前旗插隊。在這個草原、荒漠與森林的廣闊邊境,他可能有機會和當地農民、牧民摔跤、喝酒,打成一片。也許由於這一背景,他的思想和寫作之中往往貫注著一股浪漫奔放的精神,和他所體現與嚮往的自由相得益彰。自由加上浪漫奔放便造成了曉波的「思想徹底」。
曉波思想的「徹底性」表現在很多方面,這裡姑且舉一二事例為證。首先,從消極方面說,他對於共產黨的否定是徹底的,從意識形態到統治都持完全反對的態度。以意識形態而論,他對八○年代具有廣泛影響的思想啟蒙者提出鋒銳的批判,並不是抹煞他們的重大貢獻,而是因為他們在思想突破方面不夠徹底,「本身還拖著一條長長的舊意識形態的尾巴」。再就現實政治來說,一九八八年他在香港便公開發表了〈混世魔王毛澤東〉的評論,這更是徹底拒斥中共政權的一種明確表示。
其次,再從積極方面看,曉波對於普世價值的追求也同樣地勇往直前,百折不撓。前面曾指出,曉波在思想成長最初階段已完全認同自由的價值。但在第二、第三兩個階段中,他則不斷地致力於自由的深化和擴張。從他最早(一九八四年)發表的〈論藝術直覺〉和〈論莊子〉兩文來看,他是在文學和藝術的領域中尋求自由。這正是為什麼他特別注意到莊子的緣由。因為,一方面,《莊子》這部書恰好體現了最純淨的自由精神。自嚴復至蕭公權,凡是深入西方思想的現代學人,都對《莊子》有這樣的理解,如〈逍遙遊〉可以看作是自由的至境,而〈在宥〉則是「最徹底之自由思想」。另一方面,如所周知,《莊子》也是中國藝術精神的一個最重要的源頭。但是曉波很快地便將自由推向文化和思想的廣大世界,一九八六年轟動一時的〈危機!新時期文學面臨危機〉即其明證。不但如此,他在字面上斥責的雖是中國傳統文化和專制制度,但事實上卻「項莊舞劍,意在沛公」,劍鋒遙指「黨天下」的統治。這可以說,在擴充的過程中已將自由深化了。
一九八八年曉波完成了博士論文的撰寫,這也是對自由進行深化的一大努力。他的論文題目是《審美與人的自由》,其中一個核心觀點便是「因審美得自由」。當時美學討論很熱烈,而康德(Immanuel Kant)的哲學也相當流行;在這一時代背景之下,曉波所選擇的論題可以說是順理成章的。但是他特別強調「美」與「自由」之間的關係,顯然由於受到了康德的啟發。康德在他的第三《批判》(The Critique of Judgment,中譯《判斷力批判》)中對這一問題有深入的論斷:我們對於純粹的「美」的判斷必須超出一切利害(disinterested)之上,也不能在「美」的物件(如自然界的花)之外,賦予它以任何外在的目的。康德稱這樣一種精神狀態是「自由的」(free)。換句話說,人只有處在這樣一種「自由」狀態之下才能成就美感的判斷。(他稱此為「自由的美」,free beauty)。這裡毋須追究曉波和康德之間的異同,但曉波論文的主旨是要使我們對於自由的理解深入到哲學的層次,則是十分明顯的。所以,《審美與人的自由》這部專論必須看作是曉波在深化自由方面所取得的重大成績。但曉波關於自由的最後、同時也是最圓熟的理解,則見於《零八憲章》。《憲章》第二節〈我們的基本理念〉劈頭便說:
自由:自由是普世價值的核心之所在。言論、出版、信仰、集會、結社、遷徙、罷工和遊行示威等權利都是自由的具體體現。自由不昌,則無現代文明可言。
《憲章》當然代表著所有起草人和簽署人的共同理念,並不是曉波一人之見。然而,由於曉波是兩位主要起草人之一,我深信「自由是普世價值的核心之所在」這一特別提法也同時折射出他個人長期探索自由真諦的終極體悟。
最後,我要指出本書的第三個特色:曉波的精神品格的成長歷程在敍事中逐步呈現了出來。余杰寫的是一個有血有肉的真實的人,而不是什麼「橫空出世」的「天縱之聖」。因此他並不諱言曉波早年所遭受的種種批評,如廖亦武說他「好鬥」、「霸道」等等。而且余杰也指出:「年輕的劉曉波有著強烈的表現欲望,也知道如何製造話題,吸引人們的眼光。」但是通讀全書,最使我感動的則是曉波的精神境界隨著他的苦難經歷而一層一層地向上攀升。一九八九年「六四」前夕他從美國趕回天安門廣場是這一精神旅程的始點。從「六二絕食」到說服戒嚴部隊讓幾千學生從廣場撤離,曉波的心態顯然已從早年的激進轉向和平漸進。這當然是一次精神的大提升。此下一再入獄和出獄後的監視、軟禁、傳喚、暴力毆打、「勞動教養」……種種數不清的迫害都只能使他的精神境界越來越高。所以二○○九年十二月,他在法庭上最後陳述道:
我堅守著二十年前我在〈「六二」絕食宣言〉中所表達的信念——我沒有敵人,也沒有仇恨。
這是印度甘地最後所達到的精神境界,不經過千錘百煉,是不可能「堅守」下來的。中國人的精神修練自來有兩條途徑:一條是「靜坐涵養」(如二程、朱熹),另一條是「事上磨煉」(王陽明),曉波的精神旅程是循著「事上磨煉」的方式完成的。這一旅程在本書中有極其生動的記述,讀者必須熟讀深思而自得之。
這裡我願意用我和曉波的兩次短暫的直接接觸,為他精神升進的實況作見證。我第一次和曉波會面是在一九八九年四月十五日;當時有一場討論中國大陸情勢的聚會在紐約舉行,來自大陸的與會者包括劉賓雁、王若水、阮銘等人,曉波也在應邀之列,因為他恰好在哥倫比亞大學訪問。我至今還清楚地記得他和我的談話。我事先已聽說他是大陸文壇最具反叛性的青年作家,因此我問他是否已習慣於美國的學院生活?紐約和北京對比在他心理上引起了怎樣的反應?他相當激動地說,他完全不能適應紐約生活的孤寂和淡而無味。他告訴我:他在北京差不多天天都有講演,聽眾不計其數。每次講完,必得到無數的「鮮花」和震天的「掌聲」。「鮮花」和「掌聲」是他的原話,他一再強調,因此牢牢地留在我的記憶中。但那一天(四月十五日)恰好聽到胡耀邦的死訊和北京大批學生遊行悼念的報導,與會者的注意力完全被這一新聞所轉移,我和曉波的對話也就此中斷了。我當時雖然很欣賞他的坦率,但終覺得他過於受當時大陸上浮躁風氣的感染,虛榮心未免稍重。但不久之後聽說他毅然不顧個人安危,回到北京,積極參加了天安門的民主運動,我對他的印象立即發生了很大的改變。但遺憾的是,此後我一直沒有和他再見面的機會。
我第二次和他接觸是通過長途電話,事在二○○七年夏天,距初晤已十八年了。不知為什麼他忽然心血來潮,從北京家中打電話向我致意。他當時非常忙碌,除了爭取人權的許多活動外,他又接辦了蘇曉康「民主中國」的網站,同時還擔任著獨立中文筆會的會長。我對他當然十分關切,電話上大約談了十幾分鐘。最使我感覺深刻的不是別的,而是他的態度和語氣與十八年前判若兩人。他變得心平氣和,富於溫情而全無激情;涉及中國前景之類的大問題,他既能從大處著眼,又能從小處著手。余杰對曉波曾有以下一段描寫:
九○年代以來,曉波如同一塊被時間和苦難淘洗得晶瑩剔透的碧玉,早已去除了當年個人英雄主義和自我中心主義的污垢,他變得越來越溫和、越來越寬容、越來越謙卑,用劉霞的話來說,就是越來越讓人感到「舒服」。
我和曉波的兩次談話恰好可以和余杰的觀察互相印證。
我在序文的開頭說,由余杰執筆為曉波寫傳,是「天作之合」。現在我可以交代一下這句話的根據何在。我的根據便是上引余杰那篇〈看哪,這個口吃的人〉(見本書附錄一)。以年齡而言,曉波和余杰是兩代的人,但他們卻生活和思想在同一精神世界之中。更重要的,他們之間的「氣類」相近也達到了最大的限度。讀者只要能細細體味余杰這篇回憶的文字,必能得之。陳寅恪形容他和王國維之間的關係,寫下了「許我忘年為氣類」之句;他們也是「氣類」相近的兩代人。陳寅恪寫〈王觀堂先生挽詞〉和〈王觀堂先生紀念碑銘〉,都傳誦一時,流播後世,正是由於「氣類」相近,惟英雄才能識英雄。現在余杰寫曉波生平,不但有過去,還有長遠的未來,攜手開拓共同的精神世界。這將是歷史上一個最美的故事。
二○一二年五月十五日於普林斯頓

-----

 貝嶺《犧牲自由 - 劉曉波傳》德语版

Start | 2011.01.14

德国之声专访:作家贝岭谈新作《刘晓波传》

1月13日,作家贝岭为其新书《刘晓波传》的德文版在科隆大学举办了读书会。贝岭强调,他是以一个"老朋友"的身份记录重大事件中的刘晓波。他围绕这本书以及他认识的刘晓波接受了德国之声记者的专访。

记者:忽然写《刘晓波传》的原因何在?
贝岭:不是忽然写,因为21年前我就写过跟刘晓波最早交往的三年回忆,那篇文章在刘晓波获奖之前被《法兰克福汇报》发表,(德国的)出版社看到这篇 文章后通过汉学家找到了我,出版社就是希望在刘晓波获奖之后,在圣诞节之前有一本书告诉德国人。我正好在写我自己的回忆录的时候已经整理出来几万字的和刘 晓波有关的笔记和内容,后来我发现我手上有关刘晓波的东西已经很多了,我就试一试继续把这本书完成,所以它并不是在一个很短的时间内完成的,但是却在最后 一个半月的时间内彻底地变成了一本书。这本书就成了除中文之外的第一本(《刘晓波传》)。

记者:以什么身份在写这本传记呢?
贝岭:其实我是他的老朋友,我不是他最亲密的朋友,因为我们毕竟有十年没再见过面,我们最后一次通电话是在入狱前的一年。我说是老朋友是我认识他的 时候很多人还不认识他,我们又是同事,我们是哈维尔自传的中文翻译,中文出版里,刘晓波最早是我的推手,我当时创办中文笔会,他是我最主要的支持者和国内 组织会员的人。也就是说我们就是文学同事和笔会同事,他是我哈维尔自传最主要的帮助者和促成者。这些历史使我和他的关系不是一般意义上的朋友关系。但应该 说,在后来这些年,我不是他最亲密的朋友,因为不在一个国家了,也有很多分歧,我对他的很多方式不支持不赞成,主要是在笔会以后。他对于我也有很多的批 评。也就是说,我们从来都是直言不讳的老朋友。老朋友的优点是可以直言不讳,而好朋友就很难,因为涉及到利益关系,这种关系我们没有。

记者:刘晓波并不知道您给他写传?
贝岭:那当然,当我决定写的时候想告诉刘霞,但她已经失去了与外界联系的方式,她恐怕也收不到我的邮件,我们俩最后一次通email是2010年的7、8月左右。刘霞看到我21年前写的那篇回忆录,她很感动,她觉得刘晓波和他的老朋友又回来了。
《刘晓波传》德语版(Der Freiheit geopfert - Die Biographie von Liu Xiaobo) 直译 《牺牲自由 - 刘晓波传》)Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: 《刘晓波传》德语版(Der Freiheit geopfert - Die Biographie von Liu Xiaobo) 直译 《牺牲自由 - 刘晓波传》) 

记者:以您对刘晓波的认识,您认为他知道您给他写传了会有什么反应呢?
贝岭:我想,我跟他之间是非常直率的友谊, 而且认识那么多年,其实彼此之间用他的话讲就是"不玩虚的了",我唯一关心的事里面有没有对他来说不真实或不准确的。刘晓波看完以后,他通过他人眼中的" 我",他本身受过存在主义哲学影响,他人眼中的我其实是最好让你看清自己的(我)。不是你心目中的你,也不是崇拜者心目中的你,也不是大弟子余杰心目中的 你,就是一个你曾经的老朋友或者说现在又回来的老朋友写你。

记者:这本书的重点是什么?
贝岭:最大的重点就是我今天在讨论会上说的六四。其实严格上来讲,这本书是由大量的资料铺成重要历史事件里的刘晓波,其实这本与其说是刘晓波传,到 不如说通过刘晓波我来探讨知识分子在中国历史里产生的影响和作用的审视,它并不是一般意义上的传,因为对于那些细节我并没有花太多时间,比如刘晓波的父母 叫什么,他的兄弟姐妹,他童年的生活怎么样,这些我都没有花时间去讨论,我更加着魔于他在重要事件里做为如此丰富复杂的一个人的特点。这个特点才是我这本书想要呈现的。也想通过刘晓波呈现后面很多当代中国的知识分子以及当代中国的历史。而且我还常用第一人称写,写我和他。所以说不是传统的传记,但确实涵盖 了他一生里的主要生活。
科隆大学汉学系教授司马涛在朗读《刘晓波传》的德文版Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: 科隆大学汉学系教授司马涛在朗读《刘晓波传》的德文版 记者:您的眼中,刘晓波在生活里到底是个什么样的人?
贝岭:从某种意义上讲他就是一个毛病极多的一个家伙。比如说他不爱洗澡,抽烟抽得满屋子烟味儿,乱七八糟,但是当他离你很远的时候,你又觉得这是他很可爱的地方,就是说他很本色。他那喜欢口若悬河,背名言,人越多越不结巴,这些都是他的特点,从私人角度看的东西。

记者:您11月份去台湾在北京转机的时候被强行遣送回德,写这本书会不会多少有些顾虑呢?因为可能会带来更多的不便。
贝岭: 没有,那没有。我只是说不要再以这种方式经过北京,感觉就是比较意外,因为我没有准备,感觉他们随时可能让我消失,这是我的意外,但是没有任何人挡得住我 写的书。不管是写他还是写其他人。我觉得写刘晓波是意外,如果不是他获诺贝尔和平奖,他将只是在我的回忆里一部分、几万字探讨刘晓波。

记者:那作为"老朋友",他获诺奖的时候您有什么感受呢?
贝岭:他获奖的时候,我非常意外,因为没想到刘晓波这么快就获奖,因为一般提很多年才有可能。甚至我认为他需要的是自由,不是桂冠,自由比桂冠重要。现在我想,刘晓波获奖以后可能离自由更远了。但是我很快就认为这个奖对中国的反对运动从抽象意义上是个巨大的鼓舞,而且我们看到产生了像冲击波一样的 (影响),在媒体和网络没有控制的那一个星期里,我每天都会注意这个变化。
采访:安静
责编:李鱼

網誌存檔