2017年5月26日 星期五

季羡林、饒宗頤 兩耄耋重引"一眼與雙眼"說









Ji Xianlin - Thirty Years East of the River... - The East-West Dichotomy

www.east-west-dichotomy.com/ji-xianlin/



... The French scholar Aly Mazahéri who does Iranian studies dealt a lot with the ancient inventions of China in his monumental work La Route de la Soie, many of which are still unknown to us. I will not deliberate on details here, but I will only quote some pieces of talk between ancient Persians and Arabs about Chinese culture and Greek culture:
Jahez quoted a theory of the Sassanian Dynasty (226—Ca. 640), which says: “The Greeks never invented anything except some theories. They never taught any art. But the Chinese were different. They did teach all their arts, but they indeed had no scientific theories whatever.”
Here is a note by the present author Ji Xianlin: The last statement is not true. China did have theories. What this statement says is similar to Hegel’s idea that there was no philosophy in China, which is a rather lay comment. In the same book, there are statements saying:
After the Sassanian Dynasty, Ferdowsi, Salibee, Al’beruni, and others all attributed the discovery of silk fabrics, steel, mortar, and slurry to Yama and Jamashed. However, we have a firm belief in the origin of silk fabrics and steel knives in China. As to the rest of these discoveries such as slurry — cement and so on, there is a 99% probability that they also originated in China. Seeing things in this way we can appreciate the significance of a Parthian — Sassanian — Arabian — Turkman saying: “The Greeks have only one eye and only the Chinese have two eyes.” Josafa Barbaro had learned such a saying earlier in Persia, in 1471 and 1474. Around that time he also heard the same idea expressed in an abstruse manner: “The Greeks only understand theories, but the Chinese are the people who own the technologies.”
I would like to add more to the theory of one eye or two eyes, that is, I want to point out there are others who introduced the same idea, which must have originated in Manichaeism:
“Except the Chinese who observe with both eyes and the Greeks who observe with only one eye, all the other peoples are blind.”
I quote such sayings repeatedly not to feel the complacency and smugness about the flattery those foreigners heap upon the Chinese and then assume an air of self-importance. To my curiosity, such sayings existed in Persia and Arabia so long a time ago. And we cannot help today but wonder at the acumen and elaborate insight with which they observed. Indeed, at that time in the world, only China and Greece enjoyed a most prominent and magnificent culture. And it is high time that those handfuls of scholars or learners or whatever “-ers” in China who inevitably talk about nothing else but the Greek tradition come to an awakening....

季羡林舉的"單眼 vs 雙眼"舊說,為饒宗頤補充之,見"一眼與雙眼",收入【文化之旅】,北京:中華,2011







Ji Xianlin (季羡林; August 6, 1911 – July 11, 2009)




《三十年河東,三十年河西》是當代中國出版社出版的圖書,作者是季羨林。2006
作    者:季羡林   著  
出 版 社:华艺出版社 
I S B N:9787801429643    出版时间:2008-



1911年生於山東清平(今併入臨清市 )。12歲考入正誼中學,半年後轉入山東大學附設高中。1930年考入清華大學西洋文學系,專業方向德文。1935年9月赴德學習,1946年5月回國。曾擔任北京大學德語系系主任、北京大學副校長。



季羨林自言:到了耄耋之年,忽發少年狂,一系列引人關注的怪論、奇思問世。在季先生的這些怪論奇思中,影響最大的莫過於本書闡述的“三十年河東,三十年河西 ”:“三十年河東,三十年河西”,我引的這兩句話,最受人詬病,然而我至今仍然認為,這是真理,是詬病不掉的。
從人類的全過程來看,我認為,東方文化和西方文化的關係是:三十年河東,三十年河西。目前流行全世界的西方文化並非歷來如此,也絕不可能永遠如此。到了21世紀,西方文化將逐步讓位於東方文化,人類文化的發展將進入一個新的時期。

Ji Xianlin (季羡林; August 6, 1911 – July 11, 2009)


東西方文化的轉折點(2)
sinaqzonerenrenkaixingdoubanmsn


二、印度文化體系;

三、古希伯來、埃及、巴比倫、亞述以至阿拉伯伊斯蘭閃族文化體系;

四、古希臘、羅馬以至近現代歐美的印度歐羅巴文化體系。

兩大文化體系

以上四個文化體系,如果再歸納一下的話,可以分為兩大文化體系:一個是東方文化體系,包括上面的一、二、三三個文化體系;第二個是西方文化體系,就是上面的第四個。

人類自古以來的文化,盡在此矣。

兩大文化體系的同與異

兩大文化體系相同的地方是,都為人類造福,都提高了人的本質,都提高了人類的生活和享受水平,都推動了人類社會的發展。

兩大文化體係不同的地方,表現在很多方面。但是,我認為,最根本的不同卻表現在思維模式方面,這是其他一切不同之點的基礎和來源。一言以蔽之,東方文化體系的思維模式是綜合的(comprehensive),而西方則是分析的(analytical)。正如人類只能有東西兩大文化體系,人類也只能有兩個思維模式,不能有第三個。這種二分法,好像是大自然以及人類思維的一個基本原則。中國《易經》講乾坤,也就是陰陽。自然界有日月,晝夜。宗教哲學倫理有光明與黑暗,善與惡,等等。

所謂綜合思維,其特點可以歸結為兩句話:整體概念與普遍聯繫。用一句通俗的話來說,就是既見樹木,又見森林。用醫學來打個比喻:頭痛可以醫腳,反之亦然。

所謂分析思維,其特點就是抓住物質,一個勁地分析下去,一直分析到基本粒子。是不是還能再往下分呢?在這裡,科學界和哲學界意見都有分歧,一派主張物質無限可分,一派主張有限。這種分析的思維模式,用一句通俗的話來說,就是只見樹木,不見森林。再用醫學來作比喻,就是頭痛醫頭,腳痛醫腳。

中國古代天人合一的思想,是東方思維模式的最有典型意義的代表。印度古代哲學宗教的"你就是它"--指宇宙,也表現了同一思想。印度佛教的名相分析,看似分析,深究其實,則與西方的分析迥乎不同。

對東方文化的看法

現在主宰世界的是西方文化。這是事實,誰也無法否認。但這只能是一時的現象。西方人輕視東方文化,實出於民族偏見。東方人,特別是中國人,輕視東方文化,則是短見。如果看問題能上下數千年,縱橫幾萬里,則能看到事實的真相。

三十年河西,三十年河東

從人類幾千年的歷史上來看,東西方文化的相互關係是"三十年河西,三十年河東"。中國在漢唐時期,長安(西安)實際上是世界經濟文化的中心。這也是事實,誰也否認不掉的。自明末西學東漸開始,情況逐漸有了變化。1840年的鴉片戰爭是一個轉折點。日本認真學習西方文化,自1868年明治維新開始,時間早於中國,成績大於中國,直到今天,科技浸浸乎將居世界首位矣。

河西河東行將易位

西方人挾其科技優勢,自命為天之驕子。然而,據我的看法,人類歷史上從來沒有哪一個文化能延長萬歲千秋,從下一個世紀開始,河東將取代河西,東方文化將逐漸主宰世界。西方人自認為他們那種以分析思維模式為基礎的科學和哲學是絕對真理,然而自然界和人類社會中許多現象和問題,他們並不能解決。這一點西方許多有識之士已經敏銳地感覺到了,比如德國的施本格勒(Spengler)、英國的湯因比(Toynbee)等等。西方最近幾年興起的一些新興學科,比如模糊學、混沌學等等,也表現了同一個朕兆。我認為,這些新興學科,儘管內容不盡相同,甚至完全不同,卻表現了某一些共同的思維特點,這些特點不同於西方傳統的典型的分析的思維模式,而是表現出近似東方的綜合的思維模式,比如主張普遍聯繫,有了一些整體概念。

人類文化發展的前途

我說,自21世紀起,東方文化將逐漸取代西方文化,我的意思並不是說完全剷除或者消滅西方文化,那是根本不可能的,也是違反人類社會發展規律的。正確的做法是繼承西方文化在幾百年內所取得的一切光輝燦爛的業績,以東方文化的綜合思維濟西方文化分析思維之窮,把全人類文化提高到發展到一個更高更新的階段。



2017年5月25日 星期四

TSUTAYA BOOKSTORE「蔦屋書店」蔦屋重三郎;知的資本論:蔦屋書店的經營之道.



知的資本論:蔦屋書店的經營之道. 作者:(日)增田宗昭; . 以「人性的尺度」重新丈量企業的經營活動,將「賣

場」變成「生活方式提案店」。



「蔦屋書店」的「蔦」字怎麼唸? 這裡有正解
01/23/2017



▲TSUTAYA BOOKSTORE在台開設一號店。(圖/記者蔡惠如攝)
記者蔡惠如/綜合報導
TSUTAYA BOOKSTORE在台開設首間店鋪,讓入選「世界最美的20間書店」的日本「蔦屋書店」又引起討論,你知道蔦屋的「蔦」字怎麼唸嗎?
TSUTAYA BOOKSTORE日文漢字為「蔦屋書店」,「蔦」字唸法其實與中文的「鳥」的讀音相同,在中文意思裡,其實是一種「落葉小喬木」的植物名,而日本「蔦屋」的由來,是來自取自江戶時代的出版商蔦屋重三郎。
▲位於代官山的蔦屋書店。(圖/翻設自蔦屋書店官網)
其實「蔦屋」2個日文漢字目前僅使用於日本當地,在海外一律以英文TSUTAYA BOOKSTORE為名。
此外,像其他日文如「花咲」,意思為花開,「咲」字的讀音同「笑」,在中文裡其實意思也是「笑」,因為咲是笑的異體字。
此外,像東京駅的「駅」、辻利抹茶的「辻」等,都是中文字已經沒有的日文漢字,所以沒有對應的中文音。

【蔦屋書店銀座 Ginza Six 全新揭幕】
書迷們注意囉!素有最美書店之稱的「蔦屋書店」,今年 4 月底於銀座的超級商場「Ginza Six」 6 樓優雅揭幕,再次在人文景緻中烙下一個迷人身影。有別於其它蔦屋書店,銀座店特別強調藝術與日本文化,連江戶時代的文化也入題,其中更霸氣集結了多達 50 種「BIG BOOK」,場面十分壯觀!無論是想來看本好書,還是來喝上一杯精緻的美酒與咖啡,都不妨抽空來「銀座 蔦屋書店」,給自己預留一段書香時光吧!


Farīd Ud-Dīn Attar, THE CONFERENCE OF THE BIRDS《百鳥朝鳳》



1998年年底的戴明紀念會上,我講有關以西遊記比喻戴明晚年成道的故事。1999年,我讀J. L.Borges 的《想像的動物》(台北:志文出版社,楊耐冬譯,pp.164-165)的「知識樹上的不朽西牟(Simurgh)」,覺得它是一個很好的成道比喻。很顯然,Borges也對此故事情有獨鍾,他在《永恆的故事》(1936)中的〈阿個莫塔斯〉,花了半頁的注來說明、闡明:尋找者和被尋者具有同一性。
   「西牟」是種不朽的(類似鳳凰),築巢在知識樹上。根據十二世紀波斯詩人法思德 亞各丁
阿塔(另譯哈塔,為成吉思汗的士兵所殺)寫過一首四千五句對句韻律的故事:《朝鳳》(另譯為《樂門》或《的對話》)來記述它。著名的《魯拜集》創譯者E. Fitzgerald,有《朝鳳》部份英譯本。
   「遠古的王西牟(意思為「三十隻),在中國某地拋下一根光彩奪目的羽毛,眾知道這事後,立即一陣騷動,決定出發找這位王。   開始時,有的兒喪失了勇氣,開了小差:因為夜鶯向改魂求愛;鸚鵡祈求美麗鎖在籠中;鷓鴣(松雞)在山中不能沒有家;蒼鷺不能沒有沼澤;貓頭鷹不能沒有廢墟。   後來,眾冒險出發了。它們越過七谷七海(最後第二海洋叫「迷海」,最後名為「滅海」)。殘生的,受盡折磨卻沒離開的,最後只剩下三十隻,千辛萬苦後,抵達西牟大峰。終於得以見到王。   他們最後才明白,他們自己就是西牟;西牟就是他們每個個體,也是他們的全體。」

   一位大師的靈魂,就像《千面英雄》中的西藏菩薩畫(第十二圖)般,菩薩千像,化了他三十位學生中,他的三十萬讀者中,對他們進行鼓勵和啟迪。
   又據張鴻年《波斯文學史》(北京:北京大學出版社,1993,第107-108頁),對作者阿塔各(1445-1221)有極簡單的介紹:「他的主要作品為《朝鳳》和《詩樂》。作者是做過生意的詩人,一生傲骨不凡,未做過讚歌諛別人,也不願為稻糧,把「珍珠鑽孔修磨」(作詩)」。張先生是如此介紹《朝鳳》的:
   「全詩長9200行..詩中眾。寓指蘇非信徒,途中比喻他們修行的磨難…真主原本在每個人的心中,信徒只要潛心修行,敬主行善,就符合真主的意旨了。至於到外朝拜則是其次的。」

"For Attar, orthodoxy is just one more egoistic attachment that must be shattered to make room for the Divine. It’s a rebuke fit for dogmatists of every stripe and creed."
Why today's world needs the 12th-century Iranian poem THE CONFERENCE OF THE BIRDS: bit.ly/2qkYJoB


“That anyone has ever been able to surpass one of the great figures of the…
LITHUB.COM








IN A 12TH-CENTURY IRANIAN POEM, A VISION OF SOLIDARITY WE NEED TODAY
WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM THE CONFERENCE OF THE BIRDS


May 24, 2017 By Theodore McCombs






“That anyone has ever been able to surpass one of the great figures of the Divine Comedy seems incredible, and rightly so,” wrote Jorge Luis Borges, in his Nine Essays on Dante; “nevertheless, the feat has occurred.” Borges was speaking of the medieval Iranian poet Attar’s allegorical epic, Manteq al-Tayr, or The Conference of the Birds, and the magnificent image that caps the poem, of the mythical bird-deity of Persian literature, the Simorgh. Writers from Rumi to Borges to Porochista Khakpour have drawn on Attar and his sublime Simorgh, a vision of coherence in a divided world. Over eight centuries later, and with an exciting new translation released, by Iranian-American poet Sholeh Wolpé, Attar’s Simorgh still speaks to our moment of change and challenge: a moving and unsettling ideal from a very different, but very relevant time and place.


Farīd Ud-Dīn Attar, a pharmacist and poet in 12th-century Nishapur, Iran, composed The Conference of the Birds as a Sufi allegory for the soul’s journey to the Divine, with the Simorgh cast as the great king of the birds of the world. The birds look to the hoopoe, King Solomon’s favorite avian courier, to guide them on the Way to the Simorgh’s home on Mount Qaf. The birds present their fears, excuses, longings, and attachments to the hoopoe, who upbraids them to demolish their egos and fall into an ecstatic, irrational love with the Divine. The hoopoe illustrates each lesson with a series of parables on this not-quite-sane, often shocking love: there are kings who fall in love with male servants; there’s a Sufi sheikh who apostatizes for love of a Christian girl; there are blood-tears, and flayings, and every manner of holy fools ecstatically degrading themselves. The Way, Attar wants us to understand, is not confined by logic, worldly prudence, or even religious orthodoxy. Every form of ego must be sacrificed, even the conceit of rectitude.


The hoopoe’s lessons unnerve the birds so violently, some die on the spot. The remaining birds journey through countless ordeals and allegorical terrains with names like the Valley of the Quest and the Valley of Poverty and Annihilation. In the end, out of 100,000, only 30 pilgrims reach Mount Qaf. Purified and chastened by the journey, they behold the Simorgh: only to see their own reflection in the lake waters. Attar reveals his clever twist of language: si morgh, in Persian, means “30 birds.” All the birds are the Simorgh; Simorgh is them. Borges admired Attar’s economy of narrative: “adroitly, the searchers are what they seek.”


Sholeh Wolpé’s stunning new translation—the first in over 30 years—renders Attar’s engaging, singular voice with wit and flourish. As medieval Islamic allegorical epic translations go, The Conference of the Birds is also highly readable. Wolpé provides section outlines and headers to orient readers; she also makes the brilliant choice of presenting the parables as prose, emphasizing their substantive themes, while the birds’ speeches remain in a clear and lively verse. The first native Persian speaker and first woman to translate Conference, she renders genderless Persian nouns like “Simorgh” (and “God”) without that irritating Western resort to the ‘default’ masculine. (In the original mythology, the Simorgh is quite clearly a female deity.) Most importantly, Wolpé offers Attar’s masterwork not as a curiosity from a bygone age, but as a text of living wisdom whose message is always timely.


At a time when Islam is being presented both by hostile forces and extremist “champions” as a religion of grim, inflexible dogmas, Attar’s religiosity is a moving breath of freedom. For Attar, orthodoxy is just one more egoistic attachment that must be shattered to make room for the Divine. It’s a rebuke fit for dogmatists of every stripe and creed.


And while Attar wrote in a specific religious context, Wolpé chooses universal terms for the Divine, emphasizing accessibility over scholasticism. Conference isn’t really for would-be mystics in Boulder and Big Sur, but for a world beset by materialism, fear, and self-righteousness, by a damaging individualism that celebrates getting one’s own over the common good.


Wolpé’s translation comes right as we’ve elected a president who seems to embody all those things, and as many of us struggle to face the loss of national comforts, security, prosperity, and idealism. The Conference doesn’t just rebuke the proud demagogues of the age, but also goads the lukewarm who want to do good, but fear losing what looks like safety and happiness: those who are fine with #TheResistance, so long as it remains a hashtag. Attar the pharmacist writes powerfully about the disease of taking too small and close a view of things, a disease which afflicts all of us, and as cure proposes a radical openness to the other, the greater, and the more important.


“Populations do good or evil en masse: not as loosely affiliated individuals, but as movements, electorates, and economies.”



This cure plays out in unexpected ways within Attar’s surprisingly frequent trope, running through the parables, of an erotic drama between a king and his beautiful servant. Sometimes, the king is a clear allegory for the Divine, and his servant’s devotion or fickleness is raised as a model or warning. But other parables feature memorably unpredictable, dangerous, and foolish kings. In one, a king falls in love with “his silver-bodied servant,” and favors him by practicing archery, William Tell-style, with an apple balanced on the youth’s head. “In the meantime, I writhe,” the boy says, “my life always in danger for nothing at all.” These kings are living, strutting egos, embodying the pride and worldly anxiety the Wayfarer must repudiate.


The greatest sovereign in the poem, of course, is the Simorgh, who paradoxically is the pilgrim birds and their sovereign at once.


In his 1948 essay “The Simorgh and the Eagle,” Borges compared the paradox of Attar’s Simorgh to the Eagle in Dante’s Paradiso, in which thousands of righteous biblical and classical kings appear flying in eagle-shaped formation through the Heaven of Jupiter. “In the abstract,” Borges concedes, “the concept of a being composed of other beings does not appear promising,” citing the grotesque, composite allegory of Rumor in the Aeneid. But Borges praises the Eagle and the Simorgh as “one of the most memorable figures in Western literature, and another of Eastern literature,” while granting the advantage to Attar’s Simorgh:


The Eagle is merely implausible; the Simorgh, impossible. The individuals who make the Eagle are not lost in it (David serves as the pupil of one eye; Trajan, Ezekiel, and Constantine as brows); the birds that gaze upon the Simorgh are at the same time the Simorgh. The Eagle is a transitory symbol . . . ; those who form its shape with their bodies do not cease to be who they are; the ubiquitous Simorgh is inextricable.


This democratic corpus of Attar’s Simorgh contrasts with the tyrants in his parables, who marshal the collective force of their subordinates in service of their singular wills. It’s an especially potent contrast in our particular American political moment, as we watch our corporate CEO of a president wrangle with courts and entrenched bureaucracies while mass protests unfold in city centers. Trump is ego incarnate (some might say idincarnate), while the protestors—especially in the photos from the Women’s March in city after city—take on a composite, “inextricable” identity.


Attar’s image of the Simorgh captures something profound about how, especially today, populations do good or evil en masse: not as loosely affiliated individuals, but as movements, electorates, and economies. The complex ethics of the individual’s tiny, marginal impact on enormous moral events—whether it’s commuters taking the bus to fight climate change, or young people buying health insurance to lower the cost for everyone—is still being developed, and proving one of the most divisive flashpoints in the political landscape.


Attar doesn’t provide a solution to this question, but The Conference of the Birds does offer insight into the emotional and spiritual experience of this composite identity. It involves transcendence but also an annihilation of sorts, like any honest mysticism. It involves hardships and the loss of everything we cling to in order to feel better about ourselves. But the alternative is living falsely, attached to paltry, fleeting, even treacherous advantages, “always in danger for nothing at all.” Wealth, power, status, ostentation, the fear and respect of others: I look at Trump, I read and hear what he says, and I see a deeply unhappy man made more miserable by these things and his dread of losing them. As Attar tells us:


All that you have uttered,
all that you have heard,
all that you knew,
and all that you have seen,
all of it from the very start
is just the beginning of the fairy tale.


Disappear. This ruin is not your abode.
What matters is the essence of truth . . .
When the True Sun shines eternal,
does it matter if here is an atom
or here, its shadow?


Then, there are the faces of the marchers and protestors, unconcerned—at least for one cold Saturday morning, at least some of them—with anything like power and wealth, but caught up in the energy of the movement. Protests are, at their best, spectacles of affinity and unity; people see how many others, and how many different others, come together for something greater than themselves. “This is not a place of uniformity; here you find unity in diversity,” Attar writes of the Valley of Unity, the allegorical space where pilgrims shed the illusion of separateness.


That’s a profoundly hopeful vision for a country divided by media “bubbles” and polarization. It’s a hopeful vision for all of us.

2017年5月24日 星期三

Journal of John Woolman


美國編的"名著"系列,通常包括此書。

The Journal of John Woolman - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Journal_of_John_Woolman
The Journal of John Woolman is an autobiography by John Woolman which was published posthumously in 1774 by Joseph Crukshank, a Philadelphia Quaker ...


Journal of John Woolman - University of Virginia

etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/WooJour.html
Woolman, John. Journal of John Woolman Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library. | The entire work (345 KB) | Table of Contents for this work |.

2017年5月19日 星期五

毛子水《理想和現實》;方瑜《唐詩形成的研究》;Ezra Pound's "Cathay";《中国无声电影》

Kang-i Sun Chang 新增了 3 張相片。2017.5.20  FB
So proud of my old middle school and high school classmate Fang YU 方瑜! Just imagine that we were classmates in 高雄女中 from 1956-1962. That was 55-60 years ago!


顯示更多心情



《唐詩形成的研究》-----

----

毛子水《理想和現實》;方瑜《唐詩形成的研究》;Ezra Pound's "Cathay";《中国无声电影》

2014.6.16 晚上川瀨先生易牙居請客之後,到胡氏二手書店買的書。
《中国无声电影》1996剛上架,就給他買回去---後天回日本。


1971年毛子水 79歲著:《理想現實》。

---

Ezra Pound's "Cathay" 


  • Hardcover: 274 pages
  • Publisher: Princeton University Press; 1st edition (December 1969)
  • Language: English

----
中国无声电影
本书收入有关中国无声电影的各类文献资料509篇,并附有有关人物照、剧照近百幅,是一本大型文献史料图书。

作者: 中国电影资料馆 编
出版社: 中国电影出版社
副标题: 中国电影文献资料丛书
出版年: 1996年


- 萬松浦論壇 (http://www.wansongpu.com/bbs/index.asp)
-- 音像·映視廳 (http://www.wansongpu.com/bbs/list.asp? boardid=10)
---- 默片時代的聲音:中國無聲電影時代 (http://www.wansongpu.com/bbs/dispbbs.asp?boardid=10&id=57020)

--作者:塵飛揚
--發佈時間:2008/6/20 17:21:00 --默片時代的聲音:中國無聲電影時代 轉自:學術中國 中國無聲電影在中國大約存在了三十多年(1905 ---1936)。1905年,北京的豐泰照相館攝製了戲劇紀錄片<<定軍山> > ,此為中國第一部無聲電影。但直至1909年,才有第二部無聲電影問世;1930年,中國第一部有聲電影<<歌女紅牡丹> >在上海誕生,但直至1936年,無聲片的大批量商業製作方告結束。中國無聲電影誕生的艱難和謝幕的遲緩,表明了電影作為一種全新的藝術形式在中國所面臨的嚴酷的現實限制和電影從業者執著的理念訴求。正是“嚴酷的現實限制”和“執著的理念訴求”所構成的張力,驅動中國無聲電影試圖在沉默的銀幕世界發出期待社會反響的“無聲之音” 。這是一種在資金、市場、受眾趣味限制和啟蒙狂飆、政治牽引、社會期待夾擊下的默片時代的聲音。在這種聲音裡,我們聽到的是中國無聲電影在過度負重和壓抑之下的嘆息。 一、強勢的啟蒙話語代默片“立言” 雖然早在1905年中國的第一部無聲電影即已誕生,但真正形成具規模的商業製作則遲至二十世紀二十年代。1911年,中國的帝制被推翻;1919年,一批受西方啟蒙思想影響的中國知識分子掀起聲勢浩大的“新文化運動” ,帝制時期的道德規範和價值理念都被視為壓抑人性的因素而遭唾棄。在二十世紀二十年代的中國,改造社會、謀求觀念進步的呼聲已成為思想文化界的主流話語。欣逢“新文化運動”的高漲,中國無聲電影自然想極力加入這場文化狂歡的合唱。不幸的是它先天不足,一出生便得了失語症。那種滿懷壯志但又喑啞乏語的無奈,唯有身負社會理想的電影藝術家們體會得最為深切,他們不得不徒手上陣,在銀幕之外發表一系列熱情似火的言論,聊以慰藉挺身“新文化運動”的衝動。以商業為取向的各個電影製作公司,也紛紛順應社會風氣,無不以改造社會、促進觀念進步自許,以期招徠觀眾,籠絡民心,搶占市場。而當時的中國文化界,同樣期待無聲電影成為改造社會的利器。於是,電影作為一種教化的工具,幾平得到全社會的認同,電影藝術家們似乎忘記了電影所具有的獨立的藝術價值,而電影製作公司似乎也忘記了電影的商業性。電影的社會功能被無限地誇大著。 二十世紀二十年代,在中國的各大城市,電影製作公司紛紛設立。這些電影公司在其創辦之初,往往在當時的電影雜誌或本公司出品的處女作宣傳特刊上發表各自的宣言,表明其創辦宗旨。這些宣言無不把改造社會、教化民眾作為其第一要務。如商務印書館活動影戲部宣言∶“吾人應當辨別影片的內容,是否可以引起國民的良善性,是否可以矯正一般的壞風俗;果然能夠,我們便當借影戲為教育的一大助手了” ( <<電影雜誌> > 1924年第3期)。“天一公司”宣言∶“今日的電影,不僅是一件純粹的娛樂品,而且是做了文化的前線上一位衝鋒的戰士了!” (<<中國電影年鑑> > ,1934年)“聯華影業製片印刷有限公司”宣言,電影的功能在“寓教育之助益於民眾娛樂中。改良風化,箴砭社會,厥功甚偉” (<<影戲雜誌> > ,1930年第1卷第9期)。 與電影公司成立相伴生的是眾多電影刊物在二十世紀二十年代的創刊。這些刊物更是在發到辭中極力倡導電影的教化功能。如“二十世紀之電影事業,儼然成為一種勢力,足以改良社會習慣,增進人民智識,堪與教育並行,其功效至為顯著” (<<電影周刊> > > ,1921年第1號)。“我們相信中國的國民性是一種頹唐衰朽,冷酷無情的國民性。這種國民性在現代有根本改革的必要。銀幕藝術是革改這種國民性的一種工具,而且是比任何種藝術還要具體而且普遍的工具” (<<銀幕評論> > ,1926年第1卷第1號)。在一片電影教化論的呼聲中,電影的功能日益被誇大,如“影劇是普渡眾生脫離悲痛煩悶之境而至實在樂土的慈航” (<<電影雜誌> > 1924年創刊號),“影戲事業,為吾中華民國當今第一偉大之新實業,補助社會教育,宣揚古國文化,提倡高尚娛樂,挽回狂瀾漏卮,激增愛國熱情,日增月盛,舉國若狂,前仆後繼,努力於此事業者以萬計,其功作其使命之重要,可以概見” (<<中華影業年鑑> >創刊號,1927年)。而在受眾方面,當然也有人不忘記電影的娛樂功能,但娛樂功能往往被視為次要,如“多看一次電影,多增一分智識,娛樂尤在其次也” (<<電影周刊> > ,1924年第8期),電影似乎僅是社會教育的工具,“無論教育有多少偉大的目的,影戲都可以抓得上” (長城公司特刊<<浪女窮途> > ,1927年) ,“電影實在是個社會的導師,負有社會教育的最大的責任的” (<<銀星> > ,1927年第12期)。更有人把電影提到國家及民族命運所繫的高度,“它能導社會於純樸高尚,發揚民族精神,鞏固國家基礎。但反面講,同時它也能陷社會於奢靡淫逸,辱國羞邦,充其極,能使亡國滅族” (<<銀星> > ,1927年第12期)。 在強勢的啟蒙話語支配下,中國無聲電影負上了過多的重任,而社會對它也產生了過高的期待。但是,中國無聲電影果真一如自許和社會期待,在中國的“新文化運動”中扮演衝鋒陷陣的戰士、社會教化的導師、救國救民的仁人的角色?在種種激越萬千的光榮與夢想之中,誰能預料到它將面臨的荊棘與陷阱?

















--作者:塵飛揚
--發佈時間:2008/6/20 17:22:00 -- 二、資金、受眾趣味及市場效應制約下的低吟淺唱 興起於中國“新文化運動”狂飆之中的無聲電影並沒有因此一路高歌,相反,電影作為一種受制於資本和市場的文化產業,在民族資本幼稚和受眾趣味低下的雙重製約下,不得不向市場稱臣,不得不在銀幕內發出低吟淺唱的嘆息。以至中國“新文化運動”的領袖人物胡適悲憤地說,在“新文化運動”的影響之下,“戲劇與長篇小說的成績最壞” (胡適<<文學與革命> > )。而曾直接參與中國無聲電影左翼運動的柯靈,更是在晚年撰文批評道∶“在所有的姐妹藝術中,電影受新文化運動洗禮最晚。新文化運動發軔以後,有十年以上的時間,電影領域基本上處於新文化運動的絕緣狀態” (<<中國電影研究> >第1輯,香港中國電影學會,1983年)。 雖然中國無聲電影誕生於1905年,但完全由中國人投資拍攝電影事實上遲至1918年,即上海商務印書館活動影戲部的創建。其原因在於資金缺乏,難以獨立發展民族電影工業。1923年,明星影片公司拍攝的“孤兒救祖記”獲得了巨大的商業利潤,由此刺激了眾多投資者的積極性。據統計,1925年前後,在中國各大城市共出現過170多家電影製作公司,其中上海佔140多家。這些公司大多為小本經營,一旦流動資金告急,只能完全聽命於市場,進而展開殘酷的商業競爭,此直接導致​​1927至1931年間完全以商業為取向的低投入快出品的“古裝片” 、“神怪片” 、“武俠片”的極度氾濫,電影從業者們原先許下的豪言壯語,也已煙消雲散。以至於國民政府內政部、教育部屬下的電影檢查委員會不得不在1931年頒布禁拍武俠神怪片的通令。1931年,中國的電影製作公司銳減至20家。 由惡性的商業競爭而導致影片的粗製濫造,固然與電影製作公司資本弱小有關,但與中國無聲電影受眾趣味的低下也不無關係。在二十世紀二、三十年代的中國,民眾的平均識字率僅為百分之五,更嚴重的是,中國的社會精英對國產片不屑一顧,紛紛以觀看外國影片為時尚。如被譽為“民族脊梁”的中國現代文學巨匠魯迅,其在1916至1936年間共觀看過149部電影,其中美國電影佔127部,中國電影僅佔4部(<<魯迅與電影> > ,中國電影出版社,1981年)。其原因之一是,中國各大城市的豪華影院皆由外國人投資興建,並且只能放映外國影片。據統計,1926年,中國共有影院156座,其中由中國人開設的僅11座;1896至1937年,在中國發行的外國影片共達5058部,遠遠超過中國的無聲電影出品數量。當時,由中國人投資經營的影院大多設備簡陋,上流社會不願涉足,只能吸引下層民眾,而以數百年來在中國下層社會流播極廣的武俠、神怪故事為題材的低俗電影自然最受歡迎。另一方面,在殘酷的商業競爭中,各電影公司紛紛向東南亞進軍,因為那里居住有大量的華僑,而他們大多是文化程度低下的勞工,與中國無聲電影國內觀眾的趣味並無二致。中國無聲電影為求生存,不得不日趨庸俗化,由此引發出一場“電影是不是一門藝術的辯論。 在二十世紀二十年代之前,中國無聲電影大多屬於滑稽片,其放映場所並非專業的影劇院,而是附設於遊樂場或馬戲團的大棚內。所以,電影在民眾的眼裡並無藝術性可言。1925年前後,一批受“新文化運動”影響的文藝家和曾留學西方專攻電影的知識分子歸國轉入電影界,他們開始提出“為人生而藝術” 、“提倡藝術,宣揚文化”的口號,參與製作了一批具有電影藝術手段和表現技巧的中國早期的無聲電影。其留給觀眾的印像是,所謂“藝術性”的電影,就是製作認真的電影。隨著市場競爭的加劇,製作精良的電影已難尋踪跡,但這並不妨礙電影公司繼續以“藝術”為幌子招徠觀眾。“近來,藝術藝術的一片聲浪,充溢於上海的電影界,製片公司攝畢一部影片,必冠以藝術的影片之美銜,一若不是這麼做法,不足以顯示其片成績之優良,而逗起閱者的注意力,購片商也以藝術片為唯一的需要” (友聯公司特刊第3期<<兒女英雄號> > ,1927年)。而低趣味的觀眾事實上並不需要藝術片。當時極具影響力的編劇鄭正秋就不無感嘆道∶“今之大多數觀眾……歡迎火爆,不喜冷雋,於是作劇者,亦偏重劇烈之事實,如殺人放火,窮凶極惡之徒,常為觀眾所見之於銀幕,善者極善,惡者極惡,而善有善報,惡有惡報,又為千篇一律之劇規,蓋不如是,即不能使觀眾大快人心,不如是即不合觀眾眼光也,其描寫者是否真的人生觀,是否社會上真有其人其事,則非觀眾之所問矣” (明星公司特刊第3期<<上海一婦人> >號,1925年)。鑑於中國無聲電影的當時情狀,人們開始質疑電影的藝術性。“影戲是不是一種藝術,在今日還是爭論未決的問題” (大華百合公司<<探親家> >特刊,1926年),“近來常有人說,電影是一種藝術,這實在是一句很不妥當甚至錯誤的話。這正如把文字叫做文學一樣地錯誤……電影正和文字一樣,同是表達意念行為的工具……電影本身,我們可以明白完全不是藝術,所以,現今一般人把電影當作藝術,即使不是完全不對,至少也有一半的錯誤” (神州公司特刊第3期<<難為了妹妹> > ,1926年)。 原先以濟世救民自命的中國無聲電影,在短短的十年間,就淪落到連自身的合法身份也廣受質疑的境地,這不能不說是中國無聲電影的悲哀。然而,“國家不幸影家幸” 。1931年9月18日,日本入侵中國的槍聲,把中國無聲電影從萎靡不振的狀態中超撥出來。














--作者:塵飛揚
--發佈時間:2008/6/20 17:25:00 -- 三、無聲的銀幕,有聲的喉舌 繼中國東北及華北淪陷之後,1932年1月28日,日本入侵中國無聲電影的大本營上海。當時,許多導演深有同感地說,“中國已不堪破壞” ,“反帝是大任務” ,“九一八的砲聲轟醒了我” ,“九一八震撼了沉夢” 。從1932年下半年起,中國無聲電影的創作者們基本上放棄了此前從神怪武俠傳奇中取材的趨向,轉而面對國家與民族危機的現實,“給民眾一些興奮,代民眾呼喊……給民眾一些慰藉” (“1932年中國電影的總結賬與1933年的新期望”,<<現代電影> >第1期,1933年)。1932至1934年間,共有40多家電影公司製作了200多部以激發民眾抗日救國為宗旨的無聲影片。1932年因此被稱為中國電影“轉變年” 。 在全民抗戰的熱潮中,中國共產黨與國民黨的鬥爭也同時進行。中共認為電影可以在號召民族抗日的旗幟下有效地動員民眾的革命意識,於是成立左翼戲劇家聯盟,鼓勵左翼劇作家加入電影公司,擔任編劇或導演。此外還成立電影評論小組,在上海的各電影雜誌發錶帶有濃烈的無產階級革命意識的影評。他們宣稱,必鬚髮動中國電影界的無產階級電影運動,與布爾喬亞及封建的傾向鬥爭(<<中國左翼戲劇家聯盟最近行動綱領> > ,<<文學導報> > 1卷6、7期合刊, 1931年),認為此前的中國無聲電影完全是畸形的,“失去其所有的意義” ,因為其只著眼於都市中的上層階級矯情沉迷的生活。左翼電影人士呼籲“新英雄主義的影劇” ,“能衝進民眾,能掀起無數波瀾,把反抗奮鬥的精神,灌注到民眾身上心中。用全副的精神,去和環境反抗……了解覺悟自己所受的苦悶與壓抑……使懦弱而又糊塗的民眾在生活上尋覓新的東西,痛快地生,痛快地死”[出處不明] ,他們主張文藝是大眾的,為大眾的,關於大眾的。1933年2月,左翼電影人士進一步成立中國電影文化協會,聲稱電影“應把握著新的意識,以趨向新的觀點,而完成它在這新的時代中的任務” ,“藝術是宣傳,而電影更是宣傳的藝術” (“中國電影之路” ,<<明星月報> >第1卷第1期,1933年5月)。所謂“新的意識”即指階級鬥爭和無產階級革命意識,而把電影認作“宣傳的藝木” ,則完全把電影視為革命宣傳的工具並犧牲電影的獨立品格。在左翼電影人士的推動下,這一時期的中國無聲電影刻意迴避對有閒階級生活的描寫,而極力將農村生活的實景搬上銀幕。但他們往往僅從概念出發,誇大階級衝突和革命的主題,缺乏真實可信的細節,可謂注重“意識” ,忽視“技巧” 。這既是他們的電影創作主張,也是他們的電影批評立場。由於左翼影評人士是當時上海各影評刊物的主要作者或主持者,他們事實上已成為一股左右影壇輿論的力量,結果導致許多“聰明的前進的從業者諸君,已深深地知道怎樣的出品才是批評者不會指摘的” (“從意識的批判到技術的檢討” ,<<現代電影> >創刊號,1933年)。 夏衍作為中國左翼電影運動的領導人,已經意識到左翼電影中偏激的革命情緒的弊端。他說∶“革命與反革命的對描,富人與窮人生活的映照,在教育的意味上固然重要,但活潑的,更擴大的,向社會生活的各方面,攝製有關於社會的題材,給觀眾一種啟示,一樣地不可少” ,“若果因為某一部電影裡,沒有工人以及前進青年的面影,沒有窮富生活的對描,便無條件地否認這樣事實的存在,抹煞它的教育意義,這對於整個電影文化的進展,是有著很大的妨礙的。在電影界從劇本作者一直到影評家,必須突破這局限於狹隘的題材的路” (<<晨報.每日電影> > ,1933年5月25日)。左翼電影的簡單化和意識形態化當然也受到其陣營之外的電影人士的批評與抵制。才華橫溢的年輕導演蔡楚生曾這樣批評左翼電影創作∶“自從1932年發生了電影內容的轉變以後,對於劇中的主人翁,是有過不少的僅由於劇作者幻想的強調,使這些莫名其妙的主人翁成為革命戰線中最前衛的人物,這種不合邏輯的蛻化,我以為是非常錯誤的而不敢同意的。而我一貫的創作態度,是∶把社會真實的情形不誇張也不蒙蔽地暴露出來,至於怎樣解決的辦法,則不加可否” (<<影迷週報> >第1卷第1期,1934年9月),他也反對把電影作為純粹的政治宣傳工具,他說∶“我們應注意描寫的技巧。要知道一般的觀眾不是到學校裡去上課,電影本身無力強迫觀眾接受種種的教訓” (“中國電影何處去” ,<<電聲電影周刊> >第3卷第31期, 1934年)。而在1933年,為抵制左翼電影,主張“藝術至上主義”電影理論的人士出版了<<現代電影> >月刊,認為左翼電影最大的老病是“內容偏重主義” ,犯了“技巧未成熟之前的內容過多症” ,“是頭重腳輕的畸形兒” 。其代表人物劉吶鷗認為,“在一個藝術作品裡,它的'怎樣地描寫著'的問題常常是比它的'描寫著什麼'的問題更重要的” (“中國電影描寫的深度問題” ,<<現代電影> >第3期,1933年)。1933年底,更有人提出“軟性電影論” ,認為“電影是軟片,所以電影應該是軟性的” ,“電影是給眼睛吃的冰淇淋,是給心靈坐的沙發椅” ,批評左翼電影“在表面上看來,都是革命性的,前進的,奮鬥的,聳聽而又誇大的……但是試看影片的內質,卻都是空虛和貧血,勉強而淺薄。使人看後感覺喊口號的無謂,而且會使志在欣賞影藝的觀眾不再踴躍地跑進戲院去,去避免無端地受到過多所謂革命性影片的教訓和鼓吹” (“硬性電影與軟性電影” ,< <現代電影> >第1卷第6期,1933年)。 為了警惕中國共產黨領導下的左翼電影對民眾進行革命和階級鬥爭意識的灌輸,中國國民黨中央宣傳部在1932年6月通令各影片公司“以後關於戰爭及革命性的影片,均在禁攝之列” 。1933年,國民黨特務以恐怖手段威嚇甚至搗毀拍攝左翼電影的影片公司。1934年底,左翼電影創作基本上已退出影壇。而一批曾受日本入侵中國的“九一八”槍聲震醒的導演,為了影片的賣座,不得不重返商業化創作的老路。這時,中國無聲也已步入其衰落時期。 四、雙重的失語,多餘的聲音 在二十世紀二、三十年代,正是中國處於多重危機的時期∶因傳統文化的危機而有“新文化運動” ;因民族危機而有全民抗日;因政治危機而有國共兩黨的相互傾軋。稚弱喑啞的中國無聲電影不得不被捲入危機四起的波濤而難以自持。它既要代思想文化的啟蒙者“立言” ,又需為電影公司招徠觀眾,最後還不得不充當革命的吹鼓手。結果,中國無聲電影不僅無法讓劇中人在銀幕上開口說話,而且也無法獨立地表達電影自身的藝術語言。這是中國無聲電影的雙重失語。 當有聲電影在二十世紀三十年代初興起於中國之際,並沒有得到中國電影界的熱切認同,他們認為“現在的有聲電影,卻將安靜和音樂都毀滅了” ,聲音“將使聲片無藝術性可言” (“中國電影陣容總檢閱” ,<<中國電影年鑑> > ,1934年)。拒斥“聲音” ,渴望平靜,這是中國無聲電影在其遲暮之年的遲到但仍不失意義的省思。在默片時代,那些銀幕之外的爭論和主張,事實上已對中國無聲電影構成噪音,這些噪音足以將電影的藝術語言淹沒。只有拒絕噪音,中國無聲電影方可找到確切的自我認同。















時報出版公司; 2010年前,中時先進黃哲斌寫了一篇「乘著噴射機,我離開中國時報」

近日收到時報出版公司寄來樣書,版權頁上特別註明:
//時報文化出版公司成立於1975年,並於1999年股票上櫃公開發行,於2008年脫離中時集團,非屬旺中,以「尊重智慧與創意的文化事業」為信念。//
我很能理解為什麼要加這段說明啊。
//七年前,中時先進黃哲斌寫了一篇「乘著噴射機,我離開中國時報」,他說:「我再也無法說服自己,這是個值得託付的行業」,並探討了媒體業配與新聞置入如何影響了新聞自由。這幾年下來,中國時報的宣傳力快速消退,甚至比不上部落客與網紅,但大家還有一點堅持的就是「公信力」,那是無可取代的力量與眾人期許的社會價值。但這一年多來,中國時報開始肆無忌憚出賣這個由數萬名前輩努力了60多年所累積下來的公信力,正在踐踏媒體與記者編輯們的尊嚴。
沒有錢都不是重要新聞,但只要有錢,來自芝加哥的比利弗林律師就會竭誠為您服務。全版廣告訂價30、50萬,現在經常10萬、8萬就賣了,失去公信力的媒體,讀者正快速流失,價格也一路往下跌,這樣的公信力還能賣幾年?
還有許多讓人難堪的置入與作為,我不想繼續傷害中國時報,不忍再貼再寫,只能說,現在的中國時報,新聞與置入完全混雜,已讓人無法分辨哪一篇才是真的新聞,哪一篇又是花錢買的置入。政治人物的政績報導可以是買的,吹捧交通建設績效以協助爭取8800億前瞻預算經費的報導可以是買的,藝人的感人故事是買的,蔡英文去參觀桃園農博盛讚這活動有多成功的新聞是買的,說公主郵輪家族旅遊多溫馨的報導是買的,說LG跟林鳳營的產品有多優的報導一樣是買的。這樣出賣媒體風骨與公信力後換來800多萬盈餘,我不知道,如果有天蔡衍明董事長突然想通,原來他花了幾百億買來的媒體公信力正被賤賣到好似只剩800多萬,中國時報也從早期的每天60萬份第一大報變成印報量與讀者人數即將被擠出主流媒體的小報,還被這些高層沾沾自喜是「締造詭異的奇蹟!」他會有何感想?//

Jacob Burckhardt著《義大利文藝復興時代的文化》The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy


Jacob Burckhardt: The Renaissance revisited | Culture | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com › Arts › Art

Jul 9, 2010

One hundred and fifty years ago the Swiss art lover and historian Jacob Burckhardt published his master work, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy. I believe this anniversary is as important as last year's of Darwin's On the Origin of Species. These two great 19th-century books are still at the living heart of their subjects. The study of the Renaissance can no more forget Burckhardt than biology can leave Darwin behind.
Both classics began in journeys. Darwin sailed to the Galápagos; Burckhardt merely went to Italy. His book drips with love of Italy and Italians. It is, among other things, one of the most passionate homages ever paid by a northern European to southern Europe, and yet herein lies its strangeness. Northerners, from Thomas Mann in Death in Venice to Martin Amis picturing the gilded English young on holiday in a southern castle in The Pregnant Widow, have tended to imagine Italy as a languorous, sleepy, timeless and archaic place – the slow, hot unconscious of the European continent, drooping out into the Mediterranean like a surrealist appendage. Burckhardt saw things very differently. The fascination of reading his book is its vision of Italy as the birthplace of modern individualism, political calculation, science and scepticism. In 1860 Burckhardt looked at Italy and saw the shock of the new, secreted in sleepy ruins.
The ruins, at that moment, were becoming less sleepy. Italian cities were discovering art history as a commodity. Burckhardt, who studied history in Berlin before returning to work as a journalist and university teacher in his native Basel, was very much part of the 19th-century discovery of Italy by the bourgeoisie. His book The Cicerone – a cicerone was an early tour guide – offered travellers a practical account of Italy's aesthetic riches. Where 18th-century aristocrats on their grand tours had seen themselves as lineal descendents of Roman senators and admired the classical tradition as their own, eternally connecting men of taste across the millennia, the women and men of the new middle classes of the industrial age were more alive to the otherness, the exotic sensuality, the mystery of the paintings and sculptures they travelled to Italy to see.
It is hard for us to comprehend the rapture these Victorians in their frock coats and high-collared dresses felt in front of the nudity of David. To get a sense of the obsession of 19th-century culture with Renaissance Italy, you only have to look up the name Savonarola in the British Library's digital catalogue. Today, this Ferrarese friar who exerted a charismatic grip on Florentine politics in the 1490s is studied by historians, but is no longer a household name. In the 19th century, by contrast, novels, plays and popular biographies of Savonarola streamed off the presses – books for the many, not the few. One that has endured is George Eliot's Romola (1862-63). To read this novel is to get some insight into the allure of the Renaissance for Victorians.
In 1860 there was not yet any agreed corpus of Renaissance art, so at the Uffizi you could gaze on Leonardo da Vinci's shocking painting of the Medusa – sadly now exiled from his oeuvre. There were none of today's legions of curators and scholars arguing over the attribution of works. The Civilisation of the Renaissance in Italy would ignite the spark of art history as an academic subject – but its greatness as a book lies in its imaginative intoxication. It is not a critique, but the supreme expression of the 19th-century fantasy of the Italian Renaissance.
"Don't be so gloomy. After all, it's not that awful," says Orson Welles as the black marketeer Harry Lime among the bombed wastes of Vienna in The Third Man. "Remember what the fellow said – in Italy, for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder, bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love. They had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
Burckhardt felt the same way – and he was Swiss. Indeed, he is presumably the fellow Welles meant. From his vantage point of a Swiss citizen of conservative politics and modest habits, Burckhardt envied 16th-century Italians their wars and assassinations.
The Civilization of the Renaissance is a disturbing book. It is a vision of modernity – but a dark and haunted one. The first section is titled "The State as a Work of Art". Burckhardt sees the source of the Italian Renaissance in politics, for in the middle ages, while France and Britain centralised their monarchies, Italy resisted control by either the Holy Roman Empire or the Papacy and instead became a barbed collection of micro-states. "In them," Burckhardt argues, "for the first time we detect the modern political spirit of Europe, surrendered freely to its own instincts, often displaying the worst features of an unbridled egotism, outraging every right, and killing every germ of a healthier culture."


This is his theme – the birth in the Italian cities 600 years ago of an "egotism" that begins in politics and war and flows into art and culture and everyday life. In Europe in 1860 it was impossible not to wonder about the origins of the modern world. Life was changing at an unprecedented rate. Factories, railways and the triumph of capital, photography and iron-clad ships erased the immobility of the ages. In 1859 Darwin published his evidence that even nature is defined by ceaseless, unsettling change. In 1867 Karl Marx would publish the first volume of Capital, in which history is a forward movement driven by the engine of class conflict.
Burckhardt, like Darwin and Marx, wrote an epic of turbulence, change, transformation – he found in the Italian Renaissance the very birth of what he saw as the most striking aspects of the modern world. Italians never really knew feudalism, he argued. They had no time for the corporate character of medieval life. The second section of his book is called "The Development of the Individual" and portrays the typical Renaissance man as "the first-born among the sons of modern Europe."
Burckhardt's panorama of the ruthlessness of the Italian despots relies heavily on Machiavelli's writings. Indeed he sees the entire Renaissance through Machiavellian, meaning political, eyes. In contrast to Marx and today's historians of the consumerist "material culture" of the Renaissance, he starts with politics and holds that the development of the Machiavellian state liberated Italian energy. Another source he cites is Francesco Guicciardini, a friend of Machiavelli whose great History of Italy, written in the 1530s, compares with Tacitus for its disabused gloom and which flavours Burckhardt's own cynical melancholy.
The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy is a classic of modernism. Its discomfort – the abrasive stress on violent change – is akin to the works of art that in Burckhardt's day were at once quoting and mocking the past in an effort to represent the new. In 1863, in Paris, Manet painted Olympia, a portrait of a naked young woman reclining on a bed. Contemporaries saw her as a prostitute and recognised, with shock, that she is imitating the pose of Titian's Venus of Urbino in the Uffizi. Manet's painting is identical in mood to Burckhardt's cultural history. Manet reaches back to the erotic art of the Italian Renaissance to create an ironic, shockingly unsentimental image of his own time. In just the same way and just as provocatively, Burckhardt finds in the schemes of Machiavelli a mirror of the new world of atomised individualism into which his own time was hurled. It is no coincidence that Sigmund Freud, whose unveiling of the unconscious was central to the collapse of Victorian self-confidence, reached back to Burckhardt in writing his own Renaissance study, Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of His Childhood. For in the Swiss scholar's haunting and eerie masterpiece, there is a madness lurking.


我讀過的台灣翻譯本藏身 有空再記.
Jacob Burckhardt著《意大利文藝復興時代的文化》何新據英文版翻譯,   北京:商務,1978?




Jacob Burckhardt著,花亦芬譯注,《義大利文藝復興時代的文化:一本嘗試之作》。臺北:聯經出版公司(國科會經典譯注計畫第24本),2007年(目前再版中)。(HC案: 此書之前臺灣已有二種翻譯版本 中國一種?)

在史學史方面,我的研究始於譯註瑞士史家 Jacob Burckhardt(1818-1897)的經典名著《義大利文藝復興時代的文化:一本嘗試之作》(Die Kultur der Renaissance in Italien: Ein Versuch. 第一版:1860年;第二版:1869年)。這本高難度的鉅著帶領我走進19世紀德意志史學書寫的世界(圖6,7),也讓我深入接觸到 Burckhardt 對他在柏林大學求學時的老師Leopold von Ranke 史學思想的反思與超越。這兩位思想迥異的德語系史學家可說是構築了歐洲19世紀史學兩個高峰。有趣的是,兩位都是牧師之子,在大學研讀歷史學之前,也都先 讀過神學。換言之,要瞭解他們之所以走上不同的歷史思維之路,必須先瞭解他們對基督信仰文化的認知,以便能進一步討論,他們對宗教信仰的看法如何影響到他 們對歷史學研究本質的思考。


 
花亦芬老師譯注《義大利文藝復興時代的文化:一本嘗試之作》修訂二版
  • Jacob Burckhardt著,花亦芬譯注
  • 臺北市:聯經,2013年2月修訂二版,692頁,ISBN 978-957-08-3093-4。
  • 《義大利文藝復興時代的文化》是歐洲文藝復興研究真正的奠基之作,也是開啟現代文化史研究寬闊視野最重要的史學名著。雖然本書出版至今已近一百五十年,仍是進入歐洲文化史與文藝復興史堂奧最經典的鉅作。布氏從人之所以為人的角度,以及亂世中人性欲求無端氾濫的真實面,重新思考「權力」、「文化」與「信仰行為」的本質,相當鮮明地點出義大利文藝復興文化不是政治黃金時代的產物,而是在無止盡政治動盪裡,由具有高度創造力的文化菁英,與深切了解文化藝術重要性的有識之士合作打造出來的文化高峰。過去華文世界雖已有本書譯本,但都是從其他外文轉譯而來,本譯注是第一本真正從原文(德文)翻譯過來的中譯本。本中譯本不僅譯文流暢,對原書文意 掌握相當精確,譯注者也付出許多心力注解說明,幫助讀者更容易掌握布克哈特思想的精髓。譯注者所寫的導讀〈寫給故鄉的書〉文筆、內容均引人入勝,又深具學術價值,特別值得推薦。


網誌存檔