2007年2月15日星期四

The Women of Pedro Almodóvar

The Women of Pedro Almodóvar

By Daniel Mendelsohn

Volver a film directed by Pedro Almodóvar
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19911

1.

In the 1995 Almodóvar film The Flower of My Secret—a work that stands at the chronological midpoint between the director's earliest movies, with their DayGlo emotions and Benzedrine-driven plots, and the technically smoother and emotionally subtler films of the past few years—a successful middle-aged writer called Leocadia (Leo) Macìas is caught, as Almodóvar's characters so often are, between the exhausting emotional demands imposed by a complicated life and the equally exhausting demands imposed by what you might as well call Art. Leo is an author of a series of very popular novelas rosa, romance novels (literally, "pink novels"), but her life of late has been so tortured—her handsome army officer husband is leaving her, very likely for another woman; her impossible mother is driving her and her put-upon sister nuts—that, as she tells her bemused editor, whatever she writes comes out not pink, but black.

This wry pun is meant by Leo to explain the manuscript she's just submitted, to which the editor, Alicia, has reacted not at all well. As Alicia points out to a weary Leo, the new novel, a violent tale of murder and incest whose female protagonist "works emptying shit out of hospital bedpans, who's got a junkie mother-in-law and faggot son who's into black men," not only is appallingly inappropriate to the publishing house's "True Love" series, but violates the terms of Leo's contract, which stipulates "an absence of social conscience.... And, of course, happy endings." The plot of the new novel smacks less of Barbara Cartland than of Patricia Highsmith; as a sputtering Alicia puts it, it's about

a mother who discovers her daughter has killed her father, who had tried to rape her. And so that no one finds out, she hides the body in the cold storage room of a neighbor's restaurant...!

When Leo, defending the artistry of The Cold Storage Room, gently protests that "reality is like that," Alicia launches into an outburst about "reality":

Reality! We all have enough reality in our homes! Reality is for newspapers and TV. Look at the result! With so much reality, the country's ready to explode. Reality should be banned!

But it's clear that to Leo, the gritty reality of her lower-class characters is far worthier of artistic representation than the rose-hued, gossamer fantasy world of her earlier work. When Alicia glumly asks why Leo's writing has changed, Leo shrugs. "I guess I'm evolving," she says.


Pedro Almodóvar is a director who, over the course of a career that now spans a quarter-century, has famously loaded his films with references to mass entertainment, its producers and consumers; his characters tend to be directors, talk show hosts, novelists, toreros (and, in Talk to Her, a torera), actresses, journalists, publishers, dancers, fans—people who are frequently shown in the act of watching dances, plays, television shows, movies, bullfights, concerts. For this reason, exchanges in his films about the nature and merits of popular genres and their ability to represent reality are not to be taken casually. And indeed, it's hard not to think of the argument between Alicia and Leo as one that's about Almodóvar himself —about his own evolution as an artist, a progress in which The Flower of My Secret seemed, as critics at the time and Almodóvar himself have commented, to mark a watershed moment.

Before then, when you talked about "an Almodóvar film," it was pretty clear what you were talking about: an exaggerated aesthetic imbued with the lurid neon glare you associated more with certain genres of entertainment —radio and TV soap operas, film noir, pop lyrics—than with anything recognizably "real." There was the flashily self-conscious penchant for hyperbolic (and sometimes, you couldn't help feeling, ad hoc) plotting: murder, suicide, and hostage-taking were favorite mechanisms to keep the action going (in the 1987 gay stalker melodrama Law of Desire, you get all three), and —as with soap operas—hospitals and police stations were favorite settings. There was the hysterical pacing, which was only occasionally intentionally amusing (Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, the director's 1988 breakout hit, was self-consciously constructed as a filmed stage farce). And above all there were the demimondaine characters—drag queens, transsexuals, prostitutes, junkies—who were handy, vivid symbols of the transgressive themes the then-young Almodóvar, during the heady years of the post-Franco cultural explosion, was clearly eager to explore—and to flaunt.

Such style and such material ideally suited the over-the-top passions that have always been this director's subject, passions that, like those in soaps, were never less than excessive—and, too often, excessively symbolic. (In Matador, the male and female leads are a former matador and his icily beautiful lover, both of them serial murderers who can achieve orgasm only in the act of killing.) The very titles of the early work have a hysterical or camp edge: What Have I Done to Deserve This? (1984), Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! (1990), High Heels (1991), and, most famously, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown. It comes as no surprise that the director's earliest champions in this country were to be found among urban gay men, who were also enjoying, during the mid- and late 1980s, a newfound sense of political power and social visibility—and, of course, were feeling no little anxiety as well. Because a kind of hyperactive ebullience mixed with an edge of hysteria was the hallmark of Almodóvar's early style, too, the appearance, back then, of a new Almodóvar film felt to many of us obscurely like a confirmation. This perfect concentricity of the films' style and their historical moment no doubt explains why those early films, celebrated as being so gratifyingly "fabulous" at the time, feel today a bit overwrought—a bit dated.


When it came out, The Flower of My Secret—a film about an artist's need to outgrow an earlier, insufficiently serious aesthetic—was felt, with no little relief by Almodóvar's admirers, to signal a welcome renewal of creative energies after a number of films (Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!, High Heels, Kika) in which the deliciously outré boldness or the archly knowing camp fun of earlier work like The Law of Desire or Women on the Verge had hardened into shtick. Leo, to be sure, is a woman on the verge of a nervous breakdown —her attachment to her wayward husband has a familiarly hysterical edge to it—but what's interesting in this film is the way in which that mad passion fails to lead to the kind of emotional and narrative carnage with which the director had earlier liked to conclude his films.

Law of Desire, for instance, is also about an obsessed, rejected lover (an ostensibly bisexual young man, played by Antonio Banderas, who stalks and eventually seduces a famous film director and then kills the film director's boyfriend); but whereas the earlier film's melodramatic ending had the stalker shooting himself in his lover's arms —after a police siege and a hostage crisis, no less—The Flower of My Secret rejects luridly dramatic death scenes in favor of something subtler and truer. Leo's impulsive suicide attempt is foiled when, having swallowed a bottle of pills, the semiconscious woman hears her crazy mother's voice on the answering machine—at which point she races into the bathroom, forces herself to throw up, and gets on with the painful, messy business of living. The theme of eschewing melodrama for the mundane realities of everyday life is implicit in the film's trick opening, in which we see a distraught woman, whose husband or boyfriend, we are given to understand, is brain-dead, being gently pressured by two doctors to sign a donor consent form: the camera pulls back to reveal that the woman is merely an actress participating in a training exercise for physicians at a transplant clinic run by Leo's best friend.

The self-conscious turning way from hyperbole that seems to be a consistent theme in The Flower of My Secret—the transplant clinic feint, the rejection of Law of Desire's dénouement in suicidal violence, the shift in emotional interest from an erotic, solipsistic obsession with the lover to the dutiful relationship with a mother—looks forward to a larger change that's been in evidence over the past decadeor so. Among other things, since 1995 the writer-director has seemed to realize that invocations of and allusions to pop culture can be more than idle, postmodern games or advertisements for one's own cleverness. All About My Mother (1999), about a woman seeking emotional meaning (not least, in mothering other people's children) after her adored teenaged son is killed in a car accident, is beautifully organized around a series of echoes of All About Eve, with its theme of stolen identities, and of A Streetcar Named Desire, with its overriding preoccupation with fragile female psyches. Talk to Her (2002), which begins and ends with characters watching performances of Pina Bausch works, contains a brilliantly original set piece in which we get to see scenes from a bizarre 1920s silent film—Almodóvar's invention, amusingly evocative of that era and genre—whose plot comments suggestively on his characters and their motives. (An obsessive, sexually repressed male nurse describes the film—in which a man who's been shrunk to the size of a human finger as the result of a botched experiment enters the vagina of his sleeping mistress—as he himself finally enters the body of a comatose patient with whom he's been obsessed for some time.)

Since then, too, there's been an emphasis in the films on intense feelings that somehow do not lead to seduction, murder, and suicide. (The will to survive, the desire to nurture, and the need to commemorate, for instance.) If the Oscar-winning Talk to Her, like Matador sixteen years earlier, is about bullfighters and gorings, the tone of the movie, the passions that animate it—that of a journalist for the torera, and of the great torero who is his rival for her affections—are restrained, almost somber. It's as if Almodóvar were daring himself to make a film about that aesthetically and symbolically loaded cultural institution without going over the top, as he did so gleefully in the earlier movie (which opens with a scene of the sadistic retired bullfighter masturbating to slasher films in which women are dismembered, beheaded, hanged). Indeed one of the sly surprises of the later movie is that the famous torero turns out to be rather sweet and nice, and touchingly attentive to his insensate lover—talking to her constantly—as the skeptical journalist, ostensibly the less macho character, does not.


The newfound emotional subtlety and technical restraint that you get in these films seems connected to a deeper appreciation of women than was previously evident—women not as camp harpies or hysterics or vamps (which is to say women as drag icons), but as something closer to the women of real life. This is so even in Talk to Her, where the women are more the objects than the subjects of deep emotions; it's as if his two principal male characters' fraught attention to the comatose women they adore has elicited from Almodóvar some deeper feelings of his own. It is surely no coincidence that the most disappointing film of the director's recent period, the overwrought and overrated Bad Education—with its frenetically convoluted temporal layerings, its frantic Highsmithesque plot about a handsome and amoral young man whose masquerade as his own dead brother leads him to seduce both the priest who had once abused the brother and the gay film director who'd had a crush on the brother in school years before—has almost no female characters at all.

Almodóvar's finest film, All About My Mother, is in fact exclusively about women, of all kinds: young, old, successful, troubled, confused, strong, weak. The film follows Manuela, an employee at a transplant clinic (here Amodóvar once again recycles a motif from an earlier film) as she tries to rebuild her life after her precocious son's tragic death. The shift from men to women, male homosexual desire to maternal feeling, is signaled by a narrative feint with which the film begins. Early on there is a strong suggestion that the woman's fatherless son, with his fierce attachment to his mother, the prized Truman Capote book he's received for his birthday, and his love of camp classics like All About Eve, is on the verge of discovering his homosexuality; between that and the way in which the camera lingers on the beautiful face of the young actor who plays him, the film looks as if it might be the story of that discovery.

And yet soon after meeting him, we see the boy being run over by a car after trying unsuccessfully to get the autograph of a famous actress, whose car he chases after in the pouring rain. Here we realize that it's the mother, not the son, who will be our emotional focus; it becomes, so to speak, a story told by him, rather than about him. (Almodóvar has talked about the enormous impact that L'Avventura had on him as a young moviegoer, and the narrative dislocation that comes in the first third of All About My Mother bears him out.)


It is tempting to see the shift from the world of (gay) men to the world of (mostly straight) women as parallel to another, larger evolution that occurs in the movie, and in the work overall —the abandonment of melodrama for something at once subtler and more emotionally profound. This shift is evoked by yet another narrative feint: after the boy's heart is transplanted and Manuela (who because of her job has access to confidential records) goes to spy secretly on the recipient, there's a brief moment when you think the movie is going to be about another sentimental cliché—the mother's relationship with the beneficiary of her dead son's organs. But this, too, comes to nothing, and Manuela returns home to rebuild her shattered life.

Firmly grounded in reality, then, we follow Manuela over some few years as she becomes a substitute mother to several other characters: the brilliant but emotionally unstable lesbian actress who was the unwitting cause of Manuela's bereavement (played by the handsome Marisa Paredes, who had played Leo in The Flower of My Secret), and a young nun (Penélope Cruz) who's been seduced and made pregnant by the father, now dying of AIDS, of Manuela's dead son. (Since his affair with Manuela he's become a transsexual named Lola: even the men in this story aren't completely male.) What's remarkable about the film is that despite the presence of hyperbolic elements familiar from the earlier films—the addicts, the sex changes, the trannies, AIDS, the fatal accident, even the transplant clinic where Manuela works and where, in a horrible replay of the scenario with which The Flower of My Secret opens, she is compelled to sign the consent form permitting the extraction and use of her son's organs—the emotional tone is muted, tender, intense, and yet somehow sober. The film begins and ends with the death of a young person, but there is no question of such death being glamorized, sensationalized, or otherwise cheaply aestheticized; no question that the emphasis is on anything but life. It's as if, once again, Almodóvar were teasing us with elements from his earlier work only to bring us up short—to remind us of how far he'd come.


Looking back at the complex evolution of Almodóvar's style over the past two decades allows you, among other things, to see a secret and symbolic irony at play in Leo's argument with her editor in The Flower of My Secret. For Leo, greater artistic seriousness was represented by a commitment to subjects that seemed to her more grittily real, more violent, more working-class—more noir, in every sense—than the rose-colored fantasy world of her romance novels, with (presumably) their reveries about intense attentions of men to the erotic and emotional needs of women. And yet the director's own progress to greater depth and maturity has moved, if anything, in the opposite direction.

2.

The theme of returning to and suggestively recycling old material is at the very core of Almodóvar's new film, the Academy Award–nominated Volver, as its title reminds us. The Spanish verb volver means not only "to turn" —there is, indeed, a recurrent visual motif here of windmills turning—but "to return" and, with a verbal object, "to do again." Here, as in Talk to Her, two women are at the center of connected plots; here, as in All About My Mother, the emphasis is on motherhood. Most remarkably there is here a crucial allusion to the groundbreaking Flower of My Secret. For Volver takes as its donnée the plot of the very novel that Leo, in her quest for seriousness, had tried and failed to publish in the earlier film. Exactly like Leo's novel, The Cold Storage Room, the new movie is about a mother (here called Raimunda), a lower-class cleaning woman, who learns that her deadbeat husband has tried to rape her daughter and, after the husband is murdered, disposes of the body in a freezer in a neighbor's restaurant.

We eventually learn that these crimes —the incest, the murder, the mother's willingness to do anything to protect the daughter—are echoes of, "returns" to, earlier crimes committed by Raimunda's own mother; but this internal return is nowhere near as interesting as the larger one taking place here, which is that of Almodóvar himself once again returning, with delicious self-consciousness, to an old plot—one that sounded hopelessly excessive, too much like his own early work—and reconfiguring it, as he does here even more radically than in his other recent films, in the subtle but provocative manner of his mature style.


Volver dispenses fairly swiftly with two props of the old Almodóvar style: melodrama and men. Indeed, an arresting opening sequence suggestively emphasizes what will be the film's exclusive focus on female experience: it's a shot of the women of a small provincial town vigorously cleaning the tombstones of their relatives (or, in the case of one significant character, her own tomb). It is in this context of death and hard female labor that we are introduced to Raimunda, who lives in Madrid but has come for this ritual visit to her parents' graves (we learn that the couple died together in a fire three years earlier); her daughter Paula, a fourteen-year-old nymphet; her plain-looking sister, Sole; and their old friend and neighbor Agustina, who has remained in the village and who looks after Raimunda's senile old aunt, also called Paula. A visit to Tìa Paula's house is charged—characteristically, as it will turn out—with intense familial emotion and with the specter of the macabre, even the supernatural. For even as the lonely old woman tells her nieces that "the important thing is that you come back [volver]," we soon learn that someone else may have come back, too: the two sisters' dead mother, Irene, whose ghost neighbors claim to have seen, and who Tìa Paula herself, perhaps not as crazy as she sounds, insists has been doing the housework for her and cooking her meals.

Soon we are back in the big city, Madrid, where the relationships among these women—the supposedly dead mother included, as it will turn out— are the objects of the film's restrained and loving attention. Indeed, the knifing of Paco, Raimunda's husband (a crime committed by young Paula as he tries to rape her), and the disposal of his body are handled with a semi-comical brusqueness; the fact that Raimunda gets away with cleaning up the crime scene and transporting the body from the house to a nearby restaurant freezer and then to a makeshift grave suggests the filmmaker's desire simply to be rid of the men here, too. They're just a plot mechanism, a way of focusing our attention on the women. In earlier films in which murders occur (Law of Desire, Matador), Almodóvar was clearly intrigued by the high drama afforded by police procedurals; here there are no cops on the murderer's trail, and the only procedure associated with the crime is the almost lovingly filmed sequence in which Raimunda, who cleans vast office buildings for a living, expertly and unsentimentally wipes up the blood with paper towels and then mops the floor. As a cover-up she merely tells everyone that Paco has left her and Paula; when Sole insists that he'll come back (volverá), "I don't think so" is the ever-practical Raimunda's opaque reply. To his credit, the director doesn't milk the line for a laugh, as he could well do—as indeed he would have done fifteen years ago.

If anything, when men turn up here, they're soon dismissed; the emphasis repeatedly returns to the bonds that connect these hardworking women. An ongoing joke of the film is the fact that after Raimunda takes over her neighbor's restaurant (typically, he's conveniently gone out of town and we soon forget about him) and makes it thrive, she repeatedly rejects the attentions of the handsome young guy, a member of a film crew, who has hired her to cater for them. The real focus is, if anything, on the way in which a couple of Raimunda's girlfriends, one of whom is a hardworking local prostitute, end up chipping in to help her with her burgeoning business —the way in which these women, without men, start to thrive. Regina, the whore, ends up helping her friend transport and bury the freezer, too—no questions asked. In earlier films, Almodóvar's women were the sort who relied on the comfort of strangers; here, they rely on each other.


It's a tribute to how intensely Almodóvar focuses our attention on female relationships that even after the graphic murder of Paco and the black comedy about the disposal of his body, the only mysteries and the only death we care to solve or to mourn are those involving women. The death is that of Raimunda's beloved Tìa Paula, who, she learns after Paco is killed, has died the night before—an event to which, the women of the village insist, the ghost of Raimunda's mother has alerted Agustina. A strikingly photographed scene of the old lady's funeral, which shows us, from above, the black-clad townswomen batting their fans and surrounding Sole while we hear the insistent susurration of their prayers, once again—perhaps because it suggests a hive of bees—drives home the theme of feminine emotional solidarity.

Of the two mysteries we are led to care about, the first has to do with the disappearance of Agustina's mother, a local eccentric who, she tells Paula, had once been the rural town's only hippie, and who disappeared the day that Raimunda's parents perished—a mystery that torments her plain, kindly daughter, who is dying of cancer. (Agustina begs Raimunda to help her solve the riddle before she dies, even if it means appealing to ghosts—a suggestion that an incredulous Raimunda, never one for fanciful solutions to real-life problems, emphatically rejects.)

The second mystery concerns the true identity of the woman who's buried in Irene's tomb. For it soon evolves that the ghost story is another tease, another suggestion of narrative extravagance that is soon abandoned in favor of something real. Irene, we learn, is no apparition, and when she finally makes herself known to her daughters and granddaughter, she confesses to a crime that not only explains the disappearance of Agustina's mother, but brings about a violently emotional confrontation on the part of all four women with a crime committed by the dead husband, a crime far more terrible than adultery or murder in self-defense: incestuous abuse of the young Raimunda. Irene's discovery of this crime, along with her knowledge of the husband's affair with Agustina's mother, is, we learn, what led her to set the fire that killed the adulterous couple.

The terrible secrets revealed by a sorrowing Irene explain the cause of the long estrangement between her and her now-grown daughter: the daughter's rage at the mother's failure to see what was happening, the mother's uncomprehending resentment before she did learn the truth. More emotionally significant still, the sensational revelation makes us realize that the two women are poignantly similar to each other: in the daughter the admirable spirit of the mother has, after all, "returned." For each is a mother who has been willing to incur an awful guilt in order to punish a terrible crime against her daughter: although it's the young Paula and not Raimunda who kills Paco, her mother makes it clear that she's willing to take the blame if the crime is ever discovered. (Incestuous abuse by a terrible father is itself a motif to which Almodóvar has returned here: it occurs as an eleventh-hour revelation in Law of Desire, but there it feels gratuitous—it's just another outrageous incident among many, introduced as an attempt to explain a character's erotic life. Here, it has greater narrative significance and a profounder emotional impact.)

The irony of Volver's reenactment of the fictional plot from The Flower of My Secret is that the real focus, the real story here, is not in fact what had seemed so repellently sensational to Leo's editor—the murders, the dead bodies, the poverty—but rather a series of subtle, complicated, intense yet finally manageable feelings among female characters, emotions that, in the new film, really do constitute a kaleidoscopic vision of what "True Love" is. The self-wounding anger borne by daughters against their mothers; the subtly etched competitiveness between close friends and particularly between sisters (Almodóvar and his excellent cast brilliantly evoke the intricate currents that run back and forth between the plain Sole and the beautiful Raimunda, played with great effectiveness by Penélope Cruz, who seems at once more voluptuous and tougher than in her earlier work for Almodóvar, and who has certainly earned her Oscar nomination); the immense and unbearable pain felt by Irene (the great Carmen Maura), a mother who has inadvertently wounded her child by failing to see what was happening to her: these things occupy our attention to the exclusion of virtually everything else, with satisfying results.


It must be said that this newly exclusive focus on deep emotions among fairly ordinary people is a bit disconcerting for many who have come to enjoy the cinematic brand that "Almodóvar film" has long represented. The comparatively subdued reception that Volver has received may have much to do with the fact that the film does not deliver the kind of fun we've come to associate for a long time with this director's work. Or even with the kinds of extremities of incident and character that his fine, more recent work still revels in: the fantasy silent movies, the miraculous reanimations of comatose girls, the glitter and gore of the corrida.

Here I should mention a "return" of my own: on my first viewing I was fairly unaffected by Volver, largely, I think, because what I saw on screen strayed so far from my expectations of it (particularly having read of the murder with which it begins). Gone were the men, the eroticizing of the masculine that to my mind had always seemed to give the director's films either a campy or an erotic traction; gone, too, was the ostentatious appeal to "marginal" elements, gone the elaborate narrative frames created by reference to icons of pop culture, the films within films and plays within films, that gave the earlier work an elaborate and sometimes delicious self-consciousness. The only bit of trashy pop culture you get in the new movie is a scene in which the cancer-ridden Agustina goes on a daytime talk show to appeal to the viewing public for information about her mother. (Significantly, instead of embracing that tacky form of entertainment, the film rejects it—Agustina walks off the set in disgust, and keeps her stories to herself in the end.) The only performance you get here is, moreover, an almost painfully straightforward one: at the wrap party for the film crew, Raimunda, who we learn had once had auditioned for a talent show, shyly sings a song called "Volver." (One lyric is "I'm afraid of the encounter with the past that's coming back.") And the only outtake from another director's work is a terribly brief glimpse of the movie that Irene watches as she cares for Agustina: Visconti's 1951 film Bellissima, in which a mother goes to poignantly fantastic extremes to make her little daughter a child film star.

In Spanish, volverse can mean "to change one's ideas" about something. It wasn't until I myself returned and saw the film a second time—and stayed long enough to confirm the identity of the film clip you see at the very end—that the merits of this subtle new film started to affect me, and I began to see what a great change in ideas it represents. For if Bellissima is about a mother whose fantasies of glamour adversely affect her family's ability to live real life (the Anna Magnani character uses up their small funds for grooming little Maria), what's interesting and, finally, moving about Volver —what suggests that it's the logical (if not quite as extraordinary) next step from the masterful All About My Mother—is that in Almodóvar's new film, motherhood trumps Art.

At the very end of the movie, when Raimunda, bidding her mother goodnight, tells Irene almost as an afterthought that she wants to tell her about what happened to Paco, Irene is too busy at this point caring for a new daughter-figure, the dying Agustina (shades of All About My Mother here), to listen. And so she tells her daughter that the story must wait. This poignant final assertion of the value of life over the allure of overheated narratives suggests that Almodóvar, like the erstwhile romance novelist Leo Macìas, has successfully evolved: out of an abandoned melodrama he has fashioned a drama that, in its very restraint, may be the most radical thing its creator has yet attempted.

Must Love Drama Queen

I have certain kind of friends for whom people might think of them as drama queens. Without them, our lives are boring to death. But with them, you have to test your blood pressure constantly. They fall in love as if they have no other choices, they abuse their love as if they are not the person in charge, and they cry for their love afterwards as if this is the last time in love. After a while, the news comes out and they are in love again.
We can easily fall in love with a drama queen, why not? They are shining like crystal in the blue sky. They have the charisma to turn your life up and down. Many times, they are as beautiful as your dreams and you could communicate with them as you have dreamed. To love a drama queen likes to love a part of yourself—the young, abusive, ego-centric, selfish, arty, but shining part of yourself.

People believe drama queens are the lucky ones in love affairs. Not really. I think they are just the ones who will and can take the risks. On the verge of your nerve, are you daring to jump into an emotional turbulence? At the bottom heart of your mind, do you really think love is above everything? In the late night, can you afford the pain of betraying someone which you once loved and not regret? In retrospective, can you smile and still hold the hope for future? To be a drama queen, you have to be sure about yourself that nothing in your life is more adventurous and enjoyable than living the present moment.

I just wish you all can take it easy if you loved a drama queen. We have to love them, as a way to live out of our lives. Is there a better way to investigate the indepth of your emotion? To try out the different possibilites of yourself? To confront your moral disturbance?

Take it as the way it is, and enjoy this snow white Valentine’s day.

当乐盲遇到奥涅金

Young Tchaikovsky.

九十年代中期的北京,古典音乐还远远没有在大学的校园里普及,说是音乐的沙漠也不过分。虽然在中学里一直是合唱团的,接触的声乐作品也就是《伦敦德里小调》、《绿袖子》这一类通俗的作品,没有系统地接受过西方音乐的教育。只有偶尔蹬自行车到北京音乐厅或者海淀影剧院,才能买到便宜的学生票,让耳朵享受一下。这种情况到大学也没有什么改变,音乐课更从必修课降到了选修课的地位。(大学里的艺术类选修课,除了朱青生老师的西方艺术史,其余的几门都引不起学生的兴趣。我先后选修了朱老师的几门课,此外还希望对其他的艺术门类有所了解,但大学里开设的音乐类选修课太少了)。多数人和我一样,对西方古典音乐一无所知,只是出于好奇,才误打误撞地选择了歌剧欣赏。

大多数大学生对音乐的了解都停留在中学音乐课的水平上。国内中小学的音乐教育的思路是以音乐理论教育为主,完全忽略了对音乐作品的欣赏。音乐课的考核往往是笔试,考你认不认得乐谱,而不是对作品的熟悉和理解。因此,经过几年的“读谱”,我们都可以坐而论乐,但西方音乐作品从来没有走入我们的心灵,和我们的生存状态无关。我们有的是音乐的“知识”,可对音乐的魅力一无所知。好比是对着西施学习人体结构,对她的美视而不见,只看到她的人体结构特征。这种本末倒置的教育之下,音乐教育不仅索然无味,而且令人生厌。

在主流的音乐教育体系之外,我们的耳朵在港台流行音乐的熏陶下成长起来的。从80年代的百万畅销曲,到先后走红的两岸三地的歌星,我们所感兴趣的音乐不是所谓的阳春白雪,而是通俗的市井小调。这些流行音乐作品在某种程度上满足了我们对音乐的需要,但是从另一个角度来看,也让我们陷入其中不能自拔,限制了我们接触其他音乐形式和作品的可能性。所以,越听越弱智。它们满足了我们的“声色”之欲,对心灵的饥渴却鲜有帮助。它们不要求你去思考,它们代替你去思考,使得我们部分地丧失了从音乐中了解自身、了解人性的机会。

因此在电教几百人的教室里,中央音乐学院请来的刘老师常常是对着一群乐盲普及歌剧常识。刘老师五十多岁年纪,应该属于留苏的一代音乐人。他对西方古典音乐的理解局限于20世纪之前的西方,我记得他从来没有提过勋伯格或者古斯塔夫.马勒。对他讲授的理论,我一点印象也没有了。我觉得他是一个好老师,他懂得要让我们了解和喜爱音乐,理论是不够的,必须让我们接触到音乐作品本身,让我们“掉进去”,让我们打开我们的耳朵,让我们对音乐打开我们的心灵。所以大多数的时间,我们都是在听音乐,而不是在讲音乐。

印象最深的是老师对十九世纪俄罗斯音乐的热爱。他对俄罗斯的音乐作品如数家珍,他对俄国民族音乐的评价尤高,尤其是“五人强力集团”的作品。我们在课上反复欣赏鮑羅丁、穆索尔斯基、里姆斯基-柯萨科夫、居伊、以及巴拉基烈夫的作品,老师乐此不疲。这些歌剧作品出现在我们面前,就好像是让一帮营养不良的少年突然面对奢侈的盛宴。在惊讶之余,大家都哑口无言,全被这些作品的魅力所震惊。在夏日漫长的午后,电教教室的窗帘放下来,我们常常对着小小的屏幕,欣赏俄罗斯歌剧作品的录像。当时,我正在疯狂迷恋塔科夫斯基的电影和白银时代作家的作品,对俄罗斯的音乐毫无排斥,喜欢都来不及呢。现在回想起来,我们看过鲍罗丁的《伊戈尔王子》,穆索尔斯基的《鲍里斯·戈东诺夫》, 里姆斯基-科萨科夫的《金鸡》,居伊的《威廉·拉特克夫》,当然还有柴科夫斯基的《叶甫根尼·奥涅金》和《黑桃皇后》。

第一次听《奥涅金》的印象极为深刻。在冰封的湖面上,连斯基一个人在冻结的清晨的空气中向爱情和生命作别。寒冷的俄罗斯荒原好像是生命的原初状态,连斯基在生命的终点对生命发出的礼赞显得格外的凄凉和动人。这是任何一个男高音都梦寐以求的角色,因为连斯基不仅是一个敏感的青年诗人,他是作为奥涅金的对立面而存在的。奥涅金对生存意义存有怀疑,对爱情轻视、甚至无动于衷,追逐生命中不能承受之轻,是个彻底的怀疑主义者。连斯基和他完全相反,受到浪漫主义的熏陶,对于生命和爱情都充满了热情。连斯基的死是浪漫主义的幻灭,是剧中所有积极因素的结束。每次听到这里,我都不禁为之动容。我觉得这一幕比奥涅金的归来和他人性的恢复更让我感动,连斯基的死去好像是一个预兆,它意味着人生中青年时代的结束,理想的幻灭,年轻时的一切将被对生存的怀疑所取代,所扼杀。

昨天在大都会歌剧院重温了这精彩的一幕。柴科夫斯基的歌剧作品和他的芭蕾一样,具有极强的叙事性和感染力。他成功地将普希金的“society novel”转变成了自己的“lyric opera”,将一部叙事诗转化成不朽的音乐作品。此次重排的《奥涅金》,大都会歌剧院延请了俄罗斯圣彼得堡Mariinsky Theatre 的艺术总监Valery Gergiev担任指挥,Mariinsky Theatre 的女中音Larisa Shevchenko 出演保姆Filipppyevna, 男低音 Sergei Aleksashkin 担任Prince Gremin 。同样来自俄罗斯的Elena Zaremba 饰演Olga, 而我所崇拜的Dmitri Hvorostovsky 担任了奥涅金这个主要的角色(此外,他还出演了Don Carlo 中的Rodrigo)。可以说,这是一次真正意义上的俄罗斯式的盛宴。(Tchaikovsky’s universally beloved lyrical gifts reached their apex in his most popular opera, the tale of a lovelorn girl and a jaded aristocrat. Star soprano Renée Fleming sings the role of Tatiana for the first time at the Met in Tchaikovsky’s lush operatic masterpiece. Charismatic Dmitri Hvorostovsky sings the title role with the dynamic Ramón Vargas as Lenski. Valery Gergiev conducts.)。

除了出色的音乐处理之外,整体舞台的设计(Set Designer: Michael Levine)和灯光的使用(Lighting Designer: Jean Kalman)给我留下了深刻的印象。整体的舞台设计和道具的使用都非常简单,有时甚至到了miniumlism 的地步。然而“少”的使用为观众提供了巨大的想象空间,为音乐流出了空间。和其他大制作的歌剧相比,在这里音乐占据了绝对的主导地位。

在第二幕中,连斯基和奥涅金相约在清晨的郊外决斗,整个舞台空无一物,连斯基著名的咏叹调在黑暗中回响。当第二幕结束时,连斯基倒在血泊中,舞台的灯光由深蓝色逐渐转为亮色,金色的光环逐渐从舞台深处升起,象征着初升的太阳,给连斯基的失去生命气息的身体罩上了一层圣洁的光芒。紧接着的第三幕中,奥涅金在舞会上再次邂逅塔基亚娜,陷入了对她疯狂的热情。Dmitri Hvorostovsky 站在舞台的边缘,所有的灯光都消失,只有一束光从下向上投射到他身上。舞台上其他角色的身影投射到墙上,形成活动的剪影,在衣香鬓影丛中,更加显出奥涅金的寂寞。那些移动的剪影好像是浮华现世的缩影,转换着迷人的身姿,但是只可远观,因为一旦接近就会发现它们的虚空。巨大而空虚的舞台仿佛是奥涅金的灵魂,那灵魂在捕捉爱情和生命,但最终只能在绝望中叹息,

“Disgrace! Anguish! How pitiable is my fate!”

2007年2月14日星期三

Onegin

Where, oh where have you gone?

Pushkin's lyrics
XXI
 
     By chance those verses haven't vanished;
     I keep them, and will quote them here:
     ``Whither, oh whither are ye banished,
     my golden days when spring was dear?
     What fate is my tomorrow brewing?
     the answer's past all human viewing,
     it's hidden deep in gloom and dust.
     No matter; fate's decree is just.
     Whether the arrow has my number,
     whether it goes careering past,
     all's well; the destined hour at last
     comes for awakening, comes for slumber;
     blessed are daytime's care and cark,
     blest is the advent of the dark!
     {164}
 
        XXII
 
     ``The morning star will soon be shining,
     and soon will day's bright tune be played;
     but I perhaps will be declining
     into the tomb's mysterious shade;
     the trail the youthful poet followed
     by sluggish Lethe may be swallowed,
     and I be by the world forgot;
     but, lovely maiden, wilt thou not
     on my untimely urn be weeping,
     thinking: he loved me, and in strife
     the sad beginnings of his life
     he consecrated to my keeping?...
     Friend of my heart, be at my side,
     beloved friend, thou art my bride!''



Tchaikovsky's libretto





Where, oh where have you gone,

golden days of my youth?

What does the coming day hold for me?

My gaze searches in vain;

all is shrouded in darkness!

No matter: Fate's law is just.

Should I fall, pierced by the arrow,

or should it fly wide,

‘tis all one; both sleeping and waking

have their appointed hour.

Blessed is the day of care,

blessed, too, the coming of darkness!

Early in the morning the dawn-light gleams

and the day begins to brighten,

while I, perhaps, will enter

the mysterious shadow of the grave!

And the memory of a young poet

will be engulfed by Lethe's sluggish stream.

The world will forget me; but you,

You! … Olga …

Say,

will you come, maid of beauty,

to shed a tear on the untimely urn

and think: he loved me!

To me alone he devoted

the sad dawn of his storm‑tossed life!

Oh, Olga, I loved you,

to you alone I devoted

the sad dawn of my storm‑tossed life!

Oh, Olga, I loved you!

My heart's beloved, my desired one,

come, oh come! My desired one,

come, I am your betrothed, come, come!

I wait for you, my desired one,

come, come; I am your betrothed!

Where, where, where have you gone,

golden days, golden days of my youth?

Asian Historical Architecture

Asian Historical Architecture http://www.orientalarchitecture.com/nara/horyujiindex.htm

Buddhism: Sacred Places in Asia

http://www.fofweb.com.eduproxy.tc-library.org:8080/Electronic_Images/Onfiles/CROFvol8-13.pdf

2007年2月11日星期日

Multifunctional lover

Yesterday, we spent the night together and Yijia had a wonderful comment on love. She said in U.S. most Chinese couples were more close and supportive of each other than in our home country.
The reason was quite simple: because here your lover/husband/wife/boyfriend/girlfriend is not only your spiritual company, he/she is also your family, your friend, your parent, your relative, your psychological couselor, your pressure-releaser, your financial support, your medical insurance and your constant sex partner. So everyone in relationship is a multifunctional lover! As a result, his or her care means much more to you and you count more on such relationship.
This morning, I looked back to the past several years. Do I regret that I walk this long way alone? Do I regret I had to bring 20 pounds of rice from Chinatown to home alone? Do I regret I did not develop any intimate relationship with another human being? Do I regret I am who I am? Not really, I guess. I get friends they are my family, friends, parents, relatives, psychological couselor, pressure-releaser, financial support, medical insurance. I feel lucky to have them by my side.
Thank you all for being my friends!

浮生六记

沈复,字三白,苏州人,生于乾隆二十八年(1763年),卒年无考,著有《浮生六记》一书。原作实则只存四记,即《闺房记乐》、《闲情记趣》、《坎坷记愁》和《浪游记快》。另有两记存题佚文为《中山记历》和《养生记逍》。此书最初以手抄本形式在社会上流传,后为苏州独悟庵居士杨醒逋在护龙街冷摊上瞧见,慧眼识珠,立即携回刻刊,由王韬作序,在东吴大学校刊《雁来红》上刊出。这一下,使这块文学“碧玉”出土问世,重放异彩 (http://news.xinhuanet.com/book/2004-12/06/content_2300092.htm)。六记从夫妇伉俪情深写起,直到写到夫妇阴阳永隔,文人落魄,将人生轮回的甘甜与悲苦娓娓道来。虽然不是鸿篇巨著,但是清淡的小品自有可人的味道。
不知怎的,昨天看了阿尔莫多瓦的Volver,一时之间竟不知道自己身在何处,觉得影片中间的六个女人的命运正是演绎了一出《浮生六记》。根据维基不知道的介绍:
“Volver (tr. "Return") is a 2006 Academy Award-nominated Spanish film by director Pedro Almodóvar. It was one of the films competing for the Palme d'Or at the 2006 Cannes Film Festival. It eventually won two awards: Best Actress (shared by the six main actresses) and Best Screenplay. Its premiere was held on March 10, 2006 in Puertollano, where the filming had taken place. Thematically, the film centers upon return both in the dead returning and in the form of cycles of re-occurrences……Almodóvar says of the story that “it is precisely about death...More than about death itself, the screenplay talks about the rich culture that surrounds death in the region of La Mancha, where I was born. It is about the way (not tragic at all) in which various female characters, of different generations, deal with this culture. Almodóvar: Three generations of women survive easterly wind, fire, madness, superstition and even death through goodness, lies and an unlimited vitality. They are: Raimunda (Penélope Cruz), married to an unemployed worker, and her teenager daughter (Yohana Cobo). Sole (Lola Dueñas), her sister, who earns her living as hairdresser. And their mother (Carmen Maura), dead in a burning, with her husband. This character comes as an apparition first to her sister (Chus Lampreave) and then to Sole, even though the ones she had unsettled affairs with were Raimunda and her village neighbour, Agustina (Blanca Portillo). ‘Volver’ is not a surreal comedy, though it might seem so at times. The living and the dead live together without problems, but provoking hilarious situations and others full of deep and genuine emotion. It is a movie about the culture of death in my native region, La Mancha. My folks there live it in astonishing simplicity. The way in which the dead are still present in their lifes, the richness and humanity of their rites makes it possible for the dead to never really die. ‘Volver’ shatters all clichés of a dark Spain and shows a Spain that is as real as it is opposed. A white Spain, spontaneous, fun, fearless, fair and with solidarity.”
阿尔莫多瓦的电影就像是Diego Rivera的画和马尔克斯小说的混合,是超现实主义对色彩的致敬,是对当下的、地方的、传统的文化的喝彩,是对宏大叙事的反抗。当先锋电影和试验电影抛弃故事情节,完全转向技术试验和概念化,阿尔莫多瓦却能够静下心来将他的故事。他的故事开始看起来往往是惊世骇俗,但是渐渐的,从没有意义中产生出意义来,从没有结构中显现出结构来,最后总是呈现出不以伦比的人性光彩。他的故事是世俗生活的写照,但是又出离了世俗的生活,从对感情和人性的怀疑,又回到了对感情和人性的肯定。在他的故事里,那些疯狂和非理性的情节的张力,最后总是在欢笑中化解。他的色彩,上帝,他对于色彩的把握就像是女人选择自己的高跟鞋。他总是使用大量明亮的色彩,因此即便在最悲痛和黑暗的时刻,他的影片也充斥着明快的色彩,就像是斗牛场上的哭声,即便在最悲哀的时刻,人们仍然被对于生命的欢呼所包围。
Volver讲述了简单的故事。一家三代女人,为情所困,为生计所迫。祖母Irene 在愤怒中杀死了自己的丈夫和他的情人,因此不得不冒充成鬼魂和亲人一起生活。她为了得到女儿Raimunda 的谅解,又重新回到他的身边。Raimunda 小时候被父亲abused,生下了女儿 Paula。Paula 在情急之下,杀死了自己名义上的父亲。Raimunda 秘密埋葬了自己的丈夫,和女儿开始经营餐馆,开始新的生活。这时她的母亲也出现在她的身边,讲述了自己的经历。在巨大的痛苦中,这三代女人互相取得了谅解。 阿尔莫多瓦关心的是死亡,更是死亡之后,人们如何相处。死亡不是人与人关系的结束,而是新的可能性的开始。灵魂的归来,亲情的归来,人性的归来,这些都在人们的期待中变成了现实。一个童话的不能再童话的故事!

2007年2月10日星期六

灶王爷的八卦

既然说到过小年,身边把灶王爷八卦了一下。虽然关于他的传说版本有差异,但是不约而同地把饮食和男女这两件事联系在一起。细细看来,灶王爷原来是个情种,虽然死在灶边/灶里,但是仍然秉承着风流精神的主旨:打死我也不说!
灶王也叫"灶君",民间称"灶王爷"。  相传灶王原来是一个叫张单的富家子弟,曾娶一贤慧女子郭丁香为妻,后又体弃续娶李海棠。李氏好吃懒做,不久就把张家财产挥霍一空,改嫁他人。张单家境败落,又遭火灾,双目失明.沦为乞丐。一天,他乞讨到一户人家,主人给了他热汤热饭,后发现施饭者就是他休弃的妻子郭丁香,羞愧难当,碰死灶前,被姜太公封为灶王。  柳腔戏《张郎休妻》、茂腔戏《火龙记》都是说的灶王爷这段故事。崂山地区祭灶时还要供上碗面汤(面条),俗话说:"灶王爷本姓张,一年一顿杂面汤。"
《敬灶全书?真君劝善人》里说,灶王“受一家香火,保一家康泰,察一家善恶,奏一家功过。”每年腊月二十三这天,灶王爷这个人间“特派员”要回去向玉皇大帝汇报。被举告者,大错减寿三百天,小错减寿一百日。
講述:熊厚立(男,約65歲,原籍湖南,現居台北市。)  語言:普通話,有濃重湖南口音。  時間:1997年1月27日  地點:台北市植物園  採訪:簡逸光等(中文系)  附記:隨機攀談
灶王爺姓張,他本來是個亂七八糟、無惡不作的人,為什麼玉皇大帝讓他做灶王爺呢?因為他壞事做多了,腦筋一轉,一念之誠,做了一件好事情,玉皇大帝就原諒他了。  在成為灶王爺之前,他是個遊手好閒的人。有一次他跟別人賭錢,不但把家產輸掉,還把老婆也輸掉了。老婆因此改嫁給一個砍柴的人。  他已經把家產輸掉了,沒有東西吃,就又去找被他賣掉的老婆。那個老婆很賢慧,雖然被他賣掉了,還是搞了幾個粽子,還偷偷在粽子裡面放了十兩銀子,告訴他:「這幾個粽子你拿回去吃,不要給任何人喔!」  他一離開,剛好人家就來找他要錢了:「你還錢來!」他說:「我沒有錢!」「什麼沒有錢?你手上拿的什麼呀?」「吃的呀!」「吃的也可以!」結果粽子被人家搶跑了。  粽子被搶了以後,他又去找他老婆。老婆問他:「粽子呢?」他說:「被搶走了!」正好講到這裡的時候,她那個砍柴的丈夫回來了,灶王爺沒地方躲,急忙躲到燒水的灶裡面。這個砍柴的人打了一個赤膊,揹著一堆柴火,回來以後要洗澡。他對妻子還真不錯,告訴她說:「我自己來燒洗澡水。」妻子趕緊說:「啊!你不能燒!你不能燒!我來燒!」可是她這個新任的丈夫堅持自己動手,拿了柴火就在灶裡面燒。  灶王爺躲在灶裡,決定不出去。他想:「我一出去,老婆會被這個丈夫打死的!」他寧可犧牲自己,結果被活活的燒死了。  他被燒死以後,前任老婆每天早上、中午、晚上都拿香來灶前拜拜。她丈夫看到以後,問:「咦!奇怪啦!妳怎麼早上、中午、晚上都在拜拜呢?」她當然不能說她的前任丈夫燒死在那裡,只好說:「我們人能夠活在世界上,要感謝灶和鍋子,因為這些東西煮飯給我們吃。」  後來大家都覺得她的話很對:「我們要感謝灶和鍋。如果沒有灶和鍋,我們都活不了!」於是家家戶戶都拜起灶和鍋來了。  玉皇大帝知道這件事情以後,甘脆封他為灶王爺,命他每年陰曆十二月二十四號上天庭去奏報。這就叫作「上天行好事,下地報平安。」灶王爺就是這樣來的。
送灶习俗在我国南北各地极为普遍,鲁迅先生曾写有《庚子送灶即事》诗: 只鸡胶牙糖,典衣供瓣香。家中无长物,岂独少黄羊。
《后汉书·阴识传》:"宣帝时,阴子方者至孝有仁恩。腊日晨炊,而灶神形见,子方再拜受庆;家有黄羊,因以祀之。自是巳后,暴至巨富。至识三世,而遂繁昌,故后常以腊日祀灶而荐黄羊焉。"阴子方看见灶神,杀黄羊祭祀,后来交了好运。从此,杀黄羊祭灶的风俗就流传下来了。
据古籍《礼记·礼器》孔颖达疏:"颛顼氏有子日黎,为祝融,祀为灶神。"《庄子.达生》记载:"灶有髻。"司马彪注释说:"髻,灶神,着赤衣,状如美女。"《抱朴子.微旨》中又记载:"月晦之夜,灶神亦上天白人罪状。"

诸神上天,百无禁忌!

过小年了!

妈妈电话里净说废话,说什么过不过年都无所谓,其实背地里不定哭得怎么样呢!还是姥姥说的中肯,明年我不就能回家过年了吗!大家都期待着吧!
年这个东西,你要认真地对待才有意思;你糊弄它,它也糊弄你。我们应该认真的打扫卫生、准备party,购买食物,添置新衣。不发短信,而是认真地给朋友打个电话或者电子邮件,最好不用群发。因为这一个新年和任何一个都不同,这一个新年也是历史上只有一次。我要开始准备在纽约的最后一个新年,因为我要开始新的旅程了。Aijia!
=================================================
☆过小年   
腊月二十三日为祀灶日,民间俗称为“过小年”,亦称小年、小年下、小年节。这天送灶神上天言事,称为送灶、辞灶、醉司命。  祀灶是在二十三日晚间进行的。胶东地区灶神画像贴在正屋东面的锅灶墙上,两旁有一幅“上天言好事,回宫降吉祥”对联,横批是“一家之主”。祭祀时,摆上糖瓜、果品和一碗面汤,然后烧香叩头,把旧灶神揭下烧掉,这就是送灶王爷上天了。烧时要加一些谷草和杂粮,好给灶王喂马。过去有“男不拜月,女不祭灶”的说法,山东通常都由男人致祭,但在恩县、博平等地却是妇女率儿童焚香拜奠祀灶。旧灶烧了以后,有的把新灶当时贴上,有的则到除夕再贴,所以对联又有“二十三日上天去,正月初一下界来”的词句。  
祀灶多用甜和黏的食品。普通用的是糖瓜、枣等,临朐还用羊枣、柿饼,威海用糯米饼、小糖瓜,无棣、恩县、博平、招远、日照等地加用黍糕或枣糕,意思是粘住灶王的嘴,不让他上天说坏话,或者是让灶王的嘴甜,光说好话,所以成武等地称此为“涂神口”,有的还真在灶神的嘴上或锅灶门口粘上一小块糖。也有的在灶门口抹点酒糟或酒,谓“醉司命”。  
供品除糖瓜之类外,有的供水饺,取民间“起身饺子落身面”之意,有的供面条,有的还供上用秫秸插成的灶马、灶鸡,好让灶王爷骑马上天,一路顺风。祭祀之后,还要举行欢送仪式。一家人跪在灶王像前,一边磕头一边烧掉旧灶王像和一匹纸马,同时老年人念念有词:“灶王灶王,你上天堂,多说好,少说歹,五谷杂粮全带来。”那些迫切需要生儿育女的则念道:“腊月二十三,灶王上西天,多说好来少说歹,马尾巴上带个胖小子来。”这样就算把灶王爷送走了。淄川、招远等地在辞灶之后还有卜灶的习俗,即悄悄外出听人说话以卜吉凶。  
辞灶后,据说是诸神上天,百无禁忌,民间家贫不能成礼者多在此时嫁娶,谓之“乱岁”。古代称大寒后10日为阳宅乱岁,嫁娶无禁。现在农村还多在年底结婚。

在春天里

朋友的博客写的很灰,她问 "那么纽约可曾也有希望,健康的可爱的活泼的清纯的这些词放到哪里修饰谁呢?"
我一贯盲目地乐观,我觉得春节都要来了,春天还会远吗?要是想恢复对于健康、活泼、可爱、青春的信心,建议观看韩剧《恋人》、《巴黎恋人》。我最近狂迷金正恩同学主演的电视剧,我觉得她就是那堆形容词的化身,而且演对手戏的男演员们也都很养眼,韩国人的确对男色有深刻的理解和认识!总的来说,女人就是要坚信自己不是灰姑娘,只是一个爱上平凡男人的平凡女人。如果男友顺便很有钱,很高,很帅,笑起来有酒窝,很会唱歌,而且对你爱的无可救药,那你也不要嫌弃。小的时候没看过还珠楼主写的《通吃霸王》吗?
保持你牙套妹的心情吧!没看见小s嫁的好,工作顺利,儿孙满堂吗?但是别爱上带牙套的小弟弟,姐弟恋是危险的游戏。
继续保持你对艺术真真假假的热情吧!但是千万别爱上艺术家。
如果喜欢的话,相信春天会有奇迹吧!但是别爱上雷锋。没听说他仨月来,四月走吗?

Eggs With Attitude

2007年2月9日星期五

身体乃快乐之本

隔了一个月,又见到修心里面又高兴又难过。他还是高高瘦瘦的样子,pepper-salt hair, 眼镜后面的眼睛笑笑的好像是会说话。高兴的是又见到他,能跟着他一起上瑜伽;难过的是这是和他一起上课的最后一个学期。修教的不仅是瑜伽,他带着我们一步一步地了解和接受自己的身体,了解自己的局限和可能性。 修将平日被我们所忽略的肢体带到我们的面前,让我们了解它的美和存在的理由。他自己拥有完美的身材,而且是一位出色的老师,能将自己的体会和感悟用语言和动作与大家交流,帮助我们放开执著,接近和喜爱自己的身体。我最喜欢他示范 shoulder stand, 他一边做着高难度的倒立,一边讲解。有的时候还会模仿一些危险的错误姿势,让你担心他会不会从空中跌下来。要离开这样一个好的老师,心里有些失落。但是转念一想,两年来能和他一起每周分享三次瑜伽练习的集会,我应该心存感激和幸福才对。毕竟,天下没有不散的瑜伽课。 //////////////////// 我觉得瑜伽最重要的一个道理是身体是快乐的源泉。灵魂不仅存在于3.2 磅的大脑里,它也存在于你伸展的躯体中、打开的胸腔内、膝盖后面柔软的关节里,存在于你的大脚趾(pink toe)温柔触地的瞬间。当我双脚分开,两臂平伸,自然地弯曲膝盖,进入warrior’s position 的时候,我所要做的不是思考外在的世界,而是关注与自己的身体和它的需要,保持身体各部分的平衡,调动肢体最细微的感觉,将那些被遗忘的肢体和心灵之间的联系重新建立起来。经过长长的伸展四肢联系和一系列的marching positions and twists, 这个时候我最想要的就是一个Dog post, 然后接着的就是舒服的Child post。我的心会随着四肢和额头与地面的接触变得平和沉静,仿佛吮吸着大地的力量。在身体蜷缩的瞬间,我仿佛又回到了母亲的子宫,一种与世无争的的爱围绕着我。心灵和身体不再是分离的和对立的,身体就是心灵,肢体的活动给与我巨大的安慰。为此,我感谢瑜伽。 ////////////////////////// 我觉得瑜伽中许多挑战身体极限的姿势的关键不是拼命地用力,而是身体各个部分之间的协调,尤其是要懂得放松身体的某些部位已达到伸展另一些部位的目的。要放松,在放松的状态中,人反而可以完成某些难度很大的动作。瑜伽不是竞技性的体育,它是与身体的对话,它是游走在松与紧、极度的集中和放松之间的游戏。毕竟我们所接触的是瑜伽的一点皮毛,是真正的瑜伽修炼中的最初几个阶段,是为了长时间的冥想所作的热身运动。在这个意义上讲,对联系瑜伽也要抱着游戏的心态。 ///////////////////////////// 我最喜欢的瑜伽姿势就是triangle post, 一腿直立而另一腿弯曲提高,紧贴于另一大腿的内侧,膝盖放松,使得骨盆两侧平衡,双手上举,使得胸腔展开,整个人好像飞起来一样( 印度的传统雕塑作品中,可以见到许多和瑜伽姿势类似的造型,这个姿势也不例外)。我所要做的,就是放开对身体稳定的执著,在不稳定的姿势中寻找新的平衡点,体会在破除了自身桎梏之后的活力。老朱曾经说过现代艺术就是帮助现代人破除自我成见,重新回归本心的途径。在这个意义上,瑜伽和现代艺术有异曲同工之妙,都是接近自在和自为状态的方式。所不同的是,现代艺术仍然依赖于理性的思考,它是对于人类当下生存状态的反思,它是有的放矢。我觉得瑜伽提供了另一种可能性,因为它不依赖于人的理性思索,它从身体出发、经过内心、再回到身体,它无的放矢,因此也更可能帮助我们接近老住所定义的“无有的存在”(本来无一物,何处惹尘埃?)

////////////////////////////

既然说到了执著和回归本心,对瑜伽也不能过于偏爱。喜欢的时候也要懂得放手。美丽的东西自己也是独立的存在,不一定非的要拥有。看那水仙花在池塘中开得多么自在!在你身边,它只能将你的梦装点几个小时;但是在池塘中,它可以化为精灵,开启每个人的仲夏夜之梦。

Over-reacting?

“Harvard University appears ready to name the first woman president in its 371-year history — Drew Gilpin Faust, a historian who runs a research institute at the university.” Says the New York Times. In the aftermath of former Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers (an economist, interestingly)’s scandal of gender discrimination (“The opposition erupted in part over Dr. Summers suggestion that intrinsic aptitude could help explain why fewer women than men reach the highest ranks of science and math in universities.” NYT), this nomination appears to be an overdose for the damage made. ////////////////////////////// The nomination, along with dozens of other candidates announced in the past December, seems to be Harvard’s gesture of good intension. As J.F.K. said, the crisis is half danger and half opportunity. This might be Harvard’s chance to make a change. It is interesting to see how New York Times writes about this cover story. On one hand, the Times cited many people (especially UPenn’s female president Amy Gutmann)’s positive evaluation of Dr. Faust. On the other hand, it suggested many other candidates declined the nomination for various reasons. The underlying scripts say both Harvard and the Times are playing the game of political correctness, even though they do not dare to say so. ////////////////////////////// I think there are, at lest, two interesting questions involved. First, is this nomination a good thing for a conservative liberal institution like Harvard? For this question, I don’t have much to say since I don’t know its culture. Comparing to the inauguration of Teacher’s College new female president, the Harvard’s decision seems to have much bigger publicity and influence. If the nomination is only a political tactic to deal with the current situation, I doubt the female president will make much a difference to this institution. In any case, it will take time to see what is and will actually happy to this traditionally male-dominated institution. After TC President Furman’s inauguration, I asked couple of male professors in TC about their impression of the new president, they seemed to think that the gender was not the big deal for the new leadership, but the new agenda the president will bring about. ////////////////////////////// Second, is this nomination a good thing for female scholar and leadership in higher education institution? There have been many studies of the labor market within academia, which is highly segregated by institution prestige, geography, control (private vs. public), gender and race. It is well known, even within the same department of institution and controlling for other variables (such as seniority and production), female faculty members expected to receive a salary 15 to 20 percent lower than their male counterparts. In addition, the rate of getting tenure is much lower among female faculty than males, due to multiple reasons (family, finance, alternative job opportunity, and discrimination). In another words, the “voluntary attrition rate” is much higher for female in academia. On top of that, the female leadership is almost invisible in American higher education institutions. The proportion of female administrators and officials declines as one moves upward along the organizational hierarchy in colleges and universities. The past statistics shows that there are more female presidents or vice presidents in community colleges and small liberal arts institutions (single sex college) than in four-year institutions. Therefore, it is not surprising when four of the IVY league institutions put female scholars as their president, Harvard’s nomination still makes a big fuss. ////////////////////////////// I think Harvard’s action is more of a symbolic meaning than a real push to female faculty/administrator’s position in this knowledge industry. From sociological perspective, there is always stratification and mainstreaming within organizations for the purpose of maintaining the existing status quo. If there is no discrimination against female or black or Hispanic faculty members, there will be discrimination based on other criteria (prestige of graduation institution, the prettiness of your spouse, the intelligence of your kids and etc). There is also economic reasoning behind such discrimination, as a way to sorting the market. Although the discrimination might distort the incentives, it is sometimes a cheaper way to achieve equilibrium in long-run under asymmetric information. The alternatives may be government regulation and law, gild, or totally segregated markets for male and female labor. In a third-sector industry like higher education institution, I am not aware which organization’s design is more equal and efficient. In this sense, the academia is no better, or worse, place than any other industry in terms of equalization of members of the community. The faculty governance refers to academic freedom, but it is not a guarantee of equal treatment or equal pay. Because it associates with the freedom of expression and thinking, not one’s rights to pay and promotion. ////////////////////////////// One can not change an institution’s organization culture and management by simply installing a female president. It could only happy when there is equal presentation of female members in academic and non-academic positions within the college. A good example in mind is Barnard College cross the street. The democracy of gender and race will not, or rarely so, be realized in a top-down manner, but will more likely to happy in a bottom-up fashion. (One of the exceptions might be China university reform in 1950s. But I am not sure about the extent to which the reform changed female faculty’s position within institution). Since the isomorphism between higher education institution and the society, one can only expect to see a more “equal” university in a more equal society. ////////////////////////////// Anyway, the Harvard nomination may be too much of a good thing and we have to wait and see what it really means. For my own benefit, I hope Beijing University will have a female president in the near future. Just for a change, ok?

Harvard, too politically correct?

From New York Times

Harvard Expected to Name a Female President

Published: February 9, 2007
Harvard University appears ready to name the first woman president in its 371-year history — Drew Gilpin Faust, a historian who runs a research institute at the university.

Harvard’s Board of Overseers is to meet Sunday and is expected to ratify the choice, according to officials close to the process.

Dr. Faust’s ascension would come a year after Lawrence H. Summers, a former treasury secretary, resigned from the post amid fierce faculty discontent. The opposition erupted in part over Dr. Summers suggestion that intrinsic aptitude could help explain why fewer women than men reach the highest ranks of science and math in universities.

Dr. Faust is currently dean of the Radcliffe Institute of Advanced Study, by far the smallest of Harvard’s schools. Much of the research sponsored by the institute, which is named after Radcliffe College, once the women’s college at Harvard, emphasizes the study of women, gender and society.

The institute is a research organization, sponsoring about 50 fellows a year, with a staff of about 80. Its budget of about $17 million a year is barely 0.5 percent of Harvard’s $3 billion annual budget. Despite her lack of experience running a large organization, Dr. Faust was apparently perceived by the nine-member search committee as an adroit administrator with considerable people skills, a valued commodity after the polarization that occurred under Dr. Summers, particularly among women on the faculty.

The expected announcement was reported by The Harvard Crimson. John Longbrake, a university spokesman would neither confirm nor deny the selection.

Dr. Faust’s colleagues describe her as a consensus-builder, in contrast to Dr. Summers, who made many enemies on the faculty with his brash and abrasive style and his drive to overhaul a culture on the campus that some thought had become complacent.

Dr. Summers turned to Dr. Faust two years ago to help calm the furor over his remarks about women in math, engineering and science. He asked her to oversee two committees he created to come up with new ways to recruit, retain and promote women in those fields at Harvard.

“She really has the potential for being a very wise and successful president,” said Amy Gutmann, the president of the University of Pennsylvania, who was herself among several dozen potential candidates for the Harvard presidency whose names became public in December.

“Complex institutions need wise leaders with vision who can inspire collaboration for change,” said Dr. Gutmann, who had said repeatedly that she intended to remain at Penn. “And Drew has all that it takes to be such a leader. She has a strong backbone and sense and sensibility.”

Harvard will be the fourth of the eighth Ivy League universities to name a woman as its president and some of its faculty members had been hoping that it would break the sex barrier.

Speculation had grown in recent weeks among the faculty and administrators that the search committee was leaning toward Dr. Faust. Interest grew intense last week when another candidate widely believed to be a finalist dropped out of the competition.

Thomas R. Cech, a biochemist at the University of Colorado who is also president of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a philanthropy with an endowment of nearly $15 billion that promotes medical research, took the unusual step of removing himself publicly. Dr. Cech called The Harvard Crimson, the student newspaper, to say he had decided to withdraw because of his commitments to the medical institute and his desire to continue his laboratory research.

Dr. Faust has run the Radcliffe Institute since 2001. Before that, she taught American history for more than two decades at the University of Pennsylvania, where she had also gone to graduate school. An expert in Southern history and a native of Virginia, she has written books on Southern women during the Civil War, on intellectuals and ideology in the Confederate south, as well as a biography of a South Carolina plantation owner, James Henry Hammond.

Dr. Gutmann, the Pennsylvania president, who has known Dr. Faust for more than a decade, describe her as a deft administrator who worked collaboratively but who also had the toughness to lead a university as large, diverse and difficult as Harvard. Professors at Harvard and Penn made similar observations.

Some other faculty members, though, who declined to be identified, said they feared that Dr. Faust lacked the vision and tough-mindedness to be a strong leader.

The presidential search began not long after Dr. Summers resigned last February, facing a rebellion from the prestigious Faculty of Arts and Sciences over his management style and gaffes like his remarks about women. The faculty had already taken a no-confidence vote on him after his remarks about women and were threatening to take a second one.

Derek Bok, a former president of Harvard, stepped in to serve as interim president for this academic year. The search for a president became the talk of academia and even led to odds on an online betting site. The search committee includes six members of the Harvard Corporation, which governs the university, and three members of the Board of Overseers, a much larger advisory body that has few formal powers.

Seeking to soothe the university, the committee issued a broad appeal last spring to students, the faculty and alumni for nominees. It sifted through hundreds of suggestions and, at a private meeting in early December, the committee shared a list of a few dozen potential candidates with the 30-member Board of Overseers. The board has the authority to ratify or reject the search committee’s selection but is considered unlikely to buck a recommendation.

Dr. Faust takes over at a time when Harvard faces a number of challenges, including overhauling its undergraduate curriculum, putting a greater emphasis on teaching. Harvard is also expanding into stem-cell research and other cutting edge science on a new campus to be built in the Allston section of Boston.

Among those on the list were the three women who are presidents of Ivy League universities: Dr. Gutmann of Pennsylvania; Shirley M. Tilghman of Princeton; and Ruth J. Simmons of Brown. Three senior Harvard administrators were also on the list: Dr. Faust; Steven E. Hyman, the provost; and Elena Kagan, dean of the law school.

The women who are chief executives of other Ivy League institutions each said publicly that they were happy where they were and did not consider themselves candidates for the Harvard vacancy.

Other potential candidates who indicated that they did not want to be considered were Alison F. Richard, vice chancellor at the University of Cambridge in England and a former senior official at Yale; the Stanford provost, John Etchemendy; and Lawrence S. Bacow, president of Tufts University.

Youth

http://indieblog.cn/blog/nbm/chillout/archives/2007/0115.asp

因土摩托的博文而转载一篇塞缪尔·厄尔曼的著名短文《青春》并附上原文及罗马尼亚电影《沸腾的生活》配乐,以自省。

译文:

青春不是年华,而是心境;青春不是桃面,丹唇,柔膝,而是深沉的意志,恢宏的想象,炽热的感情;青春是生命的源泉在不息的涌流。

青春气贯长虹,勇锐盖过怯懦,进取压倒苟安。如此锐气,弱冠后生有之,耳顺之年,则亦多见,年岁有加,并非垂老;理想丢弃,方堕暮年。

岁月悠悠,衰微只及肌肤,热忱抛却,颓唐必至灵魂。忧烦,惶恐,丧失自信,定使 心灵扭曲,意气如灰。

无论年届古稀,抑或二八芳龄,心中皆有生命之欢乐,奇迹之诱惑,孩童般天真久盛 不衰。人人心中皆深植一片追求,只要你从天上,人间追求美好,希望,欢乐,勇气 和力量,你就青春永驻,风华长存。

一旦追求消失,锐气如同冰雪覆盖,玩世不恭,自暴自弃油然而生,即使年方二十, 实已老矣。然坚持追求,你就有望在百岁高龄告别尘寰时仍觉年青。

Samuel Ullman - Youth

Youth is not a time of life;it is a state of mind; it is not a matter of rosy cheeks, red lips and supple knees; it is a matter of the will, a quality of the imagination, a vigor of the emotions; it is the freshness of the deep springs of life.

Youth means a temperamental predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease.

This often exists in a man of 60 more than a boy of 20. Nobody grows old merely by a number of years. We grow old by deserting our ideals.

Years may wrinkle the skin, but to give up enthusiasm wrinkles the soul. Worry, fear, self-distrust bows the heart and turns the spring back to dust.

Whether 60 or 16, there is in every human being's heart the lure of wonder,the unfailing childlike appetite of what's next and the joy of the game of living.

In the center of your heart and my heart there is a wireless station: so long as it receives messages of beauty, hope, cheer, courage and power from men and from the Infinite, so long are you young.

When the aerials are down, and your spirit is covered with snows of cynicism and the ice of pessimism, then you are grown old, even at 20, but as long as your aerials are up, to catch waves of optimism, there is hope you may die young at 80.

2007年2月7日星期三

Action Pictures.

名正言顺

和自己说好不写博客了,然后一扭身儿就忘了。记吃不记打,我不应该属龙,应该肖猪。谁让我是龙年的狮子,我这德行,没辙!
昨天朋友发信问,说自己老婆要开图书公司,问应该起个什么名字。Gosh,这么靠谱的事儿也敢问我?虽然不知道媛为什么找我,还是很感动。我的建议是赶紧问靠谱的人去, 也许人家有好主意。俗话说得好,名正言顺,名字是顶重要的事,千万不能让我给忽悠了。我家附近有一家叫做迷宫(Labyrinth), 我在博客里写过,名字觉得挺好的,可惜已经被用过了。“单向街”太小资了,虽然现在很红。郭尔凯克尔的书都说了,《或次或彼》,这个乱世再一头栽进one-way street, 不是找死么?
要开书店的媛,我早就见过了,可是从来没有机会聊聊。对于我们的差别,我可以用一句话老总结:我们总是幻想,而她总在行动,行动的美德是最迷人的(涂骏的说法)。“与其坐而待之,孰若起而拯之”,其实这一点我的朋友早就明白了,要不然为什么看上了媛?她所具有的不仅是商业的敏感,而且是将理想转化为现实的能力。谁不信仰真主,真正去朝圣的有几个人?
要行动,就要有行动的目标和行动的勇气,这些都是我们所缺乏的。思考过多往往会让人丧失行动的勇气,因此,读书人少的不是意见,而是将意见转化为信仰,再将信仰转化为行动的勇气。尽管西塞罗可以用一百种方式论证凯撒的专制是对罗马民主社会的威胁,但是他只是论证;真正拿起匕首的是布鲁图斯,他用凯撒和他自己的鲜血捍卫了公民社会的理想(尽管我对他的理解有保留意见)。同样的,人人都知道要教育救国,但是办乡村教育的只有陶行之和晏阳初。行动不是力量,但是不行动就绝没有力量。
因此,我觉得媛的公司应该叫做“行动”(Action)。这样每年推出的作品就叫做“行动2007”,“行动2008” ,“行动2012”,依此类推。出版不仅仅是发行作品,出版的过程体现着出版者的理念、选择和信仰。出版什么很重要,同样,不出版什么也很重要。中国的出版市场不缺少作品,缺的是思想。老六的《读库》是朝着这个方向的一个努力。但是我更怀念老三联,出版《中华活页文选》的三联,人人都可以读的三联。出版社和作者的互动在英美的出版史上很多,有时间再撰文记述。希望媛能捧红几个作家和学者,让大家知道什么是知识分子,什么是知道分子,什么是公共场合的做秀。
不管怎么样,我觉得Action Publisher 或者Acting Bookstore挺好的,有点过导演瘾的味道。路上两个读书人碰到了,互相打招呼,就问“今天‘行动’了吗?”怎么样,挺有味儿的吧!

2007年2月6日星期二

珍爱生命,远离博客

多么中肯的两句话!我在体育馆里奋力地蹬着自行车,希望把刚才pilates 课上没出的汗好好浪费一下。这两天过的太颓废,想想我都恨不得给自己几个大嘴巴子。好多事儿都已经到了坎儿上了,我还在忽悠自己呢,真没出息!早上起来,决定不再写博客了。在洗手间里,突然想到,我改写剧本吧。 故事就从一个游泳池旁边开始,我漂浮在水面上,一个想象中的伴侣阿荀坐在游泳池边。想到这里,我的面前仿佛真的出现了一个游泳池,夏日的阳光从稠密的树叶的空隙里塞下来,就像《A Good Year》里面那么漂亮的一个游泳池。然后呢?阿荀在看书,看科略特的《By the River Piedra I Sat Down and Wept》。我呢?我应该是个美丽的黑人女子,对于阿荀来说,我应该是示巴女王。那么,他岂不就变成了所罗门王?好吧,就这样,让他的财富和我的美色相称。 夏日丝绸一样细腻的阳光打在我小麦色的皮肤上,痒痒的,原来做一个美人的感觉很好啊。
根據和合本的《舊約全書》譯本,雅歌第一章第5至6節的內容如下:
5 耶路撒冷的女眾女子啊,  我雖然黑,卻是秀美,  如同基達的帳棚,  好像所羅門的幔子。
6 不要因日頭把我曬黑了,  就輕看我。
嘻嘻,做这样的白日梦,一定是因为前几天看《Rome》看多了。有时间,一定要把屋大维八卦一下,十八岁就成名的英雄啊,应该和所罗门王一样的年轻貌美和富可敌国。
昨天,看了一个人写的长篇叙事诗《奥西乌斯之死》。读后的感觉:对于死亡的恐惧,只有死亡可以安慰。

2007年2月5日星期一

青玉案

青玉案:元 夕
辛弃疾
东风夜放花千树,更吹落、星如雨。
宝马雕车香满路,凤箫声动,玉壶光转,一夜鱼龙舞。
蛾儿雪柳黄金缕,笑语盈盈暗香去。
众里寻她千百度,蓦然回首,那人却在,灯火阑珊处。
============================================
青玉案
欧阳修
一年春事都来几?早过了、三之二。
绿暗红嫣浑可事,绿杨庭院,暖风帘幕,有个人憔悴。
买花载酒长安市,又争似家山桃李?
不枉东风吹客泪,相思难表,梦魂无据,惟有归来是。
============================================
青玉案
苏轼
三年枕上吴中路,遣黄犬、随君去。
若到松江呼小渡,莫惊鸳鸯。四桥尽是、老子经行处。
《辋川图》上看春暮,常记高人右丞句。
作个归期天定许,春衫犹是,小蛮针线,曾湿西湖雨。

只羡鸳鸯不羡仙

Yan and Enis finally got married and their love story is long and sweet. Enis is from a small village in Turkey and Yan is from Xi'an, and they get to know each other in TC. It is really amazing to see they grow together over time. When I get time, I will write about their story. For now, I just to wish them a happy and everlasting marriage and many many children to come!
白衣卿相《别思》 十里长亭霜满天,青丝白发度何年? 今生无悔今生错,来世有缘来世迁。 笑靥如花堪缱绻,容颜似水怎缠绵? 情浓渺恰相思淡,自在蓬山舞复跹。
贺学界新婚诗
负笈归来喜欲狂,玉人交拜在华堂,
鹊桥乍渡欢何若,鸳牒新成乐未央;  
自有文章警宇宙,且将粉黛伴闺房,
百年偕老和鸾凤,认得温柔是此乡。

Yan and Enis got married!

2007年2月4日星期日

Dogme 95

除了电影拍摄,特里尔也关心电影理论。他自己就是Dogme95 的倡导者和推动者。根据维基不知道的介绍,

“Dogme 95 (in English: Dogma 95) is an avant-garde filmmaking movement started in 1995 by the Danish directors Lars von Trier, Thomas Vinterberg, Kristian Levring, and Søren Kragh-Jacobsen. This movement is sometimes known as the Dogme 95 Collective or the Dogme Brethren…….The goal of the Dogme collective is to purify filmmaking by refusing expensive and spectacular special effects, postproduction modifications and other gimmicks. The emphasis on purity forces the filmmakers to focus on the actual story and on the actors' performances. The audience may also be more engaged as they do not have overproduction to alienate them from the narrative, themes, and mood. To this end, Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg produced ten rules to which any Dogme film must conform. These rules, referred to as the Vow of Chastity, are as follows:

1. Filming must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found). 2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unless it occurs within the scene being filmed). 3. The camera must be a hand-held camera. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. (The film must not take place where the camera is standing; filming must take place where the action takes place.) 4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera). 5. Optical work and filters are forbidden. 6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.) 7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say that the film takes place here and now.) 8. Genre movies are not acceptable. 9. The final picture must be transferred to the Academy 35mm film, with an aspect ratio of 4:3, that is, not widescreen. (Originally, the requirement was that the film had to be filmed on Academy 35mm film, but the rule was relaxed to allow low-budget productions.) 10. The director must not be credited. In certain cases, the titles of Dogme films are superfluous, since they are also referred to by numbers. The spirit of the Dogme technique influenced Lars von Trier's film Breaking the Waves, although it is not a Dogme film. The first of the Dogme films was Vinterberg's 1998 film Festen (The Celebration), which is also known as Dogme #1. Festen was highly acclaimed by many critics, and won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival that year. Von Trier's only Dogme film, Idioterne (The Idiots, or Dogme #2), was less successful. Since those two original films were released, other directors have participated in the creation of Dogme films. For example, the American director Harmony Korine created the movie Julien Donkey-Boy which is also known as Dogme #6.”

那些拍摄大片的中国导演真应该到丹麦去考察一下电影发展。最好不要没事儿就来纽约购物,我在纽约碰到的中国大小名家儿也够多的了,但是没觉得中国的电影有什么提高。拍电影是思考的过程和结果,没有大脑,只迎合腰带以下部位的中国电影是没有前途的。 如果需要的话,我可以把Dogme95 翻译成中文,好好地鼓吹一下。

公共电台和Media Democracy

在美国,我了解新闻的主要途径是收音机和网络。开头的一年,晚上定时收看Jim Leher的新闻节目;现在每天几乎不看电视,尤其是新闻节目。每天接触新闻,主要是早上起来收听WNYC 、NPR 、BBC、 PBS等提供的新闻节目。尤其是WNYC,除了正点的新闻播报,还有几档深入的新闻分析节目,他们请来的嘉宾多数是资深的政论家或者某些问题的专家。因此他们的分析鞭辟入里,带有一般美国电视新闻节目所没有的深度,信息量极大。随着网络技术的发展,美国公共广播电台(在密西西比河以东的公共电台一般以W开头,以西以K开头)广泛地使用PODCAST的技术将自己的节目放在网上,因此听众可以选择何时、何地收听什么节目。只要从网上将节目下载到自己的IPOD上面,无论是音频还是视频的节目,都可以在乘地铁或者排队时收看/收听。

美国的公共电台实在是一个有趣的现象。说是公共电台,但是以WNYC为例,1997年以后就不再由政府资助,而是靠听众的捐赠和广告收入来维持。因此每年春秋两季,公共电台都会花大力气请名人做广告,呼吁大家来支持它们,无论捐款数额大小,都有礼物赠送。由于经费的独立,因此在制作和购买节目方面也就不受政府或者个别利益集团的限制,而能够根据自己的创作宗旨来制作。此外,公共电台也是美国社会中的重要教育机构,尤其是公民教育和政治教育的工具(有时间,我一定要研究一下“美国公共电台作为教育机构”的故事,应该是不错的硕士论文题目)。一般来说美国大学肩负着将学生培养成有责任感的公民的义务,但是对没有接受过高等教育或者已经离开学校多年的人来说,他们在行使公民权之前,了解当前政治形势和政策分析的主要途径就是报纸、电视和电台。由于我对于前两者的陌生,所以我只能谈谈电台。以WNYC为例,每次总统大选、议会换届选举、州政府和市政府选举之前,WNYC都会拨出整档的节目时间来讨论当前选举中的热点问题、评析候选人政见的异同、分析各种备选政策的长短期效果,并且鼓励大家参与到选举的过程中去。比如著名的节目就有“30 things in 30 days”,每天讲述一个竞选所涉及的话题,有专家开始,民众电话提问,在问答之中深化双方对于问题的认识。纽约这个地方藏龙卧虎,所以有的时候听众的水平颇高,让主持人都大跌眼镜。虽然说俺们这疙瘩一自由民主主义者居多(liberal Democratic),但是公共电台一般坚持无党派的立场(non-partisan),就事论事。尽管如此,从节目的制作和编排还是可以看出,公共电台对政府和政治持批评的态度,在民主社会中充当了提高民智、呼应民声、组织民意的作用。公共电台在这个意义上是民有(募集民间经费支持)、民治(公共选出的董事会)、民享(为大众提供服务而非少数精英阶级)。

此外值得一提的就是电台的另一个教化功能,普及古典音乐。WNYC2就是一个以介绍古典音乐为主的频道(www.wnyc.org/wnyc2, Classic Music 24/7),所有的节目都可以下载到ipod上面收听。此外大都会歌剧院也有自己的三个广播频道(http://www.metoperafamily.org/metopera/broadcast/on_air.aspx),将自己最重要的节目放到网上和电台中,与大家分享。这样一来,即是因为经济的原因不能到歌剧院观赏,也可以从高清晰度的频道欣赏世界级大师的表演。除了美国的电台,我喜欢的电台还有英国广播公司(BBC)和德国之声( DEUSCH WELLE)。BBC是我所知道的第一个能从网上收听节目的电台,它的几个音乐台(BBC2, BBC3)我都很喜欢,尤其喜欢中间Steve Harley’s Sounds of 70s。 此外它的外语教育周到体贴,不仅完全免费,而且提供法语、德语、意大利语、西班牙语、中文、葡萄牙语、希腊语以及其他各种语言的教学节目(http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/)。从课本,到音频和视频节目,为学习语言提供了全方位的服务。德国之声的特色也是国际节目(http://www.dw-world.de/ ),它的中文新闻不错。此外,它为学习德语提供了各种便利,包括教学节目和语言学习的各种网站。

冷酷到底

纽约今明两天的日最高温度为-4和-6C。虽然布什总统一个劲儿地和民主党人套近乎,试图通过他本年度的预算,但美国人对于大幅度增兵伊拉克和提高对阿富汗和伊拉克的援助并不热心。对美国的中产阶级来说,这一场没有结局的战争实在是拖得太长了。这并不是说美国人对他们所生存的政治环境不关心,而是他们对政治的热情有限,更关心自己的家长里短。比如当下城里的核心话题就是统计数据表明,去年警察在路上盘查的行人数量比四年前增加了三倍,而且半数是黑人,三成是西班牙裔,这引起了关于种族歧视的大讨论。前一段时间政坛上出现了新的黑人总统候选人,同样引起了轩然大波。民权运动已经过去40年了,美国才终于有了女性和黑人总统候选人(Jessy Jackson该算是民权运动的余续),也算是社会进步的一点印证吧。

兜了一个大圈子,其实今天想谈的是最近看的一部电影《After the Wedding》。上次回国的时候在清华西门买的,回来一直没有机会看,昨天洗衣服的时候看了一遍,再一次印证了我对北欧电影的看法,冷酷到底。

根据维基不知道的介绍,“After the Wedding (Efter brylluppet) is a Danish movie from 2006. It was directed by Susanne Bier and stars Mads Mikkelsen and Sidse Babett Knudsen. It has been nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film. Susanne Bier (born April 15, 1960 in Copenhagen, Denmark) is a Danish producer, director and writer. She is recognized as one of the most influential of her kind in Denmark”。

比尔斯秉承丹麦电影的传统,使用最简洁的语汇来描述人与人之间复杂的情感关系。故事很简单,影片开始在印度的街头,丹麦人雅各布在组织街头孤儿的救济工作。他在离开国家20年之后,必须回家找钱来支持他在印度办的孤儿院。 他碰到约尔根,一个富有的商人同时也是雅各布20年前女友海伦纳的丈夫。在约尔根和海伦纳女儿安娜的婚礼上,雅各布发现安娜实际上是自己和海伦纳的女儿。约尔根答应对孤儿院予以援助,但条件是雅各布必须和安娜一起办一个基金会,而且他必须留在丹麦生活。海伦纳对于丈夫的决定和酗酒很愤怒,但她逐渐发现丈夫的酗酒实际上是因为他得了绝症,即将离开人世。约尔根将妻女拜托给雅各布,后者开始拒绝接受,但逐渐被女儿所感化,决定留在海伦纳和安娜身边。从约尔根的葬礼,影片又拉回到印度,雅各布问他收养的小男孩普德波德是否愿意和他会丹麦生活,小男孩说他还是喜欢在印度和朋友踢球。一个简单的故事,穿插着巨大的张力。影片中有许多细节,例如对于人物眼睛的描述,在一闪而过的镜头中,那些迷惘的眼睛对于生活的疑问给人留下深刻的印象。这个故事诘问了什么是爱,什么是责任,什么是个人的选择和家庭的义务?约尔根不是一个单纯的好人,他对妻子和孩子们的爱使他选择雅各布来继承自己的事业和家庭,但是影片最后也描写了他对死亡的惧怕,一个真实的人对生活的不满。雅各布最终没有实现对普德波德的许诺,没有回到印度,但是他开始承担自己逃避了20年的责任,从一个愤世嫉俗的人重新成为了一个父亲。每个人都在改变,人们的关系也在改变,个人之间冷酷的关系逐渐融化,最终爱在生命的尽头带来了新的希望。

北欧的电影我接触得不多,此前印象最深刻的是丹麦导演Lars von Trier的《金色心灵》三部曲(The Golden Heart trilogy was about naive heroines who maintain their 'golden hearts' despite the tragedies they experience. This trilogy includes Breaking the Waves (1996), The Idiots (1998) and Dancer in the Dark (2000). While all three films are sometimes associated with the Dogme 95 movement, only The Idiots is a certified Dogme 95 film)。 拉斯.凡.特里尔出生于1956年,是重要的丹麦电影导演和Dogme95运动的主要组织者,在技术上他追求极小主义原则。他成名很早,在电影学院读书的时候,就凭借Nocturne (Nocturne, 1980) and Image of Liberation (Befrielsesbilleder, 1982) 获得了慕尼黑电影节最佳影片奖。毕业之后,他拍摄他的《欧洲三部曲》,声名鹊起(the Europe trilogy, which started with The Element of Crime (Forbrydelsens element 1984). The film was a technical accomplishment and won a technical award at the Cannes Film Festival. This film was followed by Epidemic (1987) that was also shown as part of the official programme at Cannes. He then finished the Europe trilogy in 1991 with Europa (initially released as Zentropa in the U.S.), which won the Prix du Jury at Cannes Film Festival and picked up awards at other major festivals)。

之后,他开始拍摄Breaking the Waves (1996), The Idiots (1998) and Dancer in the Dark (2000), 这也是他最为中国影迷所知的几部电影。第一次在北大看了《破浪》,觉得心跳加剧,简直不知道该怎么走出放映厅。生活的残酷被用最直接的方式表现出来,没有人故意犯罪,但每个人都为爱遭受到巨大的折磨。影片对爱这个人类历史上的母题提出了怀疑和质询,是否所有以爱的名义而提出的要求都是合理的和应该得到满足的?出于爱而非理性的行为是否可取?一个人对于自己的爱和对他人的爱有没有极限?在何种情况下,自我牺牲是必要的和不必要的?当爱变成对对方的压力和折磨,另一方是否有权利拒绝?

《黑暗中的舞者》将比约克的完美声线和剧情结合起来,把一个母亲无望的挣扎表现得淋漓尽致 。在哲学中,在黑暗中舞蹈指在特定环境中的乐观主义(situational optimism),即便在身体受到制约的条件下仍然保持乐观的态度(In philosophy, "dancing in the dark" refers to any situational optimism, albeit leavened by physically-construed events, that is self-referentially seen as a way for the Id to manifest itself)。这个故事也是一个传统意义上的悲剧,比约克所饰演的母亲不远万里到美国给孩子治病,尽管自己面临失明的危险,她仍然希望给孩子光明的未来。但是阴差阳错她不得不铤而走险杀了人。影片中女主人公绝望的努力,同样对所谓的母性、信任和爱等主题提出了怀疑。母亲为子女所作出的牺牲,在多大意义上符合理性和自利的原则?在传统的司法系统中无法得到伸张的正义,是否应该有无辜者付出生命的代价?什么才是女性真正的自我?这些问题在影片中被反复追问,而答案则留给了观众自己。

我觉得这些电影和伯格曼晚期所拍摄的影片一脉相承,尤其是The Passion of Anna (original Swedish title En Passion) 。It is a 1969 drama film written and directed by Ingmar Bergman[1]. 这些影片都或多或少地带有爱德华.蒙克作品的意向,在孤独和沉默中追问生命的本源意义,怀疑基本的人类关系,质问爱的可能性。也许稀少的日光和寒冷的气候给于北欧人更多思考的时间,所以他们的电影和思考都不是向外的,而是对内的,出于对内心的关照。 在宗教之后,在现代之后,留在地球荒原上的人类应该如何自处?人是否注定应该孤独?生活是不是非此即彼,还是或此或彼?沟通是否有可能?这些本体论上的问题赋予这些影片沉重的面貌。

中国的电影本来很有希望对这些质疑提出自己独特的答案,80年代张艺谋和田壮壮的一些电影本来涉及到这些深层次的思考。但是不幸的是,这种思考没有在中国电影中真正发展起来。政治环境的变化固然是一个方面,但是我觉得最重要的因素是出于两个方面的欠缺。第一,评论家与艺术家的互动的缺乏。85新潮本来可以推动包括电影在内的中国艺术向前发展一大步,但是89之后,85新潮中的主要艺术评论家纷纷出国,因此中国艺术界缺少了反思的动力。正如格林伯格对于二战后美国艺术发展所起的重要作用,评论家与艺术家的互动是推动艺术发展的动力。这种互动的缺位是中国电影发展的第一个障碍。那些只会在影片点评会后收红包的评论家和广电总急是培养不出新的艺术品位和作品的。

第二,也是最为重要的一点,就是中国电影缺乏独立的地位。电影自从49年以后一直是作为意识形态的工具被政府所利用的,因此在80年以前,没有独立的影片选题和导演的思考。90年代以后,政府对于电影投资的减少,使得中国电影不得不迅速投入非本土投资方的怀抱,迅速向好莱坞模式看齐。这种所谓的市场化进程实际是对电影独立精神的最大伤害,因为对刚刚走出政府桎梏的脆弱的中国电影,她在还没有机会形成自己的风格以前,就被按照好莱坞的标准被重新定义了。这个道理和学术的独立一样,缺乏制度性的保障的学术自由是空谈,缺乏制度性保障的电影独立也是空谈。国内观众对国产电影不满,认为是几个导演为了拿国际大奖在粗制滥造“大片”。其实,这正是中国电影市场化的表现,是好莱坞逻辑的必然结果,这些人不过是服从了自己的“天命”,没什么可被指责的。

如果没有艺术创造和评论的互动和电影业的独立,中国观众恐怕还是要继续是望下去。由此,他们只有两种选择:或者完全不看中国电影(盗版的我都不买);或者干脆降低自己的要求,什么都看。这个和票证时代的中国一样,要不你饿着,要不你就为了填饱肚皮饥不择食。第三条道路就是支持中国电影从意识形态和市场控制中解脱出来,至于这一点的可行性,我也没有把握,只能算是痴人说梦吧。

[1] Andreas, a man struggling with the recent demise of his marriage and living in emotional isolation, meets Anna, who is grieving the recent deaths of her husband and son. While Anna uses Andreas' phone, he listens in on her conversation and later, when she has gone but left her handbag behind, Andreas searchs it and reads a letter that will later prove she is deceptive about her past. Andreas befriends a married couple, Eva and Elis-mutual friends of Anna-who are also in the midst of psychological turmoil. Andreas has a tryst with Eva but ultimately takes up living with Anna, though he is warned by Eva cryptically to be wary of her. The relationship is not very passionate but Andreas and Anna start off happy enough. Anna appears zealous in her faith and steadfast in her search for truth, but gradually her delusions surface-reinforced by what Andreas read in the letter. For his part, Andreas is unable to overcome his feelings of deep humiliation about his own past and remains disconnected, further dooming the relationship with Anna. As these events unfold, an unknown person among the island community commits acts of animal cruelty. A friend of Andreas is wrongly accused of these crimes, leading to dire consequences. In the end, the past is more powerful then present forces, violence erupts and chances for healing are lost.