
簡·奧斯丁
本書是作者最後一部小說,塑造了一位其筆下最爲高尚的人物。韶光正從安妮的身上消逝,風華正茂的時候,因爲接受了他人的“勸導”,她終與意中人溫特沃斯上校分道揚鑣。雖青春不再,又備受虛榮的父親和姐姐的冷漠,但她的高貴仁慈卻使她成爲親朋中最受歡迎的人。兩人分手八年後再次相遇,上校不能冰釋怨恨,違心追求他人;而安妮也險些接受僞君子堂兄的求婚。在因爲家族事務而引發的一系列交往中,上校進一步發現安妮的無私與堅貞無人能比,而安妮也在一次次自我勸導中找回了愛的勇氣。他們發現,重新團聚比第一次相愛更爲幸福,於是,經受了考驗的他們不再若即若離,開始盡情地回憶並表白……
何德何能,何其有幸,得以品讀簡·奧斯汀(Jane Austen)的《勸導》(Persuasion)。 一路相伴的,是戴維·M·沙帕德(David M. Shapard)的註釋本。沙帕德獲加州大學伯克利分校歐洲史博士學位,專攻十八世紀歐洲史,長年執教於高校,是奧斯汀研究領域備受推崇的註釋大家。這套註釋本窮盡攝政時代的社會風俗、海軍制度、語言典故與敘事伏筆,完整還原彼時的歷史語境與文字肌理——若無這般詳實的考據鋪陳,奧斯汀筆下那些層層暗藏的深意與隱祕情緒,讀者極易與之擦肩而過。 原著既竟,復得讀哈羅德·布魯姆(Harold Bloom)《西方正典》(The Western Canon)中的專章評析。布魯姆爲耶魯大學斯特林講席教授、二十世紀最重要的文學批評家之一,早年求學於康奈爾、劍橋與耶魯,一生堅守審美本位,拒絕被時代理論框架裹挾。他從經典美學的高度,精準提煉出《勸導》不可替代的文學價值。 微觀考據與宏觀批評,一者紮根歷史語境細讀文本,一者立足文學史視野審視作品——兩種頂級文本一前一後,伴隨同一段閱讀旅程。這般機緣,可遇不可求。 以下附上哈羅德·布魯姆《西方正典》中對《勸導》的完整評述,這也是我心目中對這部作品最精準、最具高度的經典書評。 附錄:摘自《西方正典》(10 經典記憶:早期的華茲華斯與簡·奧斯汀的《勸導》) ① “PERSUASION” is a word derived from the Latin for “advising” or “urging,” for recommending that it is good to perform or not perform a particular action. The word goes back to a root meaning “sweet” or “pleasant,” so that the good of performance or nonperformance has a tang of taste rather than of moral judgment about it. “勸導”一詞來自於拉丁語的“勸告”或“敦促”,即建議最好採取或不採取某一特定行動。這一詞的本源可以追溯到“甜蜜”或“愉悅”,因此行動或不行動的好處帶有強烈的個人趣好,而無關道德判斷。 Jane Austen chose it as the title for her last completed novel. As a title, it recalls Sense and Sensibility or Pride and Prejudice rather than Emma or Mansfield Park. We are given not the name of a person or house and estate, but of an abstraction, a single one in this case. 簡·奧斯汀選擇它作爲最後一部小說的標題,這讓我想起了《理智與情感》或《傲慢與偏見》,而不是《愛瑪》或《曼斯菲爾德莊園》。我們看到的不是一個人、一幢房子或一處莊園的名字,而是一個抽象概念,在這裏只是單獨一個名詞。 The title’s primary reference is to the persuasion of its heroine, Anne Elliot, at the age of nineteen, by her godmother, Lady Russell, not to marry Captain Frederick Wentworth, a young naval officer. 標題主要關聯着書中女主角安妮·埃利奧特,她十九歲時受到教母羅塞爾夫人的勸導,要她解除與年輕的海軍軍官弗雷德裏克·溫特沃思上校的婚約。 This was, as it turns out, very bad advice, and, after eight years, it is mended by Anne and Captain Wentworth. As with all of Austen’s ironic comedies, matters end happily for the heroine. And yet each time I finish a rereading of this perfect novel, I feel very sad. 後來的發展證明這個建議糟糕至極,直到八年之後安妮與溫特沃思上校才修復舊好。正如奧斯汀所有諷刺喜劇的風格,女主角的結局圓滿。然而每次我重新讀完這部無可挑剔的小說後,總是會感到十分難過。 This does not appear to be my personal vagary; when I ask my friends and students about their experience of the book, they frequently mention a sadness which they also associate with Persuasion, more even than with Mansfield Park. 這似乎不是我個人的異常反應;當我問及我的朋友及學生們閱讀這部小說的感受時,他們常常表示對《勸導》也會感到一種悲傷,而閱讀《曼斯菲爾德莊園》時卻很少有如此感受。 Anne Elliot, a quietly eloquent being, is a self-reliant character, in no way forlorn, and her sense of self never falters. It is not her sadness we feel as we conclude the book: it is the novel’s somberness that impresses us. 安妮·埃利奧特沉靜而善於體悟,自尊又自立,絕不會感到孤獨無助,她的自我意識從不會動搖和猶疑。我們讀完全書後,感到的並不是她的悲傷:縈繞於心的是小說的沉鬱風格。 The sadness enriches what I would call the novel’s canonical persuasiveness, its way of showing us its extraordinary aesthetic distinction. 這種悲傷充實了我所謂小說的經典勸導性,它藉此向我們顯示了其非凡的美學價值。 Persuasion is among novels what Anne Elliot is among novelistic characters—a strong but subdued outrider. 《勸導》在西方小說之中就如同安妮·埃利奧特在小說人物中的位置,是一個強有力但並不引人注目的隨從。 The book and the character are not colorful or vivacious; Elizabeth Bennett of Pride and Prejudice and Emma Woodhouse of Emma have a verve to them that initially seems lacking in Anne Elliot, which may be what Austen meant when she said that Anne was “almost too good for me.” 書和人物都樸實無華,沉靜閒逸;安妮·埃利奧特乍一看似乎缺乏《傲慢與偏見》中伊麗莎白·貝內特及《愛瑪》中愛瑪·伍德的激情活力,這或許是奧斯汀說安妮“對我來說太溫順”的言下之意。 Anne is really almost too subtle for us, though not for Wentworth, who has something of an occult wavelength to her. 安妮對我們而言確實太難以捉摸,而在溫特沃思眼中卻並非如此,他有着某種神祕的波長可以與她溝通。 Juliet McMaster notes “the kind of oblique communication that constantly goes on between Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth, where, though they seldom speak to each other, each constantly understands the full import of the other’s speech better than their interlocutors do.” 朱利葉·麥克馬斯特指出,“雖然兩人相互之間極少開口,但一種間接的交流在安妮·埃利奧特與溫特沃思上校之間不斷地進行着,各人都對對方話中的含義心領神會,而參與談話的其他人卻不能如此。” That kind of communication in Persuasion depends upon deep “affection,” a word that Austen values over “love.” “Affection” between woman and man, in Austen, is the more profound and lasting emotion. 《勸導》中的這種交流依賴於深厚的“情意”,奧斯汀認爲它的價值勝過“愛”。男女間的“情意”在奧斯汀心目中是更深沉、持久的情感。 I think it is not too much to say that Anne Elliot, though subdued, is the creation for whom Austen herself must have felt the most affection, because she lavished her own gifts upon Anne. · 埃利奧特雖不引人注目,卻必定是奧斯汀本人最情有獨鍾的創造,我這麼說並不言過其實,因爲她將自身諸多稟賦都賦予了安妮。 Henry James insisted that the novelist must be a sensibility upon which absolutely nothing is lost; by that test (clearly a limited one) only Austen, George Eliot, and James himself, among all those writing in English, would join Stendhal, Flaubert, and Tolstoy in a rather restricted pantheon. ♥ 亨利·詹姆斯堅持認爲,小說家必須感覺敏銳,絕對不能錯失任何細節;以這一標準(顯然有其狹隘之處)來衡量,在所有英語作家中,唯有奧斯汀、喬治·艾略特和詹姆斯本人,能與司湯達、福樓拜和托爾斯泰一道,躋身於那個寥寥數人的殿堂。 Anne Elliot may well be the one character in all of prose fiction upon whom nothing is lost, though she is in no danger of turning into a novelist. The most accurate estimmate of Anne Elliot that I have seen is by Stuart Tave: 安妮·埃利奧特很可能是所有散文體小說中感覺最敏銳、不曾錯失半點細節的人物,儘管她並無成爲小說家之虞。我所見過的對安妮·埃利奧特最精確的評價來自斯圖亞特·塔夫: Nobody hears Anne, nobody sees her, but it is she who is ever at the center. It is through her ears, eyes, and mind that we are made to care for what is happening. If nobody is much aware of her, she is very much aware of everyone else and she perceives what is happening to them when they are ignorant of themselves . . . she reads Wentworth’s mind, with the coming troubles he is causing for others and himself, before those consequences bring the information to him. 無人留意安妮,無人真正看見她,然而她始終處在故事的核心。我們正是經由她的聽覺、目光與思緒,纔對周遭發生的一切心生關切。旁人大多未曾留意她,她卻洞悉所有人;當人們尚且不自知自身處境時,她早已看清降臨在他們身上的命運……她讀懂了溫特沃思的內心,預見了他即將給自己與他人招致的種種麻煩,遠在這些後果擺在他眼前、讓他認清現實之前。 ② The aesthetic dangers attendant upon such a paragon are palpable: how does a novelist make such a character persuasive? Poldy, in Joyce’s Ulysses, is overwhelmingly persuasive because he is so complete a person, which was the largest of Joyce’s intentions. 塑造這般完美無瑕的人物,伴隨顯而易見的美學風險:小說家要如何令這個角色具備說服力?喬伊斯《尤利西斯》中的波爾迪極具說服力,因爲他是一個如此完整立體的人,這也正是喬伊斯最核心的創作目標。 Austen’s ironic mode does not sanction the representation of completeness: we do not accompany her characters to the bedroom, the kitchen, the privy. What Austen parodies in Sense and Sensibility she raises to an apotheosis in Persuasion: the sublimity of a particular, inwardly isolated sensibility. 奧斯汀的反諷模式制約了對完整性的表現:我們不會跟隨她的人物們進入臥室、廚房和廁所。奧斯汀在《理智與情感》中諷擬的東西,在《勸導》中卻被抬升到至尊的地位:一種內在的、特殊的孤立感受力的崇高性。 Anne Elliot is hardly the only figure in Austen who has an understanding heart. Her difference is in her almost preternatural acuteness of perception of others and of the self, which are surely the qualities that most distinguish Austen as a novelist. 安妮·埃利奧特不是奧斯汀筆下唯一善解人意的人物。她與衆不同之處在於她對他人及自我的感知準確到了幾近不可思議的程度,而這無疑是奧斯汀作爲小說家最明顯的特徵。 Anne Elliot is to Austen’s work what Rosalind of As You Like It is to Shakespeare’s: the character who almost reaches the mastery of perspective that can be available only to the novelist or playwright, lest all dramatic quality be lost from the novel or play. C. L. Barber memorably emphasized this limitation: 安妮·埃利奧特之於奧斯汀的創作正如《皆大歡喜》中的羅瑟琳之於莎士比亞:這兩個人物幾乎達到了唯有小說家或劇作家才能掌握的全知視角,若非如此,這部小說或劇作就會喪失所有的戲劇性。C. L.巴柏令人難忘地強調過這一侷限: The dramatist tends to show us one thing at a time, and to realize that one thing, in its moment, to the full; his characters go to extremes, comical as well as serious; and no character, not even a Rosalind, is in a position to see all around the play and so be completely poised, for if this were so the play would cease to be dramatic. 劇作家通常一次只向我們展現一件事,並以適當時機將其充分展現;他筆下的人物走向極端,或滑稽嬉鬧,或莊重嚴肅;劇中人物不可能俯瞰整部戲劇、做到全然泰然自若,即使羅瑟琳也不行,否則戲劇性便蕩然無存。 I like to turn Barber’s point in the other direction: more even than Hamlet or Falstaff, or than Elizabeth Bennet, or than Fanny Price in Mansfield Park, Rosalind and Anne Elliot are almost completely poised, nearly able to see all around the play and the novel. 讓我將巴柏的觀點轉個方向:比起哈姆萊特、福斯塔夫、伊麗莎白·貝內特,或《曼斯菲爾德莊園》中的芬妮·布萊斯,羅瑟琳與安妮·埃利奧特更近乎完全的從容自持,幾乎能綜覽整部戲劇與整部小說。 Their poise cannot transcend perspectivizing completely, but Rosalind’s wit and Anne’s sensibility, both balanced and free of either excessive aggressivity or defensiveness, enable them to share more of their creators’ poise than we ever come to do. 她們的從容雖不能完全超越視角的侷限,但羅瑟琳的機智與安妮的敏感都恰到好處,既不咄咄逼人,也不退縮自守,使她們得以分享創作者那份我們常人永遠無法企及的從容。 Austen never loses dramatic intensity; we share Anne’s anxiety concerning Wentworth’s renewed intentions until the novel’s conclusion. 奧斯汀始終沒有削弱戲劇張力;直至小說結尾,我們都和安妮一樣,擔憂溫特沃思是否會重新萌生情意。 But we rely upon Anne as we should rely upon Rosalind; critics would see the rancidity of Touchstone as clearly as they see the vanity of Jacques if they placed more confidence in Rosalind’s reactions to everyone else in the play, as well as to herself. 但我們應當像信賴羅莎琳德那樣信賴安妮;倘若批評家們對羅莎琳德在劇中對待其他所有人以及對待她自己的反應給予更多信任,他們就會像看清傑奎斯的虛榮一樣,清楚地看出試金石的刻薄乖戾。 Anne Elliot’s reactions have the same winning authority; we must try to give the weight to her words that is not extended by the other persons in the novel, except for Wentworth. 安妮·埃利奧特的判斷擁有同樣令人信服的權威;小說裏除溫特沃思之外,其餘人物皆未能重視她的言語,而我們則應當賦予其應有的分量。 Stuart Tave’s point, like Barber’s, is accurate even when turned in the other direction; Austen’s irony is very Shakespearean. Even the reader must fall into the initial error of undervaluing Anne Elliot. The wit of Elizabeth Bennet or of Rosalind is easier to appreciate than Anne Elliot’s accurate sensibility. 斯圖爾特·塔夫的觀點與巴伯的論斷一樣,即便反向推演依然成立;奧斯汀的反諷極具莎士比亞風格。就連讀者最初也難免犯下低估安妮·埃利奧特的錯誤。伊麗莎白·貝內特與羅莎琳德的機敏鋒芒,遠比安妮·埃利奧特精準細膩的感知力更容易被欣賞。 The secret of her character combines Austenian irony with a Wordsworthian sense of deferred hope. Austen has a good measure of Shakespeare’s unmatched ability to give us persons, both major and minor, who are each utterly consistent in her or his separate mode of speech, and yet completely different from one another. 安妮性格的內核,融合了奧斯汀式的反諷與華茲華斯筆下那種遲來的希冀。奧斯汀頗具莎士比亞那份無可比擬的功力:她塑造的人物,無論主次,各自的言談方式始終前後統一,彼此之間又判然有別。 Anne Elliot is the last of Austen’s heroines of what I think we must call the Protestant will, but in her the will is modified, perhaps perfected, by its descendant, the Romantic sympathetic imagination, of which Wordsworth, as we have seen, was the prophet. That is perhaps what helps to make Anne so complex and sensitive a character. 安妮·埃利奧特是奧斯汀筆下最後一位擁有我所說的“新教意志”的女主人公。但在她身上,這種意志經由其後繼特質——浪漫主義共情想象力——得到調和,乃至臻於完善;我們此前已經談及,華茲華斯正是這一精神的先驅。這或許正是安妮成爲一個層次豐富、心思敏銳的人物的緣由。 ③ Jane Austen’s earlier heroines, of whom Elizabeth Bennet is the exemplar, manifested the Protestant will as direct descendants of Samuel Richardson’s Clarissa Harlowe, with Dr. Samuel Johnson hovering nearby as moral authority. 簡·奧斯汀前期的女主人公們以伊麗莎白·貝內特爲典範,她們身上彰顯出“新教意志”,乃是塞繆爾·理查遜筆下克拉麗莎·哈洛的直接傳承;而塞繆爾·約翰遜博士則如影隨形,充當着道德標尺。 Marxist criticism inevitably views the Protestant will, even in its literary manifestations, as a mercantile matter, and it has become fashionable to talk about the socioeconomic realities that Jane Austen excludes, such as the West Indian slavery that is part of the ultimate basis for the financial security most of her characters enjoy. 馬克思主義批評理論總會將新教意志——即便它呈現於文學之中——視作一種商業產物;如今學界盛行一種論調,熱衷於討論簡·奧斯汀刻意迴避的社會經濟現實,例如西印度羣島的奴隸制,而奧斯汀筆下多數人物賴以安身的財富,根基正源於此。 But all achieved literary works are founded upon exclusions, and no one has demonstrated that increased consciousness of the relation between culture and imperialism is of the slightest benefit whatsoever in learning to read Mansfield Park. 但所有成熟的文學作品,皆建立在有所取捨、有所隱略的基礎之上;也無人能夠證實,深化對文化與帝國主義二者關聯的認知,對於人們研讀《曼斯菲爾德莊園》會有絲毫裨益。 Persuasion ends with a tribute to the British navy, in which Wentworth has an honored place. Doubtless Wentworth at sea, ordering the latest batch of disciplinary floggings, is not as pleasant as Wentworth on land, gently appreciating the joys of affection with Anne Elliot. 《勸導》的收尾是對英國海軍的禮讚,溫特沃思在這支隊伍中享有崇高地位。毋庸置疑,海上執掌軍艦、下令執行新一輪鞭刑懲戒的溫特沃思,遠不如陸上與安妮·埃利奧特相伴、溫柔體味情意之美的溫特沃思那般令人心生好感。 But once again, Austen’s is a great art founded upon exclusions, and the sordid realities of British sea power are no more relevant to Persuasion than West Indian bondage is to Mansfield Park. Austen was, however, immensely interested in the pragmatic and secular consequences of the Protestant will, and they seem to me a crucial element in helping us appreciate the heroines of her novels. 但話說回來,奧斯汀的偉大藝術同樣建立在有所取捨、有所隱略之上;大英海上強權之下種種不堪的現實,與《勸導》文本解讀並無關聯,一如西印度羣島的奴役制度和《曼斯菲爾德莊園》無關。不過,奧斯汀深切關注新教意志所帶來的現實世俗影響,在我看來,正是這些影響,構成了我們理解她筆下一衆女主人公的關鍵。 Austen’s Shakespearean inwardness, culminating in Anne Elliot, revises the moral intensities of Clarissa Harlowe’s secularized Protestant martyrdom, her slow dying after being raped by Lovelace. 奧斯汀具備莎士比亞式的內在精神刻畫,這一特質在安妮·埃利奧特身上臻於頂峯。它重塑了克拉麗莎·哈洛那世俗化新教殉道者身上濃烈的道德張力——克拉麗莎遭洛夫萊斯侵害後,在漫長的煎熬中走向死亡。 What removes Clarissa’s will to live is her stronger will to maintain the integrity of her being. To yield to the repentant Lovelace by marrying him would compromise the essence of her being, the exaltation of her violated will. 奪去克拉麗莎求生意志的,是她那份更爲強大的信念——堅守自身人格的完整。倘若她選擇嫁給已然悔悟的洛夫萊斯,便是向他妥協,這會損毀她存在的本質,辜負她備受摧殘卻依舊挺立的意志。 What is tragedy in Clarissa is converted by Austen into ironic comedy, but the will’s drive to maintain itself scarcely alters in this conversion. In Persuasion the emphasis is on a willed exchange of esteems, where both the woman and the man estimate the value of the other to be high. 理查遜筆下《克拉麗莎》的悲劇內核,經奧斯汀轉化爲帶有反諷意味的喜劇;但意志堅守自我的內在驅動力,在這一轉變中幾乎未曾改變。《勸導》着重刻畫一場經由意志促成的相互敬重:男女雙方都由衷認可對方珍貴的價值。 Obviously outward considerations of wealth, property, and social standing are crucial elements here, but so are the inward considerations of common sense, amiability, culture, wit, and affection. 顯而易見,財富、地產與社會地位這類外在條件固然是重要因素,但理智、溫和品性、教養、才情與情意這些內在素養同樣不容小覷。 In a way (it pains me to say this, as I am a fierce Emersonian) Ralph Waldo Emerson anticipated the current Marxist critique of Austen when he denounced her as a mere conformist who would not allow her heroines to achieve the soul’s true freedom from societal conventions. 某種意義上(說出這番話令我頗爲痛心,因爲我是堅定的愛默生追隨者),拉爾夫·沃爾多·愛默生早已預判到如今針對奧斯汀的馬克思主義批評。愛默生曾斥責奧斯汀僅僅是一名循規蹈矩之人,認爲她筆下的女主人公無法掙脫世俗規約,實現靈魂真正的自由。 But that was to mistake Jane Austen, who understood that the function of convention was to liberate the will, even if convention’s tendency was to stifle individuality, without which the will was inconsequential. 然而這是對簡·奧斯汀的誤解,她懂得成規的作用在於解放意志,儘管成規往往會扼殺個性;倘若沒有成規,意志也就無關緊要了。 ④ Austen’s major heroines—Elizabeth, Emma, Fanny, and Anne—possess such inward freedom that their individualities cannot be repressed. Austen’s art as a novelist is not to worry much about the socioeconomic genesis of that inner freedom, though the anxiety level does rise in Mansfield Park and Persuasion. 奧斯汀筆下的核心女主人公——伊麗莎白、愛瑪、範妮與安妮,都擁有內在的自由,她們的個性無從被壓制。身爲小說家,奧斯汀並不深究這份內在自由源自何種社會經濟根源,儘管在《曼斯菲爾德莊園》與《勸導》中,相關的憂慮確有加重。 In Austen, irony becomes the instrument for invention, which Dr. Johnson defined as the essence of poetry. A conception of inward freedom that centers upon a refusal to accept esteem except from one upon whom one has conferred esteem, is a conception of the highest degree of irony. 在奧斯汀這裏,反諷成爲創造性構思的手段,約翰遜博士曾將創造性構思界定爲詩歌的本質。有一種內在自由觀,其核心在於:除非讚許來自自己已然敬重之人,否則便拒絕接納這份讚許;這一觀念本身,蘊含着極致的反諷。 The supreme comic scene in all of Austen must be Elizabeth’s rejection of Darcy’s first marriage proposal, where the ironies of the dialectic of will and esteem become very nearly outrageous. That high comedy, which continued in Emma, is somewhat chastened in Mansfield Park, and then becomes something else, unmistakable but difficult to name, in Persuasion, where Austen has become so conscious a master that she seems to have changed the nature of willing, as though it, too, could be persuaded to become a rarer, more disinterested act of the self. 奧斯汀筆下最登峯造極的喜劇場景,非伊麗莎白拒絕達西首次求婚莫屬——在那裏,意志與尊崇之間的辯證反諷,幾乎到了荒唐絕倫的地步。那種高級喜劇風格在《愛瑪》中得以延續,到了《曼斯菲爾德莊園》裏則有所收斂,及至《勸導》,它又蛻變爲另一種難以名狀卻昭然若揭的東西;此時的奧斯汀已然成爲一位自覺性極高的大家,彷彿連"意願"本身的性質都被她改變了,似乎"意願"也能被勸導成一種更爲罕有、更爲超然的自我行爲。 NO ONE has suggested that Jane Austen becomes a High Romantic in Persuasion; her poet remained William Cowper, not Wordsworth, and her favorite prose writer was always Dr. Johnson. But her severe distrust of imagination and of “romantic love,” so prevalent in the earlier novels, is not a factor in Persuasion. 尚無觀點認爲簡·奧斯汀在《勸導》中轉變爲崇高浪漫主義作家;她所追隨的詩人始終是威廉·考珀,而非華茲華斯,她最推崇的散文大家也一直是約翰遜博士。但在前期小說中隨處可見的、她對於想象力與“浪漫之愛”的審慎懷疑,在《勸導》裏已不再構成主導因素。 Anne and Wentworth maintain their affection for each other throughout eight years of hopeless separation, and each has the power of imagination to conceive of a triumphant reconciliation. This is the material for a romance, not for an ironical novel. The ironies of Persuasion are frequently pungent, but they are almost never directed at Anne Elliot and only rarely at Captain Wentworth. 安妮與溫特沃思歷經八年無望別離,始終堅守對彼此的情意,二人皆擁有想象的力量,能夠構想一場圓滿的重逢和解。這本是傳奇故事的素材,而非反諷小說的底色。《勸導》中的反諷往往尖銳辛辣,卻幾乎從不針對安妮·艾略特,極少指向溫特沃思上校。 There is a difficult relation between Austen’s repression of her characteristic irony about her protagonists and a certain previously unheard plangency that hovers throughout Persuasion. 奧斯汀剋制了慣常針對主角的反諷筆法,而一種此前未曾見於她筆下的悽婉基調縈繞整部《勸導》,二者之間存在着微妙複雜的關聯。 Despite Anne’s faith in herself she is very vulnerable to the anxiety, which she never allows herself to express, of an unlived life, in which the potential loss transcends yet includes sexual unfulfillment. I can recall only one critic, the Australian Ann Molan, who emphasizes what Austen strongly implies, that “Anne . . . is a passionate woman. And against her will, her heart keeps asserting its demand for fulfillment.” 安妮雖保有內心的篤定,卻極易被一種隱憂裹挾——她從不允許自己流露這份心緒:人生留有缺憾,這種潛在的失落不止包含情慾上的未能圓滿,又將其囊括其中。我記得僅有一位評論家,澳大利亞學者安·莫蘭,點明瞭奧斯汀強烈暗示的一點:“安妮……是一個滿懷熱忱的女子。縱使本心抗拒,她的內心始終在渴求圓滿。” Since Anne had refused Wentworth her esteem eight years before, she feels a necessity to withhold her will, and thus becomes the first Austen heroine whose will and imagination are antithetical. 八年前安妮曾拒絕給予溫特沃思她的珍重,故而她自覺必須收斂自身意志,由此她成爲奧斯汀筆下第一位意志與想象力彼此相悖的女主人公。 Although Austen’s overt affinities remained with the Aristocratic Age, her authenticity as a writer impelled her, in Persuasion, a long way toward the burgeoning Democratic Age, or Romanticism, as we used to call it. 儘管奧斯汀表面上仍認同貴族時代的精神底色,但作爲作家的本真創作力,驅使她在《勸導》中大步邁向蓬勃興起的民主時代,也就是我們以往所說的浪漫主義。 There is no civil war within Anne Elliot’s psyche, or within Austen’s; but there is the emergent sadness of a schism in the self, with memory taking the side of imagination in an alliance against the will. 安妮·艾略特的內心之中並無掙扎交戰,奧斯汀本人亦是如此;但一種因自我分裂而生的悵惘已然浮現,記憶選擇與想象結成同盟,一同對抗意志。 The almost Wordsworthian power of memory in both Anne and Wentworth has been noted by Gene Ruoff. Since Austen was anything but an acciddental novelist, we might ask why she chose to found Persuasion upon a mutual nostalgia. 吉恩·魯夫曾指出,安妮與溫特沃思身上那種近乎華茲華斯式的記憶力量。奧斯汀絕非隨性落筆的小說家,我們不禁要追問,她爲何選擇以雙向的懷戀作爲《勸導》的創作根基。 After all, the rejected Wentworth is even less inclined to will a renewed affection than Anne is, and yet the fusion of memory and imagination triumphs over his will also. Was this a relaxation of the will in Jane Austen herself? Since she returns to her earlier mode in Sanditon, her unfinished novel begun after Persuasion was completed, it may be that the story of Anne Elliot was an excursion or indulgence for the novelist. 說到底,遭到回絕後的溫特沃思,比起安妮,更不願憑自身意志重拾舊情,然而記憶與想象相融的力量,同樣戰勝了他的意志。這是否代表簡·奧斯汀自身對意志的約束有所放寬?《勸導》完稿後,她動筆創作未竟之作《桑迪頓》,文風重回早年筆法,由此看來,安妮·艾略特的這段故事,或許是這位小說家一次短暫的嘗試,一場心緒的釋放。 The parallels between Wordsworth and Persuasion are limited but real. High Romantic novels in England, whether of the Byronic kind like Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights or of a Wordsworthian sort like Adam Bede, are a distinctly later development. 華茲華斯與《勸導》之間的相通之處雖有限,卻真實存在。英國的崇高浪漫主義小說,無論是《簡·愛》《呼嘯山莊》這類拜倫風格的作品,還是《亞當·比德》這類帶有華茲華斯色彩的創作,都是在此之後才逐漸發展成型。 The ethos of the Austen heroine does not change in Persuasion, but she is certainly a more problematic being, tinged with a new sadness concerning life’s limits. It may be that the elegant pathos Persuasion sometimes courts has a connection to Jane Austen’s own ill health, her intimations of her early death. 奧斯汀筆下女主人公的精神內核在《勸導》中並未改變,但安妮無疑是更爲複雜難解的人物,籠罩着一層全新的悵惘,關乎生命本身的種種侷限。《勸導》時而流露的雅緻悲愴,或許與簡·奧斯汀自身的病痛、以及她預感到自己將早逝的心境有關。 ⑤ Stuart Tave, comparing Wordsworth and Austen, shrewdly noted that both were “poets of marriage” and both also possessed “a sense of duty understood and deeply felt by those who see the integrity and peace of their own lives as essentially bound to the lives of others and see the lives of all in a more than merely social order.” 斯圖爾特·塔夫對比了華茲華斯與奧斯汀,他敏銳地注意到兩人都是“婚姻的詩人”,也都具有“爲一部分人所體悟並深懷於心的責任感:這些人視自身生活的完整與寧靜在本質上和他人的生活緊密聯結,並且理解衆生的存續依託於超越單純社交維度的秩序”。 Expanding Tave’s insight, Susan Morgan pointed to the particular affinity between Austen’s Emma and Wordsworth’s great “Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Earliest Childhood.” The growth of the individual consciousness, involving both gain and loss for Wordsworth but only gain for Austen, is the shared subject. 蘇珊·摩根拓展了塔夫的見解,她提出,奧斯汀的《愛瑪》與華茲華斯的名篇《頌詩:童年回憶的永生喻示》存在特殊的共通之處。二者共同探討個體意識的成長,對華茲華斯來說,這段歷程得失相伴,而在奧斯汀筆下,唯有收穫。 Emma’s consciousness certainly does develop, and she undergoes a quasi-Wordsworthian transformation from the pleasures of near solipsism to the more difficult pleasures of sympathy for others. 愛瑪的心智確有成長,她經歷了準華茲華斯式的轉變,從近乎唯我主義的快樂,走向共情他人這份更爲艱澀的喜悅。 Anne Elliot, far more mature from the beginning, scarcely needs to grow in consciousness. Her long-lamented rejection of Wentworth insulates her against the destructiveness of hope, which we have seen to be the frightening emphasis of the earlier Wordsworth, particularly in the story of poor Margaret. Instead of hope, there is a complex of emotions, expressed by Austen with her customary skill: 安妮·艾略特自開篇便成熟許多,幾乎不再需要完成心智上的成長。那場令她久久悵憾的拒婚,使她免於希望所具備的毀滅性力量,而這份對希望之破壞力的書寫,正是早年華茲華斯令人心驚的着力之處,尤以可憐的瑪格麗特的故事爲代表。取而代之的是一組繁複交織的情緒,奧斯汀以一貫純熟的筆法將其描摹出來: How eloquent could Anne Elliot have been,—how eloquent, at least, were her wishes on the side of early warm attachment, and a cheerful confidence in futurity, against that over-anxious caution which seems to insult exertion and distrust Providence!—She had been forced into prudence in her youth, she learned romance as she grew older—the natural sequel of an unnatural beginning. 安妮·艾略特本可以多麼善辯——至少,她內心多麼期盼一份年少熾熱的情意,期盼對未來抱有坦然篤定的信心,而非那種過度審慎的剋制,這份謹慎彷彿輕視人的努力,亦不信任天意!她年輕時被迫謹小慎微,待到年歲漸長,才習得浪漫——一段有違本真的開端,終究引向這般順理成章的結局。 Here learning romance is wholly retrospective; Anne no longer regards it as being available to her. And indeed Wentworth returns, still resentful after eight years, and reflects that Anne’s power with him is gone forever. 此處習得浪漫全然是回望過往;安妮不再認爲自己還能擁有浪漫。而溫特沃思的確回來了,八年之後依舊心懷怨懟,他暗自覺得安妮對自己的影響力早已永久消散。 The qualities of decision and confidence that make him a superb naval commander are precisely what he condemns her for lacking. With almost too meticulous a craft, Aus ten traces his gradual rettreat from this position, as the power of memory increases its dominance over him and as he learns that his jilted sense of her as being unable to act is quite mistaken. 這份決斷與自信,令他成爲一名出色的海軍指揮官,可他恰恰指責安妮欠缺這些特質。奧斯汀筆法幾近縝密入微,鋪陳他如何逐步摒棄這一看法:記憶的力量漸漸佔據上風,他也終於明白,自己此前認定安妮行事軟弱、辜負自己的想法,實則大錯特錯。 It is a beautiful irony that he needs to undergo a process of self-persuasion while Anne waits, without even knowing that she is waiting or that there is anything that could rekindle her hope. The comedy of this is gently sad, as the reader waits also, reflecting upon how large a part contingency plays in the matter. 極具美感的反諷在於:他尚需經歷一番自我勸導,安妮卻只是靜靜等候,甚至不曾知曉自己正在等待,亦不知尚有何事能夠重燃她心中的希冀。其中蘊含的喜劇意味帶着淡淡的悵然,讀者同樣一同等候,思索機緣在此事中佔據了何其重要的分量。 ⑥ While the pre-Socratics and Freud agree that there are no accidents, Austen thinks differently. Character is fate for her also, but fate, once activated, tends to evade character in so overdetermined a social context as Austen’s world. 前蘇格拉底學派與弗洛伊德都認爲世間並無偶然,奧斯汀卻持不同看法。於她而言,性格即是命運,可命運一旦啓動,在奧斯汀筆下這個多重限定的社會環境裏,往往會掙脫性格的束縛。 In rereading Persuasion, though I remember the happy conclusion, I nevertheless feel anxiety as Wentworth and Anne circle away from each other in spite of themselves. The reader is not totally persuaded of a satisfactory interview until Anne reads Wentworth’s quite agonized letter to her: 我在重讀《勸導》時儘管知道它結局圓滿,但是當溫特沃思與安妮不由自主地彼此疏遠時,我仍然心生忐忑。讀者要到安妮讀到溫特沃思寫給她那封滿是煎熬的信之後,纔會全然相信二人能夠如願相會: “I can listen no longer in silence. I must speak to you by such means as are within my reach. You pierce my soul. I am half agony, half hope. Tell me not that I am too late, that such precious feelings are gone for ever. “我不能再默默聽下去了。我必須用盡一切可行的方式向你傾訴。你刺穿了我的靈魂。我半是痛苦,半是希冀。不要對我說爲時已晚,這份珍貴的情意已然永遠消逝。 I offer myself to you again with a heart more your own, than when you almost broke it eight years and a half ago. Dare not say that man forgets sooner than woman, that his love has an earlier death. I have loved none but you. 我再次向你袒露心意,此刻這顆心,較之八年半前你幾乎將它擊碎之時,更完完全全屬於你。休要說男子比女子更容易遺忘,他的愛意消散得更早。我從未愛過旁人,唯有你。 Unjust I may have been, weak and resentful I have been, but never inconstant. You alone have brought me to Bath. For you alone I think and plan.—Have you not seen this? Can you fail to have understood my wishes? 我或許有失公允,也曾軟弱、心懷怨懟,卻從未變心。是你,唯有你,引我來到巴斯。我的思慮與籌劃,全都只爲你一人。——你難道不曾察覺?怎會不解我的心意? —I had not waited even these ten days, could I have read your feelings, as I think you must have penetrated mine. I can hardly write. I am every instant hearing something which overpowers me. ——倘若我讀懂了你的心意,我本連這十日都不會等候,我原以爲你定早已看穿我的心思。我幾乎寫不下去了。耳畔傳來的每一句話,都令我心神激盪。 You sink your voice, but I can distinguish the tones of that voice, when they would be lost on others.—Too good, too excellent creature! 你放低了聲音,但我依舊能夠分辨這語調,旁人或許早已無從聽清。——你這般美好,這般無瑕的人兒! You do us justice indeed. You do believe that there is true attachment and constancy among men. Believe it to be most fervent, most undeviating in F. W. 你的確公允地看待了我們。你願意相信男子之間亦有真摯的眷戀與不渝的堅守。請相信,這份情意熾熱至誠、始終如一,屬於 F.W.” “I must go, uncertain of my fate; but I shall return hither, or follow your party, as soon as possible. A word, a look will be enough to decide whether I enter your father’s house this evening or never.” “我必須離去,不知命運將如何安排;但我定會重返此地,或是儘快追隨你們一行人。只消一言,一瞥,便足以決定,我今夜能否踏入令尊宅邸,或是永不再登門。” I cannot imagine such a letter in Pride and Prejudice, or even in Emma or Mansfield Park. The perceptive reader might have realized how passionate Anne was, almost from the start of the novel, but until this there was no indication of equal passion in Wentworth. 很難想象《傲慢與偏見》,甚至《愛瑪》或是《曼斯菲爾德莊園》中會出現這樣一封信。心思敏銳的讀者幾乎從小說開篇便能察覺安妮滿懷深情,然而在此之前,溫特沃思身上卻看不出同等熾熱的情意。 His letter, as befits a naval commander, is badly written and not exactly Austenian, but it is all the more effective thereby. We come to realize that we have believed in him until now only because Anne’s love for him provokes our interest. 他這封信,契合一名海軍指揮官的身份,行文質樸,並不具備典型奧斯汀式文風,卻也正因如此更具感染力。我們至此方纔醒悟,一直以來我們之所以願意相信他,不過是安妮對他的深情牽動了我們的關切。 Austen wisely has declined to make him interesting enough on his own. Yet part of the book’s effect is to persuade the reader of the reader’s own powers of disccernment and self-persuasion; Anne Elliot is almost too good for the reader, as she is for Austen herself, but the attentive reader gains the confidence to perceive Anne as she should be perceived. 奧斯汀明智地未曾着力塑造一個本身就富有吸引力的溫特沃思。而本書的部分閱讀意義,在於令讀者認清自身的辨識力與自我說服的能力;安妮·埃利奧特近乎太過美好,於讀者是如此,於奧斯汀本人亦是如此,但用心的讀者終將擁有信心,以本應有的視角讀懂安妮。 The subtlest element in this subtlest of novels is the call upon the reader’s own power of memory to match the persistence and intensity of the yearning that Anne Elliot is too stoical to express directly. 這部極盡精微的小說中,最爲精妙之處,便是喚起讀者自身的記憶之力,去呼應安妮·埃利奧特那份隱忍剋制、無從直白傾訴,卻始終執着而濃烈的思念。 ⑦ The yearning hovers throughout the book, coloring Anne’s perceptions and our own. Our sense of Anne’s existence becomes identified with our own consciousness of lost love, however fictive or idealized that may be. 這份渴慕縈繞全書,浸染着安妮的感知,也浸染着我們的感知。我們對安妮的共情,與我們自身對於逝去愛意的體悟融爲一體,無論這份體悟多麼虛幻、多麼理想化。 There is an improbability in the successful renewal of a relationship devastated eight years before which ought to work against the texture of this most “realistic” of Austen’s novels, but she is very careful to see that it does not. 八年前徹底破裂的情愫終能圓滿重修,此事本有幾分不真切,理應破壞奧斯汀這部最具“現實主義”質感小說的行文肌理,但奧斯汀悉心鋪陳,避免了這一問題。 Like the author, the reader becomes persuaded to wish for Anne what she still wishes for herself. Ann Molan has the fine observation that Austen “is most satisfied with Anne when Anne is most dissatisfied with herself.” 讀者與作者心意相通,一同期盼安妮終得所願。安·莫蘭曾有精妙之論:奧斯汀“最屬意安妮之時,恰是安妮深自不滿之際”。 The reader is carried along with Austen, and gradually Anne is also persuaded and catches up with the reader, allowing her yearning a fuller expression. 讀者受奧斯汀牽引,安妮亦慢慢解開心中桎梏,與讀者同頻,得以更充分地袒露心底的渴慕。 Dr. Johnson, in The Rambler 29, on “The folly of anticipating misfortunes,” warned against anxious expectations of any kind, whether fearful or hopeful: 約翰遜博士在《漫步者》第二十九篇《預判不幸的愚行》中提出警示:一切急切期盼皆不可取,無論心中是惶憂不安,還是心懷樂觀。 because the objects both of fear and hope are yet uncertain, so we ought not to trust the representations of one more than the other, because they are both equally fallacious; as hope enlarges happiness, fear aggravates calamity. It is generally allowed, that no man ever found the happiness of possession proportionate to that expectation which incited his desire, and invigorated his pursuit; nor has any man found the evils of life so formidable in reality, as they were described to him by his own imagination. 由於恐懼與希望所指向的事物尚不確定,我們不可偏信二者其一而生出的臆想,二者同樣不足憑信;希望誇大幸福,恐懼加重災難。世人大多認同:沒有人在得償擁有之時,感受到的喜悅能匹配那份催動慾念、支撐追尋的期許;也沒有人發覺,現實中的人生磨難,會如自己想象所描摹的那般可怖。 This is one of a series of Johnsonian pronouncements against the dangerous prevalence of the imagination, some of which his disciple Austen had certainly read. If you excluded such representations, on the great critic’s advice, then Wordsworth could not have written at all, and Austen could not have written Persuasion. 這是約翰遜一系列警示想象力氾濫之害的論斷之一,其追隨者奧斯汀必定讀過其中部分文字。倘若遵從這位大批評家的勸誡,摒棄這類臆想描摹,華茲華斯將無從落筆,奧斯汀亦寫不出《勸導》。 Yet it was a very strange book for her to write, this master of the highest art of exclusion that we have known in the Western novel. Any novel by Jane Austen could be called an achieved ellipsis, with everything omitted that could disturb her ironic though happy conclusions. 然而對於這位西方小說史上,精通取捨之道這一至高寫作技藝的大師而言,寫下這樣一部作品實屬異數。簡·奧斯汀的每一部小說,皆可稱作完成度極高的省略筆法:凡會擾亂她帶着反諷卻終歸圓滿結局的內容,盡數摒除。 Persuasion remains the least popular of her four canonical novels because it is the strangest, but all her work is increasingly strange as we approach the end of the Democratic Age that her contemporary Wordsworth did so much to inaugurate in literature. 《勸導》是她四部經典小說中最爲特別、流傳也最不廣泛的一部。當我們走近民主時代的尾聲——這一時代,由她的同代人華茲華斯在文學領域奮力開啓,她全部的作品,也愈發顯得陌生。 Poised as she is at the final border of the Aristocratic Age, she shares with Wordsworth an art dependent upon a split between a waning Protestant will and a newly active sympathetic imagination, with memory assigned the labor of healing the divide. 她泰然自若地佇立在貴族時代最後的邊界之上,與華茲華斯擁有共通的藝術內核:日漸衰微的新教意志與方纔甦醒的共情想象彼此割裂,而記憶肩負彌合這道裂痕的使命。 If the argument of my book has any validity, Austen will survive even the bad days ahead of us, because the strangeness of originality and of an individual vision are our lasting needs, which only literature can gratify in the Theocratic Age that slouches toward us. 倘若本書論點成立,奧斯汀便能熬過前路黯淡的歲月而長存;原創與個體視野自帶的疏離特質,是我們永恆的渴求,在正朝我們蹣跚而來的神權時代裏,唯有文學能夠成全這份渴求。 典故 slouches toward 源自葉芝《第二次降臨》 The Second Coming “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, / Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?” 布魯姆此處的Theocratic Age不是狹義宗教神權,泛指:共識單一、思想管控、壓制個體獨立思考,以集體教條取代個人審美與思辨的時代。 深層主旨(布魯姆核心立場) 布魯姆悲觀預判:未來社會會走向教條化、同質化(他命名爲Theocratic Age),會排斥獨立個體思想。 但真正的文學經典(奧斯汀)不會消亡: 人永遠需要獨一無二的原創視角,這種需求無法被意識形態、教條規訓替代,只能依靠偉大文學實現;奧斯汀作品那種獨特、異於主流的原創特質,恰好承載這份人類永恆訴求,足以穿越艱難時代。 補充上下文呼應 前文布魯姆提出:《勸導》是奧斯汀最特別、最另類的作品;奧斯汀處在貴族時代尾聲,她與華茲華斯一樣,平衡剋制意志與共情想象。在同質化、教條化的未來,這種珍視個體心靈的寫作,會愈發珍貴。
對比了目前微信讀書上的幾個版本以後,裘因翻譯的這一版是我最能讀下去的(孫致禮那版看了幾章實在是太抽象果斷換了一本看,事實證明是明智的)。外國小說太依靠譯者了,從小到大我都看不進去外國小說,看電影要比看小說更能進入故事。在看《勸導》的時候終於get到了外國小說的好看,只能說對我來說打開外國小說的方式還得是閨情小說。 《勸導》是一本很可愛的小說,二十七歲的“老姑娘”安妮生活在一個沒有什麼的親情可言的窮講究但仍顯頹勢的貴族家庭裏,在一次社交活動中遇到了自己闊別八年的前男友。大家都到了該結婚的年紀,前男友正是找妻子來的。 故事的前半部好看在兩人裝不熟,當年分手是安妮因爲聽從了長輩的勸導提出的,前男友到現在還怨恨她,她也心懷愧疚,其實一直念念不忘,強壓住內心湧動的感情,充當戀綜觀察室嘉賓,內心點評包括前男友在內的幾位嘉賓的互動。英國的適齡青年社交文化很有意思。 後半部分則是兩個人如何衝破重重誤會重新在一起的過程。兩個人互動真的,太好磕了。安妮和溫溫都是特別好的人,他們身邊也有特別好的朋友。就算是公主脾氣毛病多多的瑪麗,在他們之中的寬容下也顯得有些可愛。瑪麗真是好命的丫頭。 借用李清照的那句“閨情自有閨情之氣象”。寫愛情、寫生育、寫養育小孩,寫閨中密友的聊天、寫女孩視角下的人情世故,寫女性的內心世界,女性的成長。這些都是我喜歡看並看得津津有味的東西。而作品的感染力和文學性並不弱於其他類型的作品。 簡奧斯丁和張愛玲還不一樣,她就是純粹的閨情,沒有任何宏大的歷史敘事,就是寫鄉間田園瑣碎的生活,她很溫和,輕柔,很治癒,很可愛。還是那句,能夠讓你感到快樂的就是好東西。 ps:這一版本的電子版有多處錯誤,如編輯注意到,請及時勘誤。尤其是時間和地名,存在缺字漏字的問題。
簡奧斯汀的愛情小說核心,從來不是愛情。在家長裏短間,在日常重複乏味的社交、宴會、舞會、旅行、瑣事中,看似在精心調配一鍋五味雜陳的愛情,其實是在小火慢燉一出人性的好戲。 安妮和溫特沃思剛剛重逢的時候,喫糖喫到我心臟加速,甜的我好像是安妮本妮一樣。但是隨着劇情無聊的推進,直到路易莎摔倒事件發生,我把手裏的糖一甩不喫了。離譜啊,離大譜了。爲了凸顯安妮的主角光環,其他人都像人機羣演NPC,腦子是真的丁點兒都懶得用,心智是急需返廠重修。我恍惚以爲看的是一部大女主翻身爽劇,其他人物扁平到A像B,B像C,感覺A是A,B是B,C是C其實也沒有什麼大分別,不過換個馬甲和名字。就像和鴨鴨說的那樣,感覺可以給這本書換個名字叫作《白雪公主和七個小丑》。人人皆小丑,膚淺勢利虛榮自以爲是,只有安妮善良溫柔體貼平和理智冷靜。這樣看故事還有什麼意思?不好玩。 但是,(衆所周知,“但是”兩個字後面纔是重點)隨着劇情的鋪展,核心人物的靈魂和性格特點才慢慢顯露出來,就像初見的一幅灰白素畫,漸漸生出自己的血肉和光彩。安妮的爸爸和姐姐,不提了,直接送四醫院去治療;安妮的妹妹瑪麗看起來敏感愛鬧,不過是因爲年紀尚幼媽媽就離開,大姐有爸爸寵,二姐有教母愛,只有自己一無所有,只能努力嚷啊叫啊鬧啊吸引他人的關愛和注意,這是一個小女孩爲了得到愛扭曲的表現;拉塞爾夫人,“她愛安妮勝過愛自己的才能,她的首要目標就是要看到安妮得到幸福。”真的淚目了。誰能明白這句話的含金量?一代人有一代人的三觀和思維方式,可是爲了愛,自己的原則和評判可以放在一邊,這就是拉塞爾夫人;最後要說一下我們的主角,溫特沃思上校,八年後的重逢,愛衝破了偏見與傷害,像一艘重新啓航的船舶,果敢堅定不疑其他向着安妮的心疾速而來。並且在史密斯太太的事情上,“他以一個無所畏懼的堅定朋友的奔走和努力,爲她寫信,爲她四處奔走,幫她闖過一道道具體而瑣碎的難關。” 這一切,他值得擁有那麼好的安妮。
我曾經以爲奧斯汀只是英國文學史上一個二流的作者,後來才知道她的偉大能和莎士比亞、狄更斯和喬伊斯比肩;如果要寫一部最簡短的英國文學史,也許有這四人就足夠了。 《勸導》流露出一種成熟的人情世故感,對心理的着墨極少,但是透過行動和語言,我們能看到人物的種種曲腸。它也有甜美溫馨的愛情,不過作用更接近於銀線,穿起生活的百態。不過,這種冷靜的洞察、這種平實而戲謔的筆調,並沒有損害作者對生活的柔情。“平衡”與“適度”既是作者的美學追求,也是她的人生觀念,像古典主義音樂。 也許奧斯汀筆下的愛情都夠不上標準的浪漫,更多是溫馨。在美好的愛情裏,財富、社會地位和周邊人的期待都佔據了重要的考量。主人公很少被激情支配。這在種種浮誇的浪漫文學裏也不失爲一種新鮮的體驗。 該譯本和孫致禮譯本都不盡理想。孫譯本的語言過於口語和俚俗,跟小說的風格不夠協調;有時雖然翻譯出了字面意思,卻沒能強調出言外之意。好處是作者的英語功力穩健,錯訛少,而且熟悉文化知識,提供了很有價值的註釋。本書是裘因譯本,語言平實,接近直譯但並不生硬,而且通常能傳達出作者的話外之音,所以在風格上是無可指摘的。但是常有錯譯的句子,而許多費解的地方缺乏及時的註釋。如果有讀不通的地方,可以參考孫譯本。 補記:我才發現汪燕是一個很優秀的譯者,起碼很合我的口味。她的《勸導》想來也不錯。
奧斯汀所有作品完結打卡☺️✌️撒花✧٩(ˊωˋ*)و✧ 幾乎是讀到這最後一部纔對奧斯汀寫的所有關於愛情和婚姻主題的作品其實最最不重要的就是愛情和婚姻有了清晰的認識。很多觀點奧斯汀藉助人物之口來表達,很多觀點通過他們的階層地位和行爲來傳達。破鏡重圓固然美麗,比起《理智與情感》以及《傲慢與偏見》這樣的作品來看,確實顯得沒有那麼跌宕起伏,更有一種中年人的心境。不是真的從一而終,也不是誤信了他人的讒言,而是最後兩害相權取其輕罷了。人性的反轉總比愛情和波折更加有趣。我的心境也變了很多。 總之最後還是小甜水(誤)不能要求更多了。 溫特沃斯那封表白情書的確讓人印象深刻,真好啊! “你刺傷了我的心。我又傷心,又企望。請別對我說爲時太晚,也別說這種珍貴的感情已一去不復返了。我再次將我自己奉獻給你,比起八年半前幾乎被你撕碎的心,現在我的心更屬於你。你不能說,男人比女人健忘,也不能說男人的愛情消亡得更早。我一直只愛着你。” “善良,你出類拔萃!你的確能公正地對待男人。你的確相信有的男人也有忠貞不渝的愛情。那就請相信,我就具有這種最熱誠,最堅貞不渝的愛情。” 不過這不是男性的情書,是簡奧斯汀寫出來的情書 hhhh
《勸導》是簡·奧斯丁一生創作中最後完整的小說。這是在她去世一年以後與《諾桑覺寺》一起,由她的哥哥整理出版的。其作品的風格和筆鋒依然是與《傲慢與偏見》、《理智與情感》一樣的精彩,人物形象的描寫十分生動細膩且輕鬆幽默,內心深處的發聲又是那麼的真實。她善用的反諷手法,在她的作品中喜劇性十分突出。而她的作品最大的特點就是環境與主人公的相似性。這一特點的主要原因是由於簡.奧斯丁她本身生活十分簡單。 記得曾經觀看的電影《簡·奧斯丁的遺憾》是 由傑瑞米·洛夫林執導,伊莫珍·波茨、奧莉維亞·威廉姆斯、格列塔·斯卡奇主演的劇情片。影片根據簡·奧斯丁的一生的經歷,並且探尋了她的生活狀態和內心世界,感受這位偉大女性作家的魅力。影片講述了即將步入40歲之際的簡.奧斯丁。她的侄女範妮·奈特在愛情和選擇夫婿的事情上,請這位寫過多部愛情小說的姑媽做參謀。一方面簡要範妮堅持婚姻關係中愛情是不可缺少的地位,一方面長期拮据的生活又讓她深知缺乏經濟基礎的愛情是不會有善果。而簡這些矛盾的態度也令範妮迷惘。簡年輕時也曾有過這種矛盾心理、她也有過真心相愛的人,可最後仍因經濟原因各奔東西。而對真實愛情的崇拜又讓她拒絕了富裕紳士的求婚。 最後簡揹負着家庭的負累,只有選擇了單身生活,她將封閉起來的愛情化作一股熾熱的情感融入自己的創作中。選擇一種看似自由自在的生活,到底她有沒有後悔過,這部《簡.奧斯丁的遺憾》間接的告訴了我們。 該片以訴述的形式,走進她鮮爲人知內心世界。遺憾並不意味生活的下沉,只是另一種選擇的可能性,是鏡子的兩面。即使是未曾經歷過的生活,也能依靠卓絕的想象力把細節描繪得栩栩如生,甚至勝過現實,因爲現實的真實往往流於平庸。不能說終身未嫁成就了奧斯丁,也不能說奧斯丁筆下的那個時代抓住了她。上帝不是無原則地給予天賦,但有這天賦也就夠了…… 《勸導》感覺就是簡.奧斯丁,給予自己人生和婚姻的嚮往最圓滿的結局。毫不誇張的講,從電影和她最後的作品中讀到了,簡.奧斯丁肯定有過後悔。因爲她追求真愛又深知不能讓愛情陷入經濟的囹圄,所以她寧可選擇一人自由,可是自由無法緩解內心中的空虛與寂寞,尤其是她這樣一位內心細膩嚮往美好愛且也曾遇到過真愛的人。所以她那個時期寫下的《曼斯菲爾德莊園》《愛瑪》和《勸導》,都是作者遷居喬頓以後所作。 《勸導》小說女主人公安妮·艾略特出生於沒落的上流社會的家庭。她母親早逝,父親和姐姐對她漠不關心,沒有把她放在眼裏。她一直過着十分孤寂的生活。十九歲那年,她遇到一位海軍軍官溫特沃思,兩人一見鍾情並私訂終身。可是家人和朋友都反對這門親事,認爲對方既沒有豐厚的家產,又沒有顯赫的親屬,因而與安妮毫不般配。安妮也擔心,如果婚後生活沒有保障,結婚就可能給對方帶來不利。爲謹慎起見,她改變了初衷。溫特沃思上校因此憤然離去。在後來漫長的歲月中,安妮一直無法忘情於他,並拒絕了一位年輕鄉紳的求愛,繼續過着孤獨的處女生活。青春和美貌過早地開始消逝,待到八年後再次遇見溫特沃思上校時,安妮已經今非昔比,對方卻依然一表人才。不僅如此,他還積攢了一筆錢財,變得相當富有。他一心想結婚成家,但又不能冰釋對安妮的怨恨,因此開始追求安妮妹夫的妹妹。在此期間他與當時正在妹妹家的安妮不免常有接觸。在交往中,溫特沃思上校進一步發現安妮無私、堅定的優良品質,重又萌發了對安妮的感情。小說最後是以有情人終成眷屬作爲圓滿的結局。 同奧斯丁的其他著作一樣,《勸導》主要描寫那個時代的中產階級的生活。作者以細膩的筆觸反映了那個階層人們生活的方方面面,也以幽默和諷刺的筆調對中產階級的虛僞和勢利進行了無情的鞭撻。 書中的沃爾特爵士是一位門第觀念十分強烈的沒落階級的代表。他對落魄的史密斯太太和達爾林普爾子爵夫人採取了截然不同的態度。 他堅決反對女兒安妮與史密斯太太的交往。“西門客棧!”他說,“安妮·艾略特小姐到西門客棧去訪問誰呀?——一個叫史密斯太太的寡婦。她丈夫是誰?……她有什麼吸引人的地方?又老又病。——說真的,安妮·艾略特小姐,你的愛好非常特別!別人厭惡地位低賤的朋友、劣等的房間、惡臭的空氣、令人討厭的關係,這些對你倒頗有吸引力。” 可是在達爾林普爾子爵夫人母女面前,沃爾特爵士卻是那麼卑躬屈膝,阿諛逢迎。爲了謁見這位遠親,他費盡了心機。在子爵夫人回訪以後,他“又把子爵遺孀和尊敬的卡特雷特小姐的名片放在最顯眼的地方,逢人便談‘我們在勞拉廣場的表親’,‘我們的表親達爾林普爾夫人和卡特雷特小姐’”。另一方面,作家在書中又深刻地揭示了所謂微不足道的小人物與地位顯赫的人們之間在精神面貌和道德觀上的反差。沃爾特爵士是位從男爵。在他的眼中,溫特沃思並非名門出身,沒有家產和顯赫的親戚,是個微不足道的小人物,因而堅決反對安妮與他的婚約。可是那位海軍軍官在服務多年後獲得了升遷,積攢了一筆錢財。沃爾特爵士本人卻終日無所事事,只知道揮霍享樂,最後坐喫山空,債臺高築,不得不搬出祖上留下的莊園,勉強維持着虛假的面子。 在沃爾特爵士看來,他的親生女兒安妮也是個微不足道的小人物,因爲她長得不像他,又不會吹牛拍馬,趨炎附勢。她在家中的地位還不如一位食客。可是安妮不僅爲人正直善良,而且頗有見地,“真正明白事理的人……都很尊重她”。婚姻是社會生活中的大事,對奧斯丁時代的婦女來說,婚姻更是賴以生存的手段。因此,奧斯丁的作品中,不同情操的人物圍繞婚姻問題作了形形色色的表演。 在這部小說中,作者花了相當多的筆墨讚揚了英帝國的支柱——海軍。安妮在一開始就指出,“海軍爲我們做出過很大貢獻”。另一位姑娘更是大談對海軍軍人的性格的欽佩和喜愛,認爲“水手的品德和熱情超過英國其他任何階層人士,只有他們才懂得如何生活,才值得人們尊敬和愛慕”。 奧斯丁的這些描述反映出她對戰爭的折衷主義觀點:一方面,她認爲戰爭能促使古老的英國社會發生變化,衝擊一些陳舊的觀念。書中那位勢利的沃爾特爵士就感到了這種新興力量的衝擊。他說,“出身微賤的人可以因此獲得很高的地位,獲得他們先輩不敢夢想的榮譽。”另一方面,作者也看到戰爭給人們生活留下的陰影以及給陣亡士兵的家人造成的痛苦。 這部小說所塑造的安妮·艾略特這個人物在奧斯丁的創作中具有特殊地位。評論家們認爲,安妮·艾略特即使不是奧斯丁作品中最惹人喜愛的女子,至少也是一位品德最高尚的人物。奧斯丁本人在1817年3月13日給一位友人的信中談到安妮時曾說過,“你也許會喜愛那位女主人公的。在我看來,她幾乎是一個完美的女性。”事實上,安妮確實是一位正直、無私、樂於助人、對愛情堅貞不渝的女性。 在《勸導》中,奧斯丁也改變了創作思想並有了新的高度。她那一向比較保守的觀點有了進一步的發展。如果說簡.奧斯丁在她的第一部小說《理智與情感》中強調理智應該戰勝情感,認爲只有在這種情況下人們才能獲得幸福,那麼,在她這最後一部小說中,奧斯丁卻用較長的篇幅描述了“謹慎”給女主人公安妮帶來多年的痛苦。她希望年輕人“充滿信心,展望未來,而不要過分憂慮和謹慎”。安妮“年輕的時候,不得不謹小慎微,年長以後才懂得什麼是浪漫——這是畸形的開端所造成的必然後果”。可是,在中世紀和文藝復興時期,“謹慎”一直被人們認爲是成功地處理個人生活的訣竅。奧斯丁在早些時候的作品中也一再告誡人們要謹慎行事。因此,《勸導》肯定人物性格從謹慎到浪漫的演變,無疑反映了奧斯丁本人從思想感情上出現了超越了情感的一些釋放! 人生最遺憾的,莫過於輕易地放棄了不該放棄的,固執地堅持了不該堅持的。你以爲小鳥飛不過滄海,是因爲小鳥沒有飛過滄海的勇氣,多年以後你才發現,不是小鳥飛不過去,而是滄海的那一頭,早已沒有了等待。 面對愛情,簡·奧斯丁選擇了獨身。青春已逝,歲月不在,儘管在簡·奧斯丁的筆下塑造很多美麗大方的女性,她們最終都收穫美好的愛情,但是現實中的她卻終身未嫁,獨賞煙花飛滿天。 在簡.奧斯丁生活的那個時代,發生了美國獨立戰爭、法國革命、英法戰爭等重大事件。她經歷了當時英國社會的變革,但她終生居住在鄉間小鎮,沒有受過多少正規教育,她的小說對這一切沒有直接的反映。她自己曾說過,“我覺得,我可以坦誠地說……世上敢於當女作家的人中間,我是最沒有學問、最無知識的一個。”“我要描寫的不過是鄉村中的點點星星幾戶人家。” 總的看來,簡·奧斯丁作品的題材範疇似乎不太廣泛和博大,沒有極端的貧富懸殊,沒有激烈的對抗和爭鬥,也沒有強烈的激情。她的一些作品中甚至很少有關自然景物的描寫。作品大多涉及家庭、婚姻和倫理問題。但事實上,她對當時的社會現象和人民生活,對歷次戰爭和英國社會出現的某些變化,是非常瞭解的。這些方面在她的每部小說中也都有所反映。而對於情感方面只有在她的小說中去尋找了!
這是安妮的故事,是凱瑟琳的故事,是她的故事,是女性的故事。 只看簡介我一直以爲簡奧斯汀是寫愛情故事的,就像我沒看張愛玲之前對她也是這樣的誤解。讀完發現實際上簡奧斯汀是在書寫女性,甚至我想猜測一下她也許只是用愛情這個永不過時的廣告當個幌子吸引更多人來讀到這些內容。 這本書講述了安妮在他人的勸導下,和當時沒錢沒勢的戀人溫特沃斯分手。八年後兩人再次相遇,看似各有自己的情路,溫特沃斯去追求路易莎,安妮被艾略特先生追求,但實則雙方內心都放不下彼此,在經歷一些事情後終於看清自己的內心,最後終成眷屬。 看完這個故事深感物質基礎的重要性,八年後的溫特沃斯上校已經變成了有錢人,雖然女主並不是看重物質的人,但如果男主八年後是個窮困潦倒的人,想必在一起不會那麼容易(也不一定非在一起)。正如書中所說“勸告好壞與否,要由事態發展來決定”。還有這段“我聽取她的勸告,是正確的;如果我不這樣做,那麼維持婚約給我帶來的痛苦會比取消婚約更嚴重,因爲我會受到良心責備。如果我們承認,在人的身上存在着這麼一種感情,那我就沒有什麼可譴責自己的。如果我的看法沒有錯,那麼強烈的責任感並不是女人的缺點。”也讓我有所啓發,對於一些選擇,過後總會有後悔的情況發生,當初如果怎樣就好了。但當下的選擇如果不那樣做,心靈上會收到煎熬,那就做當下自己認爲正確的選擇就好了,不必譴責自己。 書中一些識人的方法也是經驗之談,比如艾略特那種沒有人討厭他,看似所有人都覺得他人不錯,其實深藏爆雷,因爲這類型的人往往城府極深,虛僞不夠真誠。 關於與親戚的交往描述“安妮一直認爲,這種交往方式極不妥當,但她早就不想改變這一切了;因爲她知道,儘管雙方不斷有使人不快之舉,但現在不這樣也不行了。”也讓我覺得簡奧斯汀是我的嘴替。 關於與他人想法不同而產生爭論,這段也說的很好“這種意見分歧,是無法說清楚的。我們兩人的出發點大概都有些偏愛各自的同類,並在這種偏愛的基礎上尋找發生在我們圈子內的事情來說明自己的正確。要是不泄露別人的祕密或者不說些不該說的話,有許多情況,也許恰恰是那些最引人注目的事情,是無法說的。”意見分歧是正常的,允許不同的聲音,不強加給對方自己認爲的正確,也在堅持自我思想的同時可以做到多傾聽各種聲音,不斷思辨與成長就好。 還有這段讓我想到《抑制女性寫作》“請你不要從書本中找例子了。男人在敘述他們的奇聞軼事方面比我們強多了。他們受的教育比我們多,筆桿子握在他們手裏。我認爲書本並不能說明任何問題。”簡奧斯汀在那個年代就有這樣的表達,思想好超前,可以寫出這些好難得。 在讀完簡奧斯汀兩本書後,發覺她在塑造女性主角的時候都很立體,一想到每本的女主都會立刻從腦海裏浮現她們的特質、性格、事件。但讀她書發現想不起男主,有他沒他無所謂,他可以是任何他,也許是皮特也許是馬克,這不重要。甚至這本里的男主給我留下的印象還沒有他寫的那封信令人印象深刻哈哈。能給我留下這樣印象,我覺得她的寫法上對人物的側重、故事的佈局很有趣。男主既不是邊緣人也不是工具人,但他是女主世界裏的npc,他只是來幫她完成她人生故事線的一環,並沒有多重要,有沒有他女主都會很好(大部分時候看關於愛情的故事,男女主往往都會留下差不多相等的主要印象,甚至有些會搶走女主的戲份留下更深的印象),書中更加側重去細膩的描繪女主的心理與成長,但不讓人覺得細碎冗長,也不會因此耽誤故事情節的發展,一切融合的恰到好處。因爲這是安妮的故事,是凱瑟琳的故事,是她的故事,是女性的故事。 她的書還給我一種淡淡的感覺,沒有高潮迭起的狗血故事,只是一段女性經歷,也許你會從中讀出共鳴,讀出感悟。一切淡淡的開始了,淡淡的結束了,有種電影慢慢淡入,慢慢淡出的畫面感,回味悠長。
我看過的,最可愛最通情達理最有趣最跌宕起伏的破鏡重圓,給百年之前的簡奧斯汀跪下了。 安妮不愧是簡奧斯汀晚期塑造的最討人喜歡完美的女主角,她富有同理心同時能辯證思考,不盲目看表面也不固執己見,我幾乎可以認爲她就是我心目中簡奧斯汀本人的化身。 她對痛苦的闡述:一個人不會因爲在某個地方有過痛苦的經歷而減弱對那裏的熱愛,除非那裏只有痛苦,除了痛苦以外一無所有——不否認痛苦,也不因爲痛苦無視其他真實與快樂,是多麼厲害,是我活了三十五年還在修煉的自洽。 最有意思的是,從我的角度並沒有覺得最開始拉塞爾夫人對安妮的勸導有問題,特別是在那個年代,女人沒有繼承權,當時的溫特沃斯確實不是一個特別好的選擇,誰能知道他未來一定成功呢;但從另一個方面來說,安妮所處的位置,沒落沒錢貴族家不受寵的二女兒,其實要想嫁的好確實也只能進行一場豪賭。 謝謝簡爲那些在正確時間做出理性選擇、 卻因此失去某種可能性的人寫下這樣並不保證發生的祝福。 這就是文學的意義吧。
喜歡!喜歡! 延續了簡奧斯汀的一貫特色,在最後5%纔會瘋狂撒糖,然後狂拉進度條。 說實話這本和《諾桑覺寺》前半部分都讀的人昏昏欲睡,冗長的對話和心理描寫以及無聊的交際確實能勸退很多人。但要是懷着耐心的心情從字裏行間摳出男女主之間的互動,還是挺有意思的。 路易莎摔跤的情節我也不大喜歡,衆人的反應有點OOC,尤其是男主。 簡奧斯汀真是冷眼看人間的大師,寫言情的過程中不忘道破感情的真相:再純粹的感情也摻雜利益比較,再真摯的愛情也必須建立在物質基礎上,以及男女主都不是完美的,都像活人一樣有明顯的缺陷。 論愛女簡奧斯汀是真的愛,捨不得筆下的女主角有一點不好的結局。 不算未完成的遺作,《勸導》算是簡奧斯汀最後一本小說,相較於《傲慢與偏見》《愛瑪》,文風、技巧成熟許多,思想及見地也更爲辛辣理智。
看奧斯汀的書不會有意外,反倒給人很安心的感覺。頭腦好使的姑娘總會得到作者的眷顧,在經歷困惑彷徨後總能嫁給如意郎君。雖然她的書基本都是這個套路,但還是百看不膩,大概是喜歡這個女人的睿智和猝不及防的小諷刺吧。在一個接一個的聚會間偷窺男女主的暗送秋波和互相猜忌也是一件令人身心愉悅的事情,主要是能滿足八卦的小心情,然後男女主到最後一定會互訴衷腸,來應證之前的各種小情緒都不是空穴來風,然後撒一波甜甜的狗糧,真的,這狗糧是甜的,不酸。這大概就是奧斯汀的功力了。在平平淡淡甚至是瑣瑣碎碎的日常中,發掘了甜蜜蜜。這本書的主題就是書名—勸導。女主在接受了好友兼長輩的勸導下,遠離了情誼想通的男主,時隔七年後再次相遇,男未娶女未嫁,兩人再次愛上對方,但是由於第一次分手的原因仍存在着,讓男主有點裹足不前的不敢再愛,最終在實在沒有辦法忍受不能相愛的事實中,勇敢的表白女主,並且兩人成功說服了當年的勸導者,如願的在一起了。好希望生活也可以這麼簡單美好,最打動我的地方就是,不得不愛,宿命般兜兜轉轉還可以在一起的愛情。就是,I can't stand the idea of not meeting you.雖然被現實打腫了臉,但依然不影響我貪婪汲取着浪漫愛情故事的營養,特別是在明白了現實也只不過是現實的道理後。