加载中…
本届韩素音英汉部分原文及斋主译文
(2006-12-13 19:33:42)| 分类： 译作 |
The Literature of
Knowledge and the Literature of Power
What is it that we mean by literature?
Popularly, and amongst the thoughtless, it is
What is it that we mean by literature?
held to include everything that
is printed in a book. Little logic is required to
disturb
that
definition. The most thoughtless person is easily
made aware that in the idea of
literature one essential element
is some relation to a general and common interest of
man—
so that what applies only to a
local, or professional, or merely personal interest,
even
though presenting itself in the
shape of a book, will not belong to Literature.
So far the
definition is easily narrowed;
and it is as easily expanded. For not only is
much that
takes a station in books not
literature; but inversely, much that really is
literature
never reaches a station in
books. The weekly sermons of Christendom, that
vast pulpit
literature which acts so
extensively upon the popular mind—to warn, to uphold, to
renew,
to comfort, to alarm—does not
attain the sanctuary of libraries in the ten-thousandth
part
of its extent.
The Drama again—as, for instance, the finest of Shakespeare’s
plays in
England, and all leading
Athenian plays in the noontide of the Attic stage—operated as
a
literature on the public mind,
and were (according to the strictest letter of that
term)
published through the audiences
that witnessed their representation some time before
they
were published as things to be
read; and they were published in this scenical mode of
publication with much more
effect than they could have had as books during ages of
costly
copying or of costly
printing.
Books, therefore, do not suggest an idea coextensive and interchangeable with the idea
Books, therefore, do not suggest an idea coextensive and interchangeable with the idea
of Literature; since much
literature, scenic, forensic, or didactic (as from lecturers
and
public orators), may never come
into books, and much that does come into books may
connect
itself with no literary
interest. But a far more important correction,
applicable to the
common vague idea of literature,
is to be sought not so much in a better definition of
literature as in a sharper
distinction of the two functions which it
fulfills. In that
great social organ which,
collectively, we call literature, there may be distinguished
two
separate offices that may blend
and often do so, but capable, severally, of a severe
insulation, and naturally fitted
for reciprocal repulsion. There is, first, the
literature
of knowledge; and, secondly, the
literature of power. The function of the first
is—to
teach; the function of the
second is—to move: the first is a rudder; the second, an oar
or
a sail. The
first speaks to the mere discursive understanding; the second
speaks
ultimately, it may happen, to
the higher understanding or reason, but always through
affections of pleasure and
sympathy. Remotely, it may travel towards an
object seated in
what Lord Bacon calls dry light;
but, proximately, it does and must operate—else it
ceases
to be a literature of power—on
and through that humid light which clothes itself in
the
mists and glittering iris of
human passions, desires, and genial emotions. Men have
so
little reflected on the higher
functions of literature as to find it a paradox if one
should describe it as a mean or
subordinate purpose of books to give information.
But this
is a paradox only in the sense
which makes it honorable to be paradoxical.
Whenever we
talk in ordinary language of
seeking information or gaining knowledge, we understand
the
words as connected with
something of absolute novelty. But it is the
grandeur of all truth
which can occupy a very high
place in human interests that it is never absolutely novel
to
the meanest of minds: it exists
eternally by way of germ or latent principle in the
lowest
as in the highest, needing to be
developed, but never to be planted. To be capable
of
transplantation is the immediate
criterion of a truth that ranges on a lower
scale.
Besides which, there is a rarer
thing than truth—namely, power, or deep sympathy with
truth. What is
the effect, for instance, upon society, of
children? By the pity, by the
tenderness, and by the peculiar
modes of admiration, which connect themselves with the
helplessness, with the
innocence, and with the simplicity of children, not only are
the
primal affections strengthened
and continually renewed, but the qualities which are
dearest
in the sight of heaven—the
frailty, for instance, which appeals to forbearance,
the
innocence which symbolizes the
heavenly, and the simplicity which is most alien from
the
worldly—are kept up in
perpetual remembrance, and their ideals are continually
refreshed.
A purpose of the same nature is
answered by the higher literature, viz. the literature
of
power. What do you learn from
Paradise Lost? Nothing at all. What do you learn from
a
cookery book?
Something new, something that you did not know before, in every
paragraph.
But would you therefore put the
wretched cookery book on a higher level of estimation
than
the divine poem? What you owe to
Milton is not any knowledge, of which a million
separate
items are still but a million of
advancing steps on the same earthly level; what you owe
is
power—that is, exercise and
expansion to your own latent capacity of sympathy with
the
infinite, where every pulse and
each separate influx is a step upwards, a step ascending
as
upon a Jacob’s ladder from
earth to mysterious altitudes above the earth. All the steps
of
knowledge, from first to last,
carry you further on the same plane, but could never
raise
you one foot above your ancient
level of earth: whereas the very first step in power is
a
flight—is an ascending movement
into another element where earth is forgotten.
给予知识的著作与赋予力量的著作/知识著作或力量著作
何谓“著作”？在一般大众看来，尤其在不善思考的人眼中，凡印成书本的都是著作。要推翻此种谬见
何谓“著作”？在一般大众看来，尤其在不善思考的人眼中，凡印成书本的都是著作。要推翻此种谬见
，何劳逻辑大驾？即便最没有头脑的人，稍加点拨，也可领悟：著作的关键特质，在于和人类普遍关心
的问题相联系，所以，凡仅与一地、一行、一人相关者，即使印成书本，也不能称为“著作”。这样“
著作”的定义范围就缩小了，但同时也扩大了。一方面，印刷成书的不一定就是著作；另一方面，许多
著作又从来不会印刷成书。基督教国家里牧师每周的布道，可谓浩如烟海的讲坛著作，或告诫，或宣扬
，或激励，或安慰，或警醒，于大众心理有莫大影响，而其中付诸枣梨，厕身书房荫庇之下者，不及万
分之一。再以戏剧为例：不论英国莎氏名剧，还是雅典戏剧鼎盛时期的上乘之作，于当时当地均为影响
公众心理的著作，在编纂成书、印刷出版之前，早已公诸观众，未违“publish”一词本义
；倘若当时
即编成书本，不但誊抄印刷所费不赀，其效果也必远逊于舞台演出。
所以，“书籍”和“著作”是两个概念，指涉范围不同，不可混为一谈。不少著作——如戏剧台词、辩
所以，“书籍”和“著作”是两个概念，指涉范围不同，不可混为一谈。不少著作——如戏剧台词、辩
论辞、演说辞——也许永远不会印成书本，而许多印成书本的文字，却又未必称得起“著作”。然而，
要廓清大众对“著作”的模糊认识，倒不在于给“著作”二字下一个较清楚的定义，而在于明确区分著
作的两种功能。倘若把天下著作汇聚一处，看作一个庞大的社会机构，那么其中就有两大部门，虽可相
互渗透，常常不分彼此，但就部门之中个体而论，却也可各司其职，老死不相往来。这两大部门，一个
叫做“给予知识的著作”，一个叫做“赋予力量的著作”。前者的功能是教授知识，后者的作用是催人
奋发；前者是舵，后者是桨、是帆。前者仅仅诉诸推理的知性，后者则可能最终诉诸高级的知性，亦即
理性
，但要达到这一目的，却总要借助愉悦和同情这两种情感。长远而论，其目标或处于培根勋爵所谓
“干光”
照耀之下，但就近而言，要起到“赋予力量”的作用，却必须诉诸人的热情、欲望、愉悦，穿
越情之迷雾、欲之彩虹笼罩下的“湿光”。世人对著作高尚的功用考虑太少，所以一旦听到有人居然把
“传授知识”称为书籍的次要目的，便以为奇谈怪论。殊不知怪论之怪，正是其高妙之处。常言所道“
求知”，总不外乎追求绝对新奇的事物。其实大凡于人最有裨益的真理，妙就妙在大愚之人也略知一二
。人不论境界高低，心中自有此类真理的萌芽，潜而未发，但只可培养而不可栽种。举凡可以移植的真
理，必属等而下者。真理固已难求，但比真理更稀少的是力量，也就是对真理的深切感悟。举例来说，
儿童对社会而言有什么作用？儿童娇弱、无邪、单纯，人感此而生恻隐之心，发温柔之情，起景仰之意
，于是，人类朴素的情感得以时时巩固，历久弥新，不仅如此，上天最为珍视的品质——如唤起耐性的
柔弱、象征神圣的天真、毫无世故之气的单纯——也为人永志不忘，其理想之化身也生生不息。高尚的
著作，即赋予力量的著作，其功用正与此相同。看《失乐园》能学到什么知识？什么也学不到；看烹饪
书能学到什么？每段中都有你原先不知道的新鲜知识。然而，你难道因此而高看那平庸的烹饪书，轻视
那神圣的诗篇？弥尔顿所赋予你的，不是知识——哪怕学到了一百万条知识，也不过相当于在地面上前
进了一百万步；弥尔顿赋予你的乃是力量——拓展你的潜质，锤炼你的悟性，引有涯之生入无涯之境，
于是，每一次脉搏跳动、每一回心潮澎湃，都成为向上迈出的一步，如同登上雅各梦中的天梯
，前往高
不可测的天国。在求知的路上跋涉再远，终归寸步不离脚下的土地；在追求力量的路上只要迈出一步，
立刻腾空而起，飞向新的境界，不复以泥土为念。
注释：
1、“publish”本义为“公之于众”，但常用作“出版”之义。
2、“知性”（understanding）和“理性”（reason）的区分来自德国古典哲学。在德国古典哲学中
，自然理性或经验理性通常称为"知性”或"理智”（Verstand或understanding），指根据形式逻辑的规
则和范畴进行判断、推理的能力；而思辨理性（或曰辩证理性）则称为"理性”(Vernunft或者reason)，
与矛盾、对立统一等辩证法则相联系，且与神秘主义有极其微妙的内在联系。
3、“干光”（dry
light）为培根散文中常用的比喻，原意为纯粹而不受阻隔之光，喻指不受情感、
欲念影响的纯粹理性。下文所谓“湿光”似为作者仿“干光”而造的词。
4、据《圣经"创世记》记载，雅各行到一处，晚上梦见一架梯子立在地上，梯子的顶端高达上天，有
上帝的使者沿梯子上去下来。——以上各条注释均为译注。
此外还须说明：此文中literature为关键词，如何译令人大伤脑筋。刘炳善和参考译文作“文学”，似
不妥。参赛用的原文其实只是原文的一部分，没有要翻的部分里提到了牛顿和Laplace的著作，也算作“literature”。我想来想去，译成“著作“，也并不很满意。欢迎诸位提供更好的译法。
喜欢
0
赠金笔
前一篇：译林翻译新人奖：我的译文和评论
后一篇：关于Master