《论戏剧诗》——John Dryden

 埃文河天鹅校   甜甜译

 “To begin, then, with Shakespeare. He was the man who of all modern, and perhaps ancient poets, had the largest and most comprehensive soul. All the images of nature were still present to him, and he drew them, not laboriously, but luckily; when he describes anything, you more than see it, you feel it too. Those who accuse him to have wanted learning, give him the greater commendation: he was naturally learned; he needed not the spectacles of books to read nature; he was naturally learned; he needed not the spectacles of books to read nature; he looked inwards, and found her there. I cannot say he is everywhere alike；were he so, I should do him injury to compare him with the greatest of mankind. He is many times flat, insipid; his comic wit degenerating into clenches, his serious swelling into bombast. But he is always great, when some great occasion is presented to him; no man can say he ever had a fit subject for his wit, and did not then raise himself as high as above the rest of poets, “Quantum lenta solent inter viburna cupressi.” The consideration of this made Mr. Hales of Eaton say, that there was no subject of which any poet ever writ, but he would produce it much better done in Shakespeare; and however others are now generally preferred before him, yet the age wherein he lived, which had contemporaries with him Fletcher and Jonson, never equaled them to him in their esteem: and in the last king’s court, when Ben’s reputation was at highest, Sir John Suckling, and with him the greater part of the courtiers, set our Shakespeare far above him.

 “那么，我们先来来谈谈莎士比亚。在所有现代、或许包括古典诗人中，他的灵魂是最为广博，最为保罗万象的。一切自然意象不断地呈现于他，他巧妙地画下来，丝毫不费力气。对于他所描述的任何事物，不仅如画般展现在我们眼前，还可以触碰感知。那些指控他受的教育太少的人们反而会给他更高的褒奖。他的渊博是浑然天成；他无需带着书本这幅眼睛来窥测自然，而是循迹内心找寻到她。我不会说他样样都好，若真是这样，当把他和最伟大的人类相比，他则显得不利，但事实并非如此。很多的时候，他古板、无聊；他的喜剧天赋腐化为诡辩，他恢弘气势退化为浮言。但把伟大的时机呈现于他的时候，他总是伟大的。没有人能说出他的才智适合写那种题材，没有人敢说他没有超过其他诗人的高度， “如弯曲灌木丛中的柏树”。约翰.霍尔斯认为，其他诗人曾经写过的题材，没有能比莎士比亚写得更好的。然而有些诗人现如今比莎士比亚更受欢迎，可是在莎士比亚所处的时代，例如同时代的弗莱彻和琼森，声誉决不能与他等量齐观：在查理一世统治时期，当属本琼森的声望最高，约翰·萨克林爵士以及他的同僚们却认为莎士比亚远远超过了他。

  “Beaumont and Fletcher of whom I am next to speak, had with the advantage of Shakespeare’s wit, which was their precedent, great natural gifts, improved by study. Beaumont especially being so accurate a judge of Plays, that Ben Jonson while he lived, submitted all his Writings to his Censure, and he thought, used his judgment in correcting, if not contriving, all his plots. What value he had for him, appears by the Verses he writ to him; and therefore need speak no farther of it. The first Play which brought Fletcher and him in esteem was their Philaster: for before that, they had written two or three very unsuccessfully; as the like is reported of Ben Jonson, before he writ Every Man in his Humor. Their Plots were generally more regular than Shakespeare’s，especially those which were made before Beaumont’s death; and they understood and imitated the conversation of gentlemen much better; whose wild debaucheries, and quickness of wit in repartees, no Poet can ever paint as they have done. This Humor of which Ben Jonson derived from particular persons, they made it not their business to describe: they represented all the passions very lively, but above all, Love. I am apt to believe the English Language in them arrived to its highest perfection: what words have since been taken in, are rather superfluous than ornamental. Their Plays are now the most pleasant and frequent entertainments of the Stage; two of theirs being acted through the year for one of Shakespeare’s or Jonson’s: the reason is, because there is a certain gayety in their Comedies, and Pathos in their more serious Plays, which suits generally with all men’s humors. Shakespeare’s language is likewise a little obsolete, and Ben Jonson’s wit comes short of theirs.

     我接下来要说说博蒙特和弗莱彻，他们有着莎士比亚为榜样的才智，并通过后天研习的完善拥有了伟大的天资。特别是博蒙特, 他对戏剧的鉴赏力是如此精准，以至于他在世的时候，本.琼森把自己写的东西全部送给他批评。人们都觉得本.琼森曾经利用博蒙特的判断力来修改，甚至设计自己的剧本情节。他对琼森的可贵，从琼森提及到他的诗歌创作便可一目了然，这里就不再引申下去了。使弗莱彻和他成名的第一部戏剧是《菲拉斯特》：在这之前，他俩写了两三部非常失败的作品。本琼森也是一样，他写的《人各有癖》才让他一炮走红。与莎士比亚相比，一般来讲他俩处理情节更讲究章法，特别是博蒙特在世时的作品。而且他们更为通晓并更善于模仿上层人士的交谈。那些人如何不羁狂放，如何纵情酒色，如何机智妙答，没有一个诗人能比的上他们的刻画。而作为本.琼森所注重的特殊人的脾性，他们却不去描述：他们鲜活地描画出所有激情，尤其是，爱情。我毫无保留地承认他们英语已经达到顶尖水平。对此再增添任何语言，都会显得多余而非修饰。现如今他们的戏剧最具有愉悦性和频繁的舞台娱乐效果；而他们的两部作品上演期间，只能再选挑出莎士比亚或是本琼森的一部作品。原因就是，他们的喜剧里具有充分的愉悦元素，他们的悲剧里具有充分的悲怅元素，普遍迎合了大众口味。而相比他们，莎士比亚的语言却有一些过时，本.琼森却缺乏一些机敏。

 “As for Jonson, to whose character I am now arrived, if we look upon him while he was himself, (for his last Plays were but his dotages) I think him the most learned and judicious Writer which any Theater ever had. He was a most severe judge of himself as well as others. One cannot say he wanted wit, but rather that he was frugal of it. In his works you find little to retrench or alter. Wit and Language, and Humor also in some measure, we had before him; but something of Art was wanting to the Drama till he came. He managed his strength to more advantage than any who preceded him. You seldom find him making Love in any of his Scenes, or endeavoring to move the Passions; his genius was too sullen and saturnine to do it gracefully, especially when he knew he came after those who had performed both to such an height. Humor was his proper Sphere, and in that he delighted most to represent Mechanic people. He was deeply conversant in the Ancients, both Greek and Latin, and he borrowed boldly from them: there is scarce a Poet or Historian among the Roman Authors of those times whom he has not translated in Sejanus and Catiline. But he has done his robberies so openly, that one may see he fears not to be taxed by any law.

 He invades authors like a monarch；and what would be theft in other Poets, is only victory in him. With the spoils of these Writers he so represents old Rome to us, in its Rites, Ceremonies and Customs, that if one of their Poets had written either of his Tragedies, we had seen less of it than in him. If there was any fault in his Language, ’twas that he weaved it too closely and laboriously in his serious Plays; perhaps too, he did a little too much Romanize our Tongue, leaving the words which he translated almost as much Latin as he found them: wherein, though he learnedly followed the their language, he did not enough comply with ours. If I would compare him with Shakespeare, I must acknowledge him the more correct Poet, but Shakespeare the greater wit. Shakespeare was the Homer, or Father of our Dramatick Poets; Jonson was the Virgil, the pattern of elaborate writing; I admire him, but I love Shakespeare. To conclude of him, as he has given us the most correct Plays, so in the precepts which he has laid down in his Discoveries, we have as many and profitable Rules for perfecting the Stage as any wherewith the French can furnish us.

    至于本.琼森，若按照他能坚持他自己本性的那段期间（因为他最后的几部戏剧已经显得他过于放任自己了），就我对他的品性来看，我认为在任何剧场他都是最具学识和贤明的作家。他最为严厉地要求自己，正如他严格要求别人一样，没有人说他缺乏天赋，而是说他吝于使用。他的作品很难去删减或修改。在他之前，我们把机智，妙语和诙谐作为评判的标准, 而直到他出现前戏剧作品仍旧缺少艺术的东西。但你会极少发现他编排爱情场景，或是致力于煽动一种风尚；他的性格过于阴郁和乖戾而不能进行那种优雅的创作，特别是他很清楚地明白那些后起之秀早已把这两点提升到一定高度了。脾性的刻画则是他的擅长范围：他乐于描写一些下层人士。他用典娴熟，并能大胆地从希腊，拉丁中引以自用：在他把所有的那个时期的罗马作家中的诗人和历史学家翻译进他的《席阶纳斯》和《凯蒂琳》作品里。但是他公然盗窃着，以至于世人面前所示，他根本不惧怕任何法律的指控。借鉴其他作家时他像个君主；若是搁在别的诗人身上会是窃贼，唯有他成功的运用。持着从这些作家掠来的战利品，他把古罗马仪式，典礼，和风俗真实的呈现给我们，以至于他们任何一位古罗马诗人写的悲剧与他相比都有所欠缺。若说他语言上有瑕疵，那是源于他在悲剧里过于紧凑和繁缀地编排语言。也或许因为，有点使语言过于罗马化，保留了更为贴近原拉丁语的形式：同时，他考究地沿袭了他们的语言，而没有足够的遵循自己的语言方式。如果把他与莎士比亚来比较，我必须承认他是更为端正的戏剧诗人，但莎士比亚则是具有更伟大的天赋。莎士比亚是荷马，是我们的戏剧诗人之父。琼森是维吉尔，是善于创作精美作品的标榜。对他，我是在佩服，而对于莎士比亚，我是在爱。对于他，我的评价是他带给我们最为正规的戏剧，他在《发现》中制定的一些准则，我们从中可以拥有很多有益于我们的规则去完善舞台戏剧，就好比我们借鉴法语来为我们的语言所用。

ps:天鹅君的校对，精确而准确，并附有一定的提示。不仅纠正了我这错误百出的译文，更让我学到一定的背景知识，深深的敬佩与感谢！