How Should One Read a Book? (2):Virginia Woolf works

“We have only to compare”—with those words the cat is out
of the bag, and the true complexity of reading is admitted. The
first process, to receive impressions with the utmost
understanding, is only half the process of reading; it must be
completed, if we are to get the whole pleasure from a book, by
another. We must pass judgment upon these multitudinous
impressions; we must make of these fleeting shapes one that is hard
and lasting. But not directly. Wait for the dust of reading to
settle; for the conflict and the questioning to die down; walk,
talk, pull the dead petals from a rose, or fall asleep. Then
suddenly without our willing it, for it is thus that Nature
undertakes these transitions, the book will return, but
differently. It will float to the top of the mind as a whole. And
the book as a whole is different from the book received currently
in separate phrases. Details now fit themselves into their places.
We see the shape from start to finish; it is a barn, a pig-sty, or
a cathedral. Now then we can compare book with book as we compare
building with building. But this act of comparison means that our
attitude has changed; we are no longer the friends of the writer,
but his judges; and just as we cannot be too sympathetic as
friends, so as judges we cannot be too severe. Are they not
criminals, books that have wasted our time and sympathy; are they
not the most insidious enemies of society, corrupters, defilers,
the writers of false books, faked books, books that fill the air
with decay and disease? Let us then be severe in our judgments; let
us compare each book with the greatest of its kind. There they hang
in the mind the shapes of the books we have read solidified by the
judgments we have passed on them—Robinson Crusoe, Emma, The Return
of the Native. Compare the novels with these—even the latest and
least of novels has a right to be judged with the best. And so with
poetry—when the intoxication of rhythm has died down and the
splendour of words has faded a visionary shape will return to us
and this must be compared with Lear, with Phedre,[5] with The
Prelude;[6] or if not with these, with whatever is the best or
seems to us to be the best in its own kind. And we may be sure that
the newness of new poetry and fiction is its most superficial
quality and that we have only to alter slightly, not to recast, the
standards by which we have judged the old.
It would be foolish, then, to pretend that the second part of
reading, to judge, to compare, is as simple as the first—to open
the mind wide to the fast flocking of innumerable impressions. To
continue reading without the book before you, To hold one
shadow-shape against another, to have read widely enough and with
enough understanding to make such comparisons alive and
illuminating—that is difficult; it is still more difficult to
press further and to say, “Not only is the book of this sort, but
it is of this value; here it fails; here it succeeds; this is bad;
that is good.” To carry out this part of a reader’s duty needs
such imagination, insight, and learning that it is hard to conceive
any one mind sufficiently endowed; impossible for the most
self-confident to find more than the seeds of such powers in
himself. Would it not be wiser, then, to remit this part of reading
and to allow the critics, the gowned and furred authorities of the
library, to decide the question of the book’s absolute value for
us? Yet how impossible! We may stress the value of sympathy; we may
try to sink our own identity as we read. But we know that we cannot
sympathise wholly or immerse ourselves wholly; there is always a
demon in us who whispers, “I hate, I love,” and we cannot silence
him. Indeed, it is precisely because we hate and we love that our
relation with the poets and novelists is so intimate that we find
the presence of another person intolerable. And even if the results
are abhorrent and our judgments are wrong, still our taste, the
nerve of sensation that sends shocks through us, is our chief
illuminating; we learn through feeling; we cannot suppress our own
idiosyncrasy without impoverishing it. But as time goes on perhaps
we can train our taste; perhaps we can make it submit to some
control. When it has fed greedily and lavishly upon books of all
sorts—poetry, fiction, history, biography—and has stopped reading
and looked for long spaces upon the variety, the incongruity of the
living world, we shall find that it is changing a little; it is not
so greedy, it is more reflective. It will begin to bring us not
merely judgments on particular books, but it will tell us that
there is a quality common to certain books. Listen, it will say,
what shall we call this? And it will read us perhaps Lear and then
perhaps Agamenon[7] in order to bring out that common quality.
Thus, with our taste to guide us, we shall venture beyond the
particular book in search of qualities that group books together;
we shall give them names and thus frame a rule that brings order
into our perceptions. We shall gain a further and a rarer pleasure
from that discrimination. But as a rule only lives when it is
perpetually broken by contact with the books themselves—nothing is
easier and more stultifying than to make rules which exist out
touch with facts, in a vacuum—now at least, in order to steady
ourselves in this difficult attempt, it may be well to turn to the
very rare writers who are able to enlighten us upon literature as
an art. Coleridge[8] and Dryden[9] and Johnson,[10] in their
considered criticism, the poets and novelists themselves in their
considered sayings are often surprisingly relevant; they light up
and solidity the vague ideas that have been tumbling in the misty
depths of our minds. But they are only able to help us if we come
to them laden with questions and suggestions won honestly in the
course of our own reading. They can do nothing for us if we herd
ourselves under their authority and lie down like sheep in the
shade of a hedge. We can only understand their ruling when it comes
in conflict with our own and vanquishes it.
If this is so, if to read a book as it should be read calls
for the rarest qualities of imagination, insight, and judgment, you
may perhaps, conclude that literature is a very complex art and
that it is unlikely that we shall be able, even after a lifetime of
reading, to make any valuable contribution to its criticism. We
must remain readers; we shall not put on the further glory that
belongs to those rare beings who are also critics. But still we
have our responsibilities as readers and even our importance. The
standards we raise and the judgments we pass steal into the air and
become part of the atmosphere which writers breathe as they work.
An influence is created which tells upon them even if it never
finds its way into print. And that influence, if it were well
instructed, vigorous and individual and sincere, might be of great
value now when criticism is necessarily in abeyance; when books
pass in review like the procession of animals in a shooting
gallery, and the critic has only one second in which to load and
aim and shoot and may well be pardoned if he mistakes rabbits for
tigers, eagles for bar-door fowls, or misses altogether and wastes
his shot upon some peaceful sow grazing in a further field. If
behind the erratic gunfire of the press the author felt that that
there was another kind of criticism, the opinion of people reading
for the love of reading, slowly and unprofessionally, and judging
with great sympathy and yet with great severity, might this not
improve the quality of his work? And if by our means books were to
become stronger, richer, and more varied, that would be an end
worth reaching.
Yet who reads to bring about an end however desirable? Are
there not some pursuits that we practice because they are good in
themselves, and some pleasures that are final? And is not this
among them? I have sometimes dreamt, at least, that when the Day of
Judgment dawns and the great conquerors and lawyers and statesmen
come to receive their rewards—their crowns, their laurels, their
names carved indelibly upon imperishable marble—the Almighty will
turn to Peter[11] and will say, not without a certain envy when He
sees us coming with our books under our arms, “Look, these need no
reward. We have nothing to give them here. They have loved
reading.”
Questions for Comprehension and Consideration:
1. The title of the essay gives a sense of offering advice on
reading and the author begins her essay by saying “In the first
place, I want to emphasize the note of interrogation at the end of
my title.” Why does the author start her essay in this way and
what does she really want to point out in her first paragraph which
serves as her starting point when she offers ideas and suggestions
on reading.
2. How do you understand the author’s idea of “Do not
dictate to your author; try to become him. Be his fellow-worker and
accomplice” in paragraph 3. How does your reading experience agree
or disagree with the author’s advice?
3. Virginia Woolf says “the quickest way to understand the
elements of what a novelist is doing is not to read, but to
write;” and she also gives an example to support it. What do you
think of the example? Have you ever had such experience of
“experimenting with dangers and difficulties of words” ? If you
have how do you comment your experience?
4. The author mentions three writers in paragraph 4 and points
out that although they depict things totally different they share
one same important element. What is it? Read at least one novel of
each writer mentioned and try to understand the different worlds
the authors created and see whether you agree to the comment
Virginia Woolf made or not.
5. What is the true complexity of reading and what are the
reading processes Virginia Woolf depicts? How do the processes
agree or disagree to your reading experience?
6. In the difficult process of reading the author advises us
to read some very rare writers who are able to enlighten us upon
literature of art. To what extent and on what circumstance they are
able to help us?
7. In what sense does Virginia Woolf think that common readers
have responsibilities and importance in raising the standards and
the judgment of reading?
8. How do you feel the author’s rhetoric question “Are there
not some pursuits that we practice because they are good in
themselves, … and is not this (reading) among them”? Write a
passage with concrete examples to show your true understanding of
it.
——————————————————————————–
注释:
[1] the battle of Waterloo Waterloo is a town in Belgium, the
place where Napoleon Bonaparte(1769—1821) and his army was totally
defeated.
[2] Thomas Love Peacock (1785–1866),British novelist and
poet.
[3] Anthony Trollope (1815—82), British novelist.
[4] George Meredith(1828–1909),British novelist and
poet.
[5] Phedre French tragic poet Jean Racine’s(1639—1699)
works.
[6] The Prelude British poet William Wordsworth’s(1770—1850)
long poem.
[7] Agamenon The ancient Greece great tragic poet
Aischulos’(520 BC—456BC) works.
[8] Samuel Taylor Coleridge(1772—1834) British romantic
poet.
[9] John Dryden(1631—1700) British poet and critic.
[10] Samuel Johnson(1709—1784) British writer.
[11] Peter one of the twelve disciple of Jesus Christ.
 
 
“我们只要比较一下,”,事情就很清楚,阅读的奥秘就在于此。以尽可能的理解去感受,这只是阅读的前一半过程,如果想获得一本书的全部愉悦,还得完成另一个过程,即对各种感受进行梳理和鉴别;把变幻不定的印象固化为明确和坚实的感受。但这不必操之过急,应静待阅读的“尘埃落定”,你的困惑和质疑已经沉淀之后;出去走走,和朋友聊聊,拣去玫瑰花叶上的枯瓣,或者上床睡一觉。就这样,不经意间,造化之神在我们全然不知中完成了它内化转变的过程,书重又给我们带来全新的意义。它以其完整的意义浮现在我们心际。而完整地领会全书,和只领会它的片言只语,是不可同日而语的。书中的细节已各得其所,我们从头到尾看清了它的整体形象,正如谷仓、猪圈或教堂。现在我们就可以在书与书之间进行比较了,就像比较不同的建筑一样。这比较意味着我们的态度起了变化,我们不再是作者的朋友,而是他的审判者;正如作朋友我们不能不充满友情一样,作审判者我们就不能不严厉了。那些耗费我们时间和情感的书,其作者难道不能被看作是罪犯吗?那些充满谬误、捏造、腐朽与弊病的书,其作者难道不是社会最阴险的敌人,不是腐化者和堕落者吗?我们必须做出严厉裁判;我们把每本书都与其同类中最杰出的作品来做对比。这类作品的特点我们已经了解,我们对它们的裁决更加深了这种了解,比如〈鲁滨孙漂流记〉、〈爱玛〉与〈还乡〉等。把你读到的小说与它们相比—-即便最新和最次的小说,也都应该与这些最杰出的小说进行对比评判。诗歌同样如此。当令人陶醉的韵律被淡忘,当诗中词语的美妙意象已经消失,一种视觉形象会出现在我们的脑际,不妨把它与〈李尔王〉、〈费德尔〉和〈序曲〉相比,即使不与它们相比,也要与别的最好的,或者我们认为最好的同类作品相比。可以肯定的是,新创作的诗歌和小说的新颖之处,就在于它们的肤浅,我们无须完全改变评判过去作品的那些标准,只要稍做变动即可。
如果认为阅读的第二个阶段,即评判和比较阶段(整理那一涌而至的众多印象),与第一个阶段一样简单,那是不明智的。搁下手中的书继续阅读,心中对种种意象进行比较,同时还要广泛阅读、充分领悟,以确保这样的比较能形象而富有意义—-这无疑是困难的。如果再加上这样的要求,那就难上加难了:“不仅这类书如此,这种审视也很普遍;这里处理不够妥当;这里很成功;这地方是个败笔,这儿犹如神来之笔”,等等。想胜任这一职责的读者,必须具有非同凡响的想象力、洞察力和学识,这绝非易事,最自信者也恐难找到自身这样的潜能。那么,免去阅读的这一过程,让批评家、让图书馆里衣冠楚楚的权威来为我们决定书的最终价值这个问题,难道不更明智些吗?非也!我们可以强调同感的价值;我们可以在阅读中忘掉自己。但我们清楚,我们不可能与别人完全同感,也不可能完全忘掉自我,内心深处似乎总有一个无法平息的“魔鬼”在低语:“我恨!我爱!”。而正是这爱恨之情,密切了我们与诗人和小说家之间的关系,让我们无法容忍另一人横亘其中。即便结果不符,评判不对,但阅读中我们的品位,既震撼我们的感觉,无疑都深深打动和启迪了我们。我们通过感受获知;压抑个性会导致它的弱化和枯竭。而随着时间的推移,我们还可以培养自己的品位,使之得到某种调控。饱览各种书籍(诗歌、小说、历史、传记)之后,当你停下阅读,面对更广泛的空间,即真实大千世界中的各种矛盾时,你会发现,你的品位变化无几,它不急切,而是更加深思熟虑。它不仅令我们对具体书籍作出评判,还会告诉我们某些书所具备的类似的共同特点。注意,它会告诉我们什么是共同特点。它会引领我们去读《李尔王》,然后再读《阿伽门农》,从而去发现这共同特点。因此,有品位作向导,我们可以超越具体作品,去寻找把书籍归于一类的特点,然后为这些特点命名,并由此建构出帮助我们感知的规则。从这种辨别中,我们获得更深入、更珍贵的愉悦。然而,规则只有在与书籍本身碰撞过程中不断被打破,才会更有生命力,因此,没有什么比凭空制定规则更容易、也更笨拙了。为了能镇定地完成这一困难任务,我们不妨转向那些很独特的作家,是他们让我们认识了作为艺术的文学。柯尔律治、德莱顿和约翰逊在他们严谨的批评中,诗人和小说家在他们深思熟虑的表达中,均显出了惊人的英雄所见。他们展现并固化了我们内心混沌深处那些翻腾、模糊的思想。而只有当我们在阅读中真切产生了问题和获取了建议,才读有所获。如果只是一味顺从其权威,就像躺在灌木荫处的羊群那样,是别指望获得帮助的。只有当他们的规则与我们的发生碰撞并征服我们时,我们才能理解之。
如果读书之道就是如此,如果读书需要最珍贵的想象力、洞察力和评判力,你也许会得出这样的结论,既文学实在是一门非常复杂的艺术,即便读了一辈子的书,也很难对文学评论做出有价值的贡献。我们始终都是读者,我们不必戴上只属于被称为批评家的少数人才能戴上的荣耀桂冠。但作为读者,我们依然有自己的责任和重要地位。我们提出的标准和做出的评判,潜移默化地成作家进行创作的氛围的一部分。即便没有出版,它们也会对他们产生影响。而这影响,如果导引得好,有活力、有个性,且诚挚真切,会非常有价值。尤其是当批评正处于一种必需的搁置状态之时,情形更是如此。书籍进入评论,就像动物进入射击场,评论家只有短短一秒种时间装弹、瞄准和射击,所以如果他把兔子看成老虎,把老鹰看成百姓的家禽,或者完全脱靶,或者误中了正在附近田野里安详吃草的牧牛,都应该原谅他们。如果作者能在评论界变幻莫测的炮火之外感受到另一种批评,感受到那些因爱读书而读书的人们的看法—-这些人的评论也许不很及时,不很专业,但却很共鸣,很认真—-这难道不足以促使他提高作品的质量吗?如果通过我们的努力,图书的世界变得更有影响力,更丰富,更多样,这难道不是值得我们追寻的目标吗?
当然,谁又会在阅读时老想着实现一个目标呢?无论这个目标多么令人向往?生活中有些事我们追求,不就是因为这追求本身很值,而我们又乐在其中吗?而读书,难道不是这些乐事中的一个吗?我有时遐想,当世界审判日最终来临,那些伟大的征服者、律师、政治家前来领取他们的奖赏:王冠、桂冠和永久镂刻在不会磨灭的大理石上的名字时,上帝会转向圣·彼得,而当他看到我们夹着书向他走来时,他会不无妒意地说,“看啊,这些人不需要任何奖赏。我们这里也没有可以给他们的奖。他们热爱读书。”
(何朝阳,中国科学技术大学外语系)
文/Virginia Woolf 译/何朝阳

文章引用自:http://education.163.com/06/0411/09/2EDT24OM00290164.html

How Should One Read a Book? (1):Virginia Woolf works

南递北溉一篇文章

先八卦

作者Virginia
Woolf很多人并不熟悉,可是如果是影迷的话,应该不会陌生。前汤嫂NICHOLE
KIDMAN获得奥斯卡最佳女主角的电影《时时刻刻》(the
hours)中就有NICHOLE饰演的Virginia
Woolf撰写《Mrs.Dalloway》的情节。另外,如同电影中的描述一样,Virginia
Woolf在现实中也是一个lesbian。

上正文(后附中文翻译)


How Should One Read a Book?
应该怎样读书
by Virginia Woolf (1882-1941) from The Second Common Reader

In the first place, I want to emphasize the note of
interrogation at the end of my title. Even if I could answer the
question for myself, the answer would apply only to me and not to
you. The only advice, indeed, that one person can give another
about reading is to take no advice, to follow your own instincts,
to use your own reason, to come to your own conclusions. If this is
agreed between us, then I feel at liberty to put forward a few
ideas and suggestions because you will not allow them to fetter
that independence which is the most important quality that a reader
can possess. After all, what laws can be laid down about books? The
battle of Waterloo[1] was certainly fought on a certain day; but is
Hamlet a better play than Lear? Nobody can say. Each must decide
that question for himself. To admit authorities, however heavily
furred and gowned, into our libraries and let them tell us how to
read, what to read, what value to place on what we read, is to
destroy the spirit of freedom which is the breath of those
sanctuaries. Everywhere else we may be bound by laws and
conventions—there we have none.
But to enjoy freedom, if the platitude is pardonable, we have of
course to control ourselves. We must not squander our powers,
helplessly and ignorantly, squirting half the house in order to
water a single rose-bush; we must train them, exactly and
powerfully, here on the very spot. This, it may be, is one of the
first difficulties that faces us in a library. What is “the very
spot”? There may well seem to be nothing but a conglomeration and
huddle of confusion. Poems and novels, histories and memoirs,
dictionaries and blue-books; books written in all languages by men
and women of all tempers, races, and ages jostle each other on the
shelf. And outside the donkey brays, the women gossip at the pump,
the colts gallop across the fields. Where are we to begin? How are
we to bring order into this multitudinous chaos and get the deepest
and widest pleasure from what we read?
It is simple enough to say that since books have classes–fiction,
biography, poetry–we should separate them and take from each what
it is right that each should give us. Yet few people ask from books
what books can give us. Most commonly we come to books with blurred
and divided minds, asking of fiction that it shall be true, of
poetry that it shall be false, of biography that it shall be
flattering, of history that it shall enforce our own prejudices. If
we could banish all such preconceptions when we read, that would be
an admirable beginning. Do not dictate to your author; try to
become him. Be his fellow-worker and accomplice. If you hang back,
and reserve and criticize at first, you are preventing yourself
from getting the fullest possible value from what you read. But if
you open your mind as widely as possible, the signs and hints of
almost imperceptible fineness, from the twist and turn of the first
sentences, will bring you into the presence of a human being unlike
any other. Steep yourself in this, acquaint yourself with this, and
soon you will find that your author is giving you, or attempting to
give you, something far more definite. The thirty-two chapters of a
novel—if we consider how to read a novel first–are an attempt to
make something as formed and controlled as a building: but words
are more impalpable than bricks; reading is a longer and more
complicated process than seeing. Perhaps the quickest way to
understand the elements of what a novelist is doing is not to read,
but to write; to make your own experiment with the dangers and
difficulties of words. Recall, then, some event that has left a
distinct impression on you—how at the corner of the street,
perhaps, you passed two people talking. A tree shook; an electric
light danced; the tone of the talk was comic, but also tragic; a
whole vision; an entire conception, seemed contained in that
moment.
But when you attempt to reconstruct it in words, you will find that
it breaks into a thousand conflicting impressions. Some must be
subdued; others emphasized; in the process you will lose, probably,
all grasp upon the emotion itself. Then turn from your blurred and
littered pages to the opening pages of some great novelist—Defoe,
Jane Austen, or Hardy. Now you will be better able to appreciate
their mastery. It is not merely that we are in the presence of a
different person—Defoe, Jane Austen, or Thomas Hardy—but that we
are living in a different world. Here, in Robinson Crusoe, we are
trudging a plain high road; one thing happens after another; the
fact and the order of the fact is enough. But if the open air and
adventure mean everything to Defoe they mean nothing to Jane
Austen. Hers is the drawing-room, and people talking, and by the
many mirrors of their talk revealing their characters. And if, when
we have accustomed ourselves to the drawing-room and its
reflections, we turn to Hardy, we are once more spun around. The
other side of the mind is now exposed—the dark side that comes
uppermost in solitude, not the light side that shows in company.
Our relations are not towards people, but towards Nature and
destiny. Yet different as these worlds are, each is consistent with
itself. The maker of each is careful to observe the laws of his own
perspective, and however great a strain they may put upon us they
will never confuse us, as lesser writers so frequently do, by
introducing two different kinds of reality into the same book. Thus
to go from one great novelist to another—from Jane Austen to
Hardy, from Peacock[2] to Trollope,[3] from Scott to
Meredith[4]—is to be wrenched and uprooted; to be thrown this way
and then that. To read a novel is a difficult and complex art. You
must be capable not only of great finesse of perception, but of
great boldness of imagination if you are going to make use of all
that the novelist—the great artist—gives you.

应该怎样读书
弗吉尼亚·伍尔夫
首先我要特别提醒读者注意本文标题后面的问号,即便我能够回答这个问题,答案或许也只适合我自己而并不适合你。其实,指点别人怎样读书的唯一建议,就是别听从任何指点。遵循自己的直觉、运用自己的判断,去得出自己的结论。如果我们对此有共识,我就可以无拘束地提出一些看法和建议,因为这些看法和建议不至于会禁锢你的独立见解。而独立见解,正是读者应具备的最重要的品质。那么,关于读书,会有些什么规则呢?滑铁卢之战无疑是发生在某特定一天中的一场战役;《哈姆雷特》一剧是否就一定比《李尔王》更好呢?这问题想必很难回答,不同的读者会有不同的见解。如果让权威之说占据我们的图书领域,无论它们多堂皇、多严实,让它们指点我们怎么读、读什么和对所读之书做出评价,都无疑破坏了书之魂中所蕴涵的自由与开放精神。我们似乎在任何方面都有习俗和规范,惟独在读书方面没有。

要真正享受自由(恕我用这一陈词),就必须要有自我约束。我们不能徒劳而无益地滥用自己的精力和才智,就像为给一株玫瑰浇水而喷洒了半个花棚一样。我们应当适宜而扎实地善待自己的精力和才智,现在就立马开始。这也许是我们在图书馆首先面临的困难。何为“立马开始”?我们面对的似乎是庞杂繁纷的堆砌:诗歌、小说、历史、传记、词典、蓝皮书;不同种族不同年代的男女用不同语言写就的不同品位的书;它们一本本紧靠着排列在书架上。而院外,驴子在咴咴地嘶叫,女人在水井边叽喳地闲聊,小马驹在田野上自由地欢跳。我们从哪入手呢?我们怎么才能从纷繁的杂乱中理出头绪,进而从我们的所读中获取最深最广的欢愉呢?

无庸讳言,书籍有类别之分,比如小说,传记,诗歌等等。我们应该从各种不同类别的图书中获取不同的营养。然而,事实上,只有少数人能正确对待书籍,从中吸取其所能给予的一切。我们常常带着模糊而矛盾的观点来,要求小说该真实,诗歌应该不真实,传记必须充满溢美之词,历史得强化我们固有的观念。阅读时,如果我们能摒弃这些偏见,便是一个好的开端。不要强作者所难,而应与作者融为一体,作他的同路人和随行者。倘若你未开卷便先行犹豫退缩,说三道四,你绝不可能从阅读中最大限度地获取有用价值。但是,字里行间不易察觉的精妙之处,就为你洞开了一个别人难以领略的天地。沉浸其中,仔细玩味,不久,你会发现,作者给予你的,或试图给予你的,绝非某个确定意义。一部小说的三十二个章节——–如果我们先来讨论怎么阅读小说的话——-犹如建筑的构架,但词汇比砖头令人更难捉摸。阅读比之于观看,当然是个更为长久而复杂的过程。也许,最为快界地领略小说家工作的原理的方法,不是读,而是写;去冒险与词汇打交道。回忆一下某个曾给你留下独特印象的事件:街角处你碰到两个人正在交谈,当时周围的场景是,树在随风摆动;街灯灯光摇曳不定;说话人声调悲喜交集;那一刻你感受到的情景全然融合在一起。

可是,当你试图用语言来再现这一场景时,它却支离成上千个抵触的印象,有些得略述,有些得加强。就在你诉诸文字的当儿,当初的感受已荡然无存。抛开词不达意的支离碎片吧,去打开大师们的名著吧,比如笛福,简·奥斯丁,哈代。这时,你当能更好地领会他们的精妙。我们不只是站在不同的大师面前—笛福,简·奥斯丁,或者托马斯·哈代—-实际上我们是置身于完全不同的世界。在《鲁宾逊漂流记》中,我们跋涉于久远的征途,一个事件接着一个事件发生,事件与事件之间顺序就足以构成其巨制。如果说户外和冒险之于笛福是大显身手的领地,那么,对于简·奥斯丁就无关紧要了。奥斯丁的世界是客厅,她通过活动于客厅里的任务的对话,反映人物性格。习惯了奥斯丁的客厅和通过客厅所反映的意向以后,我们再转向哈代,脑袋似乎有一次发晕了。我们置身于荒野之中,星星在我们头上闪烁。在这里,人类灵魂的另一面—-孤寂中迸发的黑暗面,而不是处于凡世尘嚣时所表露的光明面—-被充分解剖。这里展示的不是人与人的关系,而是人与自然和命运的关系。三位作家描述了三个不同的世界,他们各自的世界是个连贯一致的整体。他们谨慎地遵循着各自观察事物、描述事物的法则。无论作家倾向性多大,读者不会在其中迷失方向,不至于像读某些不在行的作者的作品那样,在同一本书里看到两个截然不同的现实。因此,阅读一个个伟大小说家—-从简·奥斯丁到哈代,从皮科克到特罗洛普,从司各脱到梅瑞迪思—-你简直就如翻江倒海,被一会儿扔到这里,一会儿抛向那边。读小说是一门艰难而复杂的艺术。要想利用小说家—-伟大的艺术家—-给予的一切,你不仅的具备洞察的策略,你还得具有勇敢的想象。

 

(何朝阳,中国科学技术大学外语系)

文章引用自:http://education.163.com/06/0411/09/2EDT24OM00290164.html

十年:Boyz II men

今天路过报亭,买了一本《新周刊》,是一本特刊:创刊十周年!另外附送一件质量不咂地的T-shirt,白给的烧饼就不要嫌芝麻少了。一本值得回味的书(虽然是刊物)。
 
很佩服广东这个文化土壤并不肥沃的地方窜出了那么多让人兴奋的报刊。从很小接触的《足球》报到《南方周末》、《南方都市报》以及《新周刊》和经济类报纸,无一不是带入我们“走向新时代”。
 
十年,对我来说,是什么涅?
 
1 网民的十年,让我成为了mouse patato;
2
站着不理亏,躺着不肾亏的十年。四肢发达,头脑简单就是我真实的写照;
3 图书馆是我的图腾,并有幸成为专业领域的小编;
4 十年,北京有了四环、五环、六环和十环(竹帛斋主语),我的腰围也张了一环;
5
一刀拿下“十年之前,我不认识你你不属于我”的LP,是我最大的幸福;
6
踢了无数场球,幸运的是只掉了一颗牙,却收获了一个文化部足球比赛冠军;
7 经历很多的亲友变故,换来的是成长了自己;
8
跨入了自己心仪的学府深造,遇到了很多愤青般的老师和整天扯淡的同学;
9 友情出演了一部DV,过了一把明星瘾;
10 成为房奴、卡奴,但心向自由的十年!
 

韩日印象之一:IFLA SNAIL(12P)

掸掉东洋的尘土,拨开鬼子和棒子的蓝天,沉入北京的蜗居小室,开启东渡的影像,万物掷有声。
 
1
IFLA对我来说并不陌生,我曾经在1999年参加过泰国举办的IFLA会议,七年之痒,亚洲又一次举办IFLA会议,此次会议的规模较之99年提高不少,韩国的英文报纸KOREAN
TIMES报道是3000多人,也有报道说是4000多人,因为有很多是现场注册,ms目前还没有得到最终的参赛人数统计。
 
 
2
对于中国人来说,此次会议与往届最大的不同就是中文成为会议官方语言之一。虽然本人并不赞成用较高的翻译费用来达到此目的,但是不可否认的是中国图书馆界有越来越多的人参与国际大型会议,提交自己的研究成果,与更多的国外学者交流。其中,中国国家图书馆的研究馆员顾犇博士在22号的National
Bibliographies – the Asian Experience 中有一个报告:National
Bibliographies: the Chinese experience(
http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla72/papers/109-Gu-en.pdf)。我亲临现场,为这个经常给我讲笑话的本家老兄写真。
 
 
3
IFLA是个大排挡,什么都有,但许多菜品未必合你的口味,很多presentation是留于表面,广度上有所侧重,深度上稍显不足。本次会议的session太多了,大小有200多个,如果你想真正参加所需要了解领域的session倒不如去参加这个领域专门举办的会议。
 
 
4
参加大型会议另外一个原因就是探亲访友,会议上偶遇多年不见的老朋友,或是与友约好会议相见,不能把酒言欢,大碗喝酒,大块吃肉,却能互通有无,增进感情。会议文雅一点说就是会议代表的七夕银河,粗俗一点讲就是高档次的精神皮条客。竹帛斋主说过会议能够贡献GDP,此言不假。此次会议不光给韩国贡献了GDP,中国也顺带手的沾点油水,很多在韩国参会的代表会取道中国,访问图书馆,见识大中国的名山大川。
 
IFLA EXPRESS中文版就是在此地炼成的
 
5
本次会议衍生的展览会规模由于场地所限,规模只能算中等。中国有CNKI和中国科技期刊协会(ms)参展。进入展厅,OCLC的展台开始击打你的眼球,多个世界知名的数据库商展台(《数字图书馆论坛》将在近期推出世界数据库商纵览专题)更是装扮艳丽,等待选秀般的接待你。我经常访问的Emarald数据库的展台还有mp3的重奖,到目前为止,还没有收到他们的通知,我知道又赔了一张名片和一份期待。和我国有密切联系的新加坡国家图书馆管理局(NLB)又一次独立参展,副总裁兼馆长NGIAN
Lek Choh亲自坐展,还送了我一本2010年NLB的规划书。
 
 
不多说了,图有其表的图不光是图书馆的意思,还有图片的含义,嗯哈,上图!
 
写论文时经常访问的jstor展台
 
 
OCLC
EBSCO
 
 
SPRINGER
 
 
PROQUEST
 
 
THOMSON
 
 
EMARALD
 

中国男篮输了,山东鲁能赢了:不悲不喜

世界杯后,一个多月没有正经看过体育比赛了。今天晚上用遥控器在中国和希腊男篮与山东鲁能和北京国安的比赛中changing
partners。男篮输了,输的心服口服,人家是欧洲冠军。鲁能赢了,赢得天经地义,国安从来都没有在山东主场赢过球。鲁能提前六轮夺冠,创造了历史,作为忠实的山东球迷,恭喜鲁能提前夺冠,但更重要的是,鲁能能够代表中国在亚洲俱乐部比赛中雄起,所以路还很长。要知道蜘蛛侠都说:能力越强,责任越大。你们的担子不小啊!
 
山东省体育中心是山东队的福地,山东队很少在这个球场输球,当年偶也曾经在此地攻城拔寨,只不过没有守门员罢了,有图片为证(感谢铁哥们opakal拍摄,版权归你这厮所有)!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

今天是国家图书馆的生日:生生不息

中国国家图书馆有两个生日,一个阳历,一个阴历。阳历是1912年的今天,阴历是1909年9月9号。国图在90年代曾经阴历阳历生日都庆祝过,印象中97年是建馆85周年纪念大庆,99年是建馆90周年纪念大庆。我小时候由于家底不厚,油水不多,总是吵着喊着要阳历阴历都要庆生。今天是国图的阳历生日,在此我跑着跳着说声生日快乐!
 
南递北溉国图网站中的新闻介绍:
 
京师图书馆正式开馆接待读者
 
 
   
京师图书馆(中国国家图书馆前身),1912年8月27日正式开馆接待读者。
   
20世纪初,在变法图强和西学东渐的背景下,有识之士力奏清政府兴办图书馆和学堂,以承扬民族文化,吸收先进科学。1909年(清宣统元年)9月9日宣统皇帝御批兴建京师图书馆,四品翰林院编修缪荃孙为首任监督,建馆初期馆址在北京什刹海附近的广化寺。辛亥革命后,京师图书馆由北京政府教育部接管,并于1912
年8月27日开馆接待读者。1916年京师图书馆按规定正式接受国内出版物呈缴本,标志着她开始履行国家图书馆的部分职能。1917年1月馆址迁往安定门内方家胡同的清国子监南学旧址。1928年7月改名为国立北平图书馆。1929年8月与中华教育文化基金董事会建立的北平北海图书馆合并,馆名仍为国立北平图书馆。1931年在北海西侧兴建了主体馆舍(即文津街馆舍)。中华人民共和国建立后,1950年3月6日改名为国立北京图书馆,成为中国国家图书馆。1987年10月馆址迁至白石桥路紫竹院公园北侧新馆,原馆舍改为国家图书馆古籍馆。
    
中国国家图书馆是综合性研究图书馆,是国家总书库。履行搜集、加工、存储、研究、利用和传播知识信息的职责。国家图书馆是全国书目中心、图书馆信息网络中心。研究和采用现代技术,在全国图书馆标准化、规范化、数字化、网络化建设中起骨干作用。承担着为中央国家领导机关,重点科研、教育、生产单位和社会公众服务的任务。负责全国图书馆业务辅导,开展图书馆学研究。代表国家执行有关对外文化协定,开展与国内外图书馆界的交流与合作。  

读书接龙:合法的文化隐私传销

昨天晚上从韩国和日本回来,今天就看到一飞在他的blog里进行读书点名游戏,承蒙抬爱,不敢怠慢,挑灯夜博。
1. 一本你不只读了一次的图书
如何阅读一本书(Mortimer J.
Adler):还用说吗?
 
2. 一本你如果身在沙漠时想读的书
圣经:读了N年都没有读完的书
 
3. 一本让你发笑的书
动物农场(George
Orwell):其实并非所有的领导都是猪
 
 4. 一本让你哭的书
穆斯林葬礼:男人苦吧不是罪
 
5. 一本你希望是自己写的书
我为什么偷了你的奶酪:盗亦有道
 
6. 一本你希望从未写就的书
江××传:……
 
7. 一本正在读的书
部级领导干部历史文化讲座:能享受部级待遇的也就只有这个了
 
8. 一本读来有意味的书
生活的艺术:林语堂让我的商业生活有种艺术的色彩
 
9. 一本改变你一生的书
妈妈为我学龄前写的书:这本书没有精彩的故事,却有方方正正的汉字。
 
我这个人rp不好(测试后42分),就不再进行下一步的点名了。
 
在韩国国立中央图书馆(NATIONAL LIBRARY OF
KOREA)拍的照片比较切合这个主题
 

 

清华同方推出数值搜索:SE新生军

1 近日清华同方推出数值搜索,赶紧试验了一把,分别敲入“万方利润”和“同方利润”发现万方以103:99小胜同方。有朝一日能搜索锦涛的工资肯定是走入和谐社会的一个标志。另外,同方还有一个学术定义搜索也不错,本人越来越喜欢类似的垂直搜索了,像搜索图书的读秀,搜索论坛的奇虎,搜索blog的feedster,8月发布的搜索音乐的bala等等。
 
2 最近看到的time评选的热门网站——50大酷毙至极25大非你不可,有兴趣看看去。
 

美国加州大学加入Google数字图书馆计划:德行迷失于利益

1 近日美国加州大学加入Google数字图书馆计划,值得庆祝!本人是Google此计划的拥趸,号称信息共享的图书馆大部分都对此计划谨慎而保守,当然也包括了我国的图书馆。与其说他们担心自己传统的文化遗产和自身文明被美国一只“无形之手”所压,不如说他们对自己所赖以存在的垄断资源的庇护罢了。可喜的是,欧洲“为奋起辩护”,我国进行“文化共享”等项目。还有,据小道传闻称,baidu计划设立图书馆计划;据大道信息讲,我国将进行国家级古籍数字化项目(《数字图书馆论坛》近期也将推出古籍数字化专题或者专刊)。我们期待的是“代表最广大群众的根本利益”的资源共享,管它是政府行为还是商业运作。我们的图书馆不“与时俱进”的结果就是作茧自缚。2004年12月14日,一个肯定改变世界图书馆的日子!
 
2 继方正APABI惹上侵权官司后,最近中文在线也没幸免,讽刺的是:去年“警察”今年成被告,网络传播权条例发布后会有更多这样的问题存在。
 
3 闲来无空明天就来北京参加清华的数图研讨班,今天在火车上还不忘宣传《数字图书馆论坛》,我对他以建设和谐社会为目标的革命大无畏精神表示滔滔江水延绵不绝的感谢!我明天也会到清华,see
you!
 
本图片摘自闲来无空blog,版权归其所有

google是上帝:定位国图与北大图书馆

上帝之眼本周9号发布了google
earth
的汉化版,用goole
earth对我以前经常去的国内两大图书馆进行飞行测试,真是不凡。

 

国家图书馆

 

北京大学图书馆

 

用它查查你所在的位置,一定吓一跳,在google面前,我们真是truman

同时,看看你跳出百度或者google是不是也上榜了,ucloo或者mingpian。当然还有chinasns