書評：中國城市化如何吞噬鄉(xiāng)村？

Construction sites are so common in China that most people pass them without a glance. At one point during the country’s multi-decade building boom, the joke was that the crane was the national bird.

建筑工地在中國四處可見，因此大多數(shù)人路過時看都不看一眼。在中國持續(xù)數(shù)十年的建筑熱潮中，起重機(jī)一度被戲稱為“國鳥”。

But behind the hoardings’ cheerful messages of luxurious lifestyles and the “China Dream” is another, darker story: of how villages become slums, of the corruption and deceit involved as homes for the poor give way to high-rises for the wealthy, and of the loss to China’s culture when its ancient communities disappear forever.

然而，在工地圍擋上那些宣揚(yáng)奢華生活方式和“中國夢”的喜興字眼背后，隱藏著更為陰暗的故事：鄉(xiāng)村如何成了城市貧民區(qū)?在窮人的房子被拆除、騰出土地蓋只有富人才住得起的高樓的過程中，充斥著怎樣的腐敗和欺詐?當(dāng)古樸的社區(qū)永遠(yuǎn)消失后，中國的文化是怎么消逝的?

David Bandurski, an independent writer living in Hong Kong, went behind the hoardings in the centre of Guangzhou (population: 13m) to track the fate of Xian village, a community that existed during the Song dynasty in the 13th century. By the time Bandurski first visited, it was no longer a recognisable village but a thriving migrant neighbourhood, the streets smelling of urine and lit by bare lightbulbs strung on shop fronts. In other words, the last place most people would look for Chinese traditions that date back eight centuries.

住在香港的獨立撰稿人班志遠(yuǎn)(David Bandurski)來到有1300萬人口的廣州的市中心，從工地圍擋背后追蹤冼村的命運(yùn)，這個村落的歷史最早可以追溯到13世紀(jì)的宋代。班志遠(yuǎn)第一次到冼村時，這里已看不出鄉(xiāng)村的模樣，而是變成了一個興旺的外來人口聚居地。街頭彌漫著一股尿騷味，店鋪門臉上掛著光禿禿的燈泡。換句話說，要追尋從800年前傳承至今的中國傳統(tǒng)，多數(shù)人是絕不會來這里的。

As China’s cities have expanded to accommodate hundreds of millions of new city dwellers, they have swallowed the surrounding countryside. But the villages rarely disappear, at least at first, thanks to complex land laws that cede some measure of ownership to their inhabitants. Former farmers divide courtyards into dozens of rooms or bolt ramshackle second, third and even fourth stories on to the original footprint of their home. The rooms are let out cheaply to the migrant workers flooding into cities, neatly solving China’s housing shortage and allowing foreign visitors to come to the comfortable conclusion that China, alone among developing nations, lacks slums.

為了容納數(shù)億新涌入城市的居民，中國的城市大力擴(kuò)張，吞噬了周邊的鄉(xiāng)村。但村子很少會消失，至少一開始不會，這要歸因于復(fù)雜的土地法，它將一部分所有權(quán)賦予住戶。曾經(jīng)的農(nóng)民在自家院子里蓋起眾多房間，或者在自家房子的原址上倉促蓋起兩三層甚至四層搖搖欲墜的樓房。這些房子被便宜租給進(jìn)城的農(nóng)民工，正好解決了中國房子短缺的問題，也因此外國游客很容易得出這樣的結(jié)論：中國沒有貧民窟，這在發(fā)展中國家中是絕無僅有的。

Bandurski found himself in the heart of an epic of corruption and resistance thanks to his interest in the landlords of Xian village: peasant farmers who had found a niche providing housing in the metropolis. Although they had been born far from the city, urban sprawl meant they were now smack in the middle of it, sitting on real estate valued at millions of dollars. Developers wanted the land; the city of Guangzhou was eager to give it to them, and the easily corruptible village headman (and the rapacious district government behind him) was all that stood in the middle. By following the villagers of Xian and similar communities in Guangzhou, Bandurski has been able to write an unusually thorough and readable book about how exactly China’s cities have grown.

由于對冼村的房東們感興趣，班志遠(yuǎn)發(fā)現(xiàn)自己觸到了一部關(guān)于腐敗和抵抗的史詩長片的中心。當(dāng)?shù)剞r(nóng)民早早發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個商機(jī)，就是在這個大城市里提供住房。他們出生時離市區(qū)很遠(yuǎn)，但隨著城市擴(kuò)張，他們?nèi)缃裾幱诔鞘械闹行牡貛В鴵韮r值數(shù)百萬美元的房產(chǎn)。開發(fā)商想要這里的土地，市政府也想賣給他們，很容易被收買的村長(以及他背后貪婪的區(qū)政府)也插足其間。通過關(guān)注冼村及廣州其他類似地方的村民，班志遠(yuǎn)寫出了一部全面探討中國城市發(fā)展模式的可讀性很強(qiáng)的著作。

Land grabs are the leading cause of unrest in China, both in the countryside and in city neighbourhoods earmarked for “regeneration”. One Chinese researcher who specialises in analysing local unrest on Beijing’s behalf has told the Financial Times he has a secret formula for starting his investigations: look for the unfinished construction site and ask the neighbours why it has been held up. The answer will almost always unlock an explanation for local grievances, as it does in Xian village.

征地是中國導(dǎo)致騷亂的首要原因，不管是在農(nóng)村還是在城市里被指定“改造”的區(qū)域。一位專門為北京方面分析地方不安定因素的中國研究員曾經(jīng)告訴英國《金融時報》，他開展調(diào)查時有一個秘訣：找一個未完工的建筑工地，問問周邊居民停工的原因。答案幾乎總是會揭開導(dǎo)致當(dāng)?shù)孛癖姴粷M的一個原因，就像在冼村一樣。

The layers of government interests and the thugs at officials’ command provide the punch for Dragons in Diamond Village. Modern China has done its best to obliterate any forms of local culture in favour of a state-sanctioned sameness, free of dialects, ethnic identities or local loyalties. What communism couldn’t uproot is now wilting under the force of urbanisation, as young migrants leave their homes and cities swallow traditional communities. “There’s an internal truth that’s been paved over,” says popular Chinese novelist Yan Lianke, whose latest (and banned) book explores the theme of urbanisation. “You need to see how many people have been torn apart to create today’s cities.”

關(guān)于層層的政府利益以及聽命于官員的打手，《龍在鉆石村》(Dragons in Diamond Village)一書中有引人入勝的描述?，F(xiàn)代中國竭盡所能地抹除任何形式的地方文化，而傾向于支持政府認(rèn)可的統(tǒng)一性、拋棄方言、民族認(rèn)同或地方忠誠。隨著年輕農(nóng)民工離鄉(xiāng)背井、城市吞噬傳統(tǒng)社區(qū)，曾經(jīng)共產(chǎn)主義無法拔除的東西，如今正在城市化的力量之下枯萎。“一個內(nèi)在真相被掩蓋了，”人氣頗高的中國小說家閻連科表示，”你需要看看，為了創(chuàng)建今天的城市，多少人飽受折磨。”閻連科的新書(被禁)探討了城市化主題。

The villagers of Xian did not just protest with lawsuits, banners and barricades. They built dragon boats — the ceremonial wooden craft prized by the waterfront communities of southern China and Southeast Asia. Dragon boats stand for tradition and solidarity (they must be paddled by many men, in rhythm). As Bandurski gets a ride in one, it also becomes a symbol of a rare triumph — the triumph of a small community’s fragile victory over the much larger forces seeking to bury it.

冼村的村民采取了種種抗議方式，包括打官司、掛橫幅、設(shè)路障等等。他們還造了龍舟，這是一種在中國南方和東南亞的沿海沿江地區(qū)廣受重視的用在傳統(tǒng)儀式中的木船。龍舟代表著傳統(tǒng)和團(tuán)結(jié)(它們必須由很多人有節(jié)奏的劃槳)。班志遠(yuǎn)就坐過一次龍舟，它也是一場罕見勝利的象征——一個小社區(qū)對尋求埋葬它的更強(qiáng)大力量的脆弱勝利。