The Etiquette of Talking Back　回應(yīng)的禮節(jié)

The Etiquette of Talking Back

回應(yīng)的禮節(jié)

Mortimer Jerome Adler

莫蒂默·杰爾姆·阿德勒

作者簡介

莫蒂默·杰爾姆·阿德勒(Mortimer Jerome Adler，1902—2001)，以學(xué)者、教育家、編輯等多重身份享有盛名。在芝加哥大學(xué)執(zhí)教時，他協(xié)助策劃了“名著計(jì)劃”，并于1952年起任哲學(xué)研究所所長。他在著作中普及推廣西方文明的偉大思想，如《西方世界的偉大著作》(Great Books of the Western World)、《如何閱讀一本書》(How to Read a Book)和《六種偉大思想》(Six Great Ideas)等。他還是1974年第15版《大英百科全書》(Encyclopedia Britannica)的編輯。

本文節(jié)選自1940年出版的《如何閱讀一本書》。莫蒂默認(rèn)為，閱讀就像一種無聲的對話，既然作者娓娓道來，讀者就該認(rèn)真回應(yīng)。如此這般，才能對一本書有真正的了解，才能不辜負(fù)作者的一片苦心。

Reading a book is a kind of conversation. You may think it is not conversation at all, because the author does all the talking and you have nothing to say. If you think that, you do not realize your opportunities and obligations as a reader.

讀書是一種對話?；蛟S你認(rèn)為這根本不是對話，因?yàn)樽髡哔┵┒?，你卻無話可說。如果你這么想，說明你沒有意識到作為讀者應(yīng)有的機(jī)會和責(zé)任。

As a matter of fact, the reader has the last word. The author has had his say, and then it is the reader's turn. The conversation between a book and its reader would appear to be an orderly one, each party talking in turn, no interruptions, and so forth. If, however, the reader is undisciplined and impolite, it may be anything but orderly. The poor author cannot defend himself. He cannot say, “Here, wait till I've finished, before you start disagreeing. ”He cannot protest that the reader has missed his point.

事實(shí)上，讀者在作者之后發(fā)言。作者說完了要說的話，接下來輪到讀者了。書和讀者之間的對話有序可循，雙方輪流陳述，不會被打斷、干擾。但如果讀者缺乏修養(yǎng)、蠻橫無理，這番對話就可能毫無章法?？蓱z的作者無法為自己辯護(hù)。他沒法說：“抱歉，等我把話說完，您再提出異議。”讀者的理解有偏差，他也無法據(jù)理力爭。

Ordinary conversations between persons who confront each other are good only when they are carried on decently. I am not thinking merely of the decencies according to conventions of social politeness. There is, in addition, an intellectual etiquette one should observe. Without it, conversation is bickering rather than profitable communication. I am assuming here, of course, that the conversation is about a serious matter on which men can agree or disagree. Then it becomes important that they conduct themselves well. Otherwise, there is no profit in the enterprise. The profit in good conversation is something learned.

只有當(dāng)雙方都有禮有節(jié)，普通的對話才可能順利進(jìn)行。我設(shè)想的有禮有節(jié)，不僅是社交禮儀意義上的習(xí)俗，更是一個人應(yīng)該遵循的知性禮儀。沒有這樣的禮節(jié)，對話就不是有效的溝通，而是混亂的爭吵。當(dāng)然，我在此假設(shè)的是圍繞一個嚴(yán)肅問題的對話，一個人可以贊成也可以反對。然后，雙方的自制就變得相當(dāng)重要，否則整個過程就無益可言。好的對話之所以有益，就在于你能從中學(xué)到東西。

What is true of ordinary conversation is even more true of the rather special situation in which a book has talked to a reader and the reader answers back. That the author is well disciplined, we shall take for granted temporarily. That he has conducted his part of the conversation well can be assumed in the case of great books. What can the reader do to reciprocate? What must he do to hold up his end well?

日常對話中是這樣，閱讀時更是這樣——在某種特殊情境下，書向讀者傾訴，讀者作出回應(yīng)。我們暫且假定作者遵守禮儀。假定在一本好書中，作者對話時會很好地控制自己。讀者該如何回報(bào)?他要如何扮演好自己的角色?

The reader has an obligation as well as an opportunity to talk back. The opportunity is clear. Nothing can stop a reader from pronouncing judgment. The roots of the obligation, however, lie a little deeper in the nature of the relation between books and readers.

讀者有機(jī)會也有責(zé)任回應(yīng)。這里說的“機(jī)會”很明顯。沒有什么能阻止讀者宣布自己的判斷。然而，“責(zé)任”則深植于書與讀者關(guān)系的本質(zhì)。

If a book is of the sort which conveys knowledge, the author's aim was to instruct. He has tried to teach. He has tried to convince or persuade his reader about something. His effort is crowned with success only if the reader finally says, “I am taught. You have convinced me that such and such is true, or persuaded me that it is probable.”But even if the reader is not convinced or persuaded, the author's intention and effort should be respected. The reader owes him a considered judgment. If he cannot say, “I agree,”he should at least have grounds for disagreeing or even suspending judgment on the question.

在一本傳授知識的書里，作者的目標(biāo)是指導(dǎo)。他試著教育讀者，說服讀者相信某事。只有讀者最后說出“我懂了!你說服了我這是真的，這是有可能的”，作者才算成功。但即便讀者沒有被說服，作者的意圖和努力仍需得到尊重。讀者欠作者一個經(jīng)過深思熟慮的判斷。如果讀者不能說“我同意”，至少也要給出個不同意或稍后再判斷的理由。

I am saying no more than that a good book deserves an active reading. The activity of reading does not stop with the work of understanding what a book says. It must be completed by the work of criticism, the work of judging. The passive reader sins against this requirement, probably even more than against the rules of analysis and interpretation. He not only makes no effort to understand; he dismisses a book simply by putting it down or forgetting it. Worse than faint praise, he damns it by no critical consideration whatsoever.

我只想說，一本好書值得我們主動去閱讀。閱讀的主動性不應(yīng)停留在理解書的內(nèi)容，要加上批評和判斷，主動閱讀才算完成。被動閱讀者違背了這個要求，甚至可以說違背了分析和闡釋的原則。他們不僅不試圖理解，而且看書時隨隨便便就放下，或者忘得一干二凈。比蒼白無力的贊美之詞更糟的是不假思索就破口大罵。

Remember Bacon's recommendation to the reader: “Read not to contradict and confute; not to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider.”Sir Walter Scott cast even more direful aspersions on those “who read to doubt or read to scorn.”

請記住培根對讀者的忠告：“讀書不為爭長道短，不為輕信盲從，不為高談闊論，而應(yīng)推敲度量。”沃爾特·司各特爵士1對那些“閱讀只為懷疑，或只會嘲諷”的人給出了更嚴(yán)厲的批判。

There is a certain truth here, as we shall see, but I do not like the aura of impeccability with which books are thus surrounded, and the false piety it breeds. Readers may be like children, in the sense that great authors can teach them, but that does not mean they must not be heard from. I am not sure Cervantes was right in saying, “There is no book so bad but something good may be found in it.”I do think, however, that there is no book so good that fault cannot be found with it.

我們都知道，這種說法是對的。但我不喜歡所謂“毫無瑕疵”的書，也不喜歡它們導(dǎo)致的盲目崇拜。偉大作家可以教導(dǎo)讀者，從這個意義上看，讀者或許像是孩子;但這不意味著讀者就不能對書作出批評。塞萬提斯2說：“沒有一本書會壞到找不到優(yōu)點(diǎn)。”我不知道這個說法是否正確。但我認(rèn)為，沒有一本書會好到找不到缺點(diǎn)。

It is true that a book which can enlighten its readers, and is in this sense better, should not be criticized by them until they understand it. When they do, they have elevated themselves almost to peerage with the author. Now they are fit to exercise the rights and privileges of their new position. Unless they exercise their critical faculties now, they are doing the author an injustice. He has done what he could to make them his equal. He deserves that they act like his peers, that they engage in conversation with him, that they talk back.

確實(shí)，對于一本能帶給讀者啟迪的書，即在這一意義上優(yōu)點(diǎn)多于缺點(diǎn)的書，讀者應(yīng)該等理解之后再作評論。這么做的時候，讀者已將自己提升到幾乎與作者平等的地位?，F(xiàn)在，他們該熟悉一下自己的新職權(quán)和新特權(quán)。除非不具備評論能力，否則他們得給作者一個公正的評判。作者已傾盡所有，對讀者平等相待。讀者也應(yīng)對作者平等相待，全身心投入對話、積極作出回應(yīng)。

As I pointed out before, docility is generally confused with subservience. (We tend to forget that the word “docile”is derived from the Latin root which means to teach or be taught.) A person is wrongly thought to be docile if he is passive and pliable. On the contrary, docility is the extremely active virtue of being teachable. No one is really teachable who does not freely exercise his power of independent judgment. The most docile reader is, therefore, the most critical. He is the reader who finally responds to a book by the greatest effort to make up his own mind on the matters the author has discussed.

正如我此前所說，順從和卑躬屈膝通常被混為一談。(我們忘記了“順從”這個詞源于拉丁語，本義是“教導(dǎo)”或“傳授”。)如果一個人被動且易受影響，我們會誤認(rèn)為他很順從。恰恰相反，順從是一種易于受教的、極其積極的品質(zhì)。一個人如果無法獨(dú)立判斷，就不是真的易于受教。因此，最順從的讀者也最具批判精神。這種讀者在經(jīng)過深思熟慮之后，最終會對一本書作出回應(yīng)，就作者討論的問題發(fā)表意見。

* * *

一個人如果無法獨(dú)立判斷，就不是真的易于受教。

Mortimer Jerome Adler 莫蒂默·杰爾姆·阿德勒

* * *

————————————————————

1.沃爾特·司各特(Walter Scott，1771—1832)，英國著名歷史小說家和詩人，一生創(chuàng)作了20余部歷史小說。

2.米蓋爾·德·塞萬提斯·薩韋德拉(Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra，1547—1616)，文藝復(fù)興時期西班牙小說家、劇作家、詩人，諷喻小說《堂吉訶德》是其代表作。