970| 0
|
大师 |
最新书评 共 4 条
bella
A friend recommended the Master by Colm Toibin to me when I told her I really enjoyed reading The Hours at the beginning of the year. The two novels have something in common in that both are about the life of a novelist(Henry James and Virginia Woolf respectively) but neither is a memoir. They are fictional stories based on the lives of real people.
In the middle of reading the Hours, I was irritated, thinking, Michael Cunningham was stereotyping the three women. How could he know what Virginia Woolf was going through in her life or what thoughts were going through her mind? How audacious he was to presume that she committed suicide the way he described it! But later the book won me over, because I saw his point of paralleling the three women's lives and the theme seems to be, if I understand correctly, at least one of the themes seems to be: Life is composed of hours/moments that are similar to everyone. It transcends time and space. No one is too ordinary and no hour of anyone is going to waste.
If my reading of The Hours went from "dislike" to "like", my experience of reading The Master went the other way around. I put aside novel-readings at the beginning of April because I felt my resolve of working on my accent was fading. But I got tempted to read the first chapter of the Master two weeks ago and got hooked on it right away. I emailed my friend saying that it seemed The Master was really my cup of tea, even more so than The Hours. But as I went on, I got less enthusiastic. I kept on wondering, waiting for a big climax and expecting to find out: Was Henry James GAY? maybe I was too gossipy and voyeuristic. But come on, isn't sexual-orientation part of a person's identity? If you want to know a person really well, you expect to know whether he is in the closet or out. It took only one semester for my graduate school classmate to tell me he was gay. The book covers five years of Henry James' life in 300+ pages. Don't I deserve to find out whether he was gay or not after reading it?
From the beginning, a friend mentioned Paul Joukowsky's name to Henry and he was disturbed and agitated about that poignant memory. I was eager to find out what had really happened between them. But no, the story continued and there was this servant guy Hammond that waited on him in Ireland. The way Henry was observing Hammond and being self-conscious really hinted that Henry was gay. But both threads didn't go any further. The story went on to tell the story of Henry's family, his sister Alice and a cousin Minney, both of whom died before the story started in 1895. Henry seems to feel guilty about their early deaths and felt that he could have done something or have been closer to them. Instead he left them and stayed in Europe, kind of on "self-exile".
Henry had a fellow American novelist, Constance Fenimore Woolson, who corresponded with him and they exchanged comments on each other's writings. She apparently admired him, as many writers, esp. female writers did at that time. To me, they were almost like soul-mates. But once Henry heard from a friend that Constance mentioned something that indicated the closeness between her and Henry, he freaked out and cancelled his trip to Florence where Constance lived for that winter. She committed suicide afterwards, partly because of her chronic depression during winters, partly, maybe of Henry's withdrawal and distant attitude.
Chapter 10 is about a younger sculptor friend, what's his name? Hendrick Anderson. They met in Rome and he came to Henry's house in England for a brief visit. The way Henry thought about him before his visit and the anticipation of his arrival, and the detailed description of Henry's imagining what Hendrick was doing upstairs before going to sleep. I was like, he is totally in love with him! But that didn't go any further either. Hendrick was on his way to New York and was very excited about his trip, which he embarked on after a three-day stay in Lamb House.
The last chapter is about Henry James' brother William, who visited Henry at the end of 1899, the end of that millenium, with his wife and daughter. We got to know more about William's struggle. Also, through a medium, Henry's sister-in-law said, Henry's mom said Henry was going to outlive all of his family, but he wouldn't be alone because his mom was watching over him.
That's about the end of the novel, which left me unsatisfied. Maybe because the story only covers 1895 to 1900 that I only see a slice of Henry's life? Or was it because of the genre, fictional story based on a real person? I have to say, not a big fan of this way of storytelling. I want to know Henry Jame's sexual orientation! Although I understand the theme is about his repressed sexuality. But is he gay? Wait, Let me google Henry James' sexual orientation. While I was putting "Henry James' sexual orientation" in google search bar, I laughed at myself: Maybe this is the brilliance of the novel. I guess, if I want to know Henry James' sexual orientation for a fact, I can go to a documentary or a memoir. If I want a fictional character, I can go to one of many Henry James' novels. This half-memoir, half-fiction story actually attracted a lot of readers because it is unique, it is different from a memoir or biography of Henry James, and a fiction. And Colm Toibin knew he couldn't beat Henry James if he created a fictional character. Instead, creating a fictional character out of Henry James's biography made the book a sensation. The theme, according to Wiki, is "not of someone who just represses his self and his sexuality but of something more complex and ambiguous, of somebody who copes with life exerting a control on how much he'd reveal, even to himself, and choosing to be a writer in order to achieve precisely that". I guess that's why I am just a 俗人, 哈哈, therefore the title "A Layperson's review of the Master".
As a side note: the book was only short-listed for the Man Booker Prize but didn't actually win it. Maybe there are other people like me out there, being annoyed by this genre.
详情
paradi
1. 以前我沒有讀過托賓,單從這本看,不知道是不是要致敬傳主的緣故,文風跟亨利詹姆斯頗像,或者說他塑造的詹姆斯跟詹姆斯小說的主角們頗像,讀著可窩心了。但可能一章節一章節論述不同主題分段明顯了一些,總體稍微欠缺連貫之氣,且對比特別擅長以冗長的鋪墊換取難忘的高潮之詹姆斯小說,這部小說偏偏是最後一章寫兄嫂來訪的最沒意思,蛇尾了。
2.本書時間線只覆蓋了19世紀末的5年,結束在新世紀的開端前,但內容通過大量回憶段落覆蓋了詹姆斯的大半生。一個重點是表現他生活中與之發生牽絆的男男女女是如何成為其小說原型的,所以……劇透大量!非常不建議沒有讀過亨利詹姆斯小說的人閱讀本書!傷的是,國內對亨利詹姆斯的翻譯還較為不足,其小說作品長篇短篇加起來出過單行本的也只有不到20篇吧,我把能讀的都讀了還是慘遭劇透……或者有一兩個段落不知道書裡指的是那部小說。
3. 三個重要女子:有精神問題的妹妹愛麗絲(他和妹妹作為家庭中被疏離的奇怪小孩,是《螺絲在擰緊》的原型。妹妹有一個疑為女同關係的老小姐長期作陪,這段是《波士頓人》的原型)、表妹明妮(《貴婦肖像》的原型)、比他年長三歲的女作家康斯坦斯(有憂鬱癥,兩人的關係可對照《阿斯彭文稿》中男主與克萊爾的侄女的關係來看),追憶這三人的章節都寫得非常動人。明妮的章節尤其美,那一年夏天他與另外兩名男子圍繞著一名奇趣少女的圖景最終成為了多少作品的源頭、也是他幸福得如同夢一般的追憶,而一想到生活中是他這位表哥拒絕帶表妹去歐洲長見識而間接造成她夢碎而死,在《貴婦肖像》里他卻復活了表妹叫她擺脫束縛遨遊歐洲,而將表哥寫成了那個給她翅膀的人,讓人不由感嘆,這就是小說家的特權啊。
4.相對不好看的是關於亨利的弟弟參加南北戰爭造成心理創傷的章節。
5. 基情也有三段,想象一下用亨利詹姆斯那種“打死我也不直說”的文風寫基書……不要太棒哦!!!!第二章里亨利做客愛爾蘭時與一名男仆沒有開始也沒有結果的曖昧可好,讓人忍不住嘆氣“詹姆斯你這個縮卵!” 附加驚喜的再登場。這個對象雖然有階級鴻溝但卻有認真讀書還說“我覺得你比狄更斯寫得好多了”,真心不錯!中間一段回顧初體驗,“旅館房間只有一張床”的經典梗嗎,略好笑orz 對方是未來的美國大法官,這到底有沒有事實依據啊喂…………比較奧妙的是,雖然書中的亨利一碰到差不多要成型的感情就立刻往回縮,竟然有不止一個的美青年主動示好,太人生贏家了吧……
6. 當我還掩卷沉醉在亨利詹姆斯哀婉羞澀的形象中時,手賤點開了wiki,立刻就看到了亨利寫給安德森的信里肉麻得令人抖三抖的句子:"The sense that I can’t help you, see you, talk to you, touch you, hold you close & long, or do anything to make you rest on my, & feel my deep participation – this torments me, dearest boy, makes my ache for you, & for myself; makes me gnash my teeth & groan at the bitterness of things. . . . " 頓時決定只把這本書當成同人小說了……
7. 回頭看了一遍1-6,覺得怎么除了情感世界好像沒有別的了?再一想難道不應該是這樣么。亨利詹姆斯自己的小說也是這樣啊,思想、藝術、道德修為、國家意識寫來結果都是極其個人的情感和體驗,可以理解為什麽有人覺得他的小說沒內容而有人卻覺得反映著普世的真實,正如明妮寫給亨利的信中所求的:“必須把你確信為真實的事告訴我”。
详情
期拾
两年前写的书评,偶然翻出来了。
从文基班转出来后的很长一段时间,我仍常跑去听文学院LDQ的文艺理论。我乐于看着他敲着脑袋的苦闷模样,再悠悠地自问自答:“创作的积累其实是什么啊?是情感创伤的积累。”如果是这样,(真的是这样),我想托宾累积的情感创伤也许能和亨利詹姆斯比肩。
有段日子,我的魂儿像掉在托宾的《大师》里了,那冠以文豪之名的人物在三百多页纸张间变得具象、亲切可触。托宾使我惊讶,亨利詹姆斯让我目瞪口呆。经托宾揣测描画的亨利是我不能放弃的意向,他直指隐晦的内心。他们属于一类人,正是木心所说的殉了道的人。我瞧出来了,他们对自己的纤敏与孤独有种刻意的痴迷,他们养着自己的病,不自觉地爱上了它,而他们竟是如此满意这状态。
艺术家多数没有归属感,他们有的彻底醉了,像画《呐喊》的蒙克;有的还在苦恋着尘世的暖,像萧红。
托宾在写这部书时一定未多加克制地移情了(移情在古代文论和西方文论里竟是两个迥异的概念),他没有刻意节制,大约忘了尼采说的“人是需要被克服的东西”,然而达到的艺术效果是惊人的。这种巨细靡遗的描绘使那个敏感、纤弱的亨利詹姆斯格外真切,我就几乎要忘了他不是那个真的文豪亨利詹姆斯,他只是托宾的“亨利”。《大师》如此传神,这个亨利身上披着托宾自己的几多重影子。
对于每个对表达(或者说写作)有着强烈诉求的人而言(譬如说我自己),亨利詹姆斯那种阴郁、敏锐的特质经过托宾的处理,必定显得十分动人心魄。这是著述者借文字的手,与百年之前文豪的一次惊人神交。
书由亨利的噩梦起始,调子就已经阴冷,到最末兄长来访收尾。有些人从他生命里走过场,跟风吹过去了一样,没留下什么痕迹;有些人竟是蚀骨铭心,这样的人极少。因为少,因而在他们身上着墨更多。从头细数,剔除父母、妹妹爱丽丝、表妹明妮、挚友康斯坦斯(如果只能定义成挚友)、仆人哈蒙德、雕塑家安德森,他的生命就会显得过分简白。
母亲自始至终都是亨利心中的一抹温柔,在母亲死后借灵媒之口也在给予他无限关切。而父亲,这个似乎时刻遭受死神威胁的父亲,也许是亨利早年敏感的全部来源,他毕竟有个压抑的童年时代(童年对于人心性的塑造力量如此巨大,例如看完张爱玲的《小团圆》也就不再惊叹她一生是如何创造出那些曲折离合的故事,她所写的原本就是她经历过的事)。 爱丽丝与亨利的品性最为相像,但她勇敢地去赴死了,到最后一刻也不畏惧。表妹明妮本是最有可能与他结合的女性,在病怏怏的她伸手索取他的温暖时,他沉默无言的拒绝其实尤为残忍。似乎是为了赎罪或是偿还,他在《贵妇肖像》中以她为原型,带她游了意大利——这大概是他尽力做的于事无补的挽救。
哈蒙德与安德森不说了,鉴于托宾在多部作品中对于同性恋倾向的晦涩描述,多数人都会把这两个人物的安排看作是对亨利詹姆斯同性恋倾向的注解。何况书里还插了同时代的王尔德的那段。至于王尔德因同性恋有伤风化被捕入狱对托宾的隐射意义,我未看出什么。只是这两位大师同时摆在眼前,忽然觉得十分讽刺。书中的詹姆斯大约永不会赞许王尔德的讥诮语气、大卖的戏剧。王尔德成功的时候正处詹姆斯最灰暗的时候,詹姆斯写的戏不受大部分平庸观众的待见(嘻,文学与商业的矛盾那时候就这么尖锐了),他写得太精英了,或者太文气了,并无心迎合取悦大众——也许他是太高估这些受众了;就在他小心翼翼做出尝试但一败涂地的时候,他竟然有点扛不住了。王尔德指向放浪形骸,詹姆斯就指向隐忍内敛。
我接触这本书的由头其实是梁文道的《我执》,梁在书里提起《大师》时,侧重给了康斯坦斯。原本指望瞧出惊心动魄恋情的我着实失望,他们的感情没有跳出全书的格调,仍然隐晦,虽把各自的心思揭露地赤裸裸,几近难堪。梁的书中引了康斯坦斯自杀前的未写完的一条小说线索:“想像一个男人生来就少了一颗心,他善良,正直,彬彬有礼,但就是没有那颗心。”这也许是对亨利的最好阐释,他少了那颗心,他只在不断描述不断创造。执着于小说里多少年的他,再想抽身多少有点来不及了。多少年前明妮的死对于亨利的冷漠已经是个伏笔,“她失去生命后,他知道拿她怎么办”。他是个巨匠,却是个爱的无能者,他无法真正爱身边的人。也许出于恐惧,也许是因为他觉得无法把握。与情绪打交道的人对情绪的感知有异于常人的敏感,但控制起情绪来,又有了可怕的冷峻。苏有贞说亨利:“他投注了一生的精力和意志,潜心要把生命中黏腻且不合秩序的情感和欲望,奋力地强压到意识的海底。”此时的他未免已沦为一个悲剧的前景,托宾在书里给亨利安置了一段念白,“有时他觉得他的生活似乎归属于另一个人,归属于一篇尚未写下来的小说,归属于一个还没有充分构思出来的人物”。这句话似万金油,使得我们会加注在亨利身上的种种怨念戛然而止。
当年我看《梅兰芳》的公映,里面有段话好像这么讲的,原话已记不太清楚:梅兰芳的心里有个空缺,如果填满了,他就不是梅兰芳了。亨利詹姆斯至此已经化作一个艺术符号,像陀思妥耶夫斯基,像文森特梵高。他们都必定是孤独的,只是有人极端热烈,有人如此隐忍。他们不属于自己,他们是为艺术而生、而死的。
详情
Zooey
……所以中间有着广阔的创作尺度。这本书还算是较为写实的。当然也不是完全,只能说是作者朝着一个方向尽量往真实还原。所谓还原,说是为了“真实”,其实这个“真实”指的并不一定是现实,而应该是丰富合理的细节给人的一种信任与可靠之感。
我想,写一本虚拟的小说而并非纪实传记,有时书中人物就像自己带了各种细节,在作者脑子里做梦一般地自己随情节走动下去。有时为了生动形象,就再加上作者自己亲身经历过的感受来充实。而亨利詹姆斯并非是确凿证实出的同性恋,托宾为他写那些暧昧的意味时自然更多地借鉴了自己曾有的感受吧。(八卦一下,前面托宾献书给贝尔布鲁,迈克尔斯塔克。我只找到了这一条应该是关于后者的新闻:http://www.gztz.org/cn/news/doc_432077.htm)所以从书中的亨利身上应该可以窥见很多托宾的影子来。
然而整本书的文风细腻敏感,这也是我一开始读的时候最想不明白的地方,因为我想象中亨利应该是更加古朴冷竣的,但后来我又为这个困惑做了一些自以为合理的解释,后面再说。不过,我确实不了解亨利詹姆斯!先把书评放上来,以后再慢慢看他的书和传记,不然书评又要拖到猴年马月去了:]所以谬误欢迎拍砖~
(尤其是看了这个评论http://book.douban.com/review/2827022/
“没读过James的书,以至于有的时候Toibin模仿他的风格都看不出来。还有就是,对当时的社会名流了解的还是不多,以至于James生活中虚虚实实的人物分辨不出真假来。比如书里写James和Oliver Wendell Holmes小小gay了一下,而我直到最近又买了Holmes的书(不是自阅,送人)才知道他在法律界有多大拿。这些问题还是后来读了书评之后才知道的信息,而那些错过的珠玑估计是数不胜数了。”
更感到看完亨利的书和传记以及相关人物传记的重要性啊唉!)
然后是我所以为作者表现出的一些内容:(下面的H代指书中的亨利詹姆斯)
(1)视角
全文是第三人称,可读者所看到听到感觉到的都是从H而来,倒像是第一人称了,关于每个人的描述都很明显是H眼中之像,所以全书没有H的外形,打扮,因为自己看不到自己。但是在H与他人对话时,这种状况又改变了,读者被跳出来了一些,H只剩下语言,而读者并不知道他这番话的情感。我的意思是,描述性的感觉与回忆的思绪还可以在,但是他是如何思考去应对的就不知底细了。但是虽然不知,却可以很容易地猜出来,这更像是托宾留给读者的在一段段讲义间的课后练习题。毕竟这不是意识流作品嘛!这么说吧!这本书更像是一个住在H脑子里的无所不知的作者在饶有兴趣地给大家讲故事,尤其是王尔德那段,H没说自己的想法,可我们看的出,他既好奇,又鄙视,又嫉妒,又幸灾乐祸,很奇妙。托宾的留白使读者既在内,又在外,好象毕加索的立体主义一样美妙。
(2)作家的爱观察的眼和想太多的心
H始终在观察和感觉,乃至揣测他人的观察与感觉,我总是在迷茫他感觉到的究竟是不是真相,是不是只是他的错觉。不过他应该应该不在乎。他只需总七八分真相中找到生活的奇妙,魔幻,荒诞,就能够成为供养灌溉他作品的源泉。正如在梦中看书看电影,潜意识帮助我们创作和挖掘自身,而H能够在醒着的时候做梦。
像一开始他揣测别人对他戏剧的看法,浓郁稠密的焦虑和痛苦像滤纸切割我的大脑。以及种种不举例。
这个情节算是一个典型,也是一个暗示:H从窗户看到小女孩莫娜没有带帽子独自在草坪上看着一扇窗子做手势,可是当他出门去找却发现那窗子后没有人,而莫娜戴着帽子和保姆其乐融融。
(3)承接(2),这样的后果就是与现实脱节。
http://book.douban.com/review/4886848/
http://book.douban.com/review/1532418/
这几篇书评都说的很详尽了,他和2个女的,4个男的的,暧昧,全部无疾而终。先说两个女的,他铺天盖地的观察与猜测,造成自己身份的疏离。他喜爱表枚明妮坦普尔,但明妮求他带自己去威尼斯他拒绝了,因为他怕她一来,自己就只能用她的眼睛来看而不是自己的。他和小说家康斯坦斯互相心领神会,可康太了解他了,也太自省了,知道自己过多的要求反而会将他推开。可是康毕竟是个女人,所以免不了依赖,希望别人也看到自己有所依赖,H不给,她跳楼了。
本书重点有3个女人,除上面2个还有小说家的妹妹爱丽斯,我实在太喜欢她们3个了,因为同是女性,我完全理解,同情,崇敬。爱丽斯尖刻聪明,在家人眼里古怪,热衷于讨论死亡。明尼美丽明亮,聪明,勇敢,贫困,女权。康斯坦斯智慧,看到一切,温柔体贴。可是这些美好的特质全都指向凄惨的死亡。
4个男人的戏分不多,情感互动更少。托宾笔下的同性情感对于本书就如同大衣上的一个精致的纹饰花扣。是一簇突然燃起又熄灭的火苗,细腻温暖,但是无比短暂。
H总在观察生活,把看到的人放进小说,可是他自己不在生活(或者对于H说,小说)里。
H自己,就象他所说,他自己的愿望无非是坐在有壁炉的房子里写书看书。他的神经太敏感了,经不住太多波折了。
(4)时间和章节
全书以年月分章,按时间远近大概可以分为几个阶段,可是妙的是H象是一个处在时空中的多面体,每到一个时间段,作者就把他转一个面过来,然而周围的面也是能看见几个的,而且随着时间流逝有所变化,却还是原先的那个面,但是时间实实在在地流逝了。每个面都有所不同,又都是一个人的不同折射。
就像译者所说,这本书似乎将一切都包含了。我想也许它就是艺术与生活的交融,生活涵盖一切现实,而艺术就是幻觉的表达。
最后,书的封皮真让人惊讶,男女拥抱亲吻,这是亨利绝对不会做的事情吧,就是因为这个原因成为封面吗?如果真是这样可很让人钦佩啊。黄绿的颜色,就像文风一样轻飘飘的,如果是我,还是愿意加一点褐色,让文风古朴一点。
最最后,just for fun:亨利詹姆斯在文中像一个标准的天秤,可是现实中他是4月15出生的白羊男。:]我怎么也查不到托宾的生日。:]
详情
更多书评 我要评论 | ||
网站地图|小黑屋|Archiver|DoThinkings 悦书籍,思人生
GMT+8, 2024-11-27 10:26 , Processed in 0.063768 second(s), 32 queries .
Powered by Discuz! X3.3
© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.