One Day or One Life

唯讀書與寫字不可辜負
正文

假裝這個世界正常之6 (謝謝編輯欣賞,純屬個人記錄,請不要首頁推薦!)

(2020-04-07 17:10:44) 下一個

4月7日

我的日常,每天打開電腦,國內、國外的幾個網站瀏覽一遍,感受這邊的排華風險,感受國內的民族主義,看身邊海外華人中的粉紅、五毛、右右、美分為各種政治話題吵來吵去。為什麽出國後,對政治這麽敏感?想來是沒有安全感。在海外,不要跟我說,安全感是自己給的,這種政治上的安全感,自己真的給不了,我就是一粒灰,分分鍾灰飛煙滅。

今天跟姐姐電話聊起當前的形勢,我說到擔心北美有排華傾向,她完全沒有這種感覺,批評我太偏激,總看些負麵新聞、小道消息,她要我相信政府,隻看主流新聞。她更用股市打比方,說你看,這兩天股市漲了,如果你是個積極樂觀正麵的人,你對前景看好,你就會買進,而你老是悲觀,總覺得形勢還會更糟,所以你不敢買,結果掙不到錢。

有點道理呢。可我做不到啊。

WFH,因為在家工作,我們辦公室特地建了個slack,前幾天上麵很熱鬧,今天居然沒有一個人說話。大家都不見了。

情緒低落。

奧威爾永遠不過時。讀 AS I PLEASE in Tribune of April 28, 1944,劃重點

The fallacy is to believe that under a dictatorial government you can be free inside. Quite a number of people console themselves with this thought, now that totalitarianism in one form or another is visibly on the up-grade in every part of the world. Out in the street the loudspeakers bellow, the flags flutter from the rooftops, the police with their tommy-guns prowl to and fro, the face of the Leader, four feet wide, glares from every hoarding; but up in the attics the secret enemies of the régime can record their thoughts in perfect freedom—that is the idea, more or less. And many people are under the impression that this is going on now in Germany and other dictatorial countries.

Why is this idea false? I pass over the fact that modern dictatorships don’t, in fact, leave the loopholes that the old-fashioned despotisms did; and also the probable weakening of the desire for intellectual liberty owing to totalitarian methods of education. The greatest mistake is to imagine that the human being is an autonomous individual. The secret freedom which you can supposedly enjoy under a despotic government is nonsense, because your thoughts are never entirely your own. Philosophers, writers, artists, even scientists, not only need encouragement and an audience, they need constant stimulation from other people. It is almost impossible to think without talking. If Defoe had really lived on a desert island he could not have written Robinson Crusoe, nor would he have wanted to. Take away freedom of speech, and the creative faculties dry up. Had the Germans really got to England my acquaintance of the Café Royal would soon have found his painting deteriorating, even if the Gestapo had let him alone. And when the lid is taken off Europe, I believe one of the things that will surprise us will be to find how little worth-while writing of any kind—even such things as diaries, for instance—has been produced in secret under the dictators.

讀了一期《紐約客》, Feb 1, 2010,讀愛爾蘭作家Kevin Barry的《Fjord of Killary》,第一次聽說他,網上查了一下,尚無特別吸引我之處。

看電影:

不甘心,又看了一部賈樟柯,《江湖兒女》,盛名之下,其實難副。徹底死了心。好吧,國產片,國內名導的電影我也算刷過了。婁導的,我就不看了。準備找諾蘭的燒腦電影看看。

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (4)
評論
周回陶鈞 回複 悄悄話 我這些日子也在讀《1984》,怎麽會這樣?我是不是也患病了?
十字小溪 回複 悄悄話 回複 'cc_claire' 的評論 : 不奇怪, 左派或社會主義跟獨裁沒有必然關係, 隻是當今世界上的獨裁者們往往是打著左派的旗子上台的, 一旦政權在手, 就隻為自己謀私利, 偽裝也撕下了。一個具有真正左派理念的人, 應該反獨裁, 反極權。
cc_claire 回複 悄悄話 回複 '十字小溪' 的評論 : 左派,卻又反獨裁、反極權。有點奇怪啊,不是嗎?
十字小溪 回複 悄悄話 奧威爾原來是《動物莊園》的作者, 查了介紹, 得知他其實是個社會主義者, 理念類似NDP吧。他的文字讀來倒是很有點燒腦。
登錄後才可評論.