再次回到申城，仿佛这几个月的离别，从未存在；但硬件改变的步伐，却不由得自我欺骗。就连人，外表没什么变，但究竟内在有多少的玄机，也并不是我们可以一眼看出的。
在香港的这几个月，不能说讨厌那城市。毕竟，它也为我带来了或美好或孤寂或郁闷或释怀的记忆。但是，比起上海——这座我困在其中4年的“第二个家”，香港终究是个陌生的新朋友。火车进入内地时，知道吗，我心中有种难以言喻的兴奋。眼前的落后、不文明、朴素、污染、不雅、杂乱，正是这地方的美。外国人多会“憎恨”的一切，却是我所向往并珍惜的。突然，想起了张爱玲《烬余录》中刻画的那种“苍凉与世故”（李欧梵语）的交叉揉合。
老朋友，依然如故，却都已有定居。不论是孤家寡人，或是快组织家庭，那种慢慢有根扎下来的感觉，加上已经开始上班的现状，让人觉得时已过境已迁。人事或可留，但心已不同往日；性格或随境遇而悄悄转移，但友谊不变。兄弟终于能拿出钱包，请我吃饭，着实令人感动与欣慰，不管背后的原因是什么。
真的，仿佛昨天是第一次在今年见证自然的萧瑟。深橘色的枯叶，挂在干涸的骨架上，静静树立在冰凉冬天的黄金夕阳中，有种无法言表的解脱感。生命完结的季节中，人也终于卸下了什么，又开始了什么。这一切，都是在香港无法体会的。在那里，只有飘忽不定却始终挥之不去的浓雾……
2008年11月26日星期三
缘分。。。GOAL!
As I trod on our footstep traces,
In my heart, I feel the smile on all your faces.
NIE团队踏上归途，我继续滞留香港，再次回到自己的小小世界中。
这次行程，结交到新朋友，认识了日后在教育界的同僚。在玩乐与校访之中，相互切磋，共同学习，一起成长。等待着大家将照片集结到一块儿，到时上传，再来回顾并细细咀嚼每一场相遇的梦幻……
慢慢发觉，我真的越来越“脱离草根”。也许，这是离开新加坡太久的关系。但从另一个角度看，可能也正是在国外浸淫一阵子之后，世界观人生观，才会出现改变，也才会与众不同，不论这种独特/独立性是正面或是负面。
此刻的我，并不觉得纠结，亦不惋惜惆怅。有的，只是想休息的欲望。在那之后，整理行装，准备到上海，在好友的陪伴下，回顾自复旦毕业以来5个月中的成长、矛盾、洞见与无知。
只是，这里先说这一句：对于我人生的支柱——教育，以及对于华语教学在新加坡的前景，我想，自己已开始重拾那曾静静动摇的纯真与信心。在一个大家族的团结中，没有老师是孤单的，而对于下一代，我们将共同承担起责任。不管最后结果如何，同僚之间的情感联系，将是我们这一代人对先贤的继承，而我们也能因曾一起真挚地努力而问心无愧。至于谁是scholar谁是principal谁是classroom teacher，则不过是不留痕迹的过眼云烟。
In my heart, I feel the smile on all your faces.
NIE团队踏上归途，我继续滞留香港，再次回到自己的小小世界中。
这次行程，结交到新朋友，认识了日后在教育界的同僚。在玩乐与校访之中，相互切磋，共同学习，一起成长。等待着大家将照片集结到一块儿，到时上传，再来回顾并细细咀嚼每一场相遇的梦幻……
慢慢发觉，我真的越来越“脱离草根”。也许，这是离开新加坡太久的关系。但从另一个角度看，可能也正是在国外浸淫一阵子之后，世界观人生观，才会出现改变，也才会与众不同，不论这种独特/独立性是正面或是负面。
此刻的我，并不觉得纠结，亦不惋惜惆怅。有的，只是想休息的欲望。在那之后，整理行装，准备到上海，在好友的陪伴下，回顾自复旦毕业以来5个月中的成长、矛盾、洞见与无知。
只是，这里先说这一句：对于我人生的支柱——教育，以及对于华语教学在新加坡的前景，我想，自己已开始重拾那曾静静动摇的纯真与信心。在一个大家族的团结中，没有老师是孤单的，而对于下一代，我们将共同承担起责任。不管最后结果如何，同僚之间的情感联系，将是我们这一代人对先贤的继承，而我们也能因曾一起真挚地努力而问心无愧。至于谁是scholar谁是principal谁是classroom teacher，则不过是不留痕迹的过眼云烟。
2008年11月24日星期一
南丫岛之旅
这几天，新加坡教育学院（NIE）的一批学员来香港考察，所以天天只睡3至5个小时，连看报纸的时间都没有，更妄谈写文章。不过有兄弟呱呱叫，所以还是写两句好，哈哈。
昨天（星期天）去了南丫岛。游客很多，却弥漫着少有的平静。远处山上一排排屋子，阵阵淡淡的咸意随微风飘来，就连坐在凳子上看两位朋友与小孩踢足球，都是一种享受。
后来到了海边，接着出发去吃海鲜，山路陡峭，但山脚就是片一望无际的大海，深蓝泛着闪闪金黄，远处一处橘红，仿佛阿波罗潜在水面下。
晚上回中环，在漆黑的大海中乘风破浪。近处白浪翻腾，远处方方正正的住宅，镶嵌着橘黄的万家灯火。久违的沉醉，深埋在记忆中的广阔胸襟，在一瞬间再次焕发，令我凝滞，心里却十足澎湃，难以平复。
年末将至，这几个月来在“小我”中折腾的我，此刻仿佛又释怀。
人生，就是如此……此中真意，唯有同行伙伴们能了。
昨天（星期天）去了南丫岛。游客很多，却弥漫着少有的平静。远处山上一排排屋子，阵阵淡淡的咸意随微风飘来，就连坐在凳子上看两位朋友与小孩踢足球，都是一种享受。
后来到了海边，接着出发去吃海鲜，山路陡峭，但山脚就是片一望无际的大海，深蓝泛着闪闪金黄，远处一处橘红，仿佛阿波罗潜在水面下。
晚上回中环，在漆黑的大海中乘风破浪。近处白浪翻腾，远处方方正正的住宅，镶嵌着橘黄的万家灯火。久违的沉醉，深埋在记忆中的广阔胸襟，在一瞬间再次焕发，令我凝滞，心里却十足澎湃，难以平复。
年末将至，这几个月来在“小我”中折腾的我，此刻仿佛又释怀。
人生，就是如此……此中真意，唯有同行伙伴们能了。
2008年11月21日星期五
有些人……
有些人，总是什么都不说，你却能够知道他们的心始终挂念着你；
有些人，总是什么都说，你却无法走进他们的心，他们也一样，被你挡在门外；
有些人，双唇像被缝起来般沉默，却始终把每段人际感情嵌入灵魂；
有些人，嘴边挂着会心领你曾付出的一切，却能轻易地淡忘感情，即使他们不断为自己辩解；
有些人，活着就是为了去关怀别人，从成为他人的一部分中得到快乐，造就自己；
有些人，总是在赚着别人的关怀，倚仗朋友的数量来确立自己的存在价值，却只是像必须完成义务般地敷衍其他人；
现代人，已经不去思考友谊的哲学意义，因为一切显得太简单：无法弥合任何矛盾的时候，自己最重要就是了。
那些不利己的人，现代社会却赋予他们这样的称号：说好听的，叫“理想主义者”；说难听的，叫“白痴”。
如今，我终于明白尼采和海德格尔的痛苦。他们，一个成为了疯子，一个成了纳粹主义支持者，不是没有原因的。我们的社会中，总有着那些人，长了翅膀想往上飞，却脱离不了地心引力。
也许，这就是灵与肉的矛盾。最后，人也只能去过他应该过的日子，并且麻痹自己，就算他如何的心不甘情不愿。
23岁多一点的我，能写出这种文字，证明我还幼稚，但也说明我还清醒。但庆幸，在那些我来说很重要的朋友之中，也有一些与我一样的人。
也许，就是这股傻劲，会让我们有改变事态的潜力也说不定？
清醒的人，需要把握一个“度”。只要不翻天覆地地重演法国大革命的恐怖，迷醉的人将总是活在清醒的人的手掌之中。因为，迷醉的人，就像一条狗。给他一根骨头，就算打他两棍，他也会对你摇尾巴，因为他“清楚”地知道，只有这样他才能得到第二根骨头。
当然，在这个理想化为权欲的过程中，清醒者也容易被催眠。所以，只能是慢慢去体会，何谓“出淤泥而不染”。
王者与霸者，从来都没有说自己放弃统治权，只不过是初衷的不同，手段的各异，以及是否能把臣民“按摩”得服服贴贴，让他们忘记何谓造反。也就是说，迷醉者都是清醒者存在的必要前提。
有些人，总是什么都说，你却无法走进他们的心，他们也一样，被你挡在门外；
有些人，双唇像被缝起来般沉默，却始终把每段人际感情嵌入灵魂；
有些人，嘴边挂着会心领你曾付出的一切，却能轻易地淡忘感情，即使他们不断为自己辩解；
有些人，活着就是为了去关怀别人，从成为他人的一部分中得到快乐，造就自己；
有些人，总是在赚着别人的关怀，倚仗朋友的数量来确立自己的存在价值，却只是像必须完成义务般地敷衍其他人；
现代人，已经不去思考友谊的哲学意义，因为一切显得太简单：无法弥合任何矛盾的时候，自己最重要就是了。
那些不利己的人，现代社会却赋予他们这样的称号：说好听的，叫“理想主义者”；说难听的，叫“白痴”。
如今，我终于明白尼采和海德格尔的痛苦。他们，一个成为了疯子，一个成了纳粹主义支持者，不是没有原因的。我们的社会中，总有着那些人，长了翅膀想往上飞，却脱离不了地心引力。
也许，这就是灵与肉的矛盾。最后，人也只能去过他应该过的日子，并且麻痹自己，就算他如何的心不甘情不愿。
23岁多一点的我，能写出这种文字，证明我还幼稚，但也说明我还清醒。但庆幸，在那些我来说很重要的朋友之中，也有一些与我一样的人。
也许，就是这股傻劲，会让我们有改变事态的潜力也说不定？
清醒的人，需要把握一个“度”。只要不翻天覆地地重演法国大革命的恐怖，迷醉的人将总是活在清醒的人的手掌之中。因为，迷醉的人，就像一条狗。给他一根骨头，就算打他两棍，他也会对你摇尾巴，因为他“清楚”地知道，只有这样他才能得到第二根骨头。
当然，在这个理想化为权欲的过程中，清醒者也容易被催眠。所以，只能是慢慢去体会，何谓“出淤泥而不染”。
王者与霸者，从来都没有说自己放弃统治权，只不过是初衷的不同，手段的各异，以及是否能把臣民“按摩”得服服贴贴，让他们忘记何谓造反。也就是说，迷醉者都是清醒者存在的必要前提。
2008年11月18日星期二
Like a frog in slowly boiling water
| The omen: a message from the Maya | |
| The Maya collapsed at the height of their power, sucked down into a quagmire of environmental decline, warfare, weak leadership and overpopulation. As the 21st century shudders in the wake of a global financial meltdown, are there lessons to be learned? | |
| Rory Carroll Nov 16, 2008 The ruins lie silent and abandoned in the heart of the jungle; blocks of stone surrendered to the vines, which twist and writhe over temples, plazas and pyramids. Weeds and forest creatures have colonised the inner sanctums; mahogany and cedar trees swallow what once were roads, blotting out the sun. This is Tikal, the ancient Mayan city of northern Guatemala. There was a time when tens of thousands lived here. The architecture and urban planning - there are epic monuments, boastful inscriptions and even courts for playing ball games - embody boundless human confidence. Today the only voices are of murmuring tourists, interlopers in a domain of spider monkeys and jaguars. "The imagination reels. There are reliefs, pyramids, temples in the extinguished city. The ... sound of flapping wings trickle into the immense sea of silence," wrote Miguel Angel Asturias, a Nobel Prize-winning Guatemalan poet and novelist. Shortly after its apogee, around AD800, the Maya civilisation, the most advanced in the western hemisphere, withered. Kingdoms fell, monuments were smashed and the great stone cities emptied. Tikal now stands as an eerie embodiment of a society gone wrong. How it came to pass is a question that has long fascinated scholars. Titles such as Ancient Maya: The Rise and Fall of a Rainforest Civilization fill faculty bookshelves. It has also provided fodder for literature and films, most recently Mel Gibson's Apocalypto (2006). There is a grim, irresistible appeal to this tale of Central American oblivion. Recent events have injected a jarring note into Mayan studies: a sense of anxiety, even foreboding. What if the fate of the Maya is to be our fate? What if climate change and the global financial crisis are harbingers of a system that is destined to warp, buckle and collapse? No one is suggesting that vines will start crawling up the concrete canyons of Wall Street, or that howler monkeys will chase pinstriped bankers through Manhattan. Mayan kings who botched up were ritually tortured and sacrificed with the aid of stingray spines to pierce the penis; an emphatic application of moral hazard. In our era, the only thing slashed is a bonus. There are, however, striking parallels between the Mayan fall and our era's convulsions. "We think we are different," says Jared Diamond, an American evolutionary biologist. "In fact ... all those powerful societies of the past thought they too were unique, right up to the moment of their collapse." The Maya, like us, were at the apex of their power when things began to unravel, he says. As stock markets zigzag into uncharted territory and ice-caps continue to melt, it is a view increasingly echoed by scholars and commentators. What, then, is the story of the Maya? And what lessons does it hold for us? According to Diamond's thesis, this: the ancients built a very clever and advanced society but were undone by their own success. Populations grew and stretched natural resources to breaking point. Political elites failed to resolve the escalating economic problems and the system collapsed. There was no need for an external cataclysm or a plague. What did it for the Maya was a slow-boiling environmental-driven crisis that its leaders failed to recognise and resolve until too late. "Because peak population, wealth, resource consumption and waste production are accompanied by peak environmental impact - approaching the limit at which impact outstrips resources - we can now understand why declines of societies tend to follow swiftly on their peaks," wrote Diamond in a 2003 article, The Last Americans: Environmental Collapse and the End of Civilization. The idea is expanded in his book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. The link between environmental, economic and political stress is clear, says Diamond. "When people are desperate and undernourished, they blame their government, which they see as responsible for failing to solve their problems." A visit to the jungle ruins in the Yucatan Peninsula, stretching from southern Mexico down to Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Belize, is a humbling experience. There is sticky, sapping heat and squadrons of stinging mosquitoes. The Maya were not a homogenous empire like the Inca or Aztecs but a series of squabbling kingdoms. The first settlements have been dated back to 1800BC but what is known as the "classic" period started much later, around AD250. The final period - zenith and collapse between AD750 and AD900 - is known as the "terminal classic". Tikal, deep in the forest of Peten in northern Guatemala, was one of the Mayan capitals, a sprawling complex of limestone structures that was home to about 100,000 people. Kings doubled up as head priests and political leaders. There were acropolises with hieroglyphs and pyramids with flat roofs from which astronomers and mathematicians mapped the planets and calculated calendars. The Maya accomplished all this without pack animals - no cows, mules or horses to heave and push just human muscle. By AD750 there were several million people living in the region, most of them farmers. Monuments and palaces became bigger and grander as kings and nobles competed for glory. And then all of a sudden everything seemed to go pear-shaped. Archaeological records show that monument building stopped abruptly, as did the boastful inscriptions. There is evidence that palaces may have been burned. Most dramatically, the population vanished. Over a few generations numbers withered from millions to tens of thousands, maybe even just thousands. Most abandoned the cities and migrated north. The birth rates of those who stayed tumbled. (Mathematically, Russia's population decline is on a similar trajectory). By the time the Spaniards arrived in the 1500s, there was hardly anyone left. Today, lush vegetation has reclaimed Tikal, turning everything mossy and green, but the temples, the tallest pre-Columbine structures, rise high over the canopy. George Lucas used Tikal as the site for the rebel base in the first Star Wars film. To explain the mysterious collapse, scholars posit many causes; an invasion, or disease, or shifting trade routes, or a drought. There is wide agreement, however, that a leading cause was environmental pressure. "The carrying capacity of the ecosystem was pushed to its limits," says Marcello Canuto, an anthropology professor at Yale University in the United States. Lakes became silted and soils exhausted. Tilling and man-made reservoirs provided food and water but population growth outstripped technological innovation. Complex and organised it may have been but Mayan society resembled a frog who stays in slowly boiling water, says Canuto. "Things were brewing within the system that were not picked up until too late." When the political elites did react they made things worse by offering greater sacrifices to the gods and plundering neighbours. "The kingdoms were interdependent and there was a ripple effect. They did not respond correctly to a crisis which, in hindsight, was as clear as day." The environmental trouble built up over centuries and was partly concealed by short-term fluctuations in rainfall patterns and harvest yields. But when the tipping point came, events moved quickly. "Their success was built on very thin ice. Kings were supposed to keep order and avoid chaos through rituals and sacrifice," says David Webster, author of The Fall of the Ancient Maya. "When manifestly they couldn't do it people lost confidence and the whole system of kingship fell apart." This brings us to modern parallels. Webster, a professor of archaeological anthropology at Pennsylvania State University, has been waiting for the question. Pinned to his wall is an old clipping about the fall of the Enron Corporation in 2001. "That was the first tremor," he says. "You know, human beings are always surprised when things collapse just when they seem most successful. We look around and we think we're fat, we're clever, we're comfortable and we don't think we're on the edge of something nasty. Hubris? No: ignorance." Some anthropologists hesitate to make direct links between ancient and modern societies, deeming it out of academic bounds. Not Webster. "In common with the Maya, we're not very rational in how we think about how the world works. They had their rituals and sacrifices. Magic, in other words. And we also believe in magic: that money and innovation can get us out of the inherent limits of our system, that the old rules don't apply to us." This is a modish view these days but it was considered cranky Luddism back during the 1980s stock-market boom and the 90s dotcom bubble. That was when masters of the universe bestrode Wall Street, and Francis Fukuyama caught the triumphalist liberal economic zeitgeist with his book The End of History and the Last Man. That era, to borrow from Star Wars, feels a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Now Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers are history and governments are taking over banks and propping up markets. If traders and their mumbo-jumbo about securitisation and derivatives resemble Mayan priests chanting in their temples then the developed world's political leaders are the hapless kings who egged them on rather than query the "magic". As chancellor, Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown blessed the conjuring. "In budget after budget I want us to do even more to encourage the risk-takers," he said in 2004. Now the frailty is revealed and instead of Gordon Gekko's "greed is good" we are hearing Shelley's Ozymandias: "Nothing beside remains: round the decay/ Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare/ The lone and level sands stretch far away." Canuto sees an unhappy precedent. The Mayan kings who allowed their era's crisis to spin out of control were unfit to remedy it, not least because they were invested in the broken system. "The ones who caused the crisis are the ones you don't want trying to resolve it." George W. Bush, by coincidence of timing, is on his way out but other G8 leaders are hanging on. Several commentators have argued that the financial crisis is but a squall compared with the ecological hurricane they say is coming. A European study estimates deforestation alone is causing a loss of natural capital worth between US$2 trillion and US$5 trillion annually. "The two crises have the same cause," wrote George Monbiot in Britain's Guardian newspaper earlier last month. "In both cases, those who exploit the resource have demanded impossible rates of return and invoked debts that can never be repaid. In both cases we denied the likely consequences." With ecology the stock from which all wealth grows, the financial and environmental crises feed each other, says Monbiot. If so, the Maya offer an ominous glimpse of what may lie in store. "Their population growth was like driving a car faster and faster until the engine blew up," says Webster. "Look at us. I'm 65. When I was born there were 2 billion people in the world, now we're approaching 7 billion. That's extraordinary." Eventually pressure on scarce resources will overwhelm technology - and do for us as it did for the Maya. "The western conceit is that we can have it all - and call it progress," says Webster. "I'm glad I'm not 30 years old. I don't want to see what's coming in the next 40 to 50 years." Armageddon, like hemlines, is prone to changes in fashion. It has been on a roll with films such as 28 Days Later, I Am Legend and Blindness, which posit a world grimmer than anything Hobbes envisaged. Cormac McCarthy's post-apocalyptic novel, The Road, was hailed as an environmental fable. "By day the banished sun circles the Earth like a grieving mother with a lamp," he writes, before introducing baby-skewering cannibals. That too is being made into a film. Webster does not think things will get that bad. "Not like Mad Max," he says, managing to sound almost cheery. "But definitely unpleasant." The gloom may be misplaced. Reports of capitalism's death have been exaggerated before and it has stubbornly survived Karl Marx, the Great Depression, world wars and oil shocks. And in contrast to the Maya, it is possible our technology will prevail over population and environmental pressures. Malthusian doom8sayers have consistently underestimated the capacity of better irrigation, pesticides, new strains of crops and other technologies to boost food yields. The rate of population growth is slowing and human numbers are expected to peak at about 9.2 billion by 2050 before declining. That Asians are moving more and more to western-type diets and consumer baubles will strain resources, acknowledges The Economist. But don't worry: "There is no limit to human ingenuity." If the gloomy environmental prognosis is correct, and global warming is set to wreak major havoc, what are the chances we will respond better than the Maya? Electing Bush instead of Al Gore suggests limited wisdom in picking kings, and emasculating the Kyoto treaty was perhaps as sensible as burning corn harvests to appease the gods. When Republicans chant, "Drill, baby, drill" it is not much of a stretch to picture them, barefoot and in traditional huipil shirts, rooting for another sacrifice. It remains to be seen how Barack Obama responds to the challenges. Nevertheless there are promising omens. Governments are beginning to assign monetary values to natural "assets" such as forests, a conceptual leap that could reinvent economics. The EU has set up a carbon-trading market to get industry to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The UN is pushing for a new climate treaty in which governments will pay tropical countries billions of dollars annually to leave their forests untouched. Ecuador has already requested US$350 million a year in exchange for leaving 1 billion barrels of oil beneath its Amazon floor. "I believe the 21st century will be dominated by the concept of natural capital, just as the 20th was dominated by financial capital," says Achim Steiner, head of the UN environment programme. Even so, would that be enough? Civilisations rise - and collapse - for many different reasons. "If there is a simple lesson to be drawn from Central America's abandoned ruins, it is to protect the environment and control population growth," says Michael Coe, author of the seminal 1966 text, The Maya. "No civilisation lasts for ever. Most go for between 200 and 600 years." The Maya, Romans and Angkor of Cambodia lasted 600. "Western civilisation began with the Renaissance, so we're hitting 600 years," says Coe, one of the world's leading experts on civilisation collapse. "The difference is we have a choice whether to let things get worse or fix them. That's what science is about. But it takes will on the part of those who govern and those who are being governed. "To tell you the truth, I don't know if we have that." The Guardian News & Medi | |
2008年11月17日星期一
小熊的名
兄弟说，买了一只小熊给我。小熊的胸口上，还绣了一只小小熊。要我为它们取名。
苦思冥想之后，我决定了，把那熊叫大范，他胸口的那只叫小范。
兄弟的名，简写为F。这阵子，为我带来安慰的另两位朋友，一位是A君，一位是N君。于是，加起来，就是FAN。用汉语拼音念，就是“范”。
当然，可以叫小梵、小帆、小贩、小烦等等等，但这些都“名不正”。小凡不错，毕竟要平凡其实最难。但是，“大凡”感觉怪怪的，仿佛“大凡世人皆会醉”那样，而且大凡google的话有很多条目，证明这是个普通的名字。兄弟的礼物，毕竟意义非凡。所以，还是以“范”为名。带有“模范”的意思，一则符合本公子“王子病”的性格，二则告诫自己，要以这段日子的心路历程与经验为“范”，为戒，从此不要再“犯”同样的糊涂病。
兄弟，怎么样？有没有像鲁迅解释阿Q名字的感觉？哈哈哈
苦思冥想之后，我决定了，把那熊叫大范，他胸口的那只叫小范。
兄弟的名，简写为F。这阵子，为我带来安慰的另两位朋友，一位是A君，一位是N君。于是，加起来，就是FAN。用汉语拼音念，就是“范”。
当然，可以叫小梵、小帆、小贩、小烦等等等，但这些都“名不正”。小凡不错，毕竟要平凡其实最难。但是，“大凡”感觉怪怪的，仿佛“大凡世人皆会醉”那样，而且大凡google的话有很多条目，证明这是个普通的名字。兄弟的礼物，毕竟意义非凡。所以，还是以“范”为名。带有“模范”的意思，一则符合本公子“王子病”的性格，二则告诫自己，要以这段日子的心路历程与经验为“范”，为戒，从此不要再“犯”同样的糊涂病。
兄弟，怎么样？有没有像鲁迅解释阿Q名字的感觉？哈哈哈
There comes a time in life...
在众多把翅膀藏在衣袖里的天使中，寻觅到一个愿意分享他真实身份的。
本来也许需要独自在沉默中走完的这条路，出现一个旅伴，是何等的欣慰。
天使，并没有错；他们不过是害羞于表现自己的与众不同。
有的，因此而折翼；有的，则在躲躲藏藏中，一辈子戴着凡人的面具。
但愿那些终于能看清并接受自己的，最后都能回归天堂。
本来也许需要独自在沉默中走完的这条路，出现一个旅伴，是何等的欣慰。
天使，并没有错；他们不过是害羞于表现自己的与众不同。
有的，因此而折翼；有的，则在躲躲藏藏中，一辈子戴着凡人的面具。
但愿那些终于能看清并接受自己的，最后都能回归天堂。
2008年11月16日星期日
Karma
One of the greatest fallacies I've lived in the past months is trying to objectify my Self, seeking some form of transcendence from the heartfelt experiences of longing and at times, pain that thoughts and emotions I evoked have resulted in. It boils down to the issue of impermanence that all human beings have to deal with. We all hope to go beyond stages of uncertainty. We all hope for something that can account for our existence. At its largest, impermanence comes in the form of inevitable death. For that matter, we ask ourselves what the meaning of our lives is. At other phases of life, it could be a particular aim we seek to achieve: being "rich", having a "successful" career, having a family... But pitfalls await us if we are not careful. We can fall into the mistake of seeing that as the End, without realizing that life, and in fact every experience we go through, constitutes part of a PROCESS. We forget that even reaching what we set out to achieve is in itself just part of what goes on after that. In that string of thought, we may even go to the extent of trying to accelerate things to a state that we define as the most desirable, or deem as the Highest of possibilities.
I committed this mistake, in more ways than one. A recent friendship that came as a great surprise to me months ago could not develop normally because I was too eager to bring it beyond what was possible by present circumstances. Drawing on Buddha's notion of Karma (which can be translated into "acts" or "intention"), based on an agricultural form of growth, in all human experiences we first plant a seed, then we await the correct conditions for the seed to sprout, to grow and eventually bear fruit/ harvest. Too eager to see the fruits of a relationship, even to the extent of living in the illusion that a state of relationship can be persistently non-changing till both parties part this world, I tugged and pulled at the plant, drawing out part of its roots because of brute force. Now I see my mistake, and I want to remedy it. To do so, I can continue nurturing the hurt plant and hope it continues to survive. Yet I know that this baby will eventually become a tree that is deformed and unable to withstand strong winds. Suffering don't necessarily make us better or more resilient. At times, strength that manifest from the grown product may be underlined with many unseen cracks, deformities, flaws - which in all constitute a twisted personality. It is therefore my choice to pluck up the baby plant altogether. I killed it physically. But at the same time, remember that every action is part of a process. My wish is that I can sow a new seed, and lay this old plant in its soil so it becomes the fertilizer for the new plant. Like Karma, the "being" ceases to exist, but its effects will be felt in what follows after its demise.
This is life. As I passed a tree of pink frangipani I was surprised they still bloomed in autumn. However, the cold winds in the past few days must have taken a toll on their lives - some of them have began to shriver. One day all of them shall die, and the tree be bare. But they have bestowed me with their fragrance that opened my eyes to my own life. In this sense, you can say that every single word that you are reading now is part of the blossom's karma. The same logic goes behind the metaphor, "when I drink tea, I smile because I know I am drinking a piece of cloud".
Life is a process, and everything I've lived so far, including all the mistakes I've made, the hurt I've brought to some people, and this letter of confession and repentance are part of what is to come. Never again shall I be blinded by objectification and neglect the processional nature of life and living.
Hence, is there value in going through all I've gone through? Some may say it is all after all a result of my own doing and my heart's insatiable desires, and I have just wasted time. But if we believe that life is a circle, without start or end, going back to where we came from, at least I have not lived in vain neglecting the process. It is only when we come to question these basic assumptions and hypotheses others have conveniently relegated to "unthinkable", experiencing the ups and downs in realizing them - call it a psychological experiment if you wish - that true intellectual capacity is illuminated. Perhaps that is why even at the age of 4 the British Queen, when told not to eat too much of her birthday cake because it will give her a stomachache, replied, "The suffering is worth it."
I am now sharing this with you, because I have gone through a process you may or may not have experienced, and tried to capture it in words. If this has any effects on you, then you have become part of my Karma - and I hope you pass yours on.
I committed this mistake, in more ways than one. A recent friendship that came as a great surprise to me months ago could not develop normally because I was too eager to bring it beyond what was possible by present circumstances. Drawing on Buddha's notion of Karma (which can be translated into "acts" or "intention"), based on an agricultural form of growth, in all human experiences we first plant a seed, then we await the correct conditions for the seed to sprout, to grow and eventually bear fruit/ harvest. Too eager to see the fruits of a relationship, even to the extent of living in the illusion that a state of relationship can be persistently non-changing till both parties part this world, I tugged and pulled at the plant, drawing out part of its roots because of brute force. Now I see my mistake, and I want to remedy it. To do so, I can continue nurturing the hurt plant and hope it continues to survive. Yet I know that this baby will eventually become a tree that is deformed and unable to withstand strong winds. Suffering don't necessarily make us better or more resilient. At times, strength that manifest from the grown product may be underlined with many unseen cracks, deformities, flaws - which in all constitute a twisted personality. It is therefore my choice to pluck up the baby plant altogether. I killed it physically. But at the same time, remember that every action is part of a process. My wish is that I can sow a new seed, and lay this old plant in its soil so it becomes the fertilizer for the new plant. Like Karma, the "being" ceases to exist, but its effects will be felt in what follows after its demise.
This is life. As I passed a tree of pink frangipani I was surprised they still bloomed in autumn. However, the cold winds in the past few days must have taken a toll on their lives - some of them have began to shriver. One day all of them shall die, and the tree be bare. But they have bestowed me with their fragrance that opened my eyes to my own life. In this sense, you can say that every single word that you are reading now is part of the blossom's karma. The same logic goes behind the metaphor, "when I drink tea, I smile because I know I am drinking a piece of cloud".
Life is a process, and everything I've lived so far, including all the mistakes I've made, the hurt I've brought to some people, and this letter of confession and repentance are part of what is to come. Never again shall I be blinded by objectification and neglect the processional nature of life and living.
Hence, is there value in going through all I've gone through? Some may say it is all after all a result of my own doing and my heart's insatiable desires, and I have just wasted time. But if we believe that life is a circle, without start or end, going back to where we came from, at least I have not lived in vain neglecting the process. It is only when we come to question these basic assumptions and hypotheses others have conveniently relegated to "unthinkable", experiencing the ups and downs in realizing them - call it a psychological experiment if you wish - that true intellectual capacity is illuminated. Perhaps that is why even at the age of 4 the British Queen, when told not to eat too much of her birthday cake because it will give her a stomachache, replied, "The suffering is worth it."
I am now sharing this with you, because I have gone through a process you may or may not have experienced, and tried to capture it in words. If this has any effects on you, then you have become part of my Karma - and I hope you pass yours on.
2008年11月14日星期五
Reclaiming a lost part of Self
It's been a long time since I climbed the mountain behind HKU. The weather was cool, in fact it gets chilly at times. Yet moist air and the leaves' breath concocted a dish of autumn freshness that I've not tasted in a long long while.
The moon, it's solemnly yellow tonight. Its brightness radiated warmth. I could almost feel it smiling. But did God have wobbly hands today, such that he couldn't draw a perfect circle? Or perhaps Satan came with a small blade and thinly sliced God's creation out of mischief? Anyway, if it was mockery, it didn't work. Angels' eyes sparkled and blinked as they looked down upon the lone traveller. God won the fight today.
600m upslope, and there comes an opening in the foliage. Buildings on Hong Kong island stand right below, even IFC. Tsim Sha Tsui wave not too far away, as neon lights scream in silence. In the day mountains form the background across the landscape. At night you can't see the ranges, but their necklaces of orange street lamps dotting the roads form a beautiful lace in the shrouding blackness. The sea separating the two islands lay still, with ships seated upon it. Those ships that glided and skimmed across the water surface are as gentle as dragonflies that dance on water.
Crickets call, a whole band of violinists and cellists responding to one another. Like friends they each have their own voices, but never arguing or fighting for dominance. As the winds blow, bamboos sway, their leaves rustling a roughness pleasant to the ears, like how a double bass works in a quartet.
This is a place where you can almost feel like you are embracing the world, with nature and city singing a harmonious tune. You can hear it just standing still for a second - a heartbeat that thumps with the rhythm of Love.
A friend called. My best friend from primary 1 to 4. It so happens he is in HKU on his NTU GIP. For some reason I've lost most of my memories before upper primary, but I can recall chatting with this friend over the phone almost everyday when I was young. God brought us together again, in a foreign land. Somehow it just makes me believe that there are some people who are destined to be part of our lives as long as we trod on this land.
Looking up to the deep blue skies, I smiled and whispered to Mummy, "you remember KX? We've found each other again."
Today I walked a path and reclaimed a lost part of myself, in more ways than one. Some, in fact most people, never have that luxury. For that, I am grateful. =)
The moon, it's solemnly yellow tonight. Its brightness radiated warmth. I could almost feel it smiling. But did God have wobbly hands today, such that he couldn't draw a perfect circle? Or perhaps Satan came with a small blade and thinly sliced God's creation out of mischief? Anyway, if it was mockery, it didn't work. Angels' eyes sparkled and blinked as they looked down upon the lone traveller. God won the fight today.
600m upslope, and there comes an opening in the foliage. Buildings on Hong Kong island stand right below, even IFC. Tsim Sha Tsui wave not too far away, as neon lights scream in silence. In the day mountains form the background across the landscape. At night you can't see the ranges, but their necklaces of orange street lamps dotting the roads form a beautiful lace in the shrouding blackness. The sea separating the two islands lay still, with ships seated upon it. Those ships that glided and skimmed across the water surface are as gentle as dragonflies that dance on water.
Crickets call, a whole band of violinists and cellists responding to one another. Like friends they each have their own voices, but never arguing or fighting for dominance. As the winds blow, bamboos sway, their leaves rustling a roughness pleasant to the ears, like how a double bass works in a quartet.
This is a place where you can almost feel like you are embracing the world, with nature and city singing a harmonious tune. You can hear it just standing still for a second - a heartbeat that thumps with the rhythm of Love.
A friend called. My best friend from primary 1 to 4. It so happens he is in HKU on his NTU GIP. For some reason I've lost most of my memories before upper primary, but I can recall chatting with this friend over the phone almost everyday when I was young. God brought us together again, in a foreign land. Somehow it just makes me believe that there are some people who are destined to be part of our lives as long as we trod on this land.
Looking up to the deep blue skies, I smiled and whispered to Mummy, "you remember KX? We've found each other again."
Today I walked a path and reclaimed a lost part of myself, in more ways than one. Some, in fact most people, never have that luxury. For that, I am grateful. =)
返回地球表面
理想与现实，并不冲突；但现实却能够把飘入云霄的我们，拉回地球表面。
昨天与弟弟打电话，说他下学期要到浙大浸濡一个学期。于是，就谈到钱的问题。幸亏，自己这学期真的“省吃俭用”，3个月也只逛过百货商场2次，所以，估计把这学期的存款，拿一半给弟弟，应该就绰绰有余了。
谈着谈着，就说到以后弟弟上大学的事。他说还没决定自己的方向。很巧的是，他也像以前的我一样，有修读心理学的闪念。不过，他也知道那纯粹作为兴趣。而目前的我，尽管知道心理学有它微妙有价值的地方，但也明白心理学这个学科背后的一些原则性基础，是我所不苟同的。就像认为人格的一切方面都能测量，或是如福柯所言，这个学科的成立在不知不觉中，成为一种话语霸权，以至于有小毛病就进疯人院，造成人对自己弱点的夸大，对自己的不自信，以及人与人之间的疏离。
所以，弟弟说想搞“语言之类”的。一直以来，他也在搞传媒。究竟如何，我想，得由他按自己的个性与兴趣决定。如果要跟我走上一样的路，我也不反对，只要是他的选择。
问题是选择大学。说实在的，我很希望弟弟能出国留学。能够把他送到欧美最好，哪怕是去中国或台湾，也总强过留在国大或南大。也许这是我的偏见，也可能是个人经验，我总觉得，我们这一代人，如果没有国际视野，就无法很好地理解我们的存在实质。国大、南大，在很大程度上是产机器人的地方。当然，必须明白，这只是比喻。我的意思是，在新加坡上学，没有思考、思辨的自由空间。不断地赶作业，不停地搞project meetings，固然能够“提升人际交往技巧”，但如果这一辈子都在搞business networking，少了这几年的“训练”又如何？承认也好，否认也罢，新加坡的制度，是把人变成instruments的工厂。就拿NIE来说，老师是“受训”，而不是“被教育”。我们的词典中只有teacher training，而在一些发达国家，他们用的是teacher education。这之中有本质的区别。当然，“崇洋媚外”总没有好结果，毕竟各个context的历史与实际情况不同。现在念研究生的我知道，读10本英美著作，能把理论真正运用到新加坡的，也许只有1本，甚至一本也没有。
这也就是说，教育的目的，不应该是寻找现成的答案，而是明白其他人、地方、文化究竟在做些什么，我们的制度又是如何形成并在当下是怎么样一个面貌，然后以自己的能力去推陈出新，追求进步，哪怕历史总是在重复“否认-重建-得到认可-再否认”的循环。这需要才智。这也需要一个人曾经有过思考与沉淀的空间。我总认为弟弟比我聪明得多，虽然是懒猪一只。所以，如果我自己能走到今天，我相信他能走得更远。但这需要有适当的环境。留在新加坡这个“漩涡”之中，就算再聪明的人，很多时候也无法自拔。况且，我不希望自己的弟弟成为一个不明白何谓“哲学”，就一味否定或远离它的人。根本上来说，就连我，也可能因为被本地机制束缚太久，有时视野中就忽略了对“智慧”（Wisdom）的思考。对于一辈子打算搞教育的人，这是大忌。当然，很多时候，哲学并不给我们答案，因为很多时候，最重要的，便是“自知自己无知”，然后激励自己继续训练思考的能力。
也许，我没有资格去把自己的观点施加在弟弟身上。但是，正如Aristotle所说的，教育者能够传授的，是what is deemed as necessary，尽管不一定useful。思辨是知识的起点，而大学正是与知识打交道的地方。要真正成为“有知识的人”，除了懂得“那些”知识，还得知道他们从何而来，透视他们的根基。就像交朋友，如果不摸透对方的本质性格，很多时候是无法深交的。又如我最近读到的（尽管忘了在哪里），学习到了一个阶段后，需要的不是累积知识，而是塑造一个可以融入新知识、反思旧知识的理性机制（rational system of mind）。
所以，不知道自己的经济能力是否应付得来，但我真的真的希望让弟弟出国留学。下来真的要省省省了。少去一些地方旅游，少吃几顿丰盛的，少买一些无所谓的东西，如果能一点一点地累积资本，让弟弟在20岁时摆脱这个令人窒息的机制，有机会从外面回过头来审视这十几年来生活的地方及其运作方式，我想总不是什么对不起自己的事。
那么多年来，总觉得一个人生活其实很简单。多余的钱，就寄到云南给那些需要的孩子念书。以后，开始工作后，我想应该也始终如一地秉持这个理念吧。有些朋友（特别从商的）会说，应该不断地create wealth，这样才能成立“基金”去大面积地帮助下一代。有这样的念头当然好。但是，我将自己的价值视为delivering value的一端，所以我不会先把钱挣够了，自己享受够了，才来“做慈善”。反之，一到有能力去制造价值的时候，我认为就应该去做，即使是要放弃自己某些奢侈的享乐。我们总是以为，要帮助人需要有很多的钱。其实，在中国农村或印度贫民窟的某一个孩子，需要的不过是几十块新币，就能上一个学期的课，并且无需空着肚子睡觉。能帮一个，是一个。说不定，在这种累积式的运作模式下，一个人所能为其他个体制造的实质social opportunities and value，并不亚于将财产全捐出来的比尔盖兹？
昨天与弟弟打电话，说他下学期要到浙大浸濡一个学期。于是，就谈到钱的问题。幸亏，自己这学期真的“省吃俭用”，3个月也只逛过百货商场2次，所以，估计把这学期的存款，拿一半给弟弟，应该就绰绰有余了。
谈着谈着，就说到以后弟弟上大学的事。他说还没决定自己的方向。很巧的是，他也像以前的我一样，有修读心理学的闪念。不过，他也知道那纯粹作为兴趣。而目前的我，尽管知道心理学有它微妙有价值的地方，但也明白心理学这个学科背后的一些原则性基础，是我所不苟同的。就像认为人格的一切方面都能测量，或是如福柯所言，这个学科的成立在不知不觉中，成为一种话语霸权，以至于有小毛病就进疯人院，造成人对自己弱点的夸大，对自己的不自信，以及人与人之间的疏离。
所以，弟弟说想搞“语言之类”的。一直以来，他也在搞传媒。究竟如何，我想，得由他按自己的个性与兴趣决定。如果要跟我走上一样的路，我也不反对，只要是他的选择。
问题是选择大学。说实在的，我很希望弟弟能出国留学。能够把他送到欧美最好，哪怕是去中国或台湾，也总强过留在国大或南大。也许这是我的偏见，也可能是个人经验，我总觉得，我们这一代人，如果没有国际视野，就无法很好地理解我们的存在实质。国大、南大，在很大程度上是产机器人的地方。当然，必须明白，这只是比喻。我的意思是，在新加坡上学，没有思考、思辨的自由空间。不断地赶作业，不停地搞project meetings，固然能够“提升人际交往技巧”，但如果这一辈子都在搞business networking，少了这几年的“训练”又如何？承认也好，否认也罢，新加坡的制度，是把人变成instruments的工厂。就拿NIE来说，老师是“受训”，而不是“被教育”。我们的词典中只有teacher training，而在一些发达国家，他们用的是teacher education。这之中有本质的区别。当然，“崇洋媚外”总没有好结果，毕竟各个context的历史与实际情况不同。现在念研究生的我知道，读10本英美著作，能把理论真正运用到新加坡的，也许只有1本，甚至一本也没有。
这也就是说，教育的目的，不应该是寻找现成的答案，而是明白其他人、地方、文化究竟在做些什么，我们的制度又是如何形成并在当下是怎么样一个面貌，然后以自己的能力去推陈出新，追求进步，哪怕历史总是在重复“否认-重建-得到认可-再否认”的循环。这需要才智。这也需要一个人曾经有过思考与沉淀的空间。我总认为弟弟比我聪明得多，虽然是懒猪一只。所以，如果我自己能走到今天，我相信他能走得更远。但这需要有适当的环境。留在新加坡这个“漩涡”之中，就算再聪明的人，很多时候也无法自拔。况且，我不希望自己的弟弟成为一个不明白何谓“哲学”，就一味否定或远离它的人。根本上来说，就连我，也可能因为被本地机制束缚太久，有时视野中就忽略了对“智慧”（Wisdom）的思考。对于一辈子打算搞教育的人，这是大忌。当然，很多时候，哲学并不给我们答案，因为很多时候，最重要的，便是“自知自己无知”，然后激励自己继续训练思考的能力。
也许，我没有资格去把自己的观点施加在弟弟身上。但是，正如Aristotle所说的，教育者能够传授的，是what is deemed as necessary，尽管不一定useful。思辨是知识的起点，而大学正是与知识打交道的地方。要真正成为“有知识的人”，除了懂得“那些”知识，还得知道他们从何而来，透视他们的根基。就像交朋友，如果不摸透对方的本质性格，很多时候是无法深交的。又如我最近读到的（尽管忘了在哪里），学习到了一个阶段后，需要的不是累积知识，而是塑造一个可以融入新知识、反思旧知识的理性机制（rational system of mind）。
所以，不知道自己的经济能力是否应付得来，但我真的真的希望让弟弟出国留学。下来真的要省省省了。少去一些地方旅游，少吃几顿丰盛的，少买一些无所谓的东西，如果能一点一点地累积资本，让弟弟在20岁时摆脱这个令人窒息的机制，有机会从外面回过头来审视这十几年来生活的地方及其运作方式，我想总不是什么对不起自己的事。
那么多年来，总觉得一个人生活其实很简单。多余的钱，就寄到云南给那些需要的孩子念书。以后，开始工作后，我想应该也始终如一地秉持这个理念吧。有些朋友（特别从商的）会说，应该不断地create wealth，这样才能成立“基金”去大面积地帮助下一代。有这样的念头当然好。但是，我将自己的价值视为delivering value的一端，所以我不会先把钱挣够了，自己享受够了，才来“做慈善”。反之，一到有能力去制造价值的时候，我认为就应该去做，即使是要放弃自己某些奢侈的享乐。我们总是以为，要帮助人需要有很多的钱。其实，在中国农村或印度贫民窟的某一个孩子，需要的不过是几十块新币，就能上一个学期的课，并且无需空着肚子睡觉。能帮一个，是一个。说不定，在这种累积式的运作模式下，一个人所能为其他个体制造的实质social opportunities and value，并不亚于将财产全捐出来的比尔盖兹？
2008年11月13日星期四
生命协奏
昨天去小提琴演奏会，渐渐爱上了莫扎特的“Violin Concerto No. 5 in A (K219)”。感觉就像立于强风之中抬头探那不明不暗、温柔备至的月亮。
世界的中心，立着一个陈炜雄；他却还在学习如何把整个世界，装入自己的心中。
慢慢发觉，视野很重要。Vision，指的是你在什么层面看自己的人生。站得太高，一下子就看到终点，甚至觉得从生到死只不过是一个“点”的距离，就容易消极。蹲得太低，只看到一小段生命的片段，就容易被狭隘蒙蔽了自己的价值。存在，就是要找一个适当的距离去看人生（只要是“看”自己，就只能有距离。眼睛是无法看见它们本身所置于的生命体的）。找到那个高度，就会发觉，生命是有节奏的。苦闷、孤寂、烦恼、感伤，那是乐曲的低潮；但心情总会伴随各种际遇而升华乃至高亢，乐曲便有了许多的crescendos。时快时慢；时而低沉而平静，时而尖细而跳跃，时而圆润而平稳；时而在重复中找寻美，时而蹦出一两个令人眉毛一揪的特殊音符。
生命的协奏曲，也许就是这样谱写的吧。
今晚月亮特别圆而亮，云朵也不多，如微烟缭绕。风微微地吹，凉而不冷。不知明天如何？
音乐，依然奏响。现在，是柔和但绵延的间奏，静静地流动着，因为有点感冒而因写论文睡眠不足的小熊，此刻要钻进被窝中了。
世界的中心，立着一个陈炜雄；他却还在学习如何把整个世界，装入自己的心中。
慢慢发觉，视野很重要。Vision，指的是你在什么层面看自己的人生。站得太高，一下子就看到终点，甚至觉得从生到死只不过是一个“点”的距离，就容易消极。蹲得太低，只看到一小段生命的片段，就容易被狭隘蒙蔽了自己的价值。存在，就是要找一个适当的距离去看人生（只要是“看”自己，就只能有距离。眼睛是无法看见它们本身所置于的生命体的）。找到那个高度，就会发觉，生命是有节奏的。苦闷、孤寂、烦恼、感伤，那是乐曲的低潮；但心情总会伴随各种际遇而升华乃至高亢，乐曲便有了许多的crescendos。时快时慢；时而低沉而平静，时而尖细而跳跃，时而圆润而平稳；时而在重复中找寻美，时而蹦出一两个令人眉毛一揪的特殊音符。
生命的协奏曲，也许就是这样谱写的吧。
今晚月亮特别圆而亮，云朵也不多，如微烟缭绕。风微微地吹，凉而不冷。不知明天如何？
音乐，依然奏响。现在，是柔和但绵延的间奏，静静地流动着，因为有点感冒而因写论文睡眠不足的小熊，此刻要钻进被窝中了。
2008年11月12日星期三
回复兄弟的信
你说的，当然没有错。每个人，也不过就是一个”人“。但，这也就包含了我也是一个”人“的成分。也就是说，”我是一个人“这句话，可以从两个方面来看：它 带有某种集体性，而”我“与其他”人“并没有多大不同，即”我（不过）是一个人“；也可以带有凸现个体的意味，”我是（这样）一个人“。这两者，是矛盾 的；同时，这也恰恰是我们每个人身上与本性的矛盾统一。
说这个，是要说明，在很多时候，我们想做的东西，我们的理想，如果要坚持，就必须与众不同。要不同，就难以把一切人视为“平等”，即使要与众不同的欲望是 普遍存在的。我想，最大的分歧，总是在我们想要达到什么。问你，你人生的理想是什么？罗鑫的，是要拍出好照片，而且背后的意图，是要捕捉他的同胞的一切生 活相；我的，是要为教育奋斗，要说事业也行，要说权力欲望也可以，但最后总是在做一个“我造就群众，群众也早就我"的人。这种理想，不是许多人所能拥有 的；同时，我们也就必须接受，我们必须经历许多别人所不经历的，尽管我们也能体会别人所体会的。就如看月亮，任何有文学修养的人，都能吟诗，但一个文学 家，就必须为文字折腾。在我们看来，他大可不必这样折磨自己，但这就是他生活的方式，也是他所选择的身份所附带的条件。每个人的身份不同，必须经历的，也 就不一样。当我写我的文字的时候，我比较的对象，是那些与我有着同等学历（学识），但无需为所谓的”国家大事“处处思索的朋友。也就是这样，我发自内心有 种不适从。为什么别人就可以在赚钱与实习之间，显得很快乐，而我必须为那希望永远不会成为现实的社会潜在问题担忧？在试图平复的过程中，我难免会必须把自 己的价值提高，说别人虚浮，说自己有着别人没有的理想与透视。这真的是不自信的表现。然而，在同一个时候，我也在慢慢地接受，自己之所以成为自己，自己之 所以与众不同的地方，那就是我思考的能力。令我不适的，还有一个外在社会标准的附加条件：拥有思想，只是掌握value，是虚浮的；拥有金钱，是 capital，是实实在在能用来压人的东西。思想家必须把价值转为资本，有钱人则是把资本化为价值。前者的路，是更难走的。
而且，回到我自己的人生，此刻的孤独，虽不如一人漂浮在海中孤岛上，却有某种”与世隔绝“的意味。关怀，当然我有；但是，人与人之间的关系，除了 intangible的关怀，还需要那实实在在的存在感——我需要朋友本人在我身边。当你是一个对生活琐碎敏感、情感比较细腻的人，却没有可以分享这一切 的一个人，除了电脑；当你希望在人群中生活，因为你是一个外向的人，却发觉你间接被你的处境孤立于人群之外，这就是现在的我。不能说我很痛苦，但至少，我 有些难以适从。而在这个过程中，我更认识到许多从来没发觉的自己。（见下帖）
正因为是一个人，正因为试图发觉并正式我的复杂性，我才有些折腾。却很少人能够理解，都以某种”客观“角度劝我别想，劝我看开。我看得很开，但问题是，我 把灵魂的大门开得大大的，以至于我现在必须找到收拾残局的方法，并且决定我是否要继续解剖，以及解剖到何种程度。可惜，要能够明白我说什么，除非自己也在 actively exercising the reflective mind and playing this "game"，才能心照不宣。
说这个，是要说明，在很多时候，我们想做的东西，我们的理想，如果要坚持，就必须与众不同。要不同，就难以把一切人视为“平等”，即使要与众不同的欲望是 普遍存在的。我想，最大的分歧，总是在我们想要达到什么。问你，你人生的理想是什么？罗鑫的，是要拍出好照片，而且背后的意图，是要捕捉他的同胞的一切生 活相；我的，是要为教育奋斗，要说事业也行，要说权力欲望也可以，但最后总是在做一个“我造就群众，群众也早就我"的人。这种理想，不是许多人所能拥有 的；同时，我们也就必须接受，我们必须经历许多别人所不经历的，尽管我们也能体会别人所体会的。就如看月亮，任何有文学修养的人，都能吟诗，但一个文学 家，就必须为文字折腾。在我们看来，他大可不必这样折磨自己，但这就是他生活的方式，也是他所选择的身份所附带的条件。每个人的身份不同，必须经历的，也 就不一样。当我写我的文字的时候，我比较的对象，是那些与我有着同等学历（学识），但无需为所谓的”国家大事“处处思索的朋友。也就是这样，我发自内心有 种不适从。为什么别人就可以在赚钱与实习之间，显得很快乐，而我必须为那希望永远不会成为现实的社会潜在问题担忧？在试图平复的过程中，我难免会必须把自 己的价值提高，说别人虚浮，说自己有着别人没有的理想与透视。这真的是不自信的表现。然而，在同一个时候，我也在慢慢地接受，自己之所以成为自己，自己之 所以与众不同的地方，那就是我思考的能力。令我不适的，还有一个外在社会标准的附加条件：拥有思想，只是掌握value，是虚浮的；拥有金钱，是 capital，是实实在在能用来压人的东西。思想家必须把价值转为资本，有钱人则是把资本化为价值。前者的路，是更难走的。
而且，回到我自己的人生，此刻的孤独，虽不如一人漂浮在海中孤岛上，却有某种”与世隔绝“的意味。关怀，当然我有；但是，人与人之间的关系，除了 intangible的关怀，还需要那实实在在的存在感——我需要朋友本人在我身边。当你是一个对生活琐碎敏感、情感比较细腻的人，却没有可以分享这一切 的一个人，除了电脑；当你希望在人群中生活，因为你是一个外向的人，却发觉你间接被你的处境孤立于人群之外，这就是现在的我。不能说我很痛苦，但至少，我 有些难以适从。而在这个过程中，我更认识到许多从来没发觉的自己。（见下帖）
正因为是一个人，正因为试图发觉并正式我的复杂性，我才有些折腾。却很少人能够理解，都以某种”客观“角度劝我别想，劝我看开。我看得很开，但问题是，我 把灵魂的大门开得大大的，以至于我现在必须找到收拾残局的方法，并且决定我是否要继续解剖，以及解剖到何种程度。可惜，要能够明白我说什么，除非自己也在 actively exercising the reflective mind and playing this "game"，才能心照不宣。
回复学妹的信
其实，如果是想的问题，那还好，可以不想；但是，那种一个人在香港的感觉，着实令我不适。当然，它有它好的地方，因为至少能够不去在乎太多的human politics，安心地与自己和大自然接触。问题是，当我看美景时，心里也就由不得有那种希望身旁有人一起分享的欲望。我所谓的平静，便是在这个过程中慢慢培养出来的。我并不坦然。我只是希望不被沸腾的心折腾罢了。于是，情感上就总会夹杂某种矛盾。用尼采形容基督教的一句话，I am rationalizing my own weaknesses。在强大与脆弱之间，学了文学的人，总是有着矛盾。要对自己真实，你就必须面对你所有的情感，而在我们学会如何坦然接受之前，我们只能是显得有些狼狈与脆弱；但同时，你有必须强大，而在我们学会如何坦然视之之前，我们只能蒙蔽某些情感与脆弱。这也许就是现在的我。
昨天听了一个关于"democratic modernism"的比较文学讲座，演讲人把现代中国作家的特征归纳为：1，seek to emancipate the audience and stimulate intellectual debate；2, discontent and conflicts of the Self；3, refusing to believe in any pre-destined answers to their questions。鲁迅与布莱希特和卡夫卡的比较，得出的是对morality, modernity, hierarchy以及democracy的某种结论。一切并没有实质的答案。"民主"的权力核心，永远应该是空的，否则就无法成就民主。
我想，如果挣脱民主作为institutional的一种理念，将其视为一种看待自我生命的lens，那么，个体其实永远在与世界对话。他不断地接收与接受各方面的刺激与冲击，但其间的理性矛盾必然让他无法适从，知道他开始真正领悟何谓"空" —— 作为一个哲学术语来看待。于是，所谓的"虚妄"，即西方的nihilism，不只是一个理性思辨的结果，而是像尼采所言，它带有力量，如同悲剧总是令人奇妙地升华。也许，这也是为何鲁迅最终说"虚妄"，这也是为何许许多多的现代文人最后转向佛教。与基督教的信仰不同，佛教是某种哲学思辨与psychological game。于是，它是有种正面意义的（当然，如果真"空"了，正面反面其实也就无所谓了）。在我们还没办法达到那种境界之前，而我自知还没有，我想，首先就必须去适应那种知道问题但没有答案的尴尬处境——也可以说，是不能信赖任何一个答案的openness。把传统与现代相结合，如果不明白任何一方，不是显得愚昧，就会走火入魔。现在的我，便是在试图防止自己这样，尽管有些难受，尽管可以"断念"。也许，我真的在不知不觉中，走上了五四等人的道路，即使我知道，现在的社会已经不容许这种人的存在；抑或说，要能够想当时的人那样，有种不断推动他们向前的危机感，是不简单的。但是，我不愿放弃。因为，在我不想的那一天，便是被这个当代世界吸入的时刻。作为一个civil servant，如果不要过得浑浑噩噩，就必须有这份清醒，尽管这中间有某种权力的冲突。我当然可以选择与其他许多新加坡青年一样，只顾打拼，以功名或金钱来衡量自己的成功与快乐。但是，这会让我放弃许多曾令我与众不同的东西，甚至会让我这个个体瓦解得面目全非。
所以，趁现在有那种年轻的本钱，我想不断地继续experiment with my emotions, thinking and Life，尽管很多时候，我不得不诉诸与某种让我平静的心理机制——而这个不断循环的过程，这之间那种矛盾，也正是这场试验的一部分。
昨天听了一个关于"democratic modernism"的比较文学讲座，
我想，如果挣脱民主作为institutional的一种理念，
所以，趁现在有那种年轻的本钱，
给贤兄的信
今年的我，依然落泪，但不是因为思念或悔恨，而是开始把记忆作为鞭策，发觉自己实在是不够努力（以自己的标准而言），加上许多方面的反思，让自己陷入一种 I am a Paradox 的境地之中，难以自拔。于是，短暂地讨厌自己，片刻地思考自杀。如果在上海，我想还不至于此；但在香港，举目无亲，朋友也不多，更妄论深交。于是，才明白，原来自己还无法按捺孤独，也就被心魔吞噬困扰。幸好，这阵子与某友人走得比较近，经常联系，虽然说思想上的电路往往接不上，但至少他的存在让我得到某种安慰。有些朋友就是这样，以他们的presence作为感情的最高价值奉献给我们。
今时今日，也已经很少有人去反思"友情"，或是真正去体验何谓"爱"。这一年，我想，也许是碰到的人，还有自己的境遇，让我不断在"爱"的问题上打转，以至于读Mother Teresa 生前写的信，觉得仿佛有自己的影子；看见观音菩萨的微笑，才逐渐明白那背后如此深刻的寓意。短暂的爱，我们常常不难做到；长久的付出，甚至要活在身心折腾之中，让自己渐渐接受 inner martyrdom，不计较自己的得失，然后，慢慢忘却何谓得失、何谓彼此，迈向"悟空"的境界，则是条漫漫长路，急也急不来。
人生走过一个阶段，仿佛领悟了什么，但后来进入一片新的天地，回过头来，又觉得从前的领悟也许并不深，并不对，或是并没有内化，只是一时的inspiration。记得你2年前说过，许多的人生体验，经过生命洗礼后，发生转变。两年来，直觉让我能感受到，率性、可爱、大智若愚的表象下，隐藏着一个更沉着、更睿智的你，但是那深层的存在体，似乎也还没稳住阵脚，似乎有些摇摆不定，似乎还在试图调试。我的直觉对不对，只有你能告诉我。不过，只想说，我自己也在不断地探索。也许，那就是成长的意义。有时，希图别人对自己的赞誉，但与此同时，又必须牢记谢金良送我的那一句"小心你的傲气"。总以为自己的教育之梦如此牢固，却发觉原来世界已经在政治语境的转变下，抛弃了对"人"与"教育"的思考，只重视"体制"与"系统"。常在"权"与"钱"之间徘徊，以拥有"权"来慰藉自己对"钱"的轻视，却发觉原来中国知识分子历来都并非"学而优则仕"，而是以学识换权势，以权势得官饷。摇摆，谁不会？要为理想而存活，何等的难。
不过，事情总不是非此即彼的二元论。赞誉与傲气之间，存在他人对自己真诚的尊敬与自己对待他人的诚心。经济与"人学"之间，存在某种不曾对立的思辨余地——儒家经学，难道不就是伦理学+ 政治哲学吗？体制化的弊病，可以以体制的改革消解。教师失却的"师心"，能以体制对他们的尊重与自我发展得到补偿。新一代的教师，不懂教育理论，不自我提升，不掌握主动性，就无法成为"新一代"。这似乎是未来趋势，开始似乎会有压力，但希望能够成为positive pressure，让教育工作有满足感。教育最重要的，是师生的affective，而我现在越来越相信，快乐的老师，是培养快乐学生的关键。至于那钱与权，也许可用一个经济学概念来化解。商人create wealth，当权者deliver value。法国社会学家Pierre Bourdieu从马克思那里明白，Economism is a form of ethnocentrism。Capital，从来就不能严格划分为concrete or symbolic。被金钱污秽的土壤，照样能开出灿烂芬芳的花朵。
这就是现在社会，就是我们必须活在其中并在被摆布与找寻自我之间徘徊的现实。21岁的时候，有一位幼儿园的同学，鼓励我跨出第一步，在文字中探索自我。23岁，似乎是我人生真正的开始。修身齐家治国平天下，我也似乎刚刚才迈开了前几步。这里，希望你也一样，继续在思辨与文字之中徜徉，乃至翱翔。
今时今日，也已经很少有人去反思"友情"，或是真正去体验何谓"爱"。这一年，我想，也许是碰到的人，还有自己的境遇，让我不断在"爱"的问题上打转，以至于读Mother Teresa 生前写的信，觉得仿佛有自己的影子；看见观音菩萨的微笑，才逐渐明白那背后如此深刻的寓意。短暂的爱，我们常常不难做到；长久的付出，甚至要活在身心折腾之中，让自己渐渐接受 inner martyrdom，不计较自己的得失，然后，慢慢忘却何谓得失、何谓彼此，迈向"悟空"的境界，则是条漫漫长路，急也急不来。
人生走过一个阶段，仿佛领悟了什么，但后来进入一片新的天地，回过头来，又觉得从前的领悟也许并不深，并不对，或是并没有内化，只是一时的inspiration。记得你2年前说过，许多的人生体验，经过生命洗礼后，发生转变。两年来，直觉让我能感受到，率性、可爱、大智若愚的表象下，隐藏着一个更沉着、更睿智的你，但是那深层的存在体，似乎也还没稳住阵脚，似乎有些摇摆不定，似乎还在试图调试。我的直觉对不对，只有你能告诉我。不过，只想说，我自己也在不断地探索。也许，那就是成长的意义。有时，希图别人对自己的赞誉，但与此同时，又必须牢记谢金良送我的那一句"小心你的傲气"。总以为自己的教育之梦如此牢固，却发觉原来世界已经在政治语境的转变下，抛弃了对"人"与"教育"的思考，只重视"体制"与"系统"。常在"权"与"钱"之间徘徊，以拥有"权"来慰藉自己对"钱"的轻视，却发觉原来中国知识分子历来都并非"学而优则仕"，而是以学识换权势，以权势得官饷。摇摆，谁不会？要为理想而存活，何等的难。
不过，事情总不是非此即彼的二元论。赞誉与傲气之间，存在他人对自己真诚的尊敬与自己对待他人的诚心。经济与"人学"之间，存在某种不曾对立的思辨余地——儒家经学，难道不就是伦理学+ 政治哲学吗？体制化的弊病，可以以体制的改革消解。教师失却的"师心"，能以体制对他们的尊重与自我发展得到补偿。新一代的教师，不懂教育理论，不自我提升，不掌握主动性，就无法成为"新一代"。这似乎是未来趋势，开始似乎会有压力，但希望能够成为positive pressure，让教育工作有满足感。教育最重要的，是师生的affective，而我现在越来越相信，快乐的老师，是培养快乐学生的关键。至于那钱与权，也许可用一个经济学概念来化解。商人create wealth，当权者deliver value。法国社会学家Pierre Bourdieu从马克思那里明白，Economism is a form of ethnocentrism。Capital，从来就不能严格划分为concrete or symbolic。被金钱污秽的土壤，照样能开出灿烂芬芳的花朵。
这就是现在社会，
2008年11月11日星期二
复归于婴儿
知其雄，守其雌，為天下谿。
為天下谿，常德不離，復歸於嬰兒。
知其白，守其黑，為天下式。
為天下式，常德不忒，復歸於無極。
知其榮，守其辱，為天下谷。
為天下谷，常德乃足，復歸於樸。
樸散則為器，聖人用之則為官長。
故大制不割。
——老子《道德经》第28章
道家思想，常涉及“对待”，即英文的binaries。老子谈“柔”，但不忘“刚”；庄子则进一步，直接提出“破对待”。
阴阳共存，才能成大器。顺应本性的矛盾性，达成某种恒久不变的“德”，自然而然，以至于不觉得外在的conditioning是人为，而已化为自己内在的一部分，便成就“婴儿”，也类似孔子的“知天命”。
今天，喝水感觉有奶粉味，进屋仿佛有初生孩子睡房的那种味道，心河又因冰凉的天气而回归某种顺畅酣流，故胡乱作此文。
為天下谿，常德不離，復歸於嬰兒。
知其白，守其黑，為天下式。
為天下式，常德不忒，復歸於無極。
知其榮，守其辱，為天下谷。
為天下谷，常德乃足，復歸於樸。
樸散則為器，聖人用之則為官長。
故大制不割。
——老子《道德经》第28章
道家思想，常涉及“对待”，即英文的binaries。老子谈“柔”，但不忘“刚”；庄子则进一步，直接提出“破对待”。
阴阳共存，才能成大器。顺应本性的矛盾性，达成某种恒久不变的“德”，自然而然，以至于不觉得外在的conditioning是人为，而已化为自己内在的一部分，便成就“婴儿”，也类似孔子的“知天命”。
今天，喝水感觉有奶粉味，进屋仿佛有初生孩子睡房的那种味道，心河又因冰凉的天气而回归某种顺畅酣流，故胡乱作此文。
心腹来信
雄
从小的时候开始，我就喜欢自己身体的某个部位会有点疼痛。跟别人说过，他们都觉得我好奇怪。其实我不奇怪的，真是真的。很多时候，人总要被琐碎的杂事所淹没，就像现在的我一样。所以身体某部分的疼痛会让你稍微关注你自己，让你自己明白你还活着，还存在着。当然，这种痛也不仅仅是生理上的痛，还可能是心理上的。
一个明白自己的还活着的人——这种活着不是生理意义上的——是件幸福的事情。因为他还知道他需要的是什么，知道自己的目标是什么。痛，是因为他还在追求自己的目标。
现在看你写的东西，我越来越发现你是一个慢热的、与当下现实有点格格不入的人。你很容易沉浸在过去的时光里，不喜欢现实的生活。
但是我知道，不要很久之后，你肯定也会像你现在写上海、写复旦那样去想香港和港大的。人总是在失去的时候才知道想念。
自10月以来，我差不多就开始过上了买菜做饭吃饭的生活，我还有生活的理想，但是我越来越明显地感觉到生活给我的压力，越来越感觉到被生活琐事淹没的危险。
在复旦的四年，她教会了我如何寻找自由，却没有教会我如何生活。难道这就是陈思和说的自由而无用的灵魂，显然不是的吧。
这Email不是回应你的邮件，而是看到你的邮件有感而发，期待你来上海，秉烛夜谈！
鑫
-------
鑫
也许，人生之中，回忆总是最美的。这阵子，天气转凉，一方面会去体会香港的风与景，形成日后追忆的画面，另一方面又会不知不觉地得到以前在韩国、在日本那种舒服的休闲感。就是一种感觉，一种当下的情感复现。也许，你说得对，我是有点慢热。或者说，我在短时间内就能从兴奋落回平淡，然后持续平淡好久好久，中间时不时穿插一些起伏波动。就是这样。也许，如果不是一个人在香港，我不会看到自己的这一面，更不会从这种体验中获益。至于真的能得到什么，也许需要时间的见证，特别是下一次又孤零零一个人身处异乡的时候。
比起那些懂得生活却不知何为自由的人，我想，我们确实痛苦些、矛盾些，但鲁迅的"铁屋子"哲学，不就早告诉我们，踏上这条路时，就要准备时而呐喊，时而彷徨吗？最近与朋友谈天，发觉商科学生与文科毕业生之间，最大的矛盾便在于此。我偶尔会觉得，自己应该学会更有效地赚钱、生活，他也觉得以我的智力，不一定不行；我则觉得他有种细腻，但对于生命哲学，只停留在大道理的字面理解，并非真正体悟生命。但是，近来开始意识到，如果在这个现代社会中，什么都要谈"资本"，那么，我们的资本，便是那种折腾够了之后的洞见与坦然，以及那种对存在与人类社会的视野。走到一个阶段，许多人会转回头来向我们"请教"，而正因我们与许多人不一样，反而变得特别。尤其是当这种特殊性成为我们的本性，并外露为某种性格时，得到的会是他人的尊敬与钦佩。这是子微让我领悟的。她说，要得到他人某种发自内心的respect，不是大部分人所能得到的。就连那有钱人，得到的也只是他人的羡慕与嫉妒，但绝非尊重。"德" 与 "利"，我总是站在前者的立场，并将前者作为我的"社会资本"。而挣脱这经济学话语，其实，到了最后，特别是大家都过了耳顺之年后，谁能真正快乐，谁能真正满足，谁能真正不后悔，也许，才是最佳的衡量尺度。当然，为了快乐，我们总会找1001个理由说服自己，但是，骨子里的不满，我们总会心知肚明的。
谢谢你让我有这些感悟，以及某种莫名的舒坦。
雄
鑫
-------
鑫
也许，人生之中，回忆总是最美的。这阵子，天气转凉，一方面会去体会香港的风与景，形成日后追忆的画面，另一方面又会不知不觉地得到以前在韩国、在日本那种舒服的休闲感。就是一种感觉，一种当下的情感复现。也许，你说得对，我是有点慢热。或者说，我在短时间内就能从兴奋落回平淡，然后持续平淡好久好久，中间时不时穿插一些起伏波动。就是这样。也许，如果不是一个人在香港，我不会看到自己的这一面，更不会从这种体验中获益。至于真的能得到什么，也许需要时间的见证，特别是下一次又孤零零一个人身处异乡的时候。
比起那些懂得生活却不知何为自由的人，我想，我们确实痛苦些、
谢谢你让我有这些感悟，以及某种莫名的舒坦。
雄
2008年11月10日星期一
月光
脑力激荡的时刻，容易上火；偏偏香港的天气，一天内急速降低5摄氏度，有些冰凉，让我想烦躁也没办法，哈哈
今天发现一首歌，黄靖伦的《月光》。其实，曲感觉不怎么样，但词，却深深吸引着我。也许，其中的故事与意境，实在与我的际遇太相似了，仿佛就是为我而写的。
忘记了学习的初衷，忽略了爱的真挚，迷失在自己设下的心境；随波逐流，甚至连哄带骗地让自己随遇而安，这似乎是炜雄，但又仿佛不是他。敢爱敢恨，是我性格的某一部分；追求中庸，遥想平静，亦为存在的本质需要。无所谓快乐，无所谓悲伤，却在这过程中，越来越正视自我情感的细腻转变，就像湖畔的旅人，哪怕一点微风，哪怕一点涟漪，也能捕捉。很多时候，我们要“断念”，却不是因为理性已经穷尽，必须靠“悟”来明白道理，而是因为害怕面对一切心灵的波动起伏。
于是，当自己显得越平静的时候，也许，内心原来正澎湃着。表现得坦然时，其实恰恰是最纠结的。于是，我想，其实从来没有欺骗过自己。即使在洞见生命之“空”的过程中，其实我已经在品尝生命种种酸甜苦辣。也正是这样，寻觅空旷的心，其实最是茂密，枝节盘绕。只不过，太多人无法体会我的复杂，就连我自己也没法很好掌握并概括它，犹如手握细沙，抓一把，漏一些。
但是，走在这条路上，痛苦就是快乐，澎湃就是坦然，丑陋就是美丽，孤单就是满足。可多少人能真正理解，抛弃自己的理性，以心来聆听我的一切？路，很长，但我希望就这样继续走。也许，越是纠缠于世俗事务与情感动荡，就越能体会溢满背后的空虚，也就在最无所预料的情况下，迈向某种对于人生的enlightenment?
《月光》
小时候妈妈唱的那首歌
陪我走过春夏秋冬
漫长黑夜裡点亮了远方的灯
指引着我往前走
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
慢慢的 123 渐渐的在两端
独自穿过陌生街头不让泪逗留
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
喜悦 悲伤 因你而发光
陪我去闯
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
慢慢的 123 渐渐的在两端
独自穿过陌生街头不让泪逗留
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
喜悦 悲伤 因你而发光
陪我去闯
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
今天发现一首歌，黄靖伦的《月光》。其实，曲感觉不怎么样，但词，却深深吸引着我。也许，其中的故事与意境，实在与我的际遇太相似了，仿佛就是为我而写的。
忘记了学习的初衷，忽略了爱的真挚，迷失在自己设下的心境；随波逐流，甚至连哄带骗地让自己随遇而安，这似乎是炜雄，但又仿佛不是他。敢爱敢恨，是我性格的某一部分；追求中庸，遥想平静，亦为存在的本质需要。无所谓快乐，无所谓悲伤，却在这过程中，越来越正视自我情感的细腻转变，就像湖畔的旅人，哪怕一点微风，哪怕一点涟漪，也能捕捉。很多时候，我们要“断念”，却不是因为理性已经穷尽，必须靠“悟”来明白道理，而是因为害怕面对一切心灵的波动起伏。
于是，当自己显得越平静的时候，也许，内心原来正澎湃着。表现得坦然时，其实恰恰是最纠结的。于是，我想，其实从来没有欺骗过自己。即使在洞见生命之“空”的过程中，其实我已经在品尝生命种种酸甜苦辣。也正是这样，寻觅空旷的心，其实最是茂密，枝节盘绕。只不过，太多人无法体会我的复杂，就连我自己也没法很好掌握并概括它，犹如手握细沙，抓一把，漏一些。
但是，走在这条路上，痛苦就是快乐，澎湃就是坦然，丑陋就是美丽，孤单就是满足。可多少人能真正理解，抛弃自己的理性，以心来聆听我的一切？路，很长，但我希望就这样继续走。也许，越是纠缠于世俗事务与情感动荡，就越能体会溢满背后的空虚，也就在最无所预料的情况下，迈向某种对于人生的enlightenment?
《月光》
小时候妈妈唱的那首歌
陪我走过春夏秋冬
漫长黑夜裡点亮了远方的灯
指引着我往前走
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
慢慢的 123 渐渐的在两端
独自穿过陌生街头不让泪逗留
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
喜悦 悲伤 因你而发光
陪我去闯
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
慢慢的 123 渐渐的在两端
独自穿过陌生街头不让泪逗留
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
一样的月光
蒸发了泪光
爱让有情的人可以去跟痛抵抗
一样的月光
照在我的心上
有爱我的人陪我生活就有方向
喜悦 悲伤 因你而发光
陪我去闯
长大后身边的人总是沉默 把自己的心反锁
幸好有你这首歌温暖着我
不会忘记了初衷
2008年11月6日星期四
2008年11月5日星期三
依赖，换来伤痕
有一位友人，快乐的记忆成为他现在的枷锁，而与其他许多分手的情侣不同，他并没有犯任何的错，除了只是从喜欢转为爱慕。而且，他也不曾有机会当面向那女生表白。
情感，总是难以捉摸的东西。世人的对策，总是不去想，祈求时间能够治疗一切的痛。但是，在这个过程中，我们其实不断地蒙骗自己。真诚的付出了，就一定会换来伤痕。即使只是无法重复的回忆，也足以让我们时而感到揪心。
最恨的，也许就是那些让我们快乐的人，不能像我们这样去珍惜那些美好的片断，甚至就只把它当成生命的碎片。我也曾犯过同样的错，于是，现在才明白自己的罪恶。当然，付出的一方，总是会有种不言喻的奢求，希望得到更多，然后欲望不断扩大；但那些不懂付出一方的苦心的那些人，也真该受点报应——虽然说，因为爱，我们从不希望他们会发生什么不好的事。我们甚至会认为，爱了就无需计较那么多，但人总是最求平等的动物。再怎么伟大的付出，不可能不要求回报。能够克服这一关的，就已经是圣，或是基督教中的saint，而不再是那必须在患得患失中活着，并且有种自虐般地不愿放弃这种存在方式的人——因为只有这样，我们才会觉得真正实在地面对自己。
于是，只在乎快乐的人，是傻子；只看得见哀伤的人，是白痴。能在两者之间徘徊而继续生活的人，才是真正了不起的。
但是，到最后，我们总是陷入死角。于是，升华的方式，不是去克制，或者逼着自己忘记，因为这不外乎以“塞”的方式去试图阻挡心河的决堤。需要的，是疏导。方式有很多，但不外是把这种为我们带来快乐和悲伤的爱与痛苦，用在一个比个体更大的“高级意义”上。能够把对一个人的爱，转为对一群人或是一代人的爱，有时是一个突破恶圈的方式。毕竟，说实在的，男女之间的爱与那低级或高级的纯真的爱，差别不过是在肉欲。因此，我们真正要克服的，其实就是那种由肉欲与意淫带来的依赖感。做到这点，人的心界，就可谓“白茫茫大地真干净”了。120回《红楼梦》，也许根本上就是为我们刻画这人类最本质的心路历程吧。
情感，总是难以捉摸的东西。世人的对策，总是不去想，祈求时间能够治疗一切的痛。但是，在这个过程中，我们其实不断地蒙骗自己。真诚的付出了，就一定会换来伤痕。即使只是无法重复的回忆，也足以让我们时而感到揪心。
最恨的，也许就是那些让我们快乐的人，不能像我们这样去珍惜那些美好的片断，甚至就只把它当成生命的碎片。我也曾犯过同样的错，于是，现在才明白自己的罪恶。当然，付出的一方，总是会有种不言喻的奢求，希望得到更多，然后欲望不断扩大；但那些不懂付出一方的苦心的那些人，也真该受点报应——虽然说，因为爱，我们从不希望他们会发生什么不好的事。我们甚至会认为，爱了就无需计较那么多，但人总是最求平等的动物。再怎么伟大的付出，不可能不要求回报。能够克服这一关的，就已经是圣，或是基督教中的saint，而不再是那必须在患得患失中活着，并且有种自虐般地不愿放弃这种存在方式的人——因为只有这样，我们才会觉得真正实在地面对自己。
于是，只在乎快乐的人，是傻子；只看得见哀伤的人，是白痴。能在两者之间徘徊而继续生活的人，才是真正了不起的。
但是，到最后，我们总是陷入死角。于是，升华的方式，不是去克制，或者逼着自己忘记，因为这不外乎以“塞”的方式去试图阻挡心河的决堤。需要的，是疏导。方式有很多，但不外是把这种为我们带来快乐和悲伤的爱与痛苦，用在一个比个体更大的“高级意义”上。能够把对一个人的爱，转为对一群人或是一代人的爱，有时是一个突破恶圈的方式。毕竟，说实在的，男女之间的爱与那低级或高级的纯真的爱，差别不过是在肉欲。因此，我们真正要克服的，其实就是那种由肉欲与意淫带来的依赖感。做到这点，人的心界，就可谓“白茫茫大地真干净”了。120回《红楼梦》，也许根本上就是为我们刻画这人类最本质的心路历程吧。
2008年11月4日星期二
众人皆爱月
一个晚上，接连拜读两位友人的文章，皆以月为兴，各抒其遇其感：
友人1：当现代化的高楼带着满身的明亮争夺走月亮和星星的光彩时，自然变得那么的渺小和脆弱，无力再展示给人们无尽的惊奇，只有那黯淡的星光仍然坚守着，远远地望着它身边的月亮似乎在诉说着什么，还能给我们带来一点生命的欣喜。
友人1：当现代化的高楼带着满身的明亮争夺走月亮和星星的光彩时，自然变得那么的渺小和脆弱，无力再展示给人们无尽的惊奇，只有那黯淡的星光仍然坚守着，远远地望着它身边的月亮似乎在诉说着什么，还能给我们带来一点生命的欣喜。
友人二：《上弦月》
众人皆爱月，唯独我不见其踪影。也许，这是好事，至少我不伤感，不悲秋。香港的风，还是能让人欣喜得微笑不停的。
今晚的窗外，有弯上弦月，高高的，在浓雾中若隐若现。
或许，加两颗星星，她就会变成一张脸，在苍穹中张望，微微地、
一家人在越南应该玩得很开心吧。
爸爸妈妈在旅行中难免吵架。
也许，我也应该在那里吧？
而今，我却像一个买了票的观众，坐在离舞台不远的贵宾席，
众人皆爱月，唯独我不见其踪影。也许，这是好事，至少我不伤感，不悲秋。香港的风，还是能让人欣喜得微笑不停的。
On Suicide 论自杀
In his groundbreaking book "Suicide" (published 1897), French sociologist Emile Durkheim (uncle of French anthropologist Marcel Mauss) differentiated between four types of suicide:
- Egoistic suicide: Egoism is a state in which the ties attaching the individual to others in the society are weak. Since the individual is only weakly integrated into the society, their suicide will have little impact on the rest of the society. In other words, there are few social ties to keep the individual from taking their own life. This Durkheim saw as the cause of suicide among divorced men, and has been cited as the cause of rising teenage suicides by contemporary sociologists.
- Altruistic suicide: Altruism is a state opposite to egoism, in which the individual is extremely attached to the society and thus has no life of their own. Individuals who commit suicide based on altruism die because they believe that their death can bring about a benefit to the society. In other words, when an individual is too heavily integrated into the society, they will commit suicide regardless of their own hesitation if the society's norms ask for the person's death. Durkheim saw this as occurring in two different ways:
- Where people saw themselves as worthless or a burden upon society and would therefore commit suicide. He saw this as happening in ancient or 'primitive' societies, but also in highly traditionalised army regiments, such as imperial or elite guards, in contemporary society.
- Where people saw the social world as meaningless and would sacrifice themselves for a greater ideal. Durkheim saw this as happening in 'Eastern' religions, such as the Sati in Hinduism. Some contemporary sociologists have used this analysis to explain Kamikaze pilots and the cult of the suicide bomber.
- Anomic suicide: Anomie is a state in which there is weak social regulation between the society's norms and the individual, most often brought on by dramatic changes in economic and/or social circumstances. This type of suicide happens when the social norms and laws governing the society do not correspond with the life goals of the individual. Since the individual does not identify with the norms of the society, suicide seems to be a way to escape them. Examples include the spike in suicide rates during the Great Depression .
- Fatalistic suicide: Fatalism is a state opposite to anomie in which social regulation is completely instilled in the individual; there is no hope of change against the oppressive discipline of the society. The only way for the individual to be released from this state is to commit suicide. Durkheim saw this as the reason for slaves committing suicide in antiquity, but saw it as having little relevance in modern society. Contemporary sociologists have argued that modern fatalistic suicide occurs in such societies as Japan, where social mobility is so limited by social norms that individual fulfillment is impossible.
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_(book)]
People take their lives for a myriad of reasons, and to rational individuals their acts are unjustified, if not simply dumb. However, to draw a metaphor from the ancient Greek, those believers of Dionysus are never able to prevent themselves from losing their senses after drinking the God's wine; Apollo's rays of wisdom and Reason will never wake them up until they turn somber on their own.
The moral of the story is: never talk reason with someone with suicidal inclinations. But what when it is Reason that propels one towards the same notions?
There have been times when I crave for my demise, as if the two ends of Life's linearity are joined to meet, and life becomes a loop. It is not understandable to many, and I have not been able to explain just what I mean. Nonetheless, at this stage, it can be said to be a kind of insight akin to that of Hemmingway's. The reason why I have stopped in my action is because such a realization of the "nothing-ness" of Life is still a passive notion highly charged with pessimism, and death cannot be validated when life is viewed with such lens.
Many people gave me the advice to "take a step back", to "take a break", to "remember the life ahead", but if we are philosophical enough in our contemplation of Existence, all of those are simply escapism from the truth of Being. What is needed is not to delude ourselves that the mundanes of life will make us forget. Rather, it is the constant quest to return to the "nothing-ness" we have realized, and to eventually develop the understanding that such is the reality. All living beings were, perhaps, not meant to see this truth. Only God should have the right. The modern man has gone too far beyond his destiny, and hence he faces the wrath of the Almighty. The fortunate thing is, many centuries ago, someone sat under a Bodhi tree and conducted a psychological experiment that eventually found a Path that would help those who have gone beyond their primate instincts. At this stage, I am trying hard to repeat Buddha's contemplation. There is no after-life, in the religious sense. Rather, one simply lives on for eternity by planting seeds of wisdom in the hearts of those he has the fate to encounter, and the seeds bloom in the network of relationships humans build with others and their environment. For someone who is able to do this, Death then becomes his or her greatest vindication of the value possessed while he or she was alive.
Hence, when viewed philosophically, suicide probably isn't the way out either. If I have had thoughts of suicide, it's because my wisdom only allowed me to stop at a certain stage of Reason. What I have yet to realize is that there is a greater world beyond the wall that I faced - a wondrous land where tea is made from clouds, and trees are grown from love. That quest to enter this heavenly solace is what I seek in the years to come.
The moral of the story is: never talk reason with someone with suicidal inclinations. But what when it is Reason that propels one towards the same notions?
There have been times when I crave for my demise, as if the two ends of Life's linearity are joined to meet, and life becomes a loop. It is not understandable to many, and I have not been able to explain just what I mean. Nonetheless, at this stage, it can be said to be a kind of insight akin to that of Hemmingway's. The reason why I have stopped in my action is because such a realization of the "nothing-ness" of Life is still a passive notion highly charged with pessimism, and death cannot be validated when life is viewed with such lens.
Many people gave me the advice to "take a step back", to "take a break", to "remember the life ahead", but if we are philosophical enough in our contemplation of Existence, all of those are simply escapism from the truth of Being. What is needed is not to delude ourselves that the mundanes of life will make us forget. Rather, it is the constant quest to return to the "nothing-ness" we have realized, and to eventually develop the understanding that such is the reality. All living beings were, perhaps, not meant to see this truth. Only God should have the right. The modern man has gone too far beyond his destiny, and hence he faces the wrath of the Almighty. The fortunate thing is, many centuries ago, someone sat under a Bodhi tree and conducted a psychological experiment that eventually found a Path that would help those who have gone beyond their primate instincts. At this stage, I am trying hard to repeat Buddha's contemplation. There is no after-life, in the religious sense. Rather, one simply lives on for eternity by planting seeds of wisdom in the hearts of those he has the fate to encounter, and the seeds bloom in the network of relationships humans build with others and their environment. For someone who is able to do this, Death then becomes his or her greatest vindication of the value possessed while he or she was alive.
Hence, when viewed philosophically, suicide probably isn't the way out either. If I have had thoughts of suicide, it's because my wisdom only allowed me to stop at a certain stage of Reason. What I have yet to realize is that there is a greater world beyond the wall that I faced - a wondrous land where tea is made from clouds, and trees are grown from love. That quest to enter this heavenly solace is what I seek in the years to come.
2008年11月3日星期一
The call of primacy, the sounds of silence
The cool breeze of autumn leaves
In the comatose blue evening
Bowing are the orange lamps
shining on tree's nests, empty.
Diamonds dot the deep green mountains
Above, giant soaring eagles beckon
Freshness flowing in the air
Flowers swaying in unison.
Bellowing of cello strings
Hopping of the piano keys
A bright crescent with a star
and the shimmering seas beneath.
The call of my primacy,
As I take a deep breath in,
and out, the sounds of life's silence
with its everlasting peace.
In the comatose blue evening
Bowing are the orange lamps
shining on tree's nests, empty.
Diamonds dot the deep green mountains
Above, giant soaring eagles beckon
Freshness flowing in the air
Flowers swaying in unison.
Bellowing of cello strings
Hopping of the piano keys
A bright crescent with a star
and the shimmering seas beneath.
The call of my primacy,
As I take a deep breath in,
and out, the sounds of life's silence
with its everlasting peace.
Finally, the long-awaited rain
下雨了，终于。
这个秋天，虽然风清气爽，但总觉得缺少了什么。后来，逐渐发觉，似乎白云憋得太久，仿佛郁闷却装作一副无关紧要的样子。或者是以薄雾来蒙住自己的脸，总之，不愿露出真实。
于是，我为雨而欣喜，因为云终究还是选择面对现实，化解自己。
尽管我知道，那困扰着我的，始终还是无法挣脱——毕竟，该如何跳脱自己？然而，当雨轻轻落下，我也仿佛卸下了什么。
而雨过之后的舒坦，犹如温和的阿波罗之光，在辰时缓缓移动，于高山与瀑布之上，敷一层柔美的金黄。
但愿自己能时刻保持像今天凌晨聊天时的那种忘怀、精力与感动。
谢谢你，我亲爱的洋葱。
这个秋天，虽然风清气爽，但总觉得缺少了什么。后来，逐渐发觉，似乎白云憋得太久，仿佛郁闷却装作一副无关紧要的样子。或者是以薄雾来蒙住自己的脸，总之，不愿露出真实。
于是，我为雨而欣喜，因为云终究还是选择面对现实，化解自己。
尽管我知道，那困扰着我的，始终还是无法挣脱——毕竟，该如何跳脱自己？然而，当雨轻轻落下，我也仿佛卸下了什么。
而雨过之后的舒坦，犹如温和的阿波罗之光，在辰时缓缓移动，于高山与瀑布之上，敷一层柔美的金黄。
但愿自己能时刻保持像今天凌晨聊天时的那种忘怀、精力与感动。
谢谢你，我亲爱的洋葱。
活着，就是一口气的事
这一年，死亡离我特别的近。
去一次云南，差点两次丧命。一次是汽车划下山坡，而我正站在车头前；一次，是羊群从山上踢了一块石头下来，离我们的车，只有3米，继而坠下悬崖峭壁。下面，长江流水滔滔。
身体不太舒服，却一直不求医。不是不敢，只是不愿意。我相信身体始终要靠自己。
来到香港，精神差一点就死了。年轻，按捺不住孤单，忍受不了没有亲密友人在身边的飘零。
在很长一段时间里，我以微笑抚平自己。我与蓝天、白云、大海、凉风、老鹰、鹦鹉、山林、小花、飞蛾为友，伴之以那始终等着我去爱它们的书籍。就这样，一天过一天。以远大的梦来鼓励自己向前，以少年的使命告诫自己千万不能软弱。
但是，当走出自己，从躯壳之外审视自己的灵魂，才发觉，原来自己是个paradox。
前方的路，当着一块我无法搬动的大石头。于是，就以自己微薄的力量，推它、打它，甚至以头撞它。有时，头破血流，反而能在自怜中得到慰藉。每天就这样。
奇怪的是，走到这步田地，我竟会莫名其妙地觉得自己还是太完美。在我的血液里，流淌着两种意愿：一方面，希望能尽力做好一切；另一方面，排斥彻底的完美，追求某种瑕疵。也许，这令人费解。或许，简单的说，这是让我觉得自己还是个平凡人的方式，也是让我不再像以前那样，因为那些虚无缥缈的梦想而失去真实的自己；同时，历史总在不完美中前进，而我也逐步地看到，原来，我也不过是历史流程中的沧海一粟。
累得不行的时候，我真的很希望痛苦一场，但眼泪却流不出。或者说，掉下的泪，都不真实。
突然，在有些哽咽的时候，才发觉，原来，呼吸那么基本的东西，都可以那么的难。
活着，为了什么？不断地做减法，最后，那也不过是一口气的事……
去一次云南，差点两次丧命。一次是汽车划下山坡，而我正站在车头前；一次，是羊群从山上踢了一块石头下来，离我们的车，只有3米，继而坠下悬崖峭壁。下面，长江流水滔滔。
身体不太舒服，却一直不求医。不是不敢，只是不愿意。我相信身体始终要靠自己。
来到香港，精神差一点就死了。年轻，按捺不住孤单，忍受不了没有亲密友人在身边的飘零。
在很长一段时间里，我以微笑抚平自己。我与蓝天、白云、大海、凉风、老鹰、鹦鹉、山林、小花、飞蛾为友，伴之以那始终等着我去爱它们的书籍。就这样，一天过一天。以远大的梦来鼓励自己向前，以少年的使命告诫自己千万不能软弱。
但是，当走出自己，从躯壳之外审视自己的灵魂，才发觉，原来自己是个paradox。
前方的路，当着一块我无法搬动的大石头。于是，就以自己微薄的力量，推它、打它，甚至以头撞它。有时，头破血流，反而能在自怜中得到慰藉。每天就这样。
奇怪的是，走到这步田地，我竟会莫名其妙地觉得自己还是太完美。在我的血液里，流淌着两种意愿：一方面，希望能尽力做好一切；另一方面，排斥彻底的完美，追求某种瑕疵。也许，这令人费解。或许，简单的说，这是让我觉得自己还是个平凡人的方式，也是让我不再像以前那样，因为那些虚无缥缈的梦想而失去真实的自己；同时，历史总在不完美中前进，而我也逐步地看到，原来，我也不过是历史流程中的沧海一粟。
累得不行的时候，我真的很希望痛苦一场，但眼泪却流不出。或者说，掉下的泪，都不真实。
突然，在有些哽咽的时候，才发觉，原来，呼吸那么基本的东西，都可以那么的难。
活着，为了什么？不断地做减法，最后，那也不过是一口气的事……
2008年11月2日星期日
乐
洋葱说，对他而言，现在最重要的是快乐，而这也是他当下所在乎的。
快乐的追求，自古希腊就是一个没有答案的伦理学问题。在不牵涉学理的前提下，我想，既然身处于此，孤单挥之不去，那么，我也只能浑浑噩噩地“接受”，并且在这个基调之上，追求某种恶性圈的突破。就算是表面的快乐，也许能够滋润我干枯的灵魂，并且让身边的朋友，不因自己而觉得累。
人总是如此。有了一点，却要更多。说到底，我其实已经得到了许多人的理解，别人也已经不再视我为超人。这就够了。平凡的人，也总有快乐，只不过他们不知自己的肤浅。而在自知的情况下，总是活得比别人累。只不过，有人因不愿妥协而累，有人因为必须接受自己所痛恨的而累。但两者之间，我选择后者。至少，我还不至于忘记，什么是微笑。
快乐的追求，自古希腊就是一个没有答案的伦理学问题。在不牵涉学理的前提下，我想，既然身处于此，孤单挥之不去，那么，我也只能浑浑噩噩地“接受”，并且在这个基调之上，追求某种恶性圈的突破。就算是表面的快乐，也许能够滋润我干枯的灵魂，并且让身边的朋友，不因自己而觉得累。
人总是如此。有了一点，却要更多。说到底，我其实已经得到了许多人的理解，别人也已经不再视我为超人。这就够了。平凡的人，也总有快乐，只不过他们不知自己的肤浅。而在自知的情况下，总是活得比别人累。只不过，有人因不愿妥协而累，有人因为必须接受自己所痛恨的而累。但两者之间，我选择后者。至少，我还不至于忘记，什么是微笑。
2008年11月1日星期六
The individualistic Singaporean youth: Are you one?
This article appeared in the Straits Times today:
A glimpse of China through young eyes
A CHANCE meeting with a group of students in a hotel lift gave me a glimpse of the generation that will inherit a rising China. I was in Beijing recently for an event organised by the Singapore-based Asia-Europe Foundation (Asef) on the sidelines of the Asia-Europe Meeting's seventh summit.
I had come to the Asef meeting straight from the annual conference of the Fulbright Association. It had chosen Beijing as the venue both to honour the city that had hosted the Olympics this year, and to mark the 30th anniversary of the normalisation of relations between the United States and China.
At the Fulbright conference, I had led a roundtable on China's rise. It had been a productive session at which the Chinese participants had responded frankly and amicably to concerns over how a powerful China might behave.
But the discussion had been one among adults. What did young Chinese want the future to be? It was here that the meeting with the students proved fortuitous.
The young people, first-year students of history at Beijing Normal University, were on their way to another Asef event when they ran into me in the lift.
I asked whether I could meet them before I left Beijing. They agreed. Three days later, 10 of them turned up at my hotel to take me to the Temple of Heaven.
As we posed for a group photograph, they unfurled the flag of the Chinese Communist Youth League. That China's young communists should choose the Temple of Heaven as the venue was an interesting comment on the place of history, if not of religiosity, in post-Maoist China.
Emperors had once prayed at the temple for good harvests. Caught up in the mood of the moment, I thought that I should seek blessings for the students, the vanguard of China's future. I asked them what they wanted as a boon.
They were as surprised by my question as I had been by the appearance of their flag. A brief discussion ensued among them. 'Peace' was their spontaneous, and unanimous, first choice of blessing. 'Cooperation' and 'friendship' followed swiftly. As I was about to make my way to an altar nearby, one of the students added, almost as an afterthought: 'Could you pray for a bright future for us?'
That afterthought made me think. The students, four men and six women drawn from across China, had entered the 106-year-old university after having scored well in competitive examinations. Competitiveness came naturally to these 17- and 18-year-olds, whose entry to the prestigious university gave them access to a bright future. They were a part of China's elite, and they knew it.
However, for all of them, the public goods represented by peace, cooperation and friendship came to mind first, before their personal success did. Theirs was a social consciousness in which individual ambitions were expressed through collective values and goals.
Indeed, in the six hours that I spent with the students, the word 'I' was sounded no more than two dozen times and then, too, in answer to a specific enquiry, such as where a student was from. Most answers were phrased around 'we'.
Certainly, it was a contested 'we'. For example, if one student said something like 'the Chinese people think that...' and another disagreed with her, he would argue that 'while this is true, we must also remember that...'
However, 'we' prevailed over 'I'. The students' individualism was defined, not by its distance from a feared collectivity, but by a jostling for space within a trusted collectivity.
Their social consciousness appeared to have grown from a strong sense of cultural comfort. That comfort, in turn, seemed to have grown organically from China's success in emerging repeatedly from epochs of internal strife, foreign invasion and 'peaceful evolution', or alleged attempts by foreigners to subvert its polity from within.
China was so large and populous, and the weight of its history so great that, among the students, at least, a secure identity came with the fact of birth as a Chinese. These young people had no need to define themselves in opposition to other nationalities. If others chose to define themselves in opposition to the Chinese, that was their problem.
As for China's place in the world, the rather long walk to the subway station gave me an opportunity to ask the students: Had they had the choice of being born in an earlier era of Chinese history, which would it be?
The Tang Dynasty won easily, for that was when a peaceful and prosperous China had been the world's most powerful civilisation. However, a shy woman from Jilin province turned stern when she mentioned the Qin dynasty that had unified China.
Her body language suggested that, if it ever came to the issue of China's unity, even a cruel and autocratic emperor like Qin Shihuang would be preferable over those who would want to take the country back to the Warring States Period.
It was 1.30pm when we returned to my hotel. The students, who had travelled for more than an hour to meet me at 9am, were famished. I invited them to join me for a meal in the hotel.
As we were ushered into a restaurant, a student asked me anxiously: 'This place looks very expensive. Are you certain that we should eat here?'
Seated around the table, we received five copies of the menu. No one touched it except the group leader. I glanced at it and asked him to order. It was only when I received the bill that I realised that he had picked the cheapest items on the menu.
Secure in their Chineseness, courteous to a foreigner, and deferential to an older person, my new Chinese friends embody for me a China that is confident enough to seek its place at the table of the great powers - not by ejecting those already seated, but by asking for a larger table.
The writer, a former Straits Times journalist, is a visiting research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
It sparked off a chain of thoughts, which I shall document here:
I guess when I kept comparing Singapore with China using "小国思维"and"大国思维", the "we" and "I" issue is one of the contentious points. For China, they have gone from collectivism in Mao's era, to the quest of individualism after Cultural Revolution, and then for a "trusted collectivity" where individual dreams stem from a background of collective interests. I would say a degree of that exists in almost all Chinese youths. What about us? It's hard to say, but isn't it for many that the situation is opposite: the quest for individuality and personal success overshadowing collective benefits. We comfort ourselves in the notion that personal success is the premise for national unity and success. Perhaps it is that our machinery is a small one, and every gear wants to make itself heard - to the extent we obscure the collective, and even develop a mindset that we can leave the machine and operate elsewhere. There is really no right or wrong, it's just the fact of society, reality and life. In this light, it is understandably why foreign immigrants are never easily accepted or even tolerated in our society. We hate more gears coming into our machine, because every new gear added threatens the need of existence of one that was already there. Repulsion stems from lack of confidence of the individual. Acceptance comes from those who see that they themselves have the "capital" to seek greener pastures. Notions that new immigrants threaten the stability of our country's inner dynamics is often a secondary thought, and even worse, it is a facade that we use in the public domain to veil over our deepest primary worry of personal interest. Even the Lehman protests at Hong Lim, how did it garner so much collective support and presence? It's simply because every single individual wants to recoup his or her losses. It's "collective strength" for "personal interests". The latter outweighs the former - or should I say, the former is the best means of drawing the media's and govt's attention to achieve the latter. Agreeable? It all boils down to this fundamental question: how do we view and where do we place the collective in our hearts? Are we overburdened by the imposition of the collective on our lives? Perhaps, in the first place, this is an invalid question, since the collective could be a non-existent or meaningless notion in the personal philosophy of some.
My main point is about the issue of where the individual stands in relative to the collective, and how this notion of collective is formed, what impacts it has on the individual and whether at the end of the day Singaporeans have become too individualistic for whatever reasons, and if this shift in individualism will eventually make us "selfish" people. Worse, have we been trying to impose a kind of rational explanation like, "ai ya.. 人不为己，天诛地灭", or "what has everything on the newspapers, esp global affairs got to do with me if it doesn't affect the economy and make me lose my job", or "I'm not a civil servant. I'm just an office worker. Why should I care" to make ourselves believe that our individualistic infatuations that pays no heed to the collective is reasonable. It is scary when people totally see the collective (eg national identity) as a passive result. People lose ideals, they lose common ground when they absolve all responsibilities they have towards the collective, and only want to take. It's a very intangible and subtle shift, and many people are not even aware of the impacts their mindset change will have on the future. (See, some youths don't even think of the future. They say they want to earn a lot of money, but they never even realize that isn't enough for a good life, and their children will have to be raised not just in an isolated world but in a collective setting.) I may be being overly aggressive or demanding in my views. However, I am intrigued when my Chinese friends who face difficulties with their own personal issues, such as inability to find work, not living their dreams, failing all expectations etc, still know something about the world, still care about the Chinese people and society as a whole, and will not ever have NO views on anything that lies beyond their job-sourcing. Singaporean youths of the same age? They always think they are suffering the most. They see themselves as being the only people who have personal problems. They feel that the whole society's a "division of labour", so they just have to do their own jobs, live their own lives and stay quiet and unthinking about everything else. For those who read the newspapers, many are simply trying to "know" so that it becomes "economic capital" to boost their employability. The society is something that simply has to be run by a team of bureaucrats and politicians whom "I can trust", and anything that's work is supposed to be done by them. People lose interest in public causes. They don't even care about human rights. All in all, it's got to do with the size of the nation, and how much influence it has on the global stage. China's collectivity is shaped by its up and coming global image, and everyone has a role in that. Singapore already has a good image in many aspects (not all), and thus people relegate to their own pragmatic concerns, and only that. They are, in my opinion, even incomparable to some of the peasants in rural China, who would sacrifice their own interests for their little community. Seriously, at times, I get scared at the thought that these will be the Singaporeans I have to serve in future. I know this is a generalization, and as with all generalizations, there are exceptions. However, the issue is the extent to which this problem is prevalent. Nonetheless, I draw optimism too from the belief there are people in Singapore who have a vision akin to the Chinese youths mentioned in the article. I just hope that Singaporean youths can begin formulating informed views on issues that pertain to a general good, and not get overly immersed in living behind blind walls. At the same time, like the last statement of the article, we shouldn't be diffident to the extent we forget to seek security in our collective identity, "courteous to a foreigner, and deferential to an older person". The respect for authority still has to be present, otherwise we will become equally blind and individualistic but on another extreme.
I know there are bound to be many who will find disagreements with my views. However, before you start finding flaws in my argument - that, in any case, has not been constructed with the purpose of writing an academic paper in mind and is thus not properly structured, do reflect on yourself and see if you are truly free from the "assertions" I have pointed out. I don't believe there is no one who can say he or she is totally guiltless. So what does this lead us to? The problem lies with the way our politicians have run this country. They have tried to send many messages that are paradoxical and conflicting in nature. The only thing is, all these messages in discourse are so subtle we just internalize them without even knowing it. History will prove my point, provided in future there will be people interested in sorting out our nation's past.
Oh speaking of this, I guess we all know now why many Singaporean youths are ever SO disinterested in history and philosophy. All these deal with the human race, and narrow-minded people are often too juvenile to comprehend things so noble.
找一天，我要写一篇文章，名为《论小国人民的个体生存与集体意识》。
A glimpse of China through young eyes
| By Asad Latif, For The Straits Times |
I had come to the Asef meeting straight from the annual conference of the Fulbright Association. It had chosen Beijing as the venue both to honour the city that had hosted the Olympics this year, and to mark the 30th anniversary of the normalisation of relations between the United States and China.
At the Fulbright conference, I had led a roundtable on China's rise. It had been a productive session at which the Chinese participants had responded frankly and amicably to concerns over how a powerful China might behave.
But the discussion had been one among adults. What did young Chinese want the future to be? It was here that the meeting with the students proved fortuitous.
The young people, first-year students of history at Beijing Normal University, were on their way to another Asef event when they ran into me in the lift.
I asked whether I could meet them before I left Beijing. They agreed. Three days later, 10 of them turned up at my hotel to take me to the Temple of Heaven.
As we posed for a group photograph, they unfurled the flag of the Chinese Communist Youth League. That China's young communists should choose the Temple of Heaven as the venue was an interesting comment on the place of history, if not of religiosity, in post-Maoist China.
Emperors had once prayed at the temple for good harvests. Caught up in the mood of the moment, I thought that I should seek blessings for the students, the vanguard of China's future. I asked them what they wanted as a boon.
They were as surprised by my question as I had been by the appearance of their flag. A brief discussion ensued among them. 'Peace' was their spontaneous, and unanimous, first choice of blessing. 'Cooperation' and 'friendship' followed swiftly. As I was about to make my way to an altar nearby, one of the students added, almost as an afterthought: 'Could you pray for a bright future for us?'
That afterthought made me think. The students, four men and six women drawn from across China, had entered the 106-year-old university after having scored well in competitive examinations. Competitiveness came naturally to these 17- and 18-year-olds, whose entry to the prestigious university gave them access to a bright future. They were a part of China's elite, and they knew it.
However, for all of them, the public goods represented by peace, cooperation and friendship came to mind first, before their personal success did. Theirs was a social consciousness in which individual ambitions were expressed through collective values and goals.
Indeed, in the six hours that I spent with the students, the word 'I' was sounded no more than two dozen times and then, too, in answer to a specific enquiry, such as where a student was from. Most answers were phrased around 'we'.
Certainly, it was a contested 'we'. For example, if one student said something like 'the Chinese people think that...' and another disagreed with her, he would argue that 'while this is true, we must also remember that...'
However, 'we' prevailed over 'I'. The students' individualism was defined, not by its distance from a feared collectivity, but by a jostling for space within a trusted collectivity.
Their social consciousness appeared to have grown from a strong sense of cultural comfort. That comfort, in turn, seemed to have grown organically from China's success in emerging repeatedly from epochs of internal strife, foreign invasion and 'peaceful evolution', or alleged attempts by foreigners to subvert its polity from within.
China was so large and populous, and the weight of its history so great that, among the students, at least, a secure identity came with the fact of birth as a Chinese. These young people had no need to define themselves in opposition to other nationalities. If others chose to define themselves in opposition to the Chinese, that was their problem.
As for China's place in the world, the rather long walk to the subway station gave me an opportunity to ask the students: Had they had the choice of being born in an earlier era of Chinese history, which would it be?
The Tang Dynasty won easily, for that was when a peaceful and prosperous China had been the world's most powerful civilisation. However, a shy woman from Jilin province turned stern when she mentioned the Qin dynasty that had unified China.
Her body language suggested that, if it ever came to the issue of China's unity, even a cruel and autocratic emperor like Qin Shihuang would be preferable over those who would want to take the country back to the Warring States Period.
It was 1.30pm when we returned to my hotel. The students, who had travelled for more than an hour to meet me at 9am, were famished. I invited them to join me for a meal in the hotel.
As we were ushered into a restaurant, a student asked me anxiously: 'This place looks very expensive. Are you certain that we should eat here?'
Seated around the table, we received five copies of the menu. No one touched it except the group leader. I glanced at it and asked him to order. It was only when I received the bill that I realised that he had picked the cheapest items on the menu.
Secure in their Chineseness, courteous to a foreigner, and deferential to an older person, my new Chinese friends embody for me a China that is confident enough to seek its place at the table of the great powers - not by ejecting those already seated, but by asking for a larger table.
The writer, a former Straits Times journalist, is a visiting research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
It sparked off a chain of thoughts, which I shall document here:
I guess when I kept comparing Singapore with China using "小国思维"and"大国思维", the "we" and "I" issue is one of the contentious points. For China, they have gone from collectivism in Mao's era, to the quest of individualism after Cultural Revolution, and then for a "trusted collectivity" where individual dreams stem from a background of collective interests. I would say a degree of that exists in almost all Chinese youths. What about us? It's hard to say, but isn't it for many that the situation is opposite: the quest for individuality and personal success overshadowing collective benefits. We comfort ourselves in the notion that personal success is the premise for national unity and success. Perhaps it is that our machinery is a small one, and every gear wants to make itself heard - to the extent we obscure the collective, and even develop a mindset that we can leave the machine and operate elsewhere. There is really no right or wrong, it's just the fact of society, reality and life. In this light, it is understandably why foreign immigrants are never easily accepted or even tolerated in our society. We hate more gears coming into our machine, because every new gear added threatens the need of existence of one that was already there. Repulsion stems from lack of confidence of the individual. Acceptance comes from those who see that they themselves have the "capital" to seek greener pastures. Notions that new immigrants threaten the stability of our country's inner dynamics is often a secondary thought, and even worse, it is a facade that we use in the public domain to veil over our deepest primary worry of personal interest. Even the Lehman protests at Hong Lim, how did it garner so much collective support and presence? It's simply because every single individual wants to recoup his or her losses. It's "collective strength" for "personal interests". The latter outweighs the former - or should I say, the former is the best means of drawing the media's and govt's attention to achieve the latter. Agreeable? It all boils down to this fundamental question: how do we view and where do we place the collective in our hearts? Are we overburdened by the imposition of the collective on our lives? Perhaps, in the first place, this is an invalid question, since the collective could be a non-existent or meaningless notion in the personal philosophy of some.
My main point is about the issue of where the individual stands in relative to the collective, and how this notion of collective is formed, what impacts it has on the individual and whether at the end of the day Singaporeans have become too individualistic for whatever reasons, and if this shift in individualism will eventually make us "selfish" people. Worse, have we been trying to impose a kind of rational explanation like, "ai ya.. 人不为己，天诛地灭", or "what has everything on the newspapers, esp global affairs got to do with me if it doesn't affect the economy and make me lose my job", or "I'm not a civil servant. I'm just an office worker. Why should I care" to make ourselves believe that our individualistic infatuations that pays no heed to the collective is reasonable. It is scary when people totally see the collective (eg national identity) as a passive result. People lose ideals, they lose common ground when they absolve all responsibilities they have towards the collective, and only want to take. It's a very intangible and subtle shift, and many people are not even aware of the impacts their mindset change will have on the future. (See, some youths don't even think of the future. They say they want to earn a lot of money, but they never even realize that isn't enough for a good life, and their children will have to be raised not just in an isolated world but in a collective setting.) I may be being overly aggressive or demanding in my views. However, I am intrigued when my Chinese friends who face difficulties with their own personal issues, such as inability to find work, not living their dreams, failing all expectations etc, still know something about the world, still care about the Chinese people and society as a whole, and will not ever have NO views on anything that lies beyond their job-sourcing. Singaporean youths of the same age? They always think they are suffering the most. They see themselves as being the only people who have personal problems. They feel that the whole society's a "division of labour", so they just have to do their own jobs, live their own lives and stay quiet and unthinking about everything else. For those who read the newspapers, many are simply trying to "know" so that it becomes "economic capital" to boost their employability. The society is something that simply has to be run by a team of bureaucrats and politicians whom "I can trust", and anything that's work is supposed to be done by them. People lose interest in public causes. They don't even care about human rights. All in all, it's got to do with the size of the nation, and how much influence it has on the global stage. China's collectivity is shaped by its up and coming global image, and everyone has a role in that. Singapore already has a good image in many aspects (not all), and thus people relegate to their own pragmatic concerns, and only that. They are, in my opinion, even incomparable to some of the peasants in rural China, who would sacrifice their own interests for their little community. Seriously, at times, I get scared at the thought that these will be the Singaporeans I have to serve in future. I know this is a generalization, and as with all generalizations, there are exceptions. However, the issue is the extent to which this problem is prevalent. Nonetheless, I draw optimism too from the belief there are people in Singapore who have a vision akin to the Chinese youths mentioned in the article. I just hope that Singaporean youths can begin formulating informed views on issues that pertain to a general good, and not get overly immersed in living behind blind walls. At the same time, like the last statement of the article, we shouldn't be diffident to the extent we forget to seek security in our collective identity, "courteous to a foreigner, and deferential to an older person". The respect for authority still has to be present, otherwise we will become equally blind and individualistic but on another extreme.
I know there are bound to be many who will find disagreements with my views. However, before you start finding flaws in my argument - that, in any case, has not been constructed with the purpose of writing an academic paper in mind and is thus not properly structured, do reflect on yourself and see if you are truly free from the "assertions" I have pointed out. I don't believe there is no one who can say he or she is totally guiltless. So what does this lead us to? The problem lies with the way our politicians have run this country. They have tried to send many messages that are paradoxical and conflicting in nature. The only thing is, all these messages in discourse are so subtle we just internalize them without even knowing it. History will prove my point, provided in future there will be people interested in sorting out our nation's past.
Oh speaking of this, I guess we all know now why many Singaporean youths are ever SO disinterested in history and philosophy. All these deal with the human race, and narrow-minded people are often too juvenile to comprehend things so noble.
找一天，我要写一篇文章，名为《论小国人民的个体生存与集体意识》。
订阅：
博文 (Atom)
