这一阵子围绕着奥运“肾火”的传递,海内外的华人,不论其政治立场如何,肾上腺素都着实被激发了一下子。又逢柏杨老驾鹤西归,细想起来,这一切似乎都与中国的酱缸文化不无干系,而这种文化又是有它的人文地理和历史根源的。
中平的近作中所列举的那些国内的不良风气,其实只要有中国人的地方,就不会绝迹—去一下这里的中国城、中国店,you’d feel right at home!
在美籍华人学者中有一位叫段义浮(Yi-Fu Tuan)的老先生,是著名的人文地理学家,他在西方学术界的地位,绝不亚于那些华裔诺奖获得者或余英时这样的人文学者,但奇怪的是,在中国人圈子里却鲜为人知。他1970年代初在Harper’s Magazine 上曾发表了一篇短文,后来被《诺登文选》(”Norton Anthology”) 收入,建议所有的中国人都应该读一遍。
我每次回国,去探亲访友,进了人家的家门,看到室内装修得或富丽堂皇,或优雅别致,那进门前所走过的楼道和走廊的脏乱,在我的脑子里却愈加挥之不去,这时我就会想起段老的那篇美文。
去年夏天,我去北京万国城的一个朋友家去做客,那个小区比纽约中央公园的一些豪华公寓,一点儿也不逊色,难怪上了去年《时代周刊》的世界十大建筑榜。区内的住户,不是外国人就是高等华人,在楼道里碰巧撞上了一位电影明星,朋友跟她打招呼,向我介绍说是梅婷,惭愧的是我竟不知道她是谁。还有那些带着紫绒法兰西帽的门卫们,总让我想起上世纪二、三十年代上海租界上的红头阿三。而小区门外的香河园路,却是狭窄、拥挤、脏乱,路对面是低矮的破旧房子。这种蒙太奇就是当今中国社会的缩影。这时我又不禁想起段老的那篇美文。
段老的这篇文章题为:”American Space, Chinese Place”(附后),好像有人翻译为《美国的空间,中国的位置》。如果一个读者只看标题的话,一定不知其所云!若是我翻译的话,我会根据文中的内容翻译为:《美国人重生活的大空间,中国人重自家的小地盘》。虽然我翻译的啰嗦一些,也许更达意一些。
正如段老在文中指出的那样,中国人对故土(根)的眷恋、对自家那一亩三分地的辛勤耕耘和悉心呵护,是有其历史根源的。在这种大历史观下,来冷静地分析中国的酱缸文化,来客观地看待很多海外华人走上街头的现象,一切都make perfect sense, 一切也都变得了无新意。
清人龚定庵诗云:“种花都是种愁根,没个花枝又断魂。”中国就是我们心头的那个愁根,不管你嘴上愿不愿意承认。
American Space, Chinese Place
by Yi-Fu Tuan
Americans have a sense of space, not of place. Go to an American home in exurbia, and almost the first thing you do is drift toward the picture window. How curious that the first compliment you pay your host inside his house is to say how lovely it is outside his house! He is pleased that you should admire his vistas. The distant horizon is not merely a line separating earth from sky, it is a symbol of the future. The American is not rooted in his place, however lovely; his eyes are drawn by the expanding space to a point on the horizon, which is his future.
By contrast, consider the traditional Chinese home. Blank walls enclose it. Step behind the spirit wall and you are in a courtyard with perhaps a miniature garden around the corner. Once inside the private compound you are wrapped in an ambiance of calm beauty, an ordered world of buildings, pavement, rock, and decorative vegetation. But you have no distant view: nowhere does space open out before you. Raw nature in such a home is experienced only as weather, and the only open space is the sky above. The Chinese is rooted in his place. When he has to leave, it is not for the promised land on the terrestrial horizon, but for another world altogether along the vertical, religious axis of his imagination.
The Chinese tie to place is deeply felt. Wanderlust is an alien sentiment. The Taoist classic Tao Te Ching captures the ideal of rootedness in place with these words: "Though there may be another country in the neighborhood so close that they are within sight of each other and the crowing of cocks and barking of dogs in one place can be heard in the other, yet there is no traffic between them; and throughout their lives the two peoples have nothing to do with each other." In theory if not in practice, farmers have ranked high in Chinese society. The reason is not only that they are engaged in the "root" industry of producing food but that, unlike pecuniary merchants, they are tied to the land and do not abandon their country when it is in danger.
Nostalgia is a recurrent theme in Chinese poetry. An American reader of translated Chinese poems may well be taken aback, even put off, by the frequency, as well as the sentimentality of the lament for home. To understand the strength of this sentiment, we need to know that the Chinese desire for stability and rootedness in place is prompted by the constant threat of war, exile, and the natural disasters of flood and drought. Forcible removal makes the Chinese keenly aware of their loss. By contrast, Americans move, for the most part, voluntarily. Their nostalgia for hometown is really longing for childhood to which they cannot return: in the meantime the future beckons and the future is "out there," in open space. When we criticize American rootlessness we tend to forget that it is a result of ideals we admire, namely, social mobility and optimism about the future. When we admire Chinese rootedness, we forget that the word “place” means both location in space and position in society: to be tied to place is also to be bound to one's station in life, with little hope of betterment. Space symbolizes hope, place, achievement and stability.
------------------------------
若要比根或者place,中国人应该对比犹太人; 要比纯粹的space, 美国人该比照外星人。
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/05/2008
是牙痛了惆怅?
老段我早就垂青了。还在翘首等着他的《中国历史地理》出炉呢。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/05/2008
touche wrote:
是牙痛了惆怅?
是牙齿上面的鼻窦,一边基本安宁了,另一边还继续惆怅。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/05/2008
像虻兄这样博览多闻的人,的确寥若晨星--即便在这小资聚集的地方。:)
余英时和段老的东西确实好看,尤其是段老的英文--写得快赶上虻兄了。:):):)
谢老瓦转贴,CND很少有人读懂了我这个帖子。:)
touche wrote:
是牙痛了惆怅?
老段我早就垂青了。还在翘首等着他的《中国历史地理》出炉呢。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/05/2008
尚能饭 wrote:
余英时和段老的东西确实好看,尤其是段老的英文--写得快赶上虻兄了。:):):)
唉,老尚原本已经离CND江湖新一代掌门不远了,一只脚都踏进去了,但这样一肉麻,就立刻又退回了几步。难道不怕前功尽弃吗?:))
有些话是只能心里说的。公开说不可,味道不好。私下说亦不可,容易让老虻慌张,引起误会,只能心里说,那才算是真话。:) - posted on 05/05/2008
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
令胡冲 wrote:
尚能饭 wrote:唉,老尚原本已经离CND江湖新一代掌门不远了,一只脚都踏进去了,但这样一肉麻,就立刻又退回了几步。难道不怕前功尽弃吗?:))
余英时和段老的东西确实好看,尤其是段老的英文--写得快赶上虻兄了。:):):)
有些话是只能心里说的。公开说不可,味道不好。私下说亦不可,容易让老虻慌张,引起误会,只能心里说,那才算是真话。:) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/05/2008
尚能饭 wrote:
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
那就都来祸害这儿吧。我替MAYA说了:) - posted on 05/05/2008
尚能饭 wrote:
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
尚兄过虑了。CND跟过去还是一样,我的网友们还是我的网友。不过我的老网友们,无论是君子之交淡如水的,还是小人之交甜如蜜的,他们都知道我走江湖的习惯-- 上网从不需要别人的任何跟贴支持的。看了顺心,嘴角稍微翘一翘,看了不顺心,眉头最多皱一绉。如此而已。有话要说,才说,无话,就不用劳动指头尖。我若骂人,也丝毫不需要别人帮忙助威的。如果真发现有我都骂不了的主,那他们上来也白来。所以给了您错觉,好象我一个人在舌战似的。:)
CND上个别“愤中”“愤老”,不过是网上混混而已。何足挂齿。他们也没有人真敢想着把我打翻在内,除非他以后不想用固定网名在网上混了。严格地说,他们也算不上什么愤中愤老,都不知道什么该愤,什么时候该愤,如何能愤?连几个字的跟贴都写不清楚,何足挂齿。:)
我上面的意思是想说,当我对你有意见的时候,可能是因为我严重支持你。当我闭口不言,根本就不跟你贴的时候,可能是因为你我所见略同,同样的话我无需再重复一遍。老江湖的潜规则。:) - Re: 尚能饭:薷?你扳?ztposted on 05/05/2008
嗨。有了PLACE,精神才可以真正致远。需要不断寻找 a sense of space的人实际
上是找不到自己的PLACE。嗨。这个连我都懂。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
上次我说了,老氓是国歌, 能把海外的中国网民联合起来。有天我家来了一堆中国人,谁也不认识谁,连我也不认识,可全都知道老氓。哈哈,你们谁比得了?
尚能饭 wrote:
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
- posted on 05/06/2008
唉,七月也有不nice的时候!切,你这不是恶心令胡和老尚吗?:)也许给以时日,等我熬到了虻兄的网龄,或许也有个把你认识或不认识的人也会知道老尚的。:)暂时只能以夫子语来自勉:人不知而不愠也。。。:)
July wrote:
上次我说了,老氓是国歌, 能把海外的中国网民联合起来。有天我家来了一堆中国人,谁也不认识谁,连我也不认识,可全都知道老氓。哈哈,你们谁比得了?
尚能饭 wrote:
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
支持一下令胡。
CND 是一个怪地方,大家都不说实话。上街舞红旗的那么多,如果CND没几个,不成比例。“只能心里说,那才算是真话”是真理啊。
令胡冲 wrote:
唉,老尚原本已经离CND江湖新一代掌门不远了,一只脚都踏进去了,但这样一肉麻,就立刻又退回了几步。难道不怕前功尽弃吗?:))
有些话是只能心里说的。公开说不可,味道不好。私下说亦不可,容易让老虻慌张,引起误会,只能心里说,那才算是真话。:) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
商老 BE COOL!
- posted on 05/06/2008
革命尚未成功,老尚令狐还需努力啊。老氓已经是传奇了 :-)
尚能饭 wrote:
唉,七月也有不nice的时候!切,你这不是恶心令胡和老尚吗?:)也许给以时日,等我熬到了虻兄的网龄,或许也有个把你认识或不认识的人也会知道老尚的。:)暂时只能以夫子语来自勉:人不知而不愠也。。。:)
July wrote:
上次我说了,老氓是国歌, 能把海外的中国网民联合起来。有天我家来了一堆中国人,谁也不认识谁,连我也不认识,可全都知道老氓。哈哈,你们谁比得了?
尚能饭 wrote:
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
- Re: 老氓是国歌...posted on 05/06/2008
我还真是孤陋寡闻。。。sigh...
July wrote:
上次我说了,老氓是国歌, 能把海外的中国网民联合起来。有天我家来了一堆中国人,谁也不认识谁,连我也不认识,可全都知道老氓。哈哈,你们谁比得了?
- posted on 05/06/2008
我的pengyou, 你的网龄比我还短。你不知道我三年前刚上CND时,R2对我恨之入骨,我跟她也恶战了很多回合,后来她终于说,我都fan你了,你还要怎样?:)我不认为她是网管,她除了“愤“一点之外,还是个好同志,也很sharp and nice.:)
Of course, I love you, too!:) I'm too chicken to fall in love with Maya, and I want to love July but fear her rejection.:):):)
pengyou wrote:
商老慌了马脚,四处抓稻草 :-), 但还是不忘拍WG的马P。:-)
老在重复,“我爱你啊, R2。”
这里我还没听见他说,“我爱你啊, MAYA, JULY, ”
BE COOL!
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
I love you too! :-), :-), :-)...
尚能饭 wrote:
我的pengyou, 你的网龄比我还短。你不知道我三年前刚上CND时,R2对我恨之入骨,我跟她也恶战了很多回合,后来她终于说,我都fan你了,你还要怎样?:)我不认为她是网管,她除了“愤“一点之外,还是个好同志,也很sharp and nice.:)
Of course, I love you, too!:) I'm too chicken to fall in love with Maya, and I want to love July but fear her rejection.:):):)
- posted on 05/06/2008
从来没和这个 R2 说过话,最近发现她也对我恨之入骨。:-)
这种人号称是要搞民主的,可遇到与自己意见不合的人便充满仇恨,这样的“民主”实在不敢恭维。哎!
尚能饭 wrote:
我的pengyou, 你的网龄比我还短。你不知道我三年前刚上CND时,R2对我恨之入骨,我跟她也恶战了很多回合,后来她终于说,我都fan你了,你还要怎样?:)我不认为她是网管,她除了“愤“一点之外,还是个好同志,也很sharp and nice.:)
Of course, I love you, too!:) I'm too chicken to fall in love with Maya, and I want to love July but fear her rejection.:):):)
pengyou wrote:
商老慌了马脚,四处抓稻草 :-), 但还是不忘拍WG的马P。:-)
老在重复,“我爱你啊, R2。”
这里我还没听见他说,“我爱你啊, MAYA, JULY, ”
BE COOL!
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
July loves 老尚,July loves gz, July loves pengyou...
I love you all!!! - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
七月让这些受伤的心灵得到极大安慰!:-) - posted on 05/06/2008
July wrote:
上次我说了,老氓是国歌, 能把海外的中国网民联合起来。有天我家来了一堆中国人,谁也不认识谁,连我也不认识,可全都知道老氓。哈哈,你们谁比得了?
这条线乐死我了,一大帮子人卿卿我我的。要不是七月这句话,我还不好意思出来发言。那年我死缠着一位绝对美女网友见面,她冲着我那大力推荐老氓和令胡的热情,令我至今难忘。那时候老尚尚未上网。
老尚,你这篇散文我也没读懂。反思了一下,自己这把年纪,已经成了孩子们的根,已经不会惆怅了。再回想一下没成根的时候,都忙着把自己变成根,也没顾得上惆怅。完了,咱那碗文化精髓全错过了。
还是我推荐给老方的那个在日本留学的小女孩儿说得准:去迎接火炬,就好比自己在日本上学,姑妈来日本出差,一定得去见见姑妈。如此而已。 - posted on 05/06/2008
令狐这几句话很的上网聊天的要领。这是一种新文化,新社交,新心理,与各种传统交流方式不同。
如果见面聊天,双方真名真身,表情语气好恶一目了然,或同意或反对张嘴就来。网上说话的门槛要高很多,不会为一点小事就上键盘敲字,在屏幕后面点头皱眉没人知道。因为躲在马甲后面,社交礼仪可以全无顾忌,一言不合张嘴就骂。打群架,拉偏架的也都有了新形式。总之一种新的文化心理社会规范已经悄悄诞生了。
令胡冲 wrote:
...不过我的老网友们,无论是君子之交淡如水的,还是小人之交甜如蜜的,他们都知道我走江湖的习惯-- 上网从不需要别人的任何跟贴支持的。看了顺心,嘴角稍微翘一翘,看了不顺心,眉头最多皱一绉。如此而已。有话要说,才说,无话,就不用劳动指头尖。我若骂人,也丝毫不需要别人帮忙助威的。如果真发现有我都骂不了的主,那他们上来也白来。所以给了您错觉,好象我一个人在舌战似的。:)
CND上个别“愤中”“愤老”,不过是网上混混而已。何足挂齿。他们也没有人真敢想着把我打翻在内,除非他以后不想用固定网名在网上混了。严格地说,他们也算不上什么愤中愤老,都不知道什么该愤,什么时候该愤,如何能愤?连几个字的跟贴都写不清楚,何足挂齿。:)
我上面的意思是想说,当我对你有意见的时候,可能是因为我严重支持你。当我闭口不言,根本就不跟你贴的时候,可能是因为你我所见略同,同样的话我无需再重复一遍。老江湖的潜规则。:) - Re: 尚能饭:薷?你扳?ztposted on 05/06/2008
文化人好作泛泛之论。这里引的段老也不能幸免。“大空间、小天地”云云,比喻而已。到乡下去,看看新婚人家门上的对联,说“门前大路通车马,屋后高山放牛羊”,气魄不可谓不大。记得云贵山寨里的人家,站在门前望去,白云苍山,亦颇可赞美。
中国文化的弊端恐怕不是什么“酱缸”,而是“囚徒悖论”的困境。
老尚叹“无根”,指的应该不是个人,而是文化的根。如果是这样,那么这个根自宋元以降失落已经很久了。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
此子见事透彻,难得。
苦瓜 wrote:
还是我推荐给老方的那个在日本留学的小女孩儿说得准:去迎接火炬,就好比自己在日本上学,姑妈来日本出差,一定得去见见姑妈。如此而已。 - posted on 05/06/2008
苦瓜 wrote:
那年我死缠着一位绝对美女网友见面,她冲着我那大力推荐老氓和令胡的热情,令我至今难忘。那时候老尚尚未上网。
老尚,你这篇散文我也没读懂。反思了一下,自己这把年纪,已经成了孩子们的根,已经不会惆怅了。再回想一下没成根的时候,都忙着把自己变成根,也没顾得上惆怅。完了,咱那碗文化精髓全错过了。
谁?宋可丽?网友们说到加州,好象唯一相对公认的美女网友就是可丽。:)
老尚这贴子写得不透彻,所以很难说好。读懂了就麻烦了。不过我孤陋寡闻,也没听说过老段是谁?老虻在哥大的时候师从名流,所以可能听说过那人。也可能是我们江湖中人劣根难改,最讨厌什么名流名人。:)
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
段義孚的书一直很吸引眼球。他是个地理学家,但是他的作品空灵,绝对少见。我想是西方学术与东方气韵的混合物。我知他久矣。若干月前查找中国古代军事地理方面的著作,找不到什么,但却发现段先生的《中国历史地理》将于今年五月底出版。希望有所帮助。
http://www.yifutuan.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi-Fu_Tuan - posted on 05/06/2008
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
Dear Colleague:
I've lived in the United States since 1951, becoming a citizen in 1973, and only in the last few months have I felt decidedly uncomfortable as an ethnic Chinese in America. The attacks on China in all the media of the West that I know of—New York Times, New Yorker, Economist, BBC World News, Jim Lehrer's Newshour, and even our student newspapers—are venomous. As for the politicians, they—whether of the Left or Right—are united in an orgy of self-righteousness, gleefully casting the first stone as though they themselves knew no sin. I am appalled by their ignorance of history, of the actual conditions in Tibet and China. I especially despise pundits of the Left who not so long ago embraced Mao's totalitarian China and yet could speak now as though nothing has changed, as though China is not making slow but gradual progress toward a more open society, improving significantly meanwhile the material well-being of its people, including those of Tibet.
Chinese leaders are called autocrats, Chinese society authoritarian and certainly undemocratic. The Chinese government is supposed to be wily and nefarious, yet it seems helpless in the face of this onslaught. It is helpless because, in part, the words used in the onslaught are all invented by the West—democracy, freedom, human rights, and such like. When the Chinese use them, they can be accused of being either naive or hypocritical. What if the Chinese use their own words, such as "harmony," "prosperity," and "peace," rather than ones borrowed from the West? And what if the Chinese leaders call their society "traditional," or, better still, "Confucian" rather than "democratic"? Remember that in the eighteenth century, European thinkers were in full-throated praise of the Chinese government, which they deemed rational and Confucian, as distinct from European governments, which they deemed irrational, superstitious, and despotic. Enlightenment thinkers would never have praised the China of their time if it allowed something like the Falung Gong movement to flourish, for they would have seen it as an anti-science, anti-rational cult. Today, however, Western pundits, even of the Left, have become imperialists. They would love to see the Falung Gong cult poison China and so stop its headlong path to science and modernization, just as, in the nineteenth century, their forbears promoted the unimpeded spread of opium so that the Chinese people could remain drugged and backward.
In my cynical mood, I think there is only one way for China to redeem itself in Western eyes—invade Myanmar! Rid the country of its evil rulers, set up a Green Zone in Rangoon, and promote democracy even if this should take a hundred years! The cost to China would be enormous—half a trillion yuan, 4,000 dead and 25,000 wounded soldiers. To the Burmese themselves, the cost would be 80,000 dead and countless number wounded. But this happy turn of events is just my fantasy. It can never happen. Why? Well, the sad truth is: China, unlike the United States, is not a democracy.
Best wishes,
Yi-Fu
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
这封信的文辞真好。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
Dear Colleague:
流言蜚语多了,说明那姑娘是真的漂亮起来了。中国已经长到了遭人爱也遭人恨的规模,举足轻重。回头也去看看段先生的书。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
谁?宋可丽?网友们说到加州,好象唯一相对公认的美女网友就是可丽。:)
老尚这贴子写得不透彻,所以很难说好。读懂了就麻烦了。不过我孤陋寡闻,也没听说过老段是谁?老虻在哥大的时候师从名流,所以可能听说过那人。也可能是我们江湖中人劣根难改,最讨厌什么名流名人。:)
走江湖,贵在豁达。要是我,就不问是谁,偷着乐就完了。haha ~~~
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
这条线真好。
- posted on 05/06/2008
“民主派“ 会把这封信骂死了!:-)
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
I especially despise pundits of the Left who not so long ago embraced Mao's totalitarian China and yet could speak now as though nothing has changed, as though China is not making slow but gradual progress toward a more open society, improving significantly meanwhile the material well-being of its people, including those of Tibet.
" embraced Mao's totalitarian China"? what is this referring to?
It is helpless because, in part, the words used in the onslaught are all invented by the West—democracy, freedom, human rights, and such like. When the Chinese use them, they can be accused of being either naive or hypocritical. What if the Chinese use their own words, such as "harmony," "prosperity," and "peace," rather than ones borrowed from the West? And what if the Chinese leaders call their society "traditional," or, better still, "Confucian" rather than "democratic"?
It is a key question whether those Western values are "普适“ or not. Obviously t is highly controversial and hotly debated.
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
Do you have a link of this letter?
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/06/2008
- posted on 05/07/2008
I read Mr. Duan’s article with great interests and have to say that I agree, to a large extent, with his comments on differences between Chinese and American cultures. In short, Chinese strong rootedness attached to a ‘place’ leads inevitably to a constrained, narrow, passive, static, inward and pessimistic view on the world. This is in direct contrast to American or western culture. I hope this is what Old Shang meant, or 根, in his post. If this is true, I would like to say that this sort of 根 will do more harm than good to Chinese as a whole, including individuals like Old Shang.
Most of overseas Chinese are struggling in the conflict of different cultures. To survive, we must adapt and evolve ourselves. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, a Swiss-born psychiatrist, described in her thesis how people would react to the news that they would lose their lives. The described successive stages of denial, anger, negotiation, depression and acceptance, from my point of view, are equally relevant to the loss of the so-called ‘根’.
While most of last month’s red-coloured Chinese protesters are still in early stage one or two, Old Shang may be in later stage three or four. With a bit extra push, Old Shang can go through the last stage: acceptance. After this, Old Shang will care no more about place and go into space.
After all, what does a root mean? It is where we are!
老瓦 wrote:
这一阵子围绕着奥运“肾火”的传递,海内外的华人,不论其政治立场如何,肾上腺素都着实被激发了一下子。又逢柏杨老驾鹤西归,细想起来,这一切似乎都与中国的酱缸文化不无干系,而这种文化又是有它的人文地理和历史根源的。
中平的近作中所列举的那些国内的不良风气,其实只要有中国人的地方,就不会绝迹—去一下这里的中国城、中国店,you’d feel right at home!
在美籍华人学者中有一位叫段义浮(Yi-Fu Tuan)的老先生,是著名的人文地理学家,他在西方学术界的地位,绝不亚于那些华裔诺奖获得者或余英时这样的人文学者,但奇怪的是,在中国人圈子里却鲜为人知。他1970年代初在Harper’s Magazine 上曾发表了一篇短文,后来被《诺登文选》(”Norton Anthology”) 收入,建议所有的中国人都应该读一遍。
我每次回国,去探亲访友,进了人家的家门,看到室内装修得或富丽堂皇,或优雅别致,那进门前所走过的楼道和走廊的脏乱,在我的脑子里却愈加挥之不去,这时我就会想起段老的那篇美文。
去年夏天,我去北京万国城的一个朋友家去做客,那个小区比纽约中央公园的一些豪华公寓,一点儿也不逊色,难怪上了去年《时代周刊》的世界十大建筑榜。区内的住户,不是外国人就是高等华人,在楼道里碰巧撞上了一位电影明星,朋友跟她打招呼,向我介绍说是梅婷,惭愧的是我竟不知道她是谁。还有那些带着紫绒法兰西帽的门卫们,总让我想起上世纪二、三十年代上海租界上的红头阿三。而小区门外的香河园路,却是狭窄、拥挤、脏乱,路对面是低矮的破旧房子。这种蒙太奇就是当今中国社会的缩影。这时我又不禁想起段老的那篇美文。
段老的这篇文章题为:”American Space, Chinese Place”(附后),好像有人翻译为《美国的空间,中国的位置》。如果一个读者只看标题的话,一定不知其所云!若是我翻译的话,我会根据文中的内容翻译为:《美国人重生活的大空间,中国人重自家的小地盘》。虽然我翻译的啰嗦一些,也许更达意一些。
正如段老在文中指出的那样,中国人对故土(根)的眷恋、对自家那一亩三分地的辛勤耕耘和悉心呵护,是有其历史根源的。在这种大历史观下,来冷静地分析中国的酱缸文化,来客观地看待很多海外华人走上街头的现象,一切都make perfect sense, 一切也都变得了无新意。
清人龚定庵诗云:“种花都是种愁根,没个花枝又断魂。”中国就是我们心头的那个愁根,不管你嘴上愿不愿意承认。
American Space, Chinese Place
by Yi-Fu Tuan
Americans have a sense of space, not of place. Go to an American home in exurbia, and almost the first thing you do is drift toward the picture window. How curious that the first compliment you pay your host inside his house is to say how lovely it is outside his house! He is pleased that you should admire his vistas. The distant horizon is not merely a line separating earth from sky, it is a symbol of the future. The American is not rooted in his place, however lovely; his eyes are drawn by the expanding space to a point on the horizon, which is his future.
By contrast, consider the traditional Chinese home. Blank walls enclose it. Step behind the spirit wall and you are in a courtyard with perhaps a miniature garden around the corner. Once inside the private compound you are wrapped in an ambiance of calm beauty, an ordered world of buildings, pavement, rock, and decorative vegetation. But you have no distant view: nowhere does space open out before you. Raw nature in such a home is experienced only as weather, and the only open space is the sky above. The Chinese is rooted in his place. When he has to leave, it is not for the promised land on the terrestrial horizon, but for another world altogether along the vertical, religious axis of his imagination.
The Chinese tie to place is deeply felt. Wanderlust is an alien sentiment. The Taoist classic Tao Te Ching captures the ideal of rootedness in place with these words: "Though there may be another country in the neighborhood so close that they are within sight of each other and the crowing of cocks and barking of dogs in one place can be heard in the other, yet there is no traffic between them; and throughout their lives the two peoples have nothing to do with each other." In theory if not in practice, farmers have ranked high in Chinese society. The reason is not only that they are engaged in the "root" industry of producing food but that, unlike pecuniary merchants, they are tied to the land and do not abandon their country when it is in danger.
Nostalgia is a recurrent theme in Chinese poetry. An American reader of translated Chinese poems may well be taken aback, even put off, by the frequency, as well as the sentimentality of the lament for home. To understand the strength of this sentiment, we need to know that the Chinese desire for stability and rootedness in place is prompted by the constant threat of war, exile, and the natural disasters of flood and drought. Forcible removal makes the Chinese keenly aware of their loss. By contrast, Americans move, for the most part, voluntarily. Their nostalgia for hometown is really longing for childhood to which they cannot return: in the meantime the future beckons and the future is "out there," in open space. When we criticize American rootlessness we tend to forget that it is a result of ideals we admire, namely, social mobility and optimism about the future. When we admire Chinese rootedness, we forget that the word “place” means both location in space and position in society: to be tied to place is also to be bound to one's station in life, with little hope of betterment. Space symbolizes hope, place, achievement and stability.
------------------------------
若要比根或者place,中国人应该对比犹太人; 要比纯粹的space, 美国人该比照外星人。
- posted on 05/07/2008
胡葱病得真不轻!
令胡冲 wrote:
尚能饭 wrote:尚兄过虑了。CND跟过去还是一样,我的网友们还是我的网友。不过我的老网友们,无论是君子之交淡如水的,还是小人之交甜如蜜的,他们都知道我走江湖的习惯-- 上网从不需要别人的任何跟贴支持的。看了顺心,嘴角稍微翘一翘,看了不顺心,眉头最多皱一绉。如此而已。有话要说,才说,无话,就不用劳动指头尖。我若骂人,也丝毫不需要别人帮忙助威的。如果真发现有我都骂不了的主,那他们上来也白来。所以给了您错觉,好象我一个人在舌战似的。:)
令胡老弟说的也是!:)你现在在CND几乎跟我一样臭名昭著了,那些愤中、愤老们恨不得把你打翻在地,再踏上一只脚。:):)还是老虻好,离开那是非之地了。:)
CND上个别“愤中”“愤老”,不过是网上混混而已。何足挂齿。他们也没有人真敢想着把我打翻在内,除非他以后不想用固定网名在网上混了。严格地说,他们也算不上什么愤中愤老,都不知道什么该愤,什么时候该愤,如何能愤?连几个字的跟贴都写不清楚,何足挂齿。:)
我上面的意思是想说,当我对你有意见的时候,可能是因为我严重支持你。当我闭口不言,根本就不跟你贴的时候,可能是因为你我所见略同,同样的话我无需再重复一遍。老江湖的潜规则。:) - posted on 05/07/2008
老段的根。。。。。哈哈。。。。。
This letter is pathetic and Old Duan is getting old, really old. Can't Old Duan distinguish between "Confucian" and "democratic"? Or .....?
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
Dear Colleague:
I've lived in the United States since 1951, becoming a citizen in 1973, and only in the last few months have I felt decidedly uncomfortable as an ethnic Chinese in America. The attacks on China in all the media of the West that I know of—New York Times, New Yorker, Economist, BBC World News, Jim Lehrer's Newshour, and even our student newspapers—are venomous. As for the politicians, they—whether of the Left or Right—are united in an orgy of self-righteousness, gleefully casting the first stone as though they themselves knew no sin. I am appalled by their ignorance of history, of the actual conditions in Tibet and China. I especially despise pundits of the Left who not so long ago embraced Mao's totalitarian China and yet could speak now as though nothing has changed, as though China is not making slow but gradual progress toward a more open society, improving significantly meanwhile the material well-being of its people, including those of Tibet.
Chinese leaders are called autocrats, Chinese society authoritarian and certainly undemocratic. The Chinese government is supposed to be wily and nefarious, yet it seems helpless in the face of this onslaught. It is helpless because, in part, the words used in the onslaught are all invented by the West—democracy, freedom, human rights, and such like. When the Chinese use them, they can be accused of being either naive or hypocritical. What if the Chinese use their own words, such as "harmony," "prosperity," and "peace," rather than ones borrowed from the West? And what if the Chinese leaders call their society "traditional," or, better still, "Confucian" rather than "democratic"? Remember that in the eighteenth century, European thinkers were in full-throated praise of the Chinese government, which they deemed rational and Confucian, as distinct from European governments, which they deemed irrational, superstitious, and despotic. Enlightenment thinkers would never have praised the China of their time if it allowed something like the Falung Gong movement to flourish, for they would have seen it as an anti-science, anti-rational cult. Today, however, Western pundits, even of the Left, have become imperialists. They would love to see the Falung Gong cult poison China and so stop its headlong path to science and modernization, just as, in the nineteenth century, their forbears promoted the unimpeded spread of opium so that the Chinese people could remain drugged and backward.
In my cynical mood, I think there is only one way for China to redeem itself in Western eyes—invade Myanmar! Rid the country of its evil rulers, set up a Green Zone in Rangoon, and promote democracy even if this should take a hundred years! The cost to China would be enormous—half a trillion yuan, 4,000 dead and 25,000 wounded soldiers. To the Burmese themselves, the cost would be 80,000 dead and countless number wounded. But this happy turn of events is just my fantasy. It can never happen. Why? Well, the sad truth is: China, unlike the United States, is not a democracy.
Best wishes,
Yi-Fu
- posted on 05/07/2008
正如段老在文中指出的那样,中国人对故土(根)的眷恋、对自家那一亩三分地的辛勤耕耘和悉心呵护,是有其历史根源的。在这种大历史观下,来冷静地分析中国的酱缸文化,来客观地看待很多海外华人走上街头的现象,一切都make perfect sense, 一切也都变得了无新意。
不是那么简单吧? 记得肖伯纳也这样说过爱尔兰人,农业社会的
一般?
是不是都得那么早就学英国人圈地进城?
清人龚定庵诗云:“种花都是种愁根,没个花枝又断魂。”中国就是我们心头的那个愁根,不管你嘴上愿不愿意承认。
这句话,连着诗,很有味道. - posted on 05/07/2008
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
In my cynical mood, I think there is only one way for China to redeem itself in Western eyes—invade Myanmar! Rid the country of its evil rulers, set up a Green Zone in Rangoon, and promote democracy even if this should take a hundred years! The cost to China would be enormous—half a trillion yuan, 4,000 dead and 25,000 wounded soldiers. To the Burmese themselves, the cost would be 80,000 dead and countless number wounded. But this happy turn of events is just my fantasy. It can never happen. Why? Well, the sad truth is: China, unlike the United States, is not a democracy.
真是个好夥计。有人70岁的时候还能如此质朴和锋锐,保持朴素的价值观。相对而言,CND等论坛上这样的网友还如今是太少了。
老段上不上中文网?看来老虻也不是完全没有读贴的眼力的。
我才注意到,老尚这夥计的贴名叫“无根的烦恼”?男人要是没根,那不成东方不败了嘛。我一直当那是“无限的烦恼”。没有人阻挡我们自己有两个或三个根,除非咱自己跟自己过不去。:)
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/07/2008
苦瓜 wrote:
走江湖,贵在豁达。要是我,就不问是谁,偷着乐就完了。haha ~~~
唉,我在CND老坛上网的时候,老虻还不知道怎么样在PC上敲中文呢。网上跟本就不是一代人,我比他早了两年半。两年半啊。这位美女网友怎么会把他跟我并列。唉,当然了,说到这里,也得承认有时候看来我还是不够豁达。:) - posted on 05/07/2008
It is astonishing to see that a learned man like Mr. Tuan who's lived in this country for more than half a century can be still as clueless as the rest of the fengqings as to why the public sentiment in the western society is so decidedly anti-Chinese, vis-a-vis Tibet. The repeated whining about past mistreatment at the hands of western imperialists juxtaposed with brutal suppression of the colonized Tibetan people only exposes the hypocrisy of our people, the act of a very much "victimized" schoolyard bully who's caught at kicking the groin of a smaller kid. Imagine, how unfair, that an alliance of ignorant attacking dogs from Nancy Pelocy to Desmond Tutu was unleashed by the "imperialistic punditry on the Left" to smear our beloved motherland. Why can't they just all cast their focus on their own killing fields in Iraq? After all, aren't all our critics, even Nelson Mandala, George W. Bush's lap pooches?
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, if your goal is to rehabilitate the reputation of the Chinese regime, or more precisely, the reputation of the Chinese people as a whole, not only this is not helping but throwing fuel at the fire. How are past atrocities committed by the since long-dead white men absolve our responsibility of supporting a brutal policy of enslaving a whole minority people? This is the twenty first century people! And the killings of the American Indians of nineteenth century is still used to justify our treatment of the Tibetans? Why not use Hitler as an example then?
I wish if you all simply just cite force and power as the only justifications for annihilatiing people's aspiration of self-determination. If that's what you want to project the Chinese power of the new century, it at least is consistent with the ambition. Just don't act like a 弃妇 who can't stop crying about all the past grievances real or imagined.
P.S. touche=老氓? In that case greetings, long time no see.
touche wrote:
看看这封信。老段也动了肾火了。
April 25, 2008
Dear Colleague:
I've lived in the United States since 1951, becoming a citizen in 1973, and only in the last few months have I felt decidedly uncomfortable as an ethnic Chinese in America. The attacks on China in all the media of the West that I know of—New York Times, New Yorker, Economist, BBC World News, Jim Lehrer's Newshour, and even our student newspapers—are venomous. As for the politicians, they—whether of the Left or Right—are united in an orgy of self-righteousness, gleefully casting the first stone as though they themselves knew no sin. I am appalled by their ignorance of history, of the actual conditions in Tibet and China. I especially despise pundits of the Left who not so long ago embraced Mao's totalitarian China and yet could speak now as though nothing has changed, as though China is not making slow but gradual progress toward a more open society, improving significantly meanwhile the material well-being of its people, including those of Tibet.
Chinese leaders are called autocrats, Chinese society authoritarian and certainly undemocratic. The Chinese government is supposed to be wily and nefarious, yet it seems helpless in the face of this onslaught. It is helpless because, in part, the words used in the onslaught are all invented by the West—democracy, freedom, human rights, and such like. When the Chinese use them, they can be accused of being either naive or hypocritical. What if the Chinese use their own words, such as "harmony," "prosperity," and "peace," rather than ones borrowed from the West? And what if the Chinese leaders call their society "traditional," or, better still, "Confucian" rather than "democratic"? Remember that in the eighteenth century, European thinkers were in full-throated praise of the Chinese government, which they deemed rational and Confucian, as distinct from European governments, which they deemed irrational, superstitious, and despotic. Enlightenment thinkers would never have praised the China of their time if it allowed something like the Falung Gong movement to flourish, for they would have seen it as an anti-science, anti-rational cult. Today, however, Western pundits, even of the Left, have become imperialists. They would love to see the Falung Gong cult poison China and so stop its headlong path to science and modernization, just as, in the nineteenth century, their forbears promoted the unimpeded spread of opium so that the Chinese people could remain drugged and backward.
In my cynical mood, I think there is only one way for China to redeem itself in Western eyes—invade Myanmar! Rid the country of its evil rulers, set up a Green Zone in Rangoon, and promote democracy even if this should take a hundred years! The cost to China would be enormous—half a trillion yuan, 4,000 dead and 25,000 wounded soldiers. To the Burmese themselves, the cost would be 80,000 dead and countless number wounded. But this happy turn of events is just my fantasy. It can never happen. Why? Well, the sad truth is: China, unlike the United States, is not a democracy.
Best wishes,
Yi-Fu
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/07/2008
令胡总是生气别人不知道他是老人家,上车都不让着他:)。我知道的,老得没边儿了,天下再没有比他更有资格当老爷子的人啦:)
令胡,胡子多长了,该剪了没?
唉,我在CND老坛上网的时候,老虻还不知道怎么样在PC上敲中文呢。网上跟本就不是一代人,我比他早了两年半。两年半啊。这位美女网友怎么会把他跟我并列。唉,当然了,说到这里,也得承认有时候看来我还是不够豁达。:) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/07/2008
gz wrote:
“民主派“ 会把这封信骂死了!:-)
民主派是不会骂这老段的帖子了。那已经是写给那些no-brainer的美国同胞了。除非pure Brain-less people - trying-so-hard-that-got-self-disoriented-and-distorted guy may have a try to brush off the solid common sense that Mr Duan established. - posted on 05/07/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
gz wrote:民主派是不会骂这老段的帖子了。那已经是写给那些no-brainer的美国同胞了。除非pure Brain-less people - trying-so-hard-that-got-self-disoriented-and-distorted guy may have a try to brush off the solid common sense that Mr Duan established.
“民主派“ 会把这封信骂死了!:-)
You may be surprised. In fact I just came back from the same thread at CND, and, as expected, they are attacking him (too old, whatever that may imply), as well as this article of his. Of course you see some of the posts above.
(http://my.cnd.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=57607&forum=1&start=250&viewmode=flat&order=0) - posted on 05/07/2008
gz wrote:
You may be surprised. In fact I just came back from the same thread at CND, and, as expected, they are attacking him (too old, whatever that may imply), as well as this article of his. Of course you see some of the posts above.
(http://my.cnd.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=57607&forum=1&start=250&viewmode=flat&order=0)
No surprise - none of them has any hope to be anywhere near to 民主派. Some brainless net friends. Are we really bothered with that? :) - posted on 05/07/2008
Greetings Mr. Articulate. Do I have to know who I am? ;)
I personally found Old Duan's 'kidney fire' slightly amusing but quite understandable. Quite a few overseas old Chinese scholars would think more or less the same way.
Recent issue of Economist has 'Angry China' on the cover. Apparently Westerners are quite taken aback by the Chinese reactions to their reactions.
I don't know how abject Tibetans are living under Chinese rule. I just have to open my eyes for informations coming from all quarters. So far as a member of a minority living in the U.S. I haven't had much to complain.
Behind blanket reaction there are always much variety. Some are justified, some not. Let's just not let jingoism carry us away and don't know how good and how bad we really are.
tar wrote:
P.S. touche=老氓? In that case greetings, long time no see.
- posted on 05/07/2008
You know, I just feel sad for the old bloke. I actually quite like the piece in LaoShang's article. His analysis of the Chinese rootedness versus free mobility is quite interesting, a bit shallow perhaps. The more relevant difference in my view is the individualism versus partisan tribalism, and the lack of this understanding is probably why he feels besieged as a Chinese American facing the onslaught of the media criticisms of China and its policies against the Tibetan people.
In contrast to the reaction to GWB dragging all of us to this senseless Iraqi war, the majority of the American people didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally. Hell half of them (us) are against it to begin with. This is the confidence we should instill in ourselves that we don't have to pledge allegiance to our tribal leaders, even plainly whatever they are doing is wrong.
And I take pity on those apologists of the Chinese regime (which to me these days seems every other Chinese on the street) who bend out of shape trying to defend them. the people using Iraqi war as an excuse are pathologically incapable of deploying reason in arguing their case. Not only two wrongs don't make a right, but using one atrocity to defend the other is even worse, for they know the action they are defending is morally wrong, period.
On a personal note, why did you self-extricate from CND? I probably haven't seen you for many years.
touche wrote:
Greetings Mr. Articulate. Do I have to know who I am? ;)
I personally found Old Duan's 'kidney fire' slightly amusing but quite understandable. Quite a few overseas old Chinese scholars would think more or less the same way.
Recent issue of Economist has 'Angry China' on the cover. Apparently Westerners are quite taken back by the Chinese reactions to their reactions.
I don't know how abject Tibetans are living under Chinese rule. I just have to open my eyes for informations coming from all quarters. So far as a member of a minority living in the U.S. I haven't had much to complain.
Behind blanket reaction there are always much variety. Some are justified, some not. Let's just not let jingoism carry us away and don't know how good and how bad we really are.
tar wrote:
P.S. touche=老氓? In that case greetings, long time no see.
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
Now, touche is not 老氓 anymore, he is a 老唐璜 in cafe and we all love him dearly
:-)
tar wrote:
On a personal note, why did you self-extricate from CND? I probably haven't seen you for many years.
touche wrote:
Greetings Mr. Articulate. Do I have to know who I am? ;)
tar wrote:
P.S. touche=老氓? In that case greetings, long time no see.
- posted on 05/08/2008
tar wrote:...
In contrast to the reaction to GWB dragging all of us to this senseless Iraqi war, the majority of the American people didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally. Hell half of them (us) are against it to begin with. This is the confidence we should instill in ourselves that we don't have to pledge allegiance to our tribal leaders, even plainly whatever they are doing is wrong.
There were way over half of Americans who supported the Iraq war at the beginning. Many of them thought the Iraq war was an act of revenge for 911 attack. Then, when the war was criticized by some of the traditional US allies in Europe, there were some strong reactions symbolized by things like the "patriotic fries" (aka "freedom fries"), and the cancellation of some exchange programs to prevent a few poor German high school kids from coming to the US to spread "anti-American feelings". I wouldn't say they are apologists, but they might have taken the war policy a little personally, perhaps? In any case, I don't take pity on them.
Oops! Almost forgot to mention, don’t get me wrong; I am not defending anybody here, as I also happen to know that two wrongs don’t make a right.
And I take pity on those apologists of the Chinese regime (which to me these days seems every other Chinese on the street) who bend out of shape trying to defend them. the people using Iraqi war as an excuse are pathologically incapable of deploying reason in arguing their case. Not only two wrongs don't make a right, but using one atrocity to defend the other is even worse, for they know the action they are defending is morally wrong, period.
Every other Chinese on the street are defending the Chinese regime? You sure? No need to be this pessimistic. How could you be so sure that they were bending out of shape just to defend someone, instead of meerly expressing their own feelings and views? Again, don't get me wrong, they don't need to be defended, and that is not what I am doing here. I'm just expressing my views. - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
看了半天,好像老段,老尚和令狐的根是不同的 :-) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
唉,JULY等于没说。白让人家高兴一下。
July wrote:
July loves 老尚,July loves gz, July loves pengyou...
I love you all!!! - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
老段老矣!竟然回到启蒙主义时期去了。伏尔泰对中国的了解和幻想不是早被鸦片战争打碎了吗?笛福都比他看得清楚。 - posted on 05/08/2008
You made good points. The only thing I am not to agree with you is that Mr. Tuan appears to be more an old Red Gard than a FengQing.
Mr Tuan tried to make fuzz by drawing red herrings (such as harmony, prosperity, peace, and Falung Gong) in his letter. On one hand, he praised positive progress, however skin-deep in politics, in China; on the other hand, he turned a blind eye to the fundmental changes made in the West. What Mr. Tuan showed to us in his letter is exactly what he described as a Chinese in his 1970’s article, entitled “American Space, Chinese Place” – A Chinese with a constrained, narrow, passive, static, inward and pessimistic view. Isn’t it ironic?
Now we see that aging effect starts taking a toll on Mr. Tuan. A sad thing.
tar wrote:
It is astonishing to see that a learned man like Mr. Tuan who's lived in this country for more than half a century can be still as clueless as the rest of the fengqings as to why the public sentiment in the western society is so decidedly anti-Chinese, vis-a-vis Tibet. The repeated whining about past mistreatment at the hands of western imperialists juxtaposed with brutal suppression of the colonized Tibetan people only exposes the hypocrisy of our people, the act of a very much "victimized" schoolyard bully who's caught at kicking the groin of a smaller kid. Imagine, how unfair, that an alliance of ignorant attacking dogs from Nancy Pelocy to Desmond Tutu was unleashed by the "imperialistic punditry on the Left" to smear our beloved motherland. Why can't they just all cast their focus on their own killing fields in Iraq? After all, aren't all our critics, even Nelson Mandala, George W. Bush's lap pooches?
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, if your goal is to rehabilitate the reputation of the Chinese regime, or more precisely, the reputation of the Chinese people as a whole, not only this is not helping but throwing fuel at the fire. How are past atrocities committed by the since long-dead white men absolve our responsibility of supporting a brutal policy of enslaving a whole minority people? This is the twenty first century people! And the killings of the American Indians of nineteenth century is still used to justify our treatment of the Tibetans? Why not use Hitler as an example then?
I wish if you all simply just cite force and power as the only justifications for annihilatiing people's aspiration of self-determination. If that's what you want to project the Chinese power of the new century, it at least is consistent with the ambition. Just don't act like a 弃妇 who can't stop crying about all the past grievances real or imagined. - posted on 05/08/2008
The easiest way to conceal your ignorance and stupidity is to call others no-brainers.
What a real no-brainer may not know is that just as 0+0=0, one non-brainer plus another one makes no difference.
BTW, are you sure that you have fully understood what Mr. Tuan talked about in his letter?
令胡冲 wrote:
gz wrote:民主派是不会骂这老段的帖子了。那已经是写给那些no-brainer的美国同胞了。除非pure Brain-less people - trying-so-hard-that-got-self-disoriented-and-distorted guy may have a try to brush off the solid common sense that Mr Duan established.
“民主派“ 会把这封信骂死了!:-)
- posted on 05/08/2008
Please don’t behave as badly as Mr. Tuan by regarding every comments or critisim as attacks.
BTW are you gz17 in CND?
gz wrote:
You may be surprised. In fact I just came back from the same thread at CND, and, as expected, they are attacking him (too old, whatever that may imply), as well as this article of his. Of course you see some of the posts above.
(http://my.cnd.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=57607&forum=1&start=250&viewmode=flat&order=0) - posted on 05/08/2008
不定期造访者 wrote:
The easiest way to conceal your ignorance and stupidity is to call others no-brainers.
The easiest way for you to conceal your ignorance and stupidity is to learn some basic english word, ie by looking up the dictionay and find out what "no-brainer" really means. Then answer my question here, what's the difference between a no-brainer like common American and a brain-less guy like yourself? :)
Chinglish will not help yourself here. Unless you don't understand the basic Chinese chars either. :) - posted on 05/08/2008
You are so predictable! Hahaha……..
I deliberately left this obvious error for you to pick up. Do you know why? To compensate any loss you might have felt. Surely, you were feeling better until now. Weren’t you?
Back to your English, I have to tell you the result from a research carried out in England some years ago:
Any person reached age of 35 or beyond is unlikely to improve his/her language learning skill significantly.
Are you disappointed? Maybe. But I am quite sure that with your much inflated ego and Dutch courage, you will continue to drag and show your ‘glorious’ (in your term) English around.
令胡冲 wrote:
不定期造访者 wrote:The easiest way for you to conceal your ignorance and stupidity is to learn some basic english word, ie by looking up the dictionay and find out what "no-brainer" really means. Then answer my question here, what's the difference between a no-brainer like common American and a brain-less guy like yourself? :)
The easiest way to conceal your ignorance and stupidity is to call others no-brainers.
Chinglish will not help yourself here. Unless you don't understand the basic Chinese chars either. :) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
不定期造访者 wrote:
You are so predictable! Hahaha……..
I deliberately left this obvious error for you to pick up. Do you know why? To compensate any loss you might have felt. Surely, you were feeling better until now. Weren’t you?
What a clever guy. :) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
I must say that I liked this "Dear Colleague" letter. I was quite bewildered myself by the synchronized trumpeting of the west media corporations over the issues surrounding Tibet and Beijing Olympic Games, and was a little suspicious of a few black hands in the smoke-filled rooms behind the editors' offices.
I would not be too critical of Mr. Duan, especially as he said himself that he wrote this piece in a "cynical mood". I think his colleagues will read this letter, chuckle a little, then go about their own business. - posted on 05/08/2008
That is what I'm thinking. I and 八爷 always stand in the same trench. :-), :-), :-)...
八十一子 wrote:
I must say that I liked this "Dear Colleague" letter. I was quite bewildered myself by the synchronized trumpeting of the west media corporations over the issues surrounding Tibet and Beijing Olympic Games, and was a little suspicious of a few black hands in the smoke-filled rooms behind the editors' offices.
I would not be too critical of Mr. Duan, especially as he said himself that he wrote this piece in a "cynical mood". I think that his colleagues will read this letter, chuckle a little, then go about their own business. - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
No, no, no, you ought to lay low in the trench when under fire. :-)
Liked your story about school yard bullies.
pengyou wrote:
That is what I'm thinking. I and 八爷 always stand in the trench. :-), :-), :-)...
- Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
Sorry, missing the word "same," but I know I can count on 八爷 to protect me. :-), :-), :-)....
81zi wrote:
No, no, no, you ought to lay low in the trench when under fire. :-)
Liked your story about school yard bullies.
I hope you can say a little more.
- posted on 05/08/2008
I certainly don't regard "every comments or critisim as attacks" (you mean every "comment" and "criticism", I suppose?). But during discussion there are always those who seem more interested in things other than the topics being debated, such as calling others "old", "ignorance and stupidity". Is the age relevant to the debate? If you call others ignorant ad stupid, don't you think they could easily say the same thing back to you?
If you don't like the word "attack", find some better word to describe this kind of behavior. Would you?
Since you mentioned behavior, let me tell you a good behavior is always "对事不对人"
不定期造访者 wrote:
Please don’t behave as badly as Mr. Tuan by regarding every comments or critisim as attacks.
BTW are you gz17 in CND?
gz wrote:
You may be surprised. In fact I just came back from the same thread at CND, and, as expected, they are attacking him (too old, whatever that may imply), as well as this article of his. Of course you see some of the posts above.
(http://my.cnd.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=57607&forum=1&start=250&viewmode=flat&order=0) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/08/2008
好,那就说说咖啡的不是,那边由abc开的整整一条线“我的关于奥运的贴子怎么就被删了呢”转眼间被删的无影无踪,包括所有反感删帖的跟帖?有没有责任人能公开解释一下?
私人网站也可以有点透明度吧?要不也贴个“莫谈国是”的牌子?
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
Here is the explaination:
http://www.mayacafe.com/forum/topic1sp.php3?tkey=1209598562
gz wrote:
好,那就说说咖啡的不是,那边由abc开的整整一条线“我的关于奥运的贴子怎么就被删了呢”转眼间被删的无影无踪,包括所有反感删帖的跟帖?有没有责任人能公开解释一下?
私人网站也可以有点透明度吧?要不也贴个“莫谈国是”的牌子?
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
He's an acquired taste isn't he? ;-)
July wrote:
Now, touche is not 老氓 anymore, he is a 老唐璜 in cafe and we all love him dearly
:-)
tar wrote:
On a personal note, why did you self-extricate from CND? I probably haven't seen you for many years.
touche wrote:
Greetings Mr. Articulate. Do I have to know who I am? ;)
tar wrote:
P.S. touche=老氓? In that case greetings, long time no see.
- posted on 05/08/2008
I am pretty sure there are near 50-50 split in public opinion on Iraq war in the begining. Perhaps you were confused about the war on Taliban, which I also supported btw. In any case, to quibble about the numbers is missing the point. Have you seen anyone complaining incessantly about foreign media's "anti-Americanism" "hurts" American people's fragile "feelings"? Grow up already!
What I was trying to elucidate is the fact that enlightened societies have evolved out of the stone-age mindset of distinguishing right and wrong solely on the basis of tribal identities. Sure the Bushies started the war and committed many war crimes too. But the people are mature enough to know that the exposing of such war atrocities is not a direct attack on themselves. As a matter of fact the same people who are the most ardent war opponents are among the most vociferous voices on the Tibet issue. A few war mongers in congress pushing through a bill of "freedom fries" are just themselves laughing stocks.
Now I am glad you also don't think two wrongs equate to a right. Presumably you don't think dredging up the Iraq war or the mistreatment of native Americans has anything to do with the Tibet issue. Now can you sum up what's the remaining reasons of subjugating the Tibetan people forever under the harsh Chinese rule? No bending out of shape required please. ;-)
gz wrote:
tar wrote:...
In contrast to the reaction to GWB dragging all of us to this senseless Iraqi war, the majority of the American people didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally. Hell half of them (us) are against it to begin with. This is the confidence we should instill in ourselves that we don't have to pledge allegiance to our tribal leaders, even plainly whatever they are doing is wrong.There were way over half of Americans who supported the Iraq war at the beginning. Many of them thought the Iraq war was an act of revenge for 911 attack. Then, when the war was criticized by some of the traditional US allies in Europe, there were some strong reactions symbolized by things like the "patriotic fries" (aka "freedom fries"), and the cancellation of some exchange programs to prevent a few poor German high school kids from coming to the US to spread "anti-American feelings". I wouldn't say they are apologists, but they might have taken the war policy a little personally, perhaps? In any case, I don't take pity on them.
Oops! Almost forgot to mention, don’t get me wrong; I am not defending anybody here, as I also happen to know that two wrongs don’t make a right.
And I take pity on those apologists of the Chinese regime (which to me these days seems every other Chinese on the street) who bend out of shape trying to defend them. the people using Iraqi war as an excuse are pathologically incapable of deploying reason in arguing their case. Not only two wrongs don't make a right, but using one atrocity to defend the other is even worse, for they know the action they are defending is morally wrong, period.Every other Chinese on the street are defending the Chinese regime? You sure? No need to be this pessimistic. How could you be so sure that they were bending out of shape just to defend someone, instead of meerly expressing their own feelings and views? Again, don't get me wrong, they don't need to be defended, and that is not what I am doing here. I'm just expressing my views. - posted on 05/08/2008
The example of Falun Gong he cites in his letter is the most troublesome in my opinion. With his statue of achievement in scientific matters surely he knows that the fertile soil in Chinese superstition of "Chinese medicine" and Qigong are the main culprits of Falun Gong's widespread conversion? Instead of empathize with the individual Falun Gong victims' plight, he seems to blame them instead.
不定期造访者 wrote:
You made good points. The only thing I am not to agree with you is that Mr. Tuan appears to be more an old Red Gard than a FengQing.
Mr Tuan tried to make fuzz by drawing red herrings (such as harmony, prosperity, peace, and Falung Gong) in his letter. On one hand, he praised positive progress, however skin-deep in politics, in China; on the other hand, he turned a blind eye to the fundmental changes made in the West. What Mr. Tuan showed to us in his letter is exactly what he described as a Chinese in his 1970’s article, entitled “American Space, Chinese Place” – A Chinese with a constrained, narrow, passive, static, inward and pessimistic view. Isn’t it ironic?
Now we see that aging effect starts taking a toll on Mr. Tuan. A sad thing.
- posted on 05/08/2008
If I remember correctly, you also made this complaint many times on CND too. If I were you though, I just simply leave if I don't like what the admin's doing.
gz wrote:
好,那就说说咖啡的不是,那边由abc开的整整一条线“我的关于奥运的贴子怎么就被删了呢”转眼间被删的无影无踪,包括所有反感删帖的跟帖?有没有责任人能公开解释一下?
私人网站也可以有点透明度吧?要不也贴个“莫谈国是”的牌子?
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
Briefly, my nature and my principle of happiness demand that I shall not be sucked into anything for too long. Apparently CND was expendable. I could drop out of sight here without a trace too. In fact I am capable of dropping out of my own sight my own mind too. ;)
Between wasting life on the net and observing a guileless and clueless cat, what would you choose? Now this is a no-brainer. ;)
tar wrote:
On a personal note, why did you self-extricate from CND? I probably haven't seen you for many years.
- posted on 05/08/2008
tar wrote:
I am pretty sure there are near 50-50 split in public opinion on Iraq war in the begining. Perhaps you were confused about the war on Taliban, which I also supported btw. In any case, to quibble about the numbers is missing the point. Have you seen anyone complaining incessantly about foreign media's "anti-Americanism" "hurts" American people's fragile "feelings"? Grow up already!
No, I was not confused between the two wars. The war on Taliban is totally justified. But the Iraq war is a different matter altogether. I said what I said to remind you that there were people in the US who took the war policy personally. As I said repeatedly, I was not defending anyone, so I don't see the relevance of mentioning "hurting feelings" (I assume you were referring to some Chinese feel). When one disagrees with you in A, do you have to assume one believes in B? Yes, grow up, please.
What I was trying to elucidate is the fact that enlightened societies have evolved out of the stone-age mindset of distinguishing right and wrong solely on the basis of tribal identities. Sure the Bushies started the war and committed many war crimes too. But the people are mature enough to know that the exposing of such war atrocities is not a direct attack on themselves. As a matter of fact the same people who are the most ardent war opponents are among the most vociferous voices on the Tibet issue. A few war mongers in congress pushing through a bill of "freedom fries" are just themselves laughing stocks.
You seem to be so used to the idea of a binary world, there are only two sides on every issue in the world. Did I even mention Tibet? Do you even know my opinion regarding that issue? Too much presumption does not help with the discussion at all. I am glad you also think "freedom fries" is laughing stock. Congress is supposed to represent the people, is it not?
Now I am glad you also don't think two wrongs equate to a right. Presumably you don't think dredging up the Iraq war or the mistreatment of native Americans has anything to do with the Tibet issue. Now can you sum up what's the remaining reasons of subjugating the Tibetan people forever under the harsh Chinese rule? No bending out of shape required please. ;-)
As I said already, I am not trying to defend anyone let alone any regime's policy here. The vary fact that there are so many Tibetans not happy about the current situation there is enough to indicate there is something wrong. But that has nothing to do with the discussion that started this conversation.
Again, be more sophisticated than adopting a binary view of the world. It is certainly disappointing to see so many people in political discussion with this kind of mindset. Yes, grow up, be mature, the world has many more colors than just black and white.
gz wrote:
tar wrote:...
In contrast to the reaction to GWB dragging all of us to this senseless Iraqi war, the majority of the American people didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally. Hell half of them (us) are against it to begin with. This is the confidence we should instill in ourselves that we don't have to pledge allegiance to our tribal leaders, even plainly whatever they are doing is wrong.There were way over half of Americans who supported the Iraq war at the beginning. Many of them thought the Iraq war was an act of revenge for 911 attack. Then, when the war was criticized by some of the traditional US allies in Europe, there were some strong reactions symbolized by things like the "patriotic fries" (aka "freedom fries"), and the cancellation of some exchange programs to prevent a few poor German high school kids from coming to the US to spread "anti-American feelings". I wouldn't say they are apologists, but they might have taken the war policy a little personally, perhaps? In any case, I don't take pity on them.
Oops! Almost forgot to mention, don’t get me wrong; I am not defending anybody here, as I also happen to know that two wrongs don’t make a right.
And I take pity on those apologists of the Chinese regime (which to me these days seems every other Chinese on the street) who bend out of shape trying to defend them. the people using Iraqi war as an excuse are pathologically incapable of deploying reason in arguing their case. Not only two wrongs don't make a right, but using one atrocity to defend the other is even worse, for they know the action they are defending is morally wrong, period.Every other Chinese on the street are defending the Chinese regime? You sure? No need to be this pessimistic. How could you be so sure that they were bending out of shape just to defend someone, instead of meerly expressing their own feelings and views? Again, don't get me wrong, they don't need to be defended, and that is not what I am doing here. I'm just expressing my views. - posted on 05/08/2008
Not sure what you are referring to. What complaint? about what? My posts there were not deleted, like what happened here, a whole thread of many posts from different people were deleted.
Leaving this forum, or any forum, may not be a bad idea, considering the time wasted. But I am not here for the administrators, do people go to a cafe just to see the owner?
tar wrote:
If I remember correctly, you also made this complaint many times on CND too. If I were you though, I just simply leave if I don't like what the admin's doing.
gz wrote:
好,那就说说咖啡的不是,那边由abc开的整整一条线“我的关于奥运的贴子怎么就被删了呢”转眼间被删的无影无踪,包括所有反感删帖的跟帖?有没有责任人能公开解释一下?
私人网站也可以有点透明度吧?要不也贴个“莫谈国是”的牌子?
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
First of all, you seemed really taking it personally on my "grow up" comment. From the context, you should easily see it was directed at those who keep whining about Chinese people's "feeling" being hurt. This is not kindergarden make believe stuff, hence they need to "grow up." Why so touchy feely? With your level of sophistication, I am surprised at your knee jerking reflex to it. Subconsciously or not, no need to take offense. I am not talking about you.
So we are not talking about Tibet? Then why follow my post discussing Mr. Tuan's venting about western media's treatment of Tibet? And by not discussing Tibet, you keep charging that I only harbor black-and-white binary views on this issue. Am I missing something here?
And when I accuse somebody of less than nuanced grasp on a particular issue, I always give examples of such. Care to show exactly why I am being a singleton?
And we are still not discussing Tibet right? ;-) By the way, I think by recognizing that there are problems in Tibet, we have at least some common ground for exchanging views.
gz wrote:
tar wrote:No, I was not confused between the two wars. The war on Taliban is totally justified. But the Iraq war is a different matter altogether. I said what I said to remind you that there were people in the US who took the war policy personally. As I said repeatedly, I was not defending anyone, so I don't see the relevance of mentioning "hurting feelings" (I assume you were referring to some Chinese feel). When one disagrees with you in A, do you have to assume one believes in B? Yes, grow up, please.
I am pretty sure there are near 50-50 split in public opinion on Iraq war in the begining. Perhaps you were confused about the war on Taliban, which I also supported btw. In any case, to quibble about the numbers is missing the point. Have you seen anyone complaining incessantly about foreign media's "anti-Americanism" "hurts" American people's fragile "feelings"? Grow up already!
What I was trying to elucidate is the fact that enlightened societies have evolved out of the stone-age mindset of distinguishing right and wrong solely on the basis of tribal identities. Sure the Bushies started the war and committed many war crimes too. But the people are mature enough to know that the exposing of such war atrocities is not a direct attack on themselves. As a matter of fact the same people who are the most ardent war opponents are among the most vociferous voices on the Tibet issue. A few war mongers in congress pushing through a bill of "freedom fries" are just themselves laughing stocks.You seem to be so used to the idea of a binary world, there are only two sides on every issue in the world. Did I even mention Tibet? Do you even know my opinion regarding that issue? Too much presumption does not help with the discussion at all. I am glad you also think "freedom fries" is laughing stock. Congress is supposed to represent the people, is it not?
Now I am glad you also don't think two wrongs equate to a right. Presumably you don't think dredging up the Iraq war or the mistreatment of native Americans has anything to do with the Tibet issue. Now can you sum up what's the remaining reasons of subjugating the Tibetan people forever under the harsh Chinese rule? No bending out of shape required please. ;-)As I said already, I am not trying to defend anyone let alone any regime's policy here. The vary fact that there are so many Tibetans not happy about the current situation there is enough to indicate there is something wrong. But that has nothing to do with the discussion that started this conversation.
Again, be more sophisticated than adopting a binary view of the world. It is certainly disappointing to see so many people in political discussion with this kind of mindset. Yes, grow up, be mature, the world has many more colors than just black and white.
gz wrote:
tar wrote:...
In contrast to the reaction to GWB dragging all of us to this senseless Iraqi war, the majority of the American people didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally. Hell half of them (us) are against it to begin with. This is the confidence we should instill in ourselves that we don't have to pledge allegiance to our tribal leaders, even plainly whatever they are doing is wrong.There were way over half of Americans who supported the Iraq war at the beginning. Many of them thought the Iraq war was an act of revenge for 911 attack. Then, when the war was criticized by some of the traditional US allies in Europe, there were some strong reactions symbolized by things like the "patriotic fries" (aka "freedom fries"), and the cancellation of some exchange programs to prevent a few poor German high school kids from coming to the US to spread "anti-American feelings". I wouldn't say they are apologists, but they might have taken the war policy a little personally, perhaps? In any case, I don't take pity on them.
Oops! Almost forgot to mention, don’t get me wrong; I am not defending anybody here, as I also happen to know that two wrongs don’t make a right.
And I take pity on those apologists of the Chinese regime (which to me these days seems every other Chinese on the street) who bend out of shape trying to defend them. the people using Iraqi war as an excuse are pathologically incapable of deploying reason in arguing their case. Not only two wrongs don't make a right, but using one atrocity to defend the other is even worse, for they know the action they are defending is morally wrong, period.Every other Chinese on the street are defending the Chinese regime? You sure? No need to be this pessimistic. How could you be so sure that they were bending out of shape just to defend someone, instead of meerly expressing their own feelings and views? Again, don't get me wrong, they don't need to be defended, and that is not what I am doing here. I'm just expressing my views. - posted on 05/08/2008
Ok, If you say you didn't complain there, I'll take your word for it.
Still, my point is if you don't like some place, vote with your feet. I left CND (or more precisely, I don't want to go back there) just for this very reason.
gz wrote:
Not sure what you are referring to. What complaint? about what? My posts there were not deleted, like what happened here, a whole thread of many posts from different people were deleted.
Leaving this forum, or any forum, may not be a bad idea, considering the time wasted. But I am not here for the administrators, do people go to a cafe just to see the owner?
tar wrote:
If I remember correctly, you also made this complaint many times on CND too. If I were you though, I just simply leave if I don't like what the admin's doing.
gz wrote:
好,那就说说咖啡的不是,那边由abc开的整整一条线“我的关于奥运的贴子怎么就被删了呢”转眼间被删的无影无踪,包括所有反感删帖的跟帖?有没有责任人能公开解释一下?
私人网站也可以有点透明度吧?要不也贴个“莫谈国是”的牌子?
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/08/2008
Arrgh, still the narcissist we grew to love. ;-)
Your disappearance there coincided with the arrival of LaoShang (I am not implying anything here). He's more than adequately filling in for you. ;-)
touche wrote:
Briefly, my nature and my principle of happiness demand that I shall not be sucked into anything for too long. Apparently CND was expendable. I could drop out of sight here without a trace too. In fact I am capable of dropping out of my own sight my own mind too. ;)
Between wasting life on the net and observing a guileless and clueless cat, what would you choose? Now this is a no-brainer. ;)
tar wrote:
On a personal note, why did you self-extricate from CND? I probably haven't seen you for many years.
- posted on 05/09/2008
tar wrote:
So we are not talking about Tibet? Then why follow my post discussing Mr. Tuan's venting about western media's treatment of Tibet? And by not discussing Tibet, you keep charging that I only harbor black-and-white binary views on this issue. Am I missing something here?
If you go back and read my first post, you should see that I was simply disagreeing with what you said about Americans "didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally", while many Chinese are "apologists of the Chinese regime" and "trying to defend them". To elaborate a little further, it is a common human nature (across all cultures) to feel defensive while being criticized by others. I simply wanted to point out it's not that binary (or black-and-white) that Americans don't and Chinese do, as you were claiming. I was not making any comments regarding Mr. Tuan. Hope you no longer feel missing anything now.
And when I accuse somebody of less than nuanced grasp on a particular issue, I always give examples of such. Care to show exactly why I am being a singleton?
who said you are a singleton?
And we are still not discussing Tibet right? ;-) By the way, I think by recognizing that there are problems in Tibet, we have at least some common ground for exchanging views.
I don't know where you stand regarding this issue. But exchanging ideas is always welcome, so long as you don't presume how others think and feel. This is a common mistake a lot of people make when it comes to political debate.
- posted on 05/09/2008
Are you concerned why I am not leaving this place? Don't worry, maybe I will someday. On the other hand, you seem to be new here? probably you like this place?
Did I say I don't like this place? Didn't I say people don't come to a cafe just to visit the owner?
tar wrote:
Ok, If you say you didn't complain there, I'll take your word for it.
Still, my point is if you don't like some place, vote with your feet. I left CND (or more precisely, I don't want to go back there) just for this very reason.
gz wrote:
Not sure what you are referring to. What complaint? about what? My posts there were not deleted, like what happened here, a whole thread of many posts from different people were deleted.
Leaving this forum, or any forum, may not be a bad idea, considering the time wasted. But I am not here for the administrators, do people go to a cafe just to see the owner? - posted on 05/09/2008
To say you were not discussing about Tibet in replying my post about many Chinese reacting with infantile zeal at facing criticism about Tibet situation is splitting hair with Clintonian guile. But let's stick to the point. Contrary to what you attributed me as supposedly declared below, I said "the majority" of Americans don't whine about "feelings" being hurt like "those" apologists of the Chinese regime do. With your creative massaging below, it became "that Americans don't and Chinese do, as you were claiming." Can you point out anywhere in my writing such a claim was being made? If your distortion of my words is not intentional, then indeed I can see your logic derivation consists only black-and-white conclusions. And I am never presumptuous, If I might point out.
gz wrote:
tar wrote:If you go back and read my first post, you should see that I was simply disagreeing with what you said about Americans "didn't take the criticisms of the war policy personally", while many Chinese are "apologists of the Chinese regime" and "trying to defend them". To elaborate a little further, it is a common human nature (across all cultures) to feel defensive while being criticized by others. I simply wanted to point out it's not that binary (or black-and-white) that Americans don't and Chinese do, as you were claiming. I was not making any comments regarding Mr. Tuan. Hope you no longer feel missing anything now.
So we are not talking about Tibet? Then why follow my post discussing Mr. Tuan's venting about western media's treatment of Tibet? And by not discussing Tibet, you keep charging that I only harbor black-and-white binary views on this issue. Am I missing something here?
And when I accuse somebody of less than nuanced grasp on a particular issue, I always give examples of such. Care to show exactly why I am being a singleton?who said you are a singleton?
And we are still not discussing Tibet right? ;-) By the way, I think by recognizing that there are problems in Tibet, we have at least some common ground for exchanging views.I don't know where you stand regarding this issue. But exchanging ideas is always welcome, so long as you don't presume how others think and feel. This is a common mistake a lot of people make when it comes to political debate.
- posted on 05/09/2008
I can care less where you go or stay, or for that matter anybody in cyber space. I just don't like people whining about things they have absolutely no control of.
gz wrote:
Are you concerned why I am not leaving this place? Don't worry, maybe I will someday. On the other hand, you seem to be new here? probably you like this place?
Did I say I don't like this place? Didn't I say people don't come to a cafe just to visit the owner?
tar wrote:
Ok, If you say you didn't complain there, I'll take your word for it.
Still, my point is if you don't like some place, vote with your feet. I left CND (or more precisely, I don't want to go back there) just for this very reason.
gz wrote:
Not sure what you are referring to. What complaint? about what? My posts there were not deleted, like what happened here, a whole thread of many posts from different people were deleted.
Leaving this forum, or any forum, may not be a bad idea, considering the time wasted. But I am not here for the administrators, do people go to a cafe just to see the owner? - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
tar wrote:
I can care less where you go or stay, or for that matter anybody in cyber space. I just don't like people whining about things they have absolutely no control of.
You mean you can NOT care less, I suppose? Otherwise I would feel guilty to cause so much of your concern. :-)
This conversation is becoming hairsplitting and tasteless. I will take initiative to drop it. - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
我警告一下阿,谈什么都行,但必须文明,不许吵架。我们这里是小资,比较抒情和酸 :-) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
July wrote:
我警告一下阿,谈什么都行,但必须文明,不许吵架。我们这里是小资,比较抒情和酸 :-)
我已经主动停火了。:-)
可你得去教训一下楼上骂人的。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
以后谁骂老关,我删谁的帖, 不开玩笑地!
gz wrote:
July wrote:我已经主动停火了。:-)
我警告一下阿,谈什么都行,但必须文明,不许吵架。我们这里是小资,比较抒情和酸 :-)
可你得去教训一下楼上骂人的。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
七月误会了,我倒是不在乎,上面有人骂令狐呢。
不过心领了!:-) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
xw 为人正直厚道,可见一斑。
xw wrote:
这一线讨论有些内容,廖康的批评我蛮同意。另外,最好不要老在咖
啡说别的论坛不是,说一两次没关系,说多了就有点祥林嫂。
多想一层,这个道理不难理解的。
- posted on 05/09/2008
No. It is "every comments or criticism”, unless you are a bean counter. Can you see the difference? Take it for your homework.
Your comments about discussion/debate are laughable. As long as it is relevant, anything serving to enhance your argument can be adopted. In the case of Mr. Tuan’s letter, one possible and yet kind explanation for the significant differences of his points of view between his 1970’s article and the letter is aging effect. Age affects not only a person’s characteristics, but also his/her thinking. Aging is a natural and irresistible process.
One example showing Mr. Tuan’s age is that he apparently ignored the fact that western media are always critical to anybody, any government. Against all the odds, however, a man having been living in the States for more than half a century failed to recall the fact and, funnily, “felt decidedly uncomfortable” when Chinese government was criticized.
The word “attack” was used by Mr. Tuan and you; not me. Why should I be asked to exchange it for a better one? What is your logic?
Ask yourself, who first mentioned “民主派“, and why? Don't you think this guy is despicable and disgusting?
"对事不对人" is my principle applied in any debate. However, this principle should not be used as a shield to dodge behind it.
gz wrote:
I certainly don't regard "every comments or critisim as attacks" (you mean every "comment" and "criticism", I suppose?). But during discussion there are always those who seem more interested in things other than the topics being debated, such as calling others "old", "ignorance and stupidity". Is the age relevant to the debate? If you call others ignorant ad stupid, don't you think they could easily say the same thing back to you?
If you don't like the word "attack", find some better word to describe this kind of behavior. Would you?
Since you mentioned behavior, let me tell you a good behavior is always "对事不对人"
不定期造访者 wrote:
Please don’t behave as badly as Mr. Tuan by regarding every comments or critisim as attacks.
BTW are you gz17 in CND?
gz wrote:
You may be surprised. In fact I just came back from the same thread at CND, and, as expected, they are attacking him (too old, whatever that may imply), as well as this article of his. Of course you see some of the posts above.
(http://my.cnd.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=57607&forum=1&start=250&viewmode=flat&order=0) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
哈哈哈。。。。。躲在石榴裙下装勇敢,无可厚非。但是把令狐推出来,就太那个了吧。
gz wrote:
七月误会了,我倒是不在乎,上面有人骂令狐呢。
不过心领了!:-) - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
不定期的造访者,你是华夏的那谁吧,那里同志那么多,也还没玩儿够?把咖啡变得象华夏,不大好吧?要不自己去开一个网站,怎么折腾都行。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
July, when can I earn this? :-), :-), :-)...
July wrote:
以后谁骂老关,我删谁的帖, 不开玩笑地!
- posted on 05/09/2008
难得你还批件新马甲上来。何不直述你是CND的某某某,岂不更爽快?
看到你说折腾,我就笑。哪里会有人能有如此大的精力、如此多的时间来搞这?就像你去探访CND,我也偶尔来此喝杯咖啡,可算是稀客。若以发贴数计,只怕你远比我更能折腾。
华夏是华夏,咖啡是咖啡。各有长短,理应共存。有人说咖啡是小资的去处,不假。雅致,幽静,却不一定酸。如果说酸,那也是口味不同而已。女人味重了,倒是实情。
后会有期。
(网管尽可删我的贴,我不会嚷嚷或咕哝的-- Smile .......)
yeshibudingqi wrote:
不定期的造访者,你是华夏的那谁吧,那里同志那么多,也还没玩儿够?把咖啡变得象华夏,不大好吧?要不自己去开一个网站,怎么折腾都行。 - posted on 05/09/2008
不定期造访者 wrote:
No. It is "every comments or criticism”, unless you are a bean counter. Can you see the difference? Take it for your homework.
you can insist whatever you want, that is your writing. But you did change "critisim" to "criticism". As least you did half of your homework and deserve some partial credits.
I am not interested in debating Tuan's article, it does not speak for me, neither will I speak for him. Whether his view has anything to do with his age is beyond the point.
The word “attack” was used by Mr. Tuan and you; not me. Why should I be asked to exchange it for a better one? What is your logic?
Read my post more carefully. If you use words such as "ignorance and stupidity" to describe your opponent, that is "attack". It does not enhance your argument in any way, but it does show your bad taste. Also, this kind of attack is ineffective. It can be returned back to you, as if bounced back by a mirror. Haven't you experienced this already? How do you like it? :-)
Ask yourself, who first mentioned “民主派“, and why? Don't you think this guy is despicable and disgusting?
Those who engage in personal attacks in debate are despicable and disgusting, as well as incapable and incompetent. But throwing words back and forth is certainly not my game, so I will stop here.
BTW, the following is returned back to you, enjoy it!
"难得你还批件新马甲上来。何不直述你是CND的某某某,岂不更爽快?"
- posted on 05/09/2008
不仅是Tuan老了,这里的几位名人gz,shangnengfan,令胡冲也都尽显老态,这几个人气味相投,勾肩搭背,一堆遗老遗少在一起,共同之处都装大尾巴狼,一个好翻白眼,一个好卖弄,一个倒处有一搭无一搭地做网大爷,弄得女网客们遇到了要战战兢兢。
这是我在这里的观察,有这些暮气的人在这里,象ABC青冈这样的年青人早晚都要离开,这也没有办法,来去自由。我也是不定期造访者,看一帮人嘁嘁喳喳议论CND的是非,就有上面的感想。
不定期造访者 wrote:Age affects not only a person’s characteristics, but also his/her thinking. Aging is a natural and irresistible process.
One example showing Mr. Tuan’s age is that he apparently ignored the fact that western media are always critical to anybody, any government. Against all the odds, however, a man having been living in the States for more than half a century failed to recall the fact and, funnily, “felt decidedly uncomfortable” when Chinese government was criticized.
- posted on 05/09/2008
That's very magnanimous of you to try to walk away AND having the last word. But pouting is unbecoming of you.
You seem to try to pick on other people's English skills any chance you get. But isn't parroting very, um, "tasteless"? ;-)
One more thing, if you are unfamiliar with the "care less" usage, go google it.
gz wrote:
tar wrote:You mean you can NOT care less, I suppose? Otherwise I would feel guilty to cause so much of your concern. :-)
I can care less where you go or stay, or for that matter anybody in cyber space. I just don't like people whining about things they have absolutely no control of.
This conversation is becoming hairsplitting and tasteless. I will take initiative to drop it. - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
Didn't your friend Linghu use "brainless" and "no-brainer" first? And your loyalty to him perhaps clouded your judgment on what constitutes an "attack"?
gz wrote:
If you use words such as "ignorance and stupidity" to describe your opponent, that is "attack". - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/09/2008
In that case, I believe LinHu was included in the bunch gz detested. Most important thing is gz himself never used such kind of words.
tar wrote:
Didn't your friend Linghu use "brainless" and "no-brainer" first? And your loyalty to him perhaps clouded your judgment on what constitutes an "attack"?
gz wrote:
If you use words such as "ignorance and stupidity" to describe your opponent, that is "attack". - posted on 05/09/2008
tar wrote:
You seem to try to pick on other people's English skills any chance you get. But isn't parroting very, um, "tasteless"? ;-)
Don't I have to try to understand what others really meant to say before I could respond?
One more thing, if you are unfamiliar with the "care less" usage, go google it.
Yes, I am very familiar with this, just as familiar as things like "you don't know nothing!" If you identify with this kind of language usage, that is certainly your choice.
Following your suggestion and out of my own curiosity, I did google your usage of "care less", which seems another American contribution to the English language. Here is what I found:
"...... So it’s (the usage of "I could care less") actually a very interesting linguistic development. But it is still regarded as slangy, and also has some social class stigma attached. And because it is hard to be sarcastic in writing, it loses its force when put on paper and just ends up looking stupid. In such cases, the older form, while still rather colloquial, at least will communicate your meaning — at least to those who really could care less."
Pardon me for the words "looking stupid", but hope you understand they are not mine. :-)
For your information, you can read the whole thing here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm
It is quite an interesting piece to read. But when you read some other bad words such as "ignorant" and "logical nonsense", again, blame the author. This is certainly not my style.
Now go ahead, the last word is all yours. I can't care less. :-) - posted on 05/09/2008
My my we have a language snob here. But before you show your scornful disdain for "another American contribution to the English language," maybe tightening up your own writing is in order? While things like "I just came back from the same thread" or "half of Americans" are still comprehensible, a run-on sentence ("I assume you were referring to some Chinese feel") is certainly a rudimentary mistake that people with your level of condescension should never make?
Although I don't expect you to always correctly use the articles (or the lack of), at least consult a spell-checker yourself before running around correcting everybody's tiny little typos. That's "meerly" reasonable don't you think?
(A little quiz: how many split infinitives I have used so far?)
By the way, I only have time to go through the first 3 or 4 of your posts here and I assure you I haven't been very thorough yet. I am not trying to embarrass you, but simply a little reminder that none of our English writings can withstand a little scrutiny, OK?
For some reason I think you are gonna try to have the last word again despite the continuous declaration of otherwise. ;-)
gz wrote:
tar wrote:Don't I have to try to understand what others really meant to say before I could respond?
You seem to try to pick on other people's English skills any chance you get. But isn't parroting very, um, "tasteless"? ;-)
One more thing, if you are unfamiliar with the "care less" usage, go google it.Yes, I am very familiar with this, just as familiar as things like "you don't know nothing!" If you identify with this kind of language usage, that is certainly your choice.
Following your suggestion and out of my own curiosity, I did google your usage of "care less", it seems another American contribution to the English language. Here is what I found:
"...... So it’s (the usage of "I could care less") actually a very interesting linguistic development. But it is still regarded as slangy, and also has some social class stigma attached. And because it is hard to be sarcastic in writing, it loses its force when put on paper and just ends up looking stupid. In such cases, the older form, while still rather colloquial, at least will communicate your meaning — at least to those who really could care less."
Pardon me for the words "looking stupid", but hope you understand they are not mine. :-)
For your information, you can read the whole thing here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm It is quite an interesting piece to read. But when you read some other bad words such as "ignorant" and "logical nonsense", again, blame the author. This is certainly not my style.
Now go ahead, the last word is all yours. I can't care less. - posted on 05/09/2008
好像你们都忘了今天礼拜五啊,不仅要 dress-down, 还要 write-off, 既然我好事开的线,就得善始善终——此贴以后任何跟帖全部删掉,我执行,七月监督:)
----------------
以下是今天第一位烈士——浮生同学,对不起一回了,我砍了你的贴,但留下你的墨宝,该是仁至意尽了吧?
浮生 wrote:
干麻呀老瓦,老尚为根的问题惆怅,那哪有个头儿,guanzhong和tar两位好同学转而为语法问题而烦恼,也算符合咖啡ADD的精神了,我还真学了些东西呢 :)不多废话了,删吧,删吧。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/10/2008
老瓦砍吧,砍头不要紧,但根子要留下。 - Re: 尚能饭:无根的惆怅 ztposted on 05/10/2008
老瓦 has the right to 砍头? Scary. Who is Wang Guan here anyway? I'm confused. 给点透明度。
July wrote:
老瓦砍吧,砍头不要紧,但根子要留下。 - posted on 05/10/2008
浮生被砍了?都怪我!那就再上一帖,陪你挨砍!:-)
其实老瓦多此一举了,咱说不回就不回了嘛!
老瓦 wrote:
好像你们都忘了今天礼拜五啊,不仅要 dress-down, 还要 write-off, 既然我好事开的线,就得善始善终——此贴以后任何跟帖全部删掉,我执行,七月监督:)
----------------
以下是今天第一位烈士——浮生同学,对不起一回了,我砍了你的贴,但留下你的墨宝,该是仁至意尽了吧?
浮生 wrote:
干麻呀老瓦,老尚为根的问题惆怅,那哪有个头儿,guanzhong和tar两位好同学转而为语法问题而烦恼,也算符合咖啡ADD的精神了,我还真学了些东西呢 :)不多废话了,删吧,删吧。
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
- 老瓦
- #1 touche
- #2 老瓦
- #3 尚能饭
- #4 令胡冲
- #5 尚能饭
- #6 ben ben
- #7 令胡冲
- #8 ben ben
- #9 July
- #10 尚能饭
- #11 Reader86
- #12 Reader86
- #13 July
- #14 Reader86
- #15 尚能饭
- #16 Reader86
- #17 gz
- #18 July
- #19 gz
- #20 苦瓜
- #21 gz
- #22 八十一子
- #23 八十一子
- #24 令胡冲
- #25 touche
- #26 touche
- #27 玛雅
- #28 苦瓜
- #29 苦瓜
- #30 rzp
- #31 gz
- #32 3mw
- #33 gz
- #34 3mw
- #35 不定期造访者
- #36 不定期造访者
- #37 不定期造访者
- #38 xw
- #39 令胡冲
- #40 令胡冲
- #41 tar
- #42 玛雅
- #43 令胡冲
- #44 gz
- #45 令胡冲
- #46 touche
- #47 tar
- #48 July
- #49 gz
- #50 July
- #51 liaokang
- #52 liaokang
- #53 不定期造访者
- #54 不定期造访者
- #55 不定期造访者
- #56 令胡冲
- #57 不定期造访者
- #58 令胡冲
- #59 xw
- #60 八十一子
- #61 Reader86
- #62 81zi
- #63 Reader86
- #64 gz
- #65 gz
- #66 July
- #67 tar
- #68 tar
- #69 tar
- #70 tar
- #71 touche
- #72 gz
- #73 gz
- #74 tar
- #75 tar
- #76 tar
- #77 gz
- #78 gz
- #79 tar
- #80 tar
- #81 gz
- #82 July
- #83 gz
- #84 July
- #85 gz
- #86 不定期造访者
- #87 不定期造访者
- #88 不定期造访者
- #89 yeshibudingqi
- #90 Reader86
- #91 不定期造访者
- #92 gz
- #93 壹
- #94 tar
- #95 tar
- #96 壹
- #97 gz
- #98 tar
- #99 老瓦
- #100 July
- #101 Reader86
- #102 gz
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation