慧元和Ruozhi 在谈Camille Paglia, 找不到中文介绍,只好上英文。
------------------------------------------------------------
Camille Anna Paglia (born April 2, 1947 in Endicott, New York) is an American social critic, author and teacher. Her book, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson , published in 1990, became a bestseller. Since 1984 she has been a Professor at The University of the Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
She has been variously called the "feminist that other feminists love to hate," a "post-feminist feminist," one of the world's top 100 intellectuals by the UK's Prospect Magazine, and by her own description "a feminist bisexual egomaniac
Overview
Paglia is an intellectual of many seeming contradictions: she is an atheist who respects religion and a classicist who champions art both high and low, with a view that human nature has an inherently dangerous Dionysian aspect, especially the wilder, darker sides of human sexuality.
She came to public attention in 1990, with the publication of her first book, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson. Her notoriety as the author of this book made it possible for her to write on popular culture and feminism in mainstream newspapers and magazines. Paglia challenged what she saw as the "liberal establishment" of the day including figures such as Gloria Steinem, Andrea Dworkin, prominent academics and advocacy groups such as National Organization for Women (NOW) and ACT UP.
Paglia describes herself as a feminist and as a Democrat who voted for Bill Clinton and Ralph Nader, and even campaigned for John F. Kennedy as an adolescent. Her rejection of the idea that homosexuality is an inborn trait, however, indicates her willingness to break with liberal orthodoxies. Her views on the legalization of recreational drugs and prostitution, and on the relaxation of sexual consent laws, are more libertarian. She is a strong critic of much of the feminism that began with Betty Friedan's 1962 The Feminine Mystique and compared feminists, whom she considered to be victim-centered, to the Unification Church. At the same time Paglia's embrace of fetishism, pornography, prostitution and male homosexuality puts her at odds with the "family values" of American social conservatives.
She is critical of the influence certain French philosophers and theorists (including Jacques Lacan, Jacques Derrida, Helene Cixous, Luce Irigaray and Michel Foucault) have had on the humanities in the U.S. and favors a curriculum grounded in comparative religion, art history and the literary canon, with a greater emphasis on facts in the teaching of history. Paglia has condemned Foucault because she believes that he deliberately spread HIV. However, Paglia's assessment of French theorists is not purely negative, since she has made positive comments about some of the work of Roland Barthes and Gilles Deleuze.
Her supporters (for different reasons) include Andrew Sullivan, Christina Hoff Sommers, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Maher, Matt Drudge and her Yale mentor Harold Bloom. Elise Sutton, a dominatrix advocating female domination of males, describes Paglia as a female supremacist and a friend.
In September 2005, she was ranked number 20 in a list of the world's "Top 100 Public Intellectuals" compiled by the editors of the American journal Foreign Policy and the UK journal The Prospect.
Paglia wrote a column for Salon.com from its inception in 1995 until 2001 and rejoined Salon in February 2007. She is a contributing editor at Interview magazine and is on the editorial board of the classics and humanities journal Arion. At present, she is writing her third collection of essays, to be published by Vintage Books, and a companion piece to Break, Blow, Burn dealing with the visual arts rather than poetry.
- posted on 05/23/2008
我倒写过一点:
跟帕里亚的缘分
****************************************
我基本不买书。不过那天在一次小小旅途中路过一家书店,我头也没抬就进去了。处在“通俗” 地理位置的书店,竟然这样有品,科普文学哲学神学都有。我进出几趟,咬牙决定不买。最后,突然被一本说诗歌的小书弄丢了决心,垂头丧气地去交钱捧出来。书名叫<<粉碎,爆炸,燃烧(Break, Blow, Burn)>>,听上去凶恶,其实是约翰∙堂恩十四行诗中的一句。嗯,用这样的标题谈诗,决非哗众取宠,而是有会于心,我相信。
书的副题叫做“阅读43首著名英语诗歌” ,作者帕里亚(Camille Paglia), 快满六十岁的费城艺术大学教授,在六十年代的疯狂美国里成人,受教于新批评学派。我从未听说此人此书,不过据说是“国家畅销书” ,在诗评中少见。吸引我的无非是序言中直白的话,“对诗歌的技术分析好比把汽车引擎摧毁,然后再将它重新点燃。” “任何阅读都是片面的,但这并不是我们放弃追寻意义的理由。” “我挑选现代诗歌的标准之一是,它要经得起细读和重读,至少可以让人连读五六遍。” “我评论诗,先要认真地倾听其声音,寻找一种跟它们的天性相配的语言来表达。” “诗人们迅速捕捉事物的高或者低的侧面。。。这些侧面永远不可能被确定和完善地写出来。诗人写诗,明知诗将被风吹去。” 她的句子简单明确得不象学者文章,倒象给报纸写的专栏。不过,那是多么有趣而精准的表达啊。以文本为本的新批评不管有怎样的局限,“细读” 这一条,至少在技术层面无可替代。“我在哈佛读博士的时候,写了博士论文提纲,哈罗德∙布鲁姆听了之后,把我召到办公室。’ 我来指导你写论文吧’, 他说,’ 因为只有我能指导。’ ” ---我顺藤摸瓜,发现这篇论文就是后来引起轰动的<<性面具>>一书的初稿。
读诗吧读诗吧!帕里亚既然教书,又是面对公众的著名学者,多年来一直苦苦劝人,跟逼人读经典的老师布卢姆一样。评的是主流诗歌,但惊人之语遍地。比如,艾米丽∙ 狄金森那首著名的<<因为我不能为死亡停下脚步>>,竟然也被帕里亚挖掘出诡异的意味。因为诗中提到“我们” 种种—我们行路,我们看日落,我们乘车,看儿童--帕里亚说,“我们” 中的小女子,被身边的男人引诱、劫持、谋杀。而看上去,两人是小天真,不知末日将至。原来死亡跟“我们” 中那个“我” 的旁人交相辉映。这诗被人千读百解,而这样的图景,我是头一次读到。惊人之语比比皆是,然而让人不得不服—她一行行读来分析,不讨巧不回避,哪怕主题先行,也能行得处处逢生。而且你要相信,她并非故作惊人之语,她的结论有着坚硬的理由和逻辑。
这本严肃然而给大众看的诗评成了畅销,而它封面上写着“本书作者为<<性面具(Sexual Personae)>>”的作者,可见那书的轰动和影响更甚。<<性面具>>七百多页,由“性” 和“性器官”出发,以“性差别” 、“性歧视” 为引擎,把西方文明文化历史游历个遍。芜杂的历史和社会,被她凶狠地解构,刀子挖得很深,从“泰初自然”说起。而她笔下的“性” ,不色情不挑逗地无处不在--那是一个残酷的存在,是美之源泉也是恶之渊薮。在她笔下,艺术美得血腥,而性引发暴力。我们的社会、文明、历史,天然地被性的主题引导。她认为文艺的终极是为拯救作者自己---作者挥舞着自己的欲望在人群中杀出血来,以艺术的名义。
“这孩子特别能制造矛盾。她总能够在任何陈述中发现缺陷,引起争论,而她的见解又那么好。” 帕里亚的中学老师这样说。奇女子帕里亚从来是争议人物--优等生、当时少见的公开同性恋者、才华横溢的学者、批评同行的狂人,更难得的是,不避雅也不避俗,写着论文,当着专业艺术杂志编委,同时关心麦当娜和摇滚,给<<花花公子>>写稿,雅电影俗电视剧都看都评,有桑塔格的味道—嘘,她可不喜欢被人称为桑塔格,虽然她在2005年被评选为世界上最有影响的100名公众知识分子之一。现在,她常在这个沙龙露面:http://dir.salon.com/topics/camille_paglia/index.html 仍然催人读诗,也评论耶稣、女权主义和伊拉克战争。 - posted on 05/23/2008
看看她是如何写希拉里的。希拉里的“性”导致她的性格,痛恨男人,一定要战胜他们。
-------------------------------------------
Hillary without tears
Why it's time to close the book on the Clintons -- and herald the Obamas!
Subject: Hillary and sado-masochism
As her husband has dragged his numerous female play objects before her and has humiliated her on the public stage year after year, she still stays within the marriage.
Hillary seems to take every beating, and yet she appears to "keep on ticking." Does she thrive on this?
How would this affect one's (female) psyche? Judgment as President? General perspective?
Robert Philips
Corrales, New Mexico
A swarm of biographers in miners' gear has tried to plumb the inky depths of Hillary Rodham Clinton's warren-riddled psyche. My metaphor is drawn (as Oscar Wilde's prim Miss Prism would say) from the Scranton coalfields, to which came the Welsh family that produced Hillary's harsh, domineering father.
Hillary's feckless, loutish brothers (who are kept at arm's length by her operation) took the brunt of Hugh Rodham's abuse in their genteel but claustrophobic home. Hillary is the barracuda who fought for dominance at their expense. Flashes of that ruthless old family drama have come out repeatedly in this campaign, as when Hillary could barely conceal her sneers at her fellow debaters onstage -- the wimpy, cringing brothers at the dinner table.
Hillary's willingness to tolerate Bill's compulsive philandering is a function of her general contempt for men. She distrusts them and feels morally superior to them. Following the pattern of her long-suffering mother, she thinks it is her mission to endure every insult and personal degradation for a higher cause -- which, unlike her self-sacrificing mother, she identifies with her near-messianic personal ambition.
It's no coincidence that Hillary's staff has always consisted mostly of adoring women, with nerdy or geeky guys forming an adjunct brain trust. Hillary's rumored hostility to uniformed military men and some Secret Service agents early in the first Clinton presidency probably belongs to this pattern. And let's not forget Hillary, the governor's wife, pulling out a book and rudely reading in the bleachers during University of Arkansas football games back in Little Rock.
Hillary's disdain for masculinity fits right into the classic feminazi package, which is why Hillary acts on Gloria Steinem like catnip. Steinem's fawning, gaseous New York Times op-ed about her pal Hillary this week speaks volumes about the snobby clubbiness and reactionary sentimentality of the fossilized feminist establishment, which has blessedly fallen off the cultural map in the 21st century. History will judge Steinem and company very severely for their ethically obtuse indifference to the stream of working-class women and female subordinates whom Bill Clinton sexually harassed and abused, enabled by look-the-other-way and trash-the-victims Hillary.
How does all this affect the prospect of a Hillary presidency? With her eyes on the White House, Hillary as senator has made concerted and generally successful efforts to improve her knowledge of and relationship to the military -- crucial for any commander-in-chief but especially for the first female one. However, I remain concerned about her future conduct of high-level diplomacy. Contemptuous condescension seems to be Hillary's default mode with any male who criticizes her or stands in her way. It's a Nixonian reflex steeped in toxic gender bias. How will that play in the Muslim world?
The Clintons live to campaign. It's what holds them together and gives them a glowing sense of meaning and value. Their actual political accomplishments are fairly slight. The obsessive need to keep campaigning may mean a president Hillary would go right on spewing the bitterly partisan rhetoric that has already paralyzed Washington. Even if Hillary could be elected (which I'm skeptical about), how in tarnation could she ever govern?
The current wave of support for Barack Obama from Democrats, independents, and even some Republicans is partly based on his vision of a new political discourse that breaks with the petty, destructive polarization of the past 20 years. Whether Obama can build up his foreign policy credentials sufficiently to reassure an anxious general electorate remains to be seen.
But Hillary herself, with her thin, spotty record, tangled psychological baggage, and maundering blowhard of a husband, is also a mighty big roll of the dice. She is a brittle, relentless manipulator with few stable core values who shuffles through useful personalities like a card shark ("Cue the tears!"). Forget all her little gold crosses: Hillary's real god is political expediency. Do Americans truly want this hard-bitten Machiavellian back in the White House? Day one will just be more of the same.
I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee of my party, because I want Democrats appointed to the Cabinet and the Supreme Court. But I plan to vote for Barack Obama in the Pennsylvania primary because he is a rational, centered personality who speaks the language of idealism and national unity. Obama has served longer as an elected official than Hillary. He has had experience as a grass-roots activist, and he is also a highly educated lawyer who will be a quick learner in office. His international parentage and childhood, as well as his knowledge of both Christianity and Islam, would make him the right leader at the right time. And his wife Michelle is a powerhouse.
The Obamas represent the future, not the past.
- Re: Camille Pagliaposted on 05/23/2008
没仔细看英文全文,但我认为要科学对待希拉里。也许希拉里作为一个总统不合适,但作为个人,我们还是要充分尊重她。
希拉里的个性,可能是天生的,由她的脑组织决定。她的那种个性并不必然意味着她痛恨男人,一定要战胜他们。
从科学的角度,我们要广泛地理解每一个人。
July wrote:
看看她是如何写希拉里的。希拉里的“性”导致她的性格,痛恨男人,一定要战胜他们。
- posted on 05/23/2008
你读了再说。没人不尊重她,不过,现在是在选总统。她要当普通人,谁去在乎她?
abc wrote:
没仔细看英文全文,但我认为要科学对待希拉里。也许希拉里作为一个总统不合适,但作为个人,我们还是要充分尊重她。
希拉里的个性,可能是天生的,由她的脑组织决定。她的那种个性并不必然意味着她痛恨男人,一定要战胜他们。
从科学的角度,我们要广泛地理解每一个人。
July wrote:
看看她是如何写希拉里的。希拉里的“性”导致她的性格,痛恨男人,一定要战胜他们。
- Re: Camille Pagliaposted on 05/23/2008
今天下午跑到书店,买了一本Camille Paglia的<<性面具(Sexual Personae)>>, 要送给玛雅,早就想说玛雅是咖啡的Paglia。 上不了咖啡就读这本书吧。
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation