Wednesday, August 30, 2017

在伦敦国家美术馆寻找色彩中的艺术史

在伦敦国家美术馆寻找色彩中的艺术史
0条评论2014-08-11 10:20:38 来源:外滩画报 作者:钱文逸
[1/13]
国家美术馆展出的画作,雷诺阿 《轻舟》,1875

伦敦国家美术馆的大展《制造色彩》为我们展开了一场色彩、历史、科技与美术馆策划之间令人回味的精彩对话。

一百年前,艺术史是黑白的。德国艺术史学家沃尔夫林(Heinrich Wölfflin)在撰写他的《文艺复兴和巴洛克》时,他面对着他最著名的双屏对比,手执两张摄影复制的图像,黑白,全部黑白。机械复制时代不仅艺术品是 黑白的,艺术史也是。正是在这个黑白年代,形式主义诞生——文艺复兴规整、古典、诉诸理想的线条和巴洛克不设边界的、动态、诉诸情感的油画笔触。形式,在 这一个学派的历史观中独自便能构成一个封闭的美学概念和历史逻辑,从它的演进中我们便能得出内在于艺术的风格史。

走进国家美术馆今夏的展厅《制造色彩》,我们很容易视眼前的色彩为理所应当。我们不会意识到当代和这个灰度的艺术史视野之间巨大的鸿沟,而这一百年间的嬗变 起码有一部分原因来自于科技的发展。当摄影和电影进入彩色时代;当特效、动画、广告媒体以愈发绚烂的色调重新演绎十九世纪的魔法幻灯,同时,当修复师将蒙 尘多年的油画表面的清油一层一层拭去,画作的色彩才开始以一种前所未有的震慑力扑面而来。

倘若这场展览并未直接将色 彩置于一种当代审美与历史观的语境中,它给参观者留下最强烈印象的便是其科学性的宗旨,也即,国家美术馆对其作品修复及科学研究的成果展示。的确,这并非 国家美术馆第一次让其科学研究部门担任策展工作,要知道在美术馆官网上,他们最早的"技术期刊"始于1977年。正是在创刊前后的十年间,美术馆经历了最 惊心动魄、也与当代美术馆机制形成最密切相关的大起大落。

在1967至1969年间,国家美术馆展开对提香著名的画 作《酒神与阿里阿德涅》的修复,其结果同时令修复技术人员和参观的群众大惊失色。从十八十九世纪开始便令大家习以为常的那种黄色的柔和协调的光晕,时常让 当时的观者将提香和后来的伦勃朗做色调和油画笔触、技法和氛围上的比较。相比如今在我们眼中或许是文艺复兴时期用蓝色最为奢华的画作,伦敦皇家艺术学院十 八世纪的院长乔舒亚·雷诺兹(Joshua Reynolds)称赞的是提香画作中的"暖色调":"这幅画的光在我看来应当是一种暖色调,因为尽管白色可以被用来作为主要的光源……或许更恰当的是, 白色被落日的黄晕所映照,这便是提香的手法"。

在技术人员拭去的几处区域中,原先幽黄的落日将烟消云散,出现的是在七十年代令观众们手足无措的最艳丽的色彩光谱。天空大片大片纯粹的群青、两位主人公身上 不同的红与粉、右侧风景中以深浅调和树叶远近关系的绿和棕;以及画中虽处于阴影却身披泛光的橙色丝质上衣和深蓝色裙摆的那个女舞者,提香大胆地赋予这个故 事的配角最浓墨重彩的对比,让她在画作中央嫁接起天空的蓝和树影的棕橙色。

还有,在画面左侧那团不起眼却傲气十足的 黄色衣饰,令整幅画的彩虹光谱完满收局。画家在那只刻有自己签名的铜质酒瓮上用同一抹黄色颜料提亮高光,又用同样的颜料在阿里阿德涅头顶的天空上划出了她 未来化身的星座。这是一个最次要的色彩在画布上完成叙事、描绘和材料各层面的"变形纪"。从丝绸、颜料到星象,黄色完成了自身质感的三重变幻,一如画面所 展现的故事中阿里阿德涅在两个天神之间完成的自我身份与情感的变幻。

这场色彩的变形纪连带着美术馆1979年所办的 展览《国家美术馆修复部门清理并修复的画作》是美术馆第一次企图以科技带来的全新视觉盛宴更新一代人的艺术史观念,而这样的更新来得着实辛苦。诸多评论者 失望地认为修复师将提香的画作毁于一旦,纷纷以清油是艺术家用来赋予画作色彩的和谐一致的理由拒绝接受如今我们已然习以为常的色彩盛宴。

倘若提香作为文艺复兴时期便一致公认的"色彩大师"(colore)的画作修复仍要经过近十年的时间才能被大众接受,令米开朗琪罗这位公认的"线构大师" (disegno)的艳丽色彩重见天日的修复行为则遭受了更猛烈的抨击。于1994年修复完成的西斯廷教堂天顶在开幕之际收获的是两个阵营截然相反的口诛 笔伐和溢美之词。前者认为这些将米开朗琪罗的体积与空间彻底抹杀的色彩将壁画给毁了,后者则高呼他们发现了米开朗琪罗惊人的色彩。

如今回看这场争执,我想起的是在1541年米开朗琪罗的《最后审判》在西斯廷教堂揭幕之际引发的同样热烈的争议。这幅壁画从创作、揭幕到接受的历程,与意大 利天主教教会各种非官方的宗教改革讨论慢慢演变为具有划时代意义的特伦托会议(Council of Trent)的过程几乎在历史上同步。因此在画作公开展示后不久,不同地方的著名人文主义者们都在宗教理念巨大转变的背景下竞相对米开朗琪罗评头论足。对 于诸多轻宗教意义的清晰表达和平易近人、重美学上高尚的创造的人文主义者而言,米开朗琪罗延续着但丁《神曲》中以形式与修辞上的雄壮与宏大匹配内容中高尚 的神学与美学意义的传统。他们不出意外地将画家与诗人相比较,认为这般的创造力是可以被肯定的。

但受到特伦托会议和 北方新教猖獗的偶像破坏运动的警惕,诸多持教会立场的神学家、以及企图与佛罗伦萨艺术理论相抗衡的威尼斯评论者们却就着壁画艰深恐怖、过度夸张的描绘,对 其可能对不具备高度审美意识的愚昧大众的误导开始了批判。五百年前关于画作高深的美学理念和对宗教意义表达的不明晰的热议,应和着当代对米开朗琪罗是线构 还是色彩主义者的争论,仿佛曾经瓦萨里《艺苑名人传》中对佛罗伦萨和威尼斯画派之间高下的较量仍在继续。

因为这场曾 经让诸多当代画家一起企图申诉中断的修复项目,米开朗琪罗的确变身为一个比我们艺术史常识中更具颠覆性的色彩主义者。如今在梵蒂冈的教堂中仰望他的壁画, 我们看到的不仅仅是瓦萨里五百年前被一再重复的比例、体态、形象与轮廓,而是与高蹈繁复的形象一般令人震撼的光影与明丽的色彩。

正是由此,米开朗琪罗在佛罗伦萨和伦敦的几幅画作(诸如未完成的《耶稣入墓》和乌菲兹中为多尼家族所作的杰作《圣家族》)中鲜亮而跳跃的色彩得到了印证,也 由此揭示了米开朗琪罗之后佛罗伦萨手法主义一代的诸多画家——安德烈亚·德尔·萨尔托(Andrea del Sarto)、罗索·菲伦蒂诺(Rosso Fiorentino)、雅各布.达·蓬托尔莫(Jacopo da Pontormo)和米开朗琪罗身前挚友达涅勒·达·沃尔泰拉(Daniele da Volterra)——明艳跳跃的色彩风格的历史传承。文艺复兴时期用来定义艺术家和画派高下的线构与色彩之争如今看来,更多是各人通过修辞建构属于他们 的艺术版图和判断准则,此刻我们知道:米开朗琪罗是一位伟大的色彩主义者,提香的素描与线条则同样不可小觑。

但在对历史传承和风格演进的重新审视之外,我们看到的或许也是一场当代审美对文艺复兴的重新书写。我不断在米开朗琪罗用以逼近天堂之荣耀的轻盈通透的色彩里看见 现代主义的影子:倘若塞尚仍然不是一个最好的类比,令我想起最多的是西班牙超现实主义画家萨尔瓦多?达利为《神曲》创作的那套惊人的插图。

一个个纪念碑式的、将形象拉伸至极致的体态,配以各种轻快、饱和的色彩,倘若上个世纪的达利没有机会得见二十一世纪的《最后审判》,他或许也在色彩上回归了 佛罗伦萨手法主义时期那种在画面上跳跃的对比和几乎将画作空间深度削弱的饱和度。的确,达利插图中更多的是用这些轻盈通透的色彩直接构成一种无重力的超脱 感,在那里、一如在各种现代主义绘画里,色彩得以创造它自身的空间,而后者的深度与错觉已然被艺术家们抛在脑后。于是,即便如今我们眼前因修复科技重见天 日的色彩不全归因于彩色电影越发高超的特效技术,那它们或许也来自于现代主义留给我们的美学传统。

之所以绕这么大一个圈子,讲述当代修复与美术馆机制对提香和米开朗琪罗两位文艺复兴大师的重新建构,是为了在国家美术馆这个极其经济而聪明的小展中抽取出一 条更宽阔且隐含的历史脉络。为什么色彩会开始获得越来越多的关注?倘若色彩太容易对我们的感官产生直接的刺激,也因而被现代绘画越发强调,它在我们脑中或 许也占据了某种恐惧和负面的位置。色彩太感官直接、太不理性,色彩甚至是女性化的(瓦萨里正是这么批评提香的色彩,说它们无法支撑起更为高尚的题材、人物 和构图)、东方主义的(一切不和谐的、乖张的色彩都来自一种更为原始、未经深化的审美态度)。

历史上,我们始终有一种色彩恐惧症(chromophobia),热爱色彩灯箱的英国当代艺术家大卫?贝裘勒(David Batchelor)在他那本著名的同名小书里如此总结道。但在任何一种恐惧症的背后,都是对恐惧之对象怀揣的特殊痴迷——这两次修复的争议都揭示着"色 彩恐惧"和"色彩审美"之间的纠葛。

色彩能给历史建构注入何种新生命?在国家美术馆的展览里,我们看到的不仅是色彩 艳丽的画作,每个以一种色彩为主题的房间里,还有其他类型的物件。在对色彩论的简介之后,第二个房间献给蓝色。我们看到美术馆馆藏的几块硕大的青金石 (lapislazuli),和三种程度的提炼所能获得的不同粉末。最后一次提炼所得的群青灰(ultramarineash)并非完全废弃,而成为了艺 术家们用来描绘更为透明的釉彩时青睐的材料。

如今我们已经熟悉的这种从中世纪描绘圣母衣饰开始逐渐占据历史舞台的阿 富汗名贵矿石,从宗教绘画开始统领着西方绘画的表面。在红色房间中,我们则看到另一种自然材料:甲壳虫。各种学名不同的甲虫被呈列在展厅的一个角落,每只 生物的一旁放上颜料粉末的成品和注释,我们仿佛从国家美术馆来到了自然博物馆。

矿石和昆虫在展览中的出现并非简单是美术馆以科学态度满足观者的猎奇心理。它们对于艺术史研究的启发在于,色彩比形式和线条更根植于物质在历史中的流动,色 彩得以嫁接自然与文化、科学与艺术间似乎从来没有愈合的裂纹。矿石和昆虫很好地警醒着我们:绘画也是一种"科技",从最早开始,它就是画家们用来实验美学 突破、将神学、神话等等题材视觉化的一项技能。

在技术的层面上,它不断经历着突破和变化:从蛋彩绘画必须用最饱和的颜色绘制阴影,因而无法如油画的多层釉彩和调色的方式描绘出更具体积感和空间深度的图画;到十八世纪工业革命之际出现的化学合成科技,绘画不再仰仗自然材料的提炼。

于是最令英国引以为豪的透纳(Turner)用1797年被提炼而成的铬黄在他的画布上挥洒出绚烂的金色涛涌,前拉斐尔派(Pre- Raphaelites)的艺术家们第一次在画作中实验搭配两种最新发明的色彩:翡翠绿(emeraldgreen)以及因为钴蓝(cobalt blue)的发明而能调和成的新型紫色。

多亏了管装颜料的批量生产,印象派和当代的画家们都可以进行日常的油画写生,莫奈和马奈才得以在河上泛舟的惬意场景下作画、前者的画作才会在修复检查期间被发现来自沙滩的颗粒。来到画作上的颜料都默默地见证着从自然万物进入再现与美学层面的无形历史。

当我们更仔细地审视色彩,它不仅如现代主义的画家们所言成为了渲染画作情绪和内在氛围的最重要元素,在主体观感的体验之外,色彩也撼动着科技与艺术的分界 ——不仅绘画是一门由艺术家的实验与创新被推动的科技,光学从神学到科学的转变以及光始终具备的近乎形而上的美学地位也不断给予我们观看画作的另一面重要 的棱镜。这场展览不断提醒着我们,色彩的意义不是恒常不变的,往往源自美学的新需求和科技的推进,一些色彩在绘画中大放异彩、又转而销声匿迹。

对色彩历史的书写让我们得以提出一些新的问题:风景画在十七世纪的兴起和绿色在美学和技术层面的地位变化关系何在?展览开篇提及在1839年被提出的"互补 色理论"也同样是对我的一种警钟:我们被当代各种科学、娱乐和传统概念所构建起来的色彩理念是否也被缺乏反观地带入了我们对历史画作的观看?在互补色理论 的一旁,我们看到法国印象派画家雷诺阿(Pierre-Auguste Renoir)1875年的小幅画作《轻舟》中蓝色漫布的湖面上一叶映着阳光闪耀的橙黄。看着它,我想起同时期更为令人震撼的一些色彩实验:象征派大师奥 迪隆·雷东(Odilon Redon)在绿水上徜徉的黄蓝色《神秘船》、或者德国表现主义画家埃米尔·诺尔德(Emil Nolde)如旋风般令各种色彩席卷画布的抽象风景。

"互补色理论"是否激发了整个现代主义中的创作者们更具系统性地赋予色彩理论性的思考:从塞尚到马蒂斯、从克利到美国抽象表现主义,色彩的理论化与实验性实践始终在同步深入着。

这些关于色彩的问题最终触及科技发展与美学理念之间不能被轻易简化的互动,两者之间并非简单地互为因果,而是相互促进和影响的关系。就像我们不能武断地说, 因为铬黄的发明,我们获得了透纳浪漫主义的崇高海景;我们如今,也不能再完全忽视工业革命中诞生的颜料或许也是透纳风景中崇高理念不可化约的因素之一。

同样的,展厅墙上所写的那句雷诺阿的"没有管装颜料,就不会有塞尚、莫奈、毕沙罗、也不会有印象派"提醒着我们管装颜料、可携带的颜料箱和画架都是现代科技 赋予现代美学发展的可能性。但我们也必须在这些颜料和绘画工具的便捷与批量生产中看到同一股驱动着现代社会与美学的力量,不论是画家、材料还是他们共同所 处的社会,个体经验都在趋向流动性、即时性和稍纵即逝。倘若波德莱尔在世纪末对"现代生活的绘画者"的描述可被称为现代的美学宣言,那这份宣言也同样适用 于创作的技术层面,仿佛颜料画架也都开始追寻瞬间之美的漂流,在人群的涌动、无限的徜徉中。

稍纵即逝的也是展览中各种画作的色彩本身。在展厅中,我们不断看到画作脆弱的衰变在色彩中体现出来。在普鲁士蓝(prussian blue)和合成钴蓝(cobalt blue)在工业革命中发明之前,能替代群青的蓝色只有两种更为不稳定的颜料:含玻璃成分的钴蓝(smalt)和石青(azurite)。前者在威尼斯画 家委洛内塞(Veronese)的诸多画做中用来呈现天空,如今那幅无比安详梦幻的《圣海伦娜的梦》中女圣徒衣饰上对黄、粉、红、橙、紫色颜料的高超运用 只能成为独唱,背景那片原先用来形成印衬的蓝天此刻只能诉诸想象。

而在巴洛克大师委拉斯开茲那幅被女性主义激进分子 划破过的镇馆之宝《对镜的维纳斯》身下那袭深灰色绸被则曾经是红色淀颜料(redlake)与石青调和而成的紫色。还有佛罗伦萨画家安东尼奥?德尔?保莱 沃洛(Antonio del Pollaiuolo)在那幅精致的小画《阿波罗与达芙涅》中潜逃的月桂女神双臂中伸出的两根月桂枝干,也因为铜绿色(verdigris)的不稳定而变成黑色。

这绿色奇妙的"碳化",也让我想起九年前学画期间道听途说的一则关于印象派绘画的轶闻。忘了是哪位画家曾指导路人在艳阳下的的写生,他对那位路人说:你认真 看这棵树的颜色,它的叶子你看到的是绿色还是黑色?路人回答:黑色(恐怕是因为逆光的缘故)。画家说:那就画成黑色。仿佛是一种色彩作为科技与作为美学概 念之间的奇妙转换,当作为物质的色彩由绿变黑,它竟然也无意间巧合地回应了色彩感知在不同历史时期的理论变化。在达芙涅身体变形之际的定格和色彩与历史的 流变中,我们似乎又捕捉到了一次科技与美学之间无声的交叉。

国家美术馆的展览并非全面,它获得的媒体评价都褒贬不 一。在展览屈指可数的展厅中走过,从蓝、绿、红、黄、紫到金和银,我们会发现白与黑并没有出现,而展览的对象到了十九世纪之后也戛然而止。到了画家们拾起 各种工业颜料的二十世纪的确是另一个故事了,这个故事对于馆藏只到十九世纪的国家美术馆的科研部门显然是个不适合的课题。

展览的不全面也不仅在于一些色彩的消失和历史时段的局限,或许正因为其注重展示最新的修复科技、知识与成果的主旨,许多大家期待进入展览的画作都仍然安静地 矗立在美术馆的常设展厅中。我想,抱怨其不全面的评价并没有触及展览择作的核心问题。这个由美术馆科学部门策划的展览中满是一个国际水准的机构对自己馆藏 精打细算的权衡与考量,在这些批评声中,我们或许能探出美术馆如此策划的深层缘由。

在我伦敦多年观展的体验中,这次 展览的相对廉价很能说明美术馆的自我定位。他们深知这不将是一场如同诸多伦敦大型美术馆每个季度都令大家望眼欲穿的大片式展览,从票价和展览的规模来看这 都是一场极经济且不铺张的展览。又或许,正是因为春季刚刚结束的委洛内塞大展的标题中就有"豪华"(magnificence)一词,这个夏季的色彩小 展,颇有点悖论的、却也为了降低展览的基调,显得格外不绚烂。

媒体中诸多对这场展览的负面评价都指向一些特定画作的 缺席:除了大家众所周知的德加的红色梳发图被纳入展览之外,譬如文章开头提及的国家美术馆中那幅最蓝的提香和中世纪英国全部用金和青金石完成的珍贵小型画 作《威尔顿双联画》(Wilton Diptych),以及诸多艺术史中的色彩大师(委洛内塞、鲁本斯)都相继缺席。这些缺席都告诉我们,这不是一场关于色彩的大师级盛宴,这样只会让国家美 术馆重复在寻常艺术史框架下那些最家喻户晓的名家名作,相反,美术馆希望我们看到更多历史上在用色和科研方面更为特殊的"案例"。

十七世纪开始在金属和大理石上的绘画作为某种珍奇之物被诸多宫廷人士收藏。于是在蓝色的展厅中,我们看到这一潮流中最为特殊的一例,巴洛克画家奥拉齐奥·真 蒂莱斯基(Orazio Gentileschi)将青金石打磨光滑之后,直接借用青金石矿石的色彩作画。在这幅珍奇的画作中,是绘画与自然在技艺上的比拼与协作,是十七世纪开始 对自然中的珍奇之物越发深入的自然哲学式的兴趣。于是相反于将自然矿石在幕后碾磨成深邃的蓝色,自然本来的色彩成为了绘画,这幅蓝得炫目而讨巧的画作更接 近中国玉雕中的巧色技法,但仍没有人对这一现象与东西方工艺品交流的历史背景做深入的分析。

同样的,在红色展厅中, 我们尽管没有再重复地看到上个展季出现的委洛内塞(所指正是文中提及的《圣海伦娜的梦》),展厅中却出现了北方费拉拉宫廷中诙谐而极具个人风格的柯西莫· 图拉(Cosimo Tura)。他画中未能确认身份的缪思女神桀骜地端坐在一个装饰繁复的宝座上,她上身是高贵典雅的深蓝色,全身披着梅紫草绿的华美衣衫。但画面最突出之处 便是那被精心描绘的红色丝绒花纹,她向外撑着的手肘很有意识地强调着这种质地独特的衣饰。

展厅中央,我们看到在佛罗伦萨这座十五十六世纪的纺织业中心出产的特种丝绒,正和图拉画中描绘的吻合。在威尼斯笔触至上的色彩堆叠和佛罗伦萨手法主义时期跳跃通透的色调之外,这里是另一种规整却不乏象征意义、并同时与物质文化更紧密相关的色彩逻辑。

这样的例子还有很多。紫色厅中来自德国文艺复兴的一幅展品,倘若不被放在这个展览中,参观者恐怕任意走过都不会注意到其建筑结构中特别的紫色调。黄色在十六 世纪宫廷装饰性餐盘(majolica)的烤土技艺的重要性被点明,同时在工业革命发现铬这种金属可以合成的黄色之前,我们也发现雄黄(realgar) 这种由硫化砷提炼出来的剧毒颜料是如何令画家们敬而远之的。

金色则是一个更为特殊的课题,展厅中不仅向我们展示了各 种镀金表面效果的技艺与中世纪圣像传统不可分割的关系,也呈现了诸多运用非金材料模仿金色的案例。而绿厅中极容易逃过无心参观者的法眼的是蛋彩中对所谓土 绿色(earthgreen)的运用。在所有蛋彩画对皮肤的描绘中,画家都会先画上一层淡淡的灰绿色作为皮肤阴影的色彩,然后在这个背景下画上肉色。

国家美术馆馆藏中或许最能体现这一技法在意大利绘画蛋彩油彩技艺交替之际遗留下的挣扎痕迹的,便是米开朗琪罗未完成木板蛋彩画《曼彻斯特圣母》。因为米开朗 琪罗对油彩新技术的不适应,画家不断放弃油画回归蛋彩,他也同时继续沿用着蛋彩中先用土绿衬底的画法。画家无数未完成的画作中的这一幅最终留给我们观者 的,是在中世纪绘画手册中指导画家们或是用来画"死尸"、或是用来为肤色衬底的那片土绿色鬼影。

对于我这个对国家美术馆的馆藏相对熟悉的参观者,这些相对另类珍奇、容易忽视的作品体现着一个美术馆不断自我更新、通过科研部门的推进重新审视其馆藏价值的 努力。作为一个完全有能力将馆藏中与色彩有关的名作集结成一场视觉饕餮的美术馆,这场谦逊的小展让美术馆仍然得以在远游至此的游客不错过太多的前提下,通 过馆藏编织出一个新的故事。它是一个美术馆在对馆藏的自我更新与维护之间构想的"权宜之计"。对于一些渴求看到名作集锦和色彩刺激的参观者,它或许是失望 的,但这场小展中体现出一个顶尖国家美术馆对其馆藏日常的策略性思考与创新,却是值得任何大陆的美术馆借鉴与思考的。

艺术品修复在大陆仍然是一个相对边缘的话题。但在当代艺术日新月异地涌入内陆之际,在国内一个个新美术馆的建筑方案拍板钉盯之后,馆藏的建设、维护、更新与 修复却将是每个大陆美术馆亟待思考的问题。国家美术馆的这场小展完全得益于他们已经实行了三十年的科学修复部门对馆藏的悉心照料和突破性研究。而在国内对 海外艺术引进的喧嚣过后,留给国内美术馆更重要的建设性问题这般不起眼的小展却恰恰能带来深刻的启发。

当代的艺术生态是活跃、混杂而极具消耗性的。景观式的消费之余,建构持久的馆藏与展览项目则需要更多热爱并熟知艺术品及其维护的专业人士以孜孜不倦的心态潜入那些看似 熟悉的地域重新挖掘出新的领地。伦敦国家美术馆这场反景观的小展供我们思考之处是多重的:在当代色彩审美的一端与一百年前黑白艺术史之间,它为我们展开了 一场色彩、历史、科技与美术馆策划之间令人回味的精彩对话。

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Friday, August 18, 2017

Why English is such a great language for puns


The quip and the dreadWhy English is such a great language for puns

Gamers now even take part in world champunships

Away With Words: An Irreverent Tour Through the World of Pun Competitions. By Joe Berkowitz. Harper Perennial; 273 pages; $15.99 and £8.99.

LAST week's issue of this paper contained the following headlines: "Rooms for improvement" (in a story about British housing); "Though Mooch is taken, Mooch abides" (on the firing of Anthony Scaramucci); and "LIBOR pains" (on interbank loan rates). The Economist is not alone in its taste for wordplay. Our colleagues at the Financial Times routinely sneak subtle jokes into their headlines (July 17th: "Why China's global shipping ambitions will not easily be contained") while those at the tabloids indulge themselves more obviously. On the arrest of a famous golfer for drink-driving: "DUI of the Tiger".

These authors are fortunate to work at English-language publications. For English is unusually good for puns. It has a large vocabulary and a rich stock of homophones from which puns can be made. It is constantly evolving, with new words being invented and old ones given fresh meanings. And it is mostly uninflected, allowing for verbs and nouns to switch places. Moreover, other than the occasional customary feminine pronoun, for ships, say, or nation-states, it has no gendered nouns, which makes it easier to play with innuendo and double entendres. (Chinese is another good language for punsters, which is a boon for those keen to avoid the country's censors. Puns are especially popular around Chinese new year.)

Newspaper editors get paid to write silly jokes for an audience. But over the past few years a growing band of amateurs has taken up the sport. In New York a monthly event called Punderdome features jokesters with pseudonyms such as "Punder Enlightening", "Jargon Slayer" and "Words Nightmare" who compete over the course of four increasingly absurd rounds. Similar competitions exist in Washington, DC, (Beltway Pundits), Milwaukee (Pundamonium), San Francisco (Bay Area Pun-Off) and elsewhere. The annual O. Henry Pun-Off in Austin, Texas, which started in 1978, bills itself as the genre's World Championship. (Word Champunship, surely?)

But who would pay to watch people make puns? That was how Joe Berkowitz, an editor at Fast Company, an American business magazine, reacted when he first discovered Punderdome. He went on to spend a year travelling round America, attending pun-parties and interviewing humour experts and comedy writers. The outcome? "Away With Words", a faintly anthropological examination of puns and the people who make them. The chief attraction of these competitions, he reports, is that they create a space for something "people feel like they're not supposed to like and ought not to do".

Puns are widely held in low esteem, a justifiable consideration. They are one of the first forms of humour that children understand and deploy, before they move on to more sophisticated jokes that use language semantically, Vinod Goel, a neuroscientist, tells Mr Berkowitz. That may account both for the reaction that puns get from listeners—the groan suggesting that the punster ought to know better—but also for their popularity. Many puns are indeed juvenile. They are also easy to understand.

Yet puns demand intelligence, creativity and general knowledge: the best draw on cultural references, allude to several things at the same time and are intricately constructed (such as the one about Mahatma Gandhi, who walked barefoot a lot and often fasted, leading to bad breath, thus making him a "super calloused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis"). The Harry Potter series would be less magical without Knockturn Alley and Diagon Alley. Salman Rushdie uses puns without shame.

It is not just the quality of puns that is divisive but also the definition. At Punderdome a pun is simply "a play on words". The winners are picked by volume of applause. At the O. Henry Pun-Off onstage referees disqualify what they consider subpar wordplay, and a panel of judges hold up scores at the end of each round. Every potential topic is heavily pun-tested by organisers before being deemed fit for play. "I sometimes get embarrassed by how seriously I take this," says one veteran contestant of both competitions.

He is not alone. This reviewer disregards any pun that requires a hyphen (ovicular puns are egg-specially eggs-cruciating) and believes that puns must have a set-up (the more elaborate the better). Throughout "Away With Words" punsters, comedy writers and academics offer their own standards for how to tell a good pun from a bad one. Mr Berkowitz himself cannot resist the temptation to set a few rules. The four types of bad pun, according to him, are those that suffer from bad timing, are too obvious, have no second meaning or are too earnest.

A pun, like porn, is defined less by intention than by reception. One contestant at the O. Henry, on the topic of birds, told the audience, "Beak kind to me, don't thrush to judgment, I'm not robin anyone, hawking anything, talon tails out of school, ducking responsibilities or emulating anyone." Only the reader should decide whether that deserves a prize or social ostrichism.

Correction (August 15th, 2017): As many commenters and letter-writers have pointed out, "ovine" means relating to sheep, not eggs. The correct word is ovicular. This has been amended. Apologies for the woolly thinking. 

This article appeared in the Books and arts section of the print edition under the headline "The quip and the dread"

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Going Nowhere | The Point Magazine


The Point Magazine

Share

Before my dad died in August 2010, he had begun work on his next book. "The time has come," he had decided, "to write about more than just the things one understands; it is just as important if not more so to write about the things one cares about." The thing my dad understood was twentieth-century European history. The thing he cared about—more than almost anything or anyone—was trains. His next book would be titled Locomotion: a history of the railway.

He spent his Putney, London childhood riding trains to nowhere in particular, just for the sake of riding. On summer days, he took the quaint suburban electric railway around suburbs and lumpy British hills, then back to Clapham Junction, where he picked his ride home from a row of grunting diesels and majestic old steamers that shuffled along nineteen different platforms. I spent my childhood listening to these wistful remembrances, trying to imagine eight-year-old Tony peering out onto a dark and smoggy London.[1]

Whenever he could, Dad took us railroading through Europe. We would board at the Gare du Nord, with its serpentine TGVs, or the Gare du Midi, with its blue and yellow boxy Belgian locals, or Paddington, with its rows of channel-hopping Eurostars. We always arrived early so Dad could sip a double-espresso in the main hall.

If stations were his "cathedrals," as my dad once wrote, timetables were his Bible. "My Europe is measured in train time," he wrote. I distinctly remember the Christmas when Mom got him a Cook's European train timetable, stuffed with up-to-date minutiae on the comings-and-goings of even the most local lines. It sat on his bedside table for months. My dad, ever the social democrat and in most respects fiercely egalitarian, took great pleasure in the fact that trains would not wait for anyone. "Rail travel," he wrote, "was decidedly public transport."

The other reason my dad cared so much about the railway's effect on time was that rail travel was decidedly historical. "The truly distinctive feature of modern life," he wrote, "is neither the unattached individual nor the unconstrained state. It is what comes in between them: society." The advent of the railway marked this historical turn. Riding a train became the physical embodiment of a society moving collectively—not just through space, but through time.

This was the metaphor for trains that the historian Tony Judt, perhaps with a healthy dose of deformation professionelle, firmly held. What strikes me when I read him on railroads, though, is how his writing bears strikingly little resemblance to the man I grew up with—Tony as a private individual, and as a father. For that Tony, the railway was decidedly solitary and ahistorical. The two trains he cared about the most—one in a tiny Swiss town called Mürren, the other in a slightly larger but also tiny Vermont town called Rutland—were not about going somewhere collectively. They were a way to enter a state of timelessness where the past didn't matter—where history didn't exist.

To get to Mürren, you have to take the train. From Lauterbrunnen, a small valley town dappled with sun that glints off mountain glaciers, a cable car rocks you gently up a cliff side to Grütschalp. From Grütschalp, a dinky, light-brown single-carriage electric snakes slowly along the mountainside, stopping only at Winteregg—a stereotypically Swiss café with coffee, ice cream and astonishing views of the Jungfrau and Eiger mountains—before tugging you into Mürren. This route has been the same since 1891.

The people on the train to Mürren were almost always tourists and almost always British. My dad first came with his dad, Joe, in 1956. Joe, born in Belgium but by then a seasoned Londoner with a lower-middle-class British accent, saw Mürren as an escape: away from his wife (they eventually divorced), away from London, back to the continent.[2] When I asked Joe a few years ago what he remembered of Mürren, he told me about the silence. "It was so quiet, a silent sheet of ice, a small village overwhelmed by the heights around it." And indeed: in the Fifties as today, there is nothing to be done in Mürren but listen to silence, broken only by the habitual click-clack and whirr of the brown electric train. There are no cars (there is no road up the mountain) and only 426 inhabitants. Mürren's hotels—seven, by my count—have nearly fifteen hundred beds, but these are hardly ever full, especially in summer, when my dad liked to go.

As a child in the 1950s, my dad was struck by how Switzerland seemed untouched by the war. The hotels were still "old, solid wood everywhere," he wrote. The trains were methodical, technologically stunning, and a wonderful exception to Europe's otherwise demolished infrastructure. Dad's favorite quotation—one he managed to sneak into nearly every lecture he gave—was Harry Lime in The Third Man: "In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love—they had five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock." He read this as a compliment.

But when I read his work, it becomes difficult for me to distinguish between Dad's childhood idea of Mürren and his adult one. When he was a child, Mürren might have offered him an escape from all the usual schoolboy alienations; perhaps it meant refuge from London; or perhaps it was simply a beautiful vacation spot that his father loved. When he began to study the history of twentieth-century Europe, though, I suspect Mürren took on a different role. My dad chose to become a historian of his own land in his own time. He remained perpetually at work: his source base was the world around him, always there, right under his nose. I suspect that Mürren became a place for my dad to turn off his historical radar; a beacon of childhood nostalgia, yes, but also of profound academic relief. If nothing happens, there is no history to be done.

From 1916 to 1918, some four hundred British soldiers and officers made Mürren their home. They were injured prisoners of war, held as part of an Anglo-German repatriation agreement. Switzerland's location and neutrality made it the perfect place for the English, Germans, French and Belgians to exchange prisoners without risk of seeing their former captives back on the battlefield. The soldiers' journey up to Mürren was the same as Dad's in the Fifties, or mine today: a funicular followed by a trundling brown carriage.

Perhaps sensing they might be a while in Switzerland, the soldiers transformed the Swiss village into a surreal, miniature homeland, a London in the Alps. On May 27, 1917, they renamed Mürren's few streets. One could stroll down "Piccadilly Lane" onto "Old Kent Road," and from there wander to "Bow Street," where he might stop and watch the train make its regular departures from "Charing Cross Station"! ("The geography is rather mixed," one officer conceded.) The British internees established shops and training centers: a carpenter, a tailor, a dentist's office, a motoring school, even a watchmaker's store. They founded a YMCA hall for entertainment, and opened a library with over two thousand English volumes. They formed sports teams out of the hotels they lived in—the Hotel Eiger versus the Hotel Jungfrau in football, for example—and kept careful track of the results.

Soldiers communicated with their friends and families in England (and frequently wrote to ask for money), but they rarely heard news of the war that raged on around them. Sometimes, they didn't want any. The editors of the local magazine BIM, British Interned at Mürren, asked not to receive war updates from London-based correspondents, perhaps to avoid raising hopes and fears. "At times echoes of the heavy guns reach us, reminding us of days that are past," wrote BIM's editors in their first issue. "We more or less patiently await the day when, for the last time, we descend the funicular on our way … home."

Eventually, the YMCA ran out of its cheap tobacco, and to pass the time, soldiers began speculating on what part of the car to sit in, should the funicular cable snap and send them hurtling down the mountainside. "One end of the town seems dead and deserted, and the other end is not much better," mused a listless writer for BIM in October 1917. "We are altogether lonely and miserable."

When the war ended, so did the little world the soldiers had created in Mürren. BIM stopped without notice. The village's roads were renamed. Its hotels no longer doubled as sports teams, and went back to serving wealthy British tourists. It was as though a little civilization had, one day and without warning, tumbled off the face of the earth. For two years, four hundred British troops had waited desperately to board the little electric train at "Charing Cross Station," out of Mürren and back into the world.

In 2002, Dad brought me and my brother to Mürren for the first time. I was eight—the same age he was when he'd first gone in 1956. We took four trains: an impeccably modern inter-city line from Zurich Flughafen to Interlaken Ost; a slower but equally punctual regional train, with light blue polyester seats, from Interlaken to Lauterbrunnen; the cog-rail funicular up to Grütschalp; and the single-carriage cream-and-light-brown electric into Mürren. "There was still nothing to do," he later wrote of our trip. "Paradise."

I'm certain Dad didn't know about the interned soldiers who, some 85 years earlier, would have agreed with "nothing to do" but objected to "paradise." And yet had he known about BIM, about renamed streets and hotel sports teams, I think he would have said that history confirmed his instincts. The British soldier and my dad saw the same scenic train and felt the same escape from history, though only one of them enjoyed it.

At the end of every night, my mom, my brother and I walked down the little sloping road to Dad. We were heaving from our race up the hill, raw mountain air chilled our lungs, and we did not talk. Dad's outline came into focus. Catcher-like, stocky, with a thick neck and a ruddy head, he stood alone in the crisp air, the bald plateau of his scalp reflecting the light of Mürren's streetlamps out towards the Eiger mountain, whose dark outline carved a puzzle out of the blue-black sky. I stared at Dad, Dad stared at the mountain; nothing moved. In that second, I knew nothing would.

The railway brought us, at least metaphorically, from New York City to Rutland, Vermont in 2004. There were other reasons, too: the shock of September 11 had sent us and many other New Yorkers in search of refuge, a place where planes wouldn't fly into skyscrapers and where the world remained unchanged. The clapboard house we settled in, creaky with old wooden beams, sits atop a hill, twenty minutes from town. At the bottom, a wall of evergreens conceals the railroad. Dad, double espresso in hand, stood on the back porch twice every day to catch a glimpse of the freight train through the trees. "We chose Rutland very deliberately because of the train station," Mom said. For Dad, a train meant Rutland was an American Mürren.

Rutland is the last stop on Amtrak's "Ethan Allen," which runs daily out of New York City. The engine, a big, hunkering diesel, arrives at Rutland Station late each night and leaves early the next morning. The only other train in operation at the station, an earth-shaking freight, pulls propane, marble and everything in-between from Rutland to Massachusetts. But Dad never asked why this modest Vermont enclave (as opposed, say, to larger cities like Burlington or Manchester) could boast Amtrak service to New York or a freight railway that bordered our house.


Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Inspiration, procrastination and the importance of pens: how writers write | The Spectator


Inspiration, procrastination and the importance of pens: how writers write

Authors reveal their hugely contrasting routines for getting words on the page

How do they do it? Among writers, the earnest audience member at a literary festival who asks, 'Do you write by hand or on a computer?' is a sort of running joke; an occasion for the rolling of eyes. And yet, let's enter a note in defence of that audience member: how novelists and the authors of literary nonfiction go about their work is interesting. If, as Kingsley Amis argued, most of a writer's work is the application of the seat of one's trousers to the seat of the chair, it's legitimate to ask: what trousers, what chair, sexuality where and when? In my experience the answers are wildly different from writer to writer; an experience borne out by our sampling — 400 words a day, or 15,000? A bath for inspiration, or exercise? Endless redrafting or first thought, best thought?

Sam Leith, literary editor

IRVINE WELSH

If you are a writer of my disposition you tend to grasp any opportunity for self–sabotage and distraction. So here's my shabby, rapidly declining two bob's worth.

The process to me is generally an ideal I am working towards or aspiring to, like drinking less or going to the gym more. Whenever I pompously declare 'I'm at my desk every morning by 7 a.m.' a cynical voice in my head screams 'You wish!' But the good news is that it's easier to stop a teenager from masturbating than a real writer from writing.

The ideal I aspire to is rising at 6 a.m., having a light breakfast, being at my desk till 10.30, and hammering out words, lots and lots of them, with an utter disregard for quality or structure, while music blares in the background. Then I'll pack up and go to the boxing club for a workout — either a circuit, sparring on the pads, or some weights and cardio. This takes you away from the writing and, paradoxically, forgetting about it for a while allows the subconscious to do the heavy lifting.

Spending a lot of time obsessing about something the rest of the world has no connection with or window into is probably not a recipe for healthy relationships. I've learned a lot of de-roling techniques from actors; they have helped me considerably in reorienting myself back into the real world. But even they don't work when you are in that crazy place — the home straight, where you just have to batter those keys until you break the book or it breaks you. That's when your music goes off, your partner heads to her sister's and your cat loses weight.

Is it worth it? Well that's a question you can't even consider if you're a real writer, because it's just what you do and you are not going to stop until you drop.

Irvine Welsh's The Blade Artist is out now.

SUSAN HILL

Of course I began with pen and ink and paper, and paper was expensive in terms of pocket money, so I asked for W.H. Smith tokens for Christmas. Then a neighbour brought up a stash of assorted old office notebooks from hiding somewhere, so the first novel was written in 'Ledger' and 'Salaries'.

I wrote by hand, on A4 ruled with feint and margin, for the next 20 years, making notes in whatever was to hand, often those red shiny Silvine ones from Woolworths. Those notebooks and MSs are now safely housed in handsome red boxes in Eton College library.

When the books were finished I typed them up on my father's old Remington. I could never write directly on to it; too much clatter, too much metal coming between me and the words.

And so it continued until my first laptop, which changed everything. Laptops — close to you, quiet, instinctive, smooth to use. I can think on to a laptop. But I still make notes in notebooks, and write by hand if I need to hear what I am writing, think slowly and carefully. Keyboards run away with you.

I shock creative writing students, their tutors even more, when I say I only ever write one draft. But it's true. It just comes out of my head through my ears on to the page. I finish, correct and tidy up, and that's it. If I get stuck, or reach the end knowing this one just doesn't work, I throw it away. There's always another idea or three waiting in the wings, or the notebook.

I think for a long time — books stew for months — make a few notes, then go. No creative writing course would accept me, but I am too old to change my ways and in any case, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Susan Hill's Jacob's Room Is Full Of Books is out in October.

GEOFF DYER

In the sixth form we'd get assigned essays to be written over the Christmas holidays. I always did these right away, either on Friday night or Saturday morning. Not because I liked writing but because the homework cast such a blight over the holiday that it was best to get it over with. I look back on that period as a precocious summit of self-discipline.

I'd love to recapture that iron resolve now, more than 40 years later, when it takes longer and longer to settle down to things, to fight off the dread of having to concentrate, when it seems likely that the only parole from this life sentence of homework will come with dementia or death. On the other hand, when I was younger, there were more things to tempt me out of the house, so it's actually easier to stay put, girding my loins in front of the computer.

My greatest achievement as a writer is undoubtedly the highly refined autocorrect settings on my laptop. Hundreds of words emerge fully formed from a few abbreviations. Sometimes these represent a saving of only a character or two — 'mtn' instantly becomes 'mountain' — but you put all these little savings together, over the course of a lifetime of writing and you've ('uve') probably ('probly') gained a couple of years even if thinking up, implementing and occasionally withdrawing shortcuts ('ben' becoming 'been' was great until Ben Webster turned into 'Been') will have taken far longer.

It is entirely in keeping with the vagaries of my nature that I fritter away my time fretting over things like this rather than making more meaningful programmes. (That was meant to come out as 'progress'.)

Geoff Dyer's latest novel is White Sands.

KAMILA SHAMSIE

For years I tried to avoid building up 'writing habits'. They quickly become writing tics that get in the way of just sitting down and getting on with putting words on a page. When working on my first novel, I wrote in the daytime as well as the night, wrote by longhand as well as on my computer, wrote in one continent or another, just so long as I had a quiet space.

But at a certain point, habits creep in. Sometimes for your own good: though I'm nocturnal I force myself to write during the day, so that I can be done by the evening. Sometimes for the sake of convenience: it's been years since I wrote longhand — editing is so much easier on a laptop. Sometimes for no good reason except that every writer needs to have something to be irrational about: while I can still shift from one continent to the next as I write, I can no longer — as I did with my first three novels — write while looking at a wall. I need a window to look out of, or better yet, a table and chair outdoors so I'm unenclosed.

I could pretend that lack of enclosure is necessary for the imagination to feel unbound, or some such hooey. Truth is, I let down my guard, I allowed in a tic, and now it's taken up residence and won't be shifted.

Kamila Shamsie's Home Fire was longlisted for the 2017 Man Booker Prize and will be released on 15 August.

NICOLA BARKER

I establish rules (ear defenders, Apple laptop, not online, particular font for a particular novel, dedication up front, always hunched over my desk, etc etc) and then break them without the slightest qualm. Each book has its own way of defining what its wants and needs are.

What I do know is that Art is Innocent. This is my mantra. And Ambition Corrodes the Soul.

The work likes to be fluid. Fluidity is joyful — if you are having fun you throw things at the page willy-nilly. Having said that, I generally write something, reread it, read it again, reread, read it out loud, read, reread, congratulate myself, castigate myself. Back and forth x 1,000. Phew. The first paragraph.

I never write about what I know — so the whole world is my oyster (because I know so little!)

I don't take myself seriously. I do take the work seriously. I still don't really consider myself 'a writer', just someone who enjoys writing.

I am unashamedly agenda-driven, even though I often don't have a clue about what my agenda is.

Never mollycoddle the reader. Heaven forbid! They deserve so much better.

Nicola Barker's latest novel is H(A)PPY.

FRANCIS SPUFFORD

I have a beautifully quiet workroom at home, but somehow the expectant hush in there raises the stakes intolerably, and I only use it in an emergency. Instead I put my laptop in my bag and make my way to a café which meets my needs for a steady background murmur of other people's conversation, and decent coffee. Also, for tolerance of a gurning, teeth-picking, hair-twiddling, head-scratching man in the corner who sits for hours at a time, only buying Americanos. If anything, my present café is a little bit too white and bright and hipster-aspirational. There used to be one nearby that almost perfectly embodied my ideal of shabbiness and decay: but then it exceeded it, lost all its remaining clients, and closed.

So now I'm ensconced among coders and bike messengers and new mothers venturing out to meet their friends with tiny, tiny babies in slings. If I were a better human being, I expect I would be tempted to eavesdrop, but luckily my solipsism is great enough that I can treat the talk as a bath of lovely white noise, in which (I don't know why) I can usually find the thread of whatever I am thinking about. 400 or 500 words is an OK day, 700 or 800 words is a good day, and anything over 1,000 words is an astonishing, greased-lightning, festal superfluke of a day.

Francis Spufford's first novel Golden Hill won the 2016 Costa Prize for a debut novel.

ADAM NICOLSON

I don't have many fixed habits except this — read anything relevant for a long time, maybe for 18 months, hungrily, anywhere it can be found; make notes, most of them on the pages of the books I am reading, and few of which get looked at again; keep a dictaphone in the car for fugitive phrases; then write the thing, very fast, 2,000 or 3,000 words a day every day for a couple of months, then stop and show it to someone. It is undoubtedly in bad shape. Susan Watt, who was my editor for many years, usually said at this stage, 'I think you'd better take another year.' A few months later, by which time a viable structure will hopefully have made itself clear, I write it again, fast enough, quarry-ing the first version, dumping the rubbish. This is best done alone in a very quiet place, with an excellent hot water system, as a bath is the only place to untangle the knots. Never more than four baths a day. Meanwhile: love the reader.

Adam Nicolson's The Seabird's Cry: The Life and Loves of Puffins, Gannets and Other Ocean Voyagers is available now.

MICHAEL MOORCOCK

I learned to write professionally by working for IPC comics and magazines. You were trained to make every element of the story (continuity, picture, speech balloons, characters etc) drive the plot and reveal the elements in properly paced scenes. No deus ex machina allowed. Introduction. Development. Resolution. Every manuscript I produced in my early days had exactly the same number of pages. I created a series of formulas which proved useful in writing the fantasy novels I produced in my late teens and twenties. Because I was a very fast typist, I could produce a novel in three days. Knowing precisely what element is needed as you go helps considerably.

I'd get up, make the wife a cuppa, get the kids to school, start work and have an hour off for lunch, finishing around 6 p.m. — 15,000 words a day. However, as my literary skills and ambitions grew, I became a prisoner of those formulas, knowing too many narrative tricks; so I had to rid myself of conventions I had created. I developed what I hoped was a different structure for every novel or novel sequence.

Mother London was like a wheel and the Pyat sequence essentially linear. I had written Gloriana as a simple allegory divided into four parts conforming to the seasons and offering a kind of argument to Spenser. By the time I wrote my War Amongst the Angels books, I was using a consciously musical structure and making them seem as loose and lyrical as possible. With every book I set the goals higher and made them more difficult, believing that a certain tension is added to a story which means it doesn't get stale to the reader.

I'm slower these days and have no kids to consider but knowing what elements I need for structure still helps me work pretty quickly, though I now take three years rather than three days to finish a book.

Michael Moorcock's Legends of the Multiverse is published by Hollywood Comics.

GARY SHTEYNGART

I write in bed next to a coffee machine.

Gary Shteyngart's Super Sad True Love Story won the 2010 Salon Book Award.

Sign up to the Weekly Highlights email

The best of the current issue – delivered straight to your inbox, every Thursday


Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

意大利文版《波德莱尔》导言

意大利文版《波德莱尔》导言

阿甘本

译者按:本文是阿甘本2012年为意大利文版《波德莱尔:发达资本主义时代的抒情诗人》所撰写的前言。

 

意大利文版《波德莱尔》
 

阿甘本为意大利文版《波德莱尔》撰写的导言
瓦尔特·本雅明的《波德莱尔:发达资本主义时代的抒情诗人》是一本很特别的书,不仅是因为他那非比寻常的形式,而且也因为它那带有冒险风格的历史故事,或者毋宁说,一种前历史,至少对我来说,这个前历史与印刷文献形式的存在密不可分。

1981年,那时我在巴黎,在那里寻找一些著名文献的踪迹,按照丽萨·费特科(Lisa Fittko)的说法——就是这个女人,帮助本雅明从被纳粹占领的法国逃亡到西班牙,最终本雅明在那里终结了自己的生命——本雅明将这本文献收藏在他的一个黑色皮套的文件夹里。

因此,我翻阅了全部乔治·巴塔耶的通信集,那时,这些通信集还收藏在法国国家图书馆的手稿部里。想象一下,当我发现了一封巴塔耶写给让·布鲁诺(Jean Bruno,当时图书馆的一名图书管理员)的信件,在信中,巴塔耶叮嘱布鲁诺要好生照看这些本雅明托付给他的非同一般的手稿时,我当时是多么的震惊和惊喜。顺着这封信读下去,布鲁诺做了一个批注:"这些手稿现在被收藏在B.N.柜"。信的日期与批注的日期不同,但两个日期都晚于1947年,也就是巴塔耶将这些手稿的所有权交付给了皮耶尔·米萨克(Pierre Missac),而后者将这些手稿交给了阿多诺。

我迅速冲到手稿室的管理员那里,并问她是否了解这些手稿在哪里。她断然否定了图书馆收藏过任何本雅明的手稿,但面对这样一个批注的证据,他同意打电话给布鲁诺,那时布鲁诺已经退休了。布鲁诺不太记得这些手稿的情况,但他十分确定,如果他批注过手稿在图书馆,那么这必定确凿无疑。

随后,图书管理员开始寻找部分手稿的工作,一个月之后,我收到了她一条简短的来信,信中告诉我手稿找到了,我可以过去了解一下。我被告知,这些手稿的确保存在图书馆,但巴塔耶的遗孀并未捐献出来,而图书馆不会为没有所有权的手稿编目。我被带进一个房间,那里有一个木制的柜子,收藏着这些保存的手稿,其中还囊括一些其他重要作者的手稿,或许这些手稿都有待编目。

无论如何,我从图书管理员那里收到了五封黄皮纸信封包裹着的本雅明的手稿(其中一些是打印稿,但其中绝大部分是我相当熟悉的手写字体的稿件)并非毫无感觉。这不是我第一次对发现本雅明的手稿感到如痴如醉。当我们研究一个作者并沉浸在他的思想、他的著作、他的生命中时,会发生某种很奇怪的现象,这种现象有点像是着了魔法,但我相信这种魔法可以归结为吉奥达诺·布鲁诺(Giordano Bruno)所说的"自然魔法",而他认为自然魔法是一种特殊的物质科学。

我的意思是说,如果你真的认同一位作者的精神,用文献学的热情去思考和研究他的作品,他的字眼,如果,正如在我这里,你多次到达他生活过的和他与其他人交谈过的地方,所以,如果你与他发生接触,也就是说,接触到这些材料,发生了某种预想不到的交流(correspondence, 在隐微教诲的意义上,correspondence已经出现在波德莱尔那里,本雅明很小心谨慎地评注了波德莱尔的谈correpondence的诗)。这种交流早些年出现在我在罗马的时期,那时,我从家里(我家那时住在鲜花广场(Campo dei Fiori))发现了足足300英尺厚的材料,我家的房子是赫伯特·布鲁门塔尔·贝尔莫尔(Herbert BlumenthalBelmore)住过的房子,他是青年本雅明在1914年到1916年柏林期间最要好的朋友之一。本雅明后来与他割席断交,但他保存了一大批本雅明的信件和手稿,他现在把这些手稿移交给我,现在我仍然拥有着这些手稿。最好玩的事情是,当他向我展示这些他精心保存的手稿时,他也同时向我承认,他很讨厌这位作者,他与本雅明已经六十年没有见面了,而他不知道本雅明已经去世四十年了。就好像波德莱尔之前非常熟悉后来突然绝交的一位对手一样,在感情上伤害了他,因爱成恨。

好吧,回来谈谈巴黎手稿。发现这些手稿非常重要,因为这些手稿让我们看到了本雅明一生最后三年(即1937年到1940年)里的著作的样貌。实际上,其中一个信封包括了一系列本雅明参考了论波德莱尔的书籍,在《拱廊计划》写作的间歇,本雅明绝大多数时间都在看这些书。

1937年3月,本雅明完成了他论福克斯(Fuchs)的手稿,这是给法兰克福社会研究所的下一本著作的三个可能的主题之一。第一个主题是论克拉格和荣格,试图澄清他关于《拱廊计划》的方法论问题,而他已经为此工作了若干年;第二个主题是"资产阶级历史编年和唯物主义历史编年之间的比较",与第一个主题很类似,目的是确定一个全书的概念框架,"最后,如果你们不同意我的这种研究方式……我会建议你们,直接进入主题,即直接看关于波德莱尔的部分"。本雅明的第一个主题遭到了拒绝,在社会研究所那里,意味着他与弗洛姆在精神分析问题上产生了激烈的争论,第二个主题,与"福克斯"部分所处理过的问题过于重合,而第三个主题引起了霍克海默的重视:"这就是长期以来所希望的从唯物主义角度来研究波德莱尔的文章。如果你能够首先写出你的著作的这一章的话,我将由衷地向你表示感谢。"

几个月之后,在克服了多次更换驻地的的困难之后,本雅明开始了他的写作。

在这个阶段,无论对于其客户(社会研究所)还是对于作者乱说,这个计划都是正在进展中的本雅明的著作《巴黎,十九世纪的首都》(在与一些信件和朋友交流时,这本书都被非正式地叫做《拱廊计划》)一书中的一个章节。被公开的作品,于1935年5月被提交给社会研究所的朋友(那时,他们还在日内瓦,名字叫"社会研究国际协会"(Société internationalede recherches sociales)),里面包括一个部分(即第五章,标题是"波德莱尔或巴黎街道")里面提到一些观念都是这一章原来的看法。然而,随着对材料研究和阐释的进展,本雅明意识到这个计划中的"章节"正越来越重要,且篇幅也越来越厚,而之前他部分预料到了这一点。1938年4月16日,在写给霍克海默的一封信中,他将这部作品分为三个部分,并用了三个词来表达这部作品。

 

结果是这篇文章篇幅越来越大,而《拱廊计划》的核心主题已经囊括在其中了。这既是由于主题的本质,也是由于本章节的事实,即它就是本书的一个中心章节,反而它需要首先写出来。我已经预料到这种趋势,在于泰迪(Teddie)的交谈中,我将这一章概括为本书的缩编版(Miniaturmmodell)。因为比起我的想法,桑·雷默(San Remo)已经更认可了这一点……波洛克(Pollock)先生要求就上面的问题与他联系,因为之前您所期望的是一篇普通篇幅的稿子。我知道的,但我想,如果我的研究可能成为相当大的篇幅的作品,那样可能会更好一些。我今天仍然希望在原则上不会提出根本性的反对意见,事实上,我真的不知道如何在三四十页的篇幅里怎样处理这个问题最基本的方面。我相反想用更大的篇幅——我指的是用一本书的篇幅——这等于是原来的三倍篇幅,在最低层次上相当于原来的两倍GB, 6:64-65

 

必须要总结一下,本雅明在这里将《波德莱尔》一书定性为"缩编版"的状况。他确定了部分与整体之间的悖论式关系,其中如果整体包含自身,也就是说,套层结构(en abîme),则部分倾向于与整体结合,充当一个腐蚀性的因素,渐渐地掏空了这部广泛性的著作。再说一遍,在一封7月9日写给肖勒姆的信中,那时本雅明和布莱希特在丹麦,本雅明说他的著作是"《拱廊计划》更精准的版本,他将思想者的整本书和最后的研究都置于运动之中。"(GB, 6:131)。而几天之前,在写给波洛克的信中,他谈到他正在写的这本书是"《拱廊计划》的扩展版","这本书可以从视角上瞥见十九世纪的纵深。" (GB, 6:133)

一个月之后,本雅明已经重新组织了这本著作的材料和结构,他不得不承认,到现在为止,这本"缩编版"已经成为了自动生成的书,这本书逐渐自己囊括了他为《拱廊计划》准备的大部分材料和看法:

 

我不得不联系霍克海默先生,当这本书对我长期以来已经收集的各种材料进行重新考究的时候,霍克海默先生对《波德莱尔》一书的热情,已经变成了我对这本书的热情。我必须让我自己面对内在于这件事本身之中的必要工作,其结果是,很多东西根本不是我起初想象的那样……这本书不同于《拱廊计划》。然而,这本书不仅包含了很大一部分我为写作《拱廊计划》而准备的材料,而且也包含了后者大量的哲学性内容(GB, 6:158-159)。

 

8月3日,在一封信中,本雅明再次阐明了这本书的三个部分的结构,在他的批判实验室里,这本书不断增加的体量也在此被重新提及:

 

很明显,相对于《拱廊计划》的研究与反思,"波德莱尔"章必须单独拿出来考量……《拱廊计划》的基本范畴,即集中讨论了商品拜物教的特征,则完全在"波德莱尔"章得到了体现。尽管我很想限制它,但这部分的进展超出了我研究限定的范围GB, 6:149

 

9月28日,在写给霍克海默的信中(信里还给出了这本书最后一部分的内容,与想象的三个部分的第二部分相对应,其标题是"波德莱尔笔下的第二帝国时期的巴黎"(Das Paris des SecondEmpire bei Baudelaire)),我们可以更清楚地看到这个自动推进的章节,同时还有它与《拱廊计划》之间的关系:

 

我想以明晰的方式,让本书呈现出《拱廊计划》中的一些最关键的哲学要素。如果在这个原始计划之外,还有一个可以见到的主题的话,毫无疑问,这个主题就是波德莱尔。最终,《拱廊计划》的主要材料和构成要素已经自动地围绕着这个主题而推进了GB, 6:162

 

通过这种方式,波德莱尔章实际上在原则上消解了关于巴黎的书的整个结构,本雅明也在如下文字中暗示了这个事实:"我将要展开《拱廊计划》的波德莱尔章,而为《拱廊计划》的另外两个章节也在准备中,即论格兰维尔(Grandville)的章节和论奥斯曼(Haussmann)的章节" (GB, 6:163)。

社会研究所不太喜欢这个部分的研究,而在本雅明与阿多诺密集通信之后,开启了这本著作的新的阶段。尽管感到不舒服("我在与世隔绝的状态下生活和工作,这种隔绝状态产生了一种异常的依赖,即依赖于有人能喜欢我所做的事情"GB, 6:217),但本雅明直接策划了对研究的第二章的修订版("游荡"( Flâneur)),并按照新的范畴重新整理了材料。626日,在给格雷太尔·阿多诺(GretelAdorno)的一封信中,他意识到,在整个生产中,新稿子意味着进一步强化了《波德莱尔》的重要性:"我认为之前从来没有一篇稿子会确定有这样一个消逝点,在这个点上(正如现在它对我来说),从一个分叉点出来的所有我的思考都和谐一致了。"GB, 6:308

新稿子(与此前稿子的第二章相对应,而新稿子覆盖了全书的第二章的核心部分)终于在1939年的7月底完成,这一次,远在纽约的朋友表示了热忱的欢迎。现在,这本书比《拱廊计划》更加贴近本雅明理论工作的中心,而1940年的前几个月里撰写完成的《历史概念论纲》似乎证明了这一点,在其作者看来,这本书不是自动推进的文章,而毋宁是"波德莱尔第二次研究的理论中枢" (GB, 6:308),"在某种程度上,这些文本具有实验性质",在一个月之后在他写给格雷太尔·阿多诺的信中写道,"这些文本不仅从方法论角度起到了为继续《波德莱尔》的准备的作用。"GB, 6:436

从论巴黎艺术的"缩微版"开始,《波德莱尔》一书已经具有了"十九世纪原历史"计划的地位——起初这个地位是赋予《拱廊计划》的——这个计划也得到最先进的实现,在这本书里,凝聚着本雅明思想的所有主旨。在1940年5月7日的一封信中,本雅明最后一次提到这本书,几周前,他先从巴黎飞往卢尔德(Lourdes)和马赛,之后偷渡穿过法国-西班牙边界,最后于1940年9月26日死在了波尔特沃(PortBou)。

《拱廊计划》——或者说,本雅明收集的各类卡片和材料,这些东西构成了这本书的文献基础(因为在今天,我们知道编辑给出的《拱廊计划》一书就是本雅明的卡片索引)——由罗尔夫·提德曼(Rolf Tiedemann)于1982年公开出版了,成为了《本雅明文集》(GesammeltSchriften)第五卷。而关于波德莱尔的著作的两个部分已经成稿,反而放在了《本雅明文集》的第一卷里,即三个部分的第二部分的第一稿(《波德莱尔笔下的第二帝国时期的巴黎》)以及同一个部分的第二稿(《论波德莱尔的几个问题》(Übereinige Motive bei Baudelaire),这些已经加上了《中央公园》(Zentralpark)笔记,更多附加的不同性质的材料出版在第一卷的"评注"(Anmerkungen)中。重写这样一本书,以及让这个版本的《拱廊计划》登上舞台,这些东西都没有可能出现了。

随着1981年在法国国家图书馆发现的这些材料,情况瞬间扭转。其中的一个信封(被发现者编号为第五封)包含了一堆卡片和笔记,这些卡片和笔记都以不同方式指向了关于波德莱尔的著作,(结合在他们帮助下找到的一些手稿一起看)不仅可以让我们以最接近的方式来重构这本书,而且也展现了一些意想不到的东西,既有整个书的缘起和进展,还有在更一般意义上本雅明这本生前最后的著作的整个研究方法。提德曼毫无疑问是本雅明手稿的最大权威,在出版《本雅明文集》的巴黎手稿选辑时,写到:"如果有朝一日编辑能得到这些手稿,或许有可能在这里(即对于论波德莱尔这本书)……至少可以弄出本雅明的考察的历史评笺本,即便那时可以打破现在的文集版的编辑结构。"(GS,7.2:736)。

现在这本书(中译注:阿甘本指的是意大利文版的本雅明的《波德莱尔》)给出的并不是这样一本历史评笺本(在翻译上,我们完全无法想象弄出这样的版本),而是一个历史溯源版,在今天可能获得的文献基础上,可以让我们在本雅明写作的不同阶段,跟随着这本"创作中"的稿子大量意料之外的相当丰富的材料,以及关系本书缘起和发展的非常清楚的层次,在某种意义上,这构成了对本雅明晚期创作的总结。

我强调"创作中"这个表达,不仅是因为这本书是一种相当罕见的情况,即我们可以成功看到和展现出著作的最初的梗概和重新安排卡片摘录,到最后成书的整个发生的过程。我之所以强调这一点,还因为这本书可以让我们用一种十分典型的方式反思了"创作中"意味着什么——即提出这样的问题:创作中的著作走向何方?或者换个问法,一本未完成的著作是什么著作,以及它与完成了的著作的区别是什么?

我们十分熟悉在这两个概念之间做出清晰的区分,当然,普通的编辑践行着这个区分,让这个区分看似是自明的区分。但事情并不这么简单。有些著作自身就展现为未完成的著作,但是作者依然就像这样出版著作。典型的例子是帕索里尼的《石油》(Petrolio),当然,区分完成的著作和未完成的著作并不容易。如果我们从时间上回溯一下,我们经常会遇到一些著作,不仅仅是文学著作,可以说,是被其他作者完成的(看一下《玫瑰传奇》(Romande la rose)是一个作者开的头,即纪尧姆·德洛里斯(Guillaumede Lorris),但又是另一个作者完成的,即让·德·莫恩(Jeande Meun)完成,贝利尼的名画《诸神的午餐》(Festinodegli)最后是由提香完成的——但这里"完成"一词意思是什么?)

贝利尼和提香共同完成的名作《诸神的午餐》


正如区分遗作中的完成与未完成的著作遇到的困难一样,本雅明绝大多数著作都属于这种类型。在这里,做出判定的是出版社,而他们的判定未必依据文献学标准。

事实上,所有的著作都是创作中的著作,在途中的著作:但是通往何处?如果认为著作走向完成的形式,就有点太想当然了。要么达到完成,要么在中途迷失,仿佛道路必然在中途和终点之间。当某些作品——或许所有带有一定分量的作品——都注定是在途中的作品,在指向自身的途中,指向自身并不意味着走向终点,事实上,它多次排斥了终点。正如亚里士多德谈自然时说,所有的工作都是一条道路(hodos),一条指向自己的道路。

在这个意义上,作品会不停地走在这条通往自身的道路上:碰巧,出于各种各样的理由,在某个时刻,作者放弃了工作,如贾科梅蒂(Giacometti)谈他的画作一样。这种放弃并不一定与那些被正当地视为完成的作品完全一致——即便形容词"未完成的"似乎并不足以解释这两种情况。

在这里,我请你们注意一个特别的情况,这个情况说明,甚至文本批评和文献学——即所谓的轶闻学,与编辑文本相关联——正在逐步意识到这个真相。你们知道,在文献学传统中,文献学家的贡献在于考察原稿或现存作品的版本,目的是构成一个版本,即评笺本,而这个本子被视为尽可能最权威的版本。所以在五十年代,贝斯内(Beissner)编辑的荷尔德林圣歌集,成为了一个独一无二的评笺版本,在这个本子里,原稿展现了同一首圣歌的若干个版本。但几十年之后,在萨特勒(Sattler)编辑的本子中,圣歌不再是一首圣歌,而是三首、五首、甚至六首圣歌,这些圣歌不再视为是同一圣歌的若干版本或变体,而是各自独立成诗的诗歌,相对于这些诗歌,不再去追问,这首诗是完成了,还是未完成。

这或许对应了我们时代里正在发生的作品概念的危机,在这场危机中,当代艺术扮演了十分重要的角色,对于其方式,不好专门作出回应。但是,这并非让这个当然至关重要问题向前走。对我来说,最关键的毋宁是向你标示出这个版本的特殊性,或许这个版本第一次以这样的精确度,跟随着作品走向自身。

如果谈及本雅明,这些情况会更为宝贵,他经常在一些无关紧要的细节里与朋友们一起聊起他作品的理论前设,与之相反,他似乎更喜欢将他实质性的创作过程隐藏起来,真实创作,在一些批评者和他的朋友看来,会伤害到他隐微教诲的传奇色彩。或许正是由于这些材料让我们可以用极其清晰的方式了解这本关于波德莱尔的著作缘起和发展的各个阶段,所以打破了这个神话,相反,在这本书的发展过程中,展现了一种本雅明所理解的唯物主义写作的模式,在这样的模式中,不仅理论阐明了创作的物质过程,而且后者也将一束新的光线射向了理论。

本雅明很早就在他著作的文献收集和作品架构上做出了区分。埃斯帕纳(Espagne)和维尔内(Werner)要我们注意这个区分,他们正确地看到,这些东西不能立即为"作品在时间顺序上的两个阶段的区分,从时间顺序上来看,这两个部分是平行的"。事实是,本雅明十分完美地理解了马克思在研究方法(Forschungsweise)和写作方式(Darstellungsweise)之间的区分,而他在《拱廊计划》的第N部分解释了这个区分:

 

研究必须适应于特殊的材料,必须分析它们不同的发展形式(Entwicklungsformen),并回溯到内在线索(inneresBand)。只有在这个作品完成之后,才能以恰当的方式来再现这个真实的运动。如果这成功了,如果材料的生命(das Leben des Stoffs)现在将自己展现为一种理想的反思,那么看起来我们就不得不去面对这样一个先天的架构。(GS,5.1:581)

 

 

为了正确分析智力劳动的过程,我们要好好分析这段话:研究所搜集的材料,并不是某种静态的东西,而有生命的物质,它自身中已经包含了作品发展的形式和内在线索。研究的任务就是要揭示这些形式与线索,让材料的生命最后能以先天架构的形式显现出来。在1935年10月9日写给格雷太尔·阿多诺的一封信中,本雅明写到,他已经将自己推至"一个逐步完成整个作品架构的关键点上,也就是说,那些文献编录所切分开来的关键点" (GB, 6:170-171),他用画图的方式表达了这个区分,与此同时,他也直接解释了文献编录和作品结构,研究模式和写作模式。从文献编录和写作架构的关系来说,这里出现的某种东西很类似于本雅明遭遇在过去与当下之间的"可认识的现在"时描述的东西(Jetzt derErkennbarkeit,这是本雅明最隐秘的概念之一,他自己也承认,"这是按隐微教诲的方式弄出来的概念"(GB, 6:171),但从这个角度来看,这个概念变得完全清晰可见了):

 

图像的历史索引事实上意味着,它们不仅仅属于某个确定时代,而且首先只能在某个确定时代里,才能解读它们。准确来说,让它们"可以理解"的东西正是其中一个确定的批评点。所有的当下都是有与之同时代的图像所确定的:每一个"现在"(Jetzt)都是一个确定的可认识的"现在"。在这个"现在"之中,真理承载着时间,直至最终湮灭……并不是过去将光线投向当下,或者当下将光线投向过去,而是图像就是这样,在图像中,曾经的存在在一道闪电中,与星丛之中的"现在"结合起来。换句话说,图像就是一个静止点上的辩证法(GS, 5.1:577-578)。

 

比起以往任何时候来说,在这种情况下,对本雅明具体创作过程的分析,让我们可以澄清他的认识论的基本范畴:正如建构性要素并不是先天性地施加在文献收集材料之上,而是从其自身的内在运动中崛起的,这个运动在不同阶段上逐渐展开,直至最终成稿,因此,当代性(Jetztzeit)并非在时间上只能从当下来界定的东西,它却是一种星丛,在星丛中,在一道闪电中,它与"现在"结合起来,与一个确定的历史事实结合起来,而星丛被两极化为前历史和后历史(参看GS, 5.1:69; N7a,1)。

一个偶然事件或许是历史-哲学文学史上的一个独一无二的事件(当然,这个事件就在本雅明的作品中),由于巴黎手稿(主要是《单目》和《蓝纸稿》的发现,分别对应于意大利文版的《波德莱尔》的2.7和3.3)的发现,让其成为可能,在非常接近的层次上,跟随着它的"内在运动",借助这种方式,在逐渐成稿的过程中,文献编录与"逐步完善"的作品结构产生了交集。

在有了作者的卡片索引(在这里,就是论巴黎的著作的"材料注释"部分)和由它而产生的作品(或者毋宁说,部分作品)之外,在这个奇迹的带动下,我们可以看到卡片索引是面向成稿来变动和安排自身的,让其推进的内在线索昭然若揭。材料的变动在理论上并非中立的,而是伴随着(我们完没有可能判定,在何种程度上,理论反思可以让卡片索引发生变化,或者相反,材料的生命就是理论最隐秘的宝藏)必不可少的哲学方法论部分的创作(其中,《中央公园》就是最明显的例子,在文本的秩序和布局上,这些哲学方法论的部分就像症候一样,总是交织着元文本注解)。

在古典修辞学那里,介于发现(inventio,今天,我们会说发现主题及其文献编录)和说出(elocutio,对应于写作或成稿)之间,即布局(dispositio),西塞罗将其界定为"按顺序来布置所发现的东西"(rerum iventarum inordinem distributio),这样,布局在本雅明创作进程中出现在前景位置上,明显对立于现代作者赋予优先地位的写作阶段,其特征非常怪异,我们可以正确地称之为"辩证式本雅明布局"。

这也让我们可以从一个恰当的角度来界定"文学蒙太奇",本雅明曾将其作为其作品最恰当的方法(GS, 5.1:574)。正如阿多诺强调说,问题并不在于"仅仅借助于材料的那令人震惊的蒙太奇拼贴(schokhafte Montage)来产生意义",也不在于写一本"只有引文构成的书"。,而是在于——通过写作过程中的中心布局——让蕴含在文献学材料中的发展形式和内在线索,仅仅通过其架构来引导它们走向成稿。从这一点来看,正如提德曼所说,波德莱尔一书肯定让我们认为,"(《拱廊计划》)本雅明并未成稿,但看起来好像完稿了。"(GS,5.2:1073)

在更一般的意义上,关于《波德莱尔》第一稿在信件往来时,本雅明与阿多诺在方法论上的争论,再一次在精神上清楚地说明了(正如这个版本允许我们这样来做)本雅明的写作方法和隐含在写作中的架构性的概念。为了反对他的朋友指责他忘记从理论上来思考问题,于是,这本书陷入了"糟糕透顶的纯粹事实的罗列"(GS,1.3:1098)。本雅明坚持认为这是必要的,而这就是暗含在其架构下的"方法论上的谨慎":

 

我的意思是说,我们并不是必须去穿戴上隐微教诲的蜡制的翅膀,而是唯有去探索仅仅暗藏在架构之中的强有力的源泉时,我们这种大胆的飞翔才有可能获得成功。在架构上需要在本书的第二部分安排一些在本质上不同于文献学材料的东西。因此,与其说这是一种"苦行式的戒律",不如说这是方法论上的谨慎……当你说这是"糟糕透顶的纯粹事实的罗列"时,你用这种方式概括出来是的真正文献学的态度。必须采用这样的方式,不仅是因为我喜欢这样的结果,而且也就是这样……所展现的有限的事实,与文献学紧密相关,并对研究者施了魔咒,这些有限事实在某个点上消失了,即这些对象都是在一个历史视角下被建构起来的。这个架构的飞行线汇集在他们自己的历史经验当中。这个对象被建构为一个单子。在这个单子这里,正如文本上的证据一样,在僵化的神话中一直沉寂着,而此刻开始具有了生命活力。(GS, 1.3:1103-1104)

 

在这里需要从字面上来理解他对莱布尼茨的单子论的参照。单子没有窗户,"如有窗户,一切东西都可以进入到单子里,或从单子里逃出去",这意味着单子的变化"源自于内在原则"。另一方面,因为单子的本质是"代表性"的,每一个单子,都连同整个宇宙一起,代表着"分配给它的特殊的物体"。这个文献的哲学证据表明在架构上,它是一个单子,那么这意味着为了可以被解释,它并不需要任何理论的中介性影响,相反,唯有当文献编录和创作架构有所交织,并走向结束的时候,那么作品才能"被解释所侵入,几乎等于是说被解释所震动"(GS, 1.3:1104)。

在本雅明的方法中,复活了中世纪的教义,在这些教义里,材料已经在自身中包含了形式,它已经以"初始"状态和潜在状态包含了形式,认识就是揭示(eductio)隐含(inditae)在这些材料中的形式。对阿多诺来说,直到最后,其中都包含着某种非辩证的残余物,而这种残余物反而是极其深刻的架构,它与材料中的"流体形式"(forma fluens,中世纪的说法)紧密相关。然而,正如中世纪神学家们所说,在架构上不断生成的形式-材料所指向的消失点,并不是神的智慧,而是"我们自己的历史经验"。

实际上也就是说,这里我们看到了作为神话实践的文献学概念,而这就是青年本雅明与肖勒姆所讨论的问题。正如在所有的神话经验中,文献学家不得不拉低自己的身体和灵魂,屈就于文献、档案和注解,誊写版和各种版本当中那些含混和迷雾重重的研究。但是这种实践的风险在于,会经常迷失自己的道路,但它与材料有着亲密的接触,在材料中,形式以神圣启示的形式出现,正如一位中世纪哲学家令人震惊的定理(由于这个定义,这位哲学家被当做异端)中所说,"心灵、上帝和材料是同一回事"(mens, Deus, et Yleidem sunt)。

我想得出结论——但事实上我们永远不可能得出结论,我们会放弃掉结论,好比贾科梅蒂放弃了自己的画作一样——在这个过程中,最具有风险的,但也最富有生命活力的,去重构出这部著作——像所有"创作中"的作品一样——让其继续永无止境地延续下去。

我指出了一个令人惊奇的事实,即重构本书的缘起和进展,必须与描绘出本雅明心目中的波德莱尔的诗歌形象携手并进——这样,所揭示的正是主题材料与让书成形的方式之间难分彼此。似乎是该书的生成过程——详细地展现了本书的架构的程式,我们在其中可以看到,书稿的形式正是来自于研究材料的蒙太奇拼贴(montaggio)——仿佛重述和摹仿了波德莱尔在与他的时代(发达资本主义时代)的决斗中的策略。

对于一种震惊的经验——按照本雅明的说法,这种震惊的经验是波德莱尔诗歌的中心——在本雅明那里,对应的正是阿多诺或许很不恰当地称为材料的"令人震惊的蒙太奇"的东西,对于氛围(aura)消逝和恢复的诗性经验来说,在书中,它对应于研究者的一瞥,当他观看他耐心细致搜集的碎片时,他同时感到这些东西也观看着他,并成功地赋予这些碎片一种能力,即它们会返还他的一瞥——你们知道,这就是本雅明在第一次出版这本重要的碎片时,对氛围给出的定义。

本雅明——在国家图书馆的阅览室里,感受到他自己将这些书页发出的沙沙声,与画在穹顶拱门上的或者在巴黎街头闲逛中的树叶发出的声音混淆了,他试图去解码这个时代的暗号——本雅明面临着与波德莱尔与他的时代同样致命的搏斗。

我相信进入到本书迷宫中的读者——如果我真的说明这本书是"过程中"的作品,即在走向自己的途中的作品,它是活的作品,带有生命悸动的作品——最终会遇到一个怪异的怪兽:米诺陶(Minotaur),这个怪兽一半波德莱尔,一半本雅明,一半诗人,一半批评家。这肯定是最为神奇的经历——杂合的怪兽最终完美地对应于读者你们手中这本书的架构。这本书也是材料与形式、研究与成稿、阅读与写作的杂合体。

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Friday, August 11, 2017

On the Touchy Subject of Class in America 保罗‧福塞尔《格调》,美国阶级,中产

On the Touchy Subject of Class in America


By DWIGHT GARNER JULY 27, 2017

CreditPatricia Wall/The New York Times
CLASS
A Guide Through the American Status System
By Paul Fussell
202 pages. Touchstone Books. $16.

The historian and social critic Paul Fussell (1924-2012) wrote so many brisk and pleasurable books, of so many sorts, that singling out one for the purposes of this column is a headache-making task. I'm a Fussell addict. I know others. We addicts like to fight about where this man was most effective.

His most thorough critical success was with "The Great War and Modern Memory" (1975), a war book like few others. It was not just about the trenches but also about irony, poetry and wit. You might argue as vigorously for his essay collections, "Thank God for the Atom Bomb" (1988) and "The Boy Scout Handbook and Other Observations" (1982), in which he radiated curmudgeonly intelligence about everything from nude beaches and the Indianapolis 500 to George Orwell's radical honesty.

But then I've forgotten "The Anti-Egotist" (1994), his pint-size biography of Kingsley Amis, and "Abroad: British Literary Traveling Between the Wars" (1979). Let's not forget his autobiography, "Doing Battle: The Making of a Skeptic" (1996). It spoke of, among other things, his service in the 103rd Infantry Division during World War II, for which he was awarded a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.

Fussell was an enemy of jargon and woolly-headedness of every variety. To read him is to receive a master class in slashing rhetoric. Always serious, he was rarely solemn. His guff detector was as strong as Mark Twain's or H. L. Mencken's.

The Fussell book that detonates most forcefully, in my mind, at any rate, has always been "Class: A Guide Through the American Status System" (1983). There are few books like it in this country's literature.

Each year there are many volumes, most of them dead to the touch, about social class in America. The authors pace professorially around their subject, dribbling on statistics and polling data. Fussell, on the other hand, plunged into the topic as if he were carving a turkey.

"Since we have them," he remarked about social classes, "why not know as much as we can about them? The subject may be touchy, but it need not be murky forever."

"Class" is not for the easily offended. Fussell intends to draw blood, and does. Reading this book — especially if, like me, you grew up middle-class and never gave the matter much thought — is like getting one of those massages that pulls each of your bones apart before snapping it back onto your torso.

For the tyro reader, Fussell dispatches early the notion that class has much to do with how much money you have. Those who've paid any attention "perceive that taste, values, ideas, style and behavior are indispensable criteria of class, regardless of money or occupation." Donald J. Trump is an instructive specimen in this regard.

Fussell draws thick dividing lines before drawing thin ones. He suggests, for example, that "you could probably draw a trustworthy class line based wholly on the amount of sugar consumed by a family, making allowances for the number of children in the household."

A prickly observer of language, he notes that "an important class divide falls between those who feel veneration before the term executive and those who feel they want to throw up."

His book investigates how Americans talk, how we decorate our homes, how we dress, how we read. This book is nearly 35 years old, and some of its examples are out of date. It is less and less true, for example, that "top-class food resembles British, being bland and mushy, with little taste and no chances taken."

He investigates the social language of flowers. He speaks of what he calls "the college swindle": the notion that a degree from a third-rate university will give you much of an advantage in terms of income or anything else.

If you are not secure in your fondness for professional sports, back away from Fussell now. "The World Series and the Super Bowl give every man his opportunity to perform as a learned bore, to play for the moment the impressive barroom pedant, to imitate for a brief season the superior classes identified by their practice of weighty utterance and informed opinion."

One of his fundamental points is how rigid, though invisible, America's caste system is. "We're pretty well stuck for life," he writes, "in the class we're raised in."

More depressing is his sense of how difficult it is for classes to genuinely combine. Speaking about two people, one who regularly uses double negatives, and one who doesn't, he writes: "The two can respect each other, but they can never be pals. They belong to different classes, and if they attempt to mix, they will inevitably regard each other as quaint and not quite human." I don't fully agree with that observation, but to dismiss it entirely would be folly.

The line between wit and cruelty is always a fine one, and that's especially true in "Class." But it's not an insensitive book. Sensitivity is, in fact, among its themes.

In one of his final chapters, Fussell posits a way out of the class cages he has so ruthlessly described. You can escape them by becoming what he calls an "X person." He writes: "You earn X-personhood by a strenuous effort of discovery in which curiosity and originality are indispensable."

I know readers who have thrown this book across a room, thus illustrating the essential truth of one of Fussell's contentions: "If you find an American who feels entirely class-secure, stuff and exhibit him. He's a rare specimen."

American Beauties is a column by Dwight Garner, appearing every other week, about undersung American books of the past 75 years. Follow Dwight Garner on Twitter: @DwightGarner

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Naked Ladies and Weird, Invisible Men


Naked Ladies and Weird, Invisible Men

What Carina Chocano Learned from her Grandfather's Playboy Collection

I learned about sex from Where Did I Come From? but I learned about sexiness from my grandfather's Playboys and Bugs Bunny in drag. I gathered, from the book, that sex was an awkward thing that happened when a lumpy man was feeling "very loving" toward a lumpy lady and wanted to "get as close to her as possible." From Playboy, I learned that sexiness was naked ladies and weird, invisible men.

My grandparents' house was built in the mid-1950s and looked like the set of a Pink Panther movie. The den, in particular, showcased the kind of rakish, cosmopolitan masculinity that was cool at the time. Perhaps there was a time when my grandfather hosted regular poker games with other guayabera-wearing, Brylcreemed, sun-damaged men in white socks with sandals gathered around the green-felted card table, but by the time I came along, he was down to one. Tío César was a retired navy admiral whose gentle mien, bulbous nose, and severe vision impairment recalled a beatific Mr. Magoo. Another interesting thing about him was that he had lost his vocal cords to cancer and relearned to speak by gulping down air and burping out words. (It's called esophageal speech. He taught us to do it.) By the time I came along, the den was not a social space so much as a shrine to the persona my grandfather had created for himself, with Playboy as his guide.

My grandfather collected Playboy magazines. I don't mean he saved every issue; I mean he saved every issue, had them bound by the dozen into leather-bound annuals with gold-embossed spines, and arrayed them on a low shelf behind the poker table like a set of handsome encyclopedias. They imparted a pervy yet learned vibe to the room that offset the lowbrow ribaldry of the framed cartoons by the mirror-backed bar, featuring scenes of sexy nurses and sexy secretaries being sexually harassed. There was also—my former favorite—a cartoon of a man flushing himself down the toilet over a caption that read, "Goodbye, cruel world." The nurses and doctors in the framed cartoons in my grandfather's den looked like creatures from two different planets (Toad Mars and Bimbo Venus), but it was the pink, chubby, bald, and frizzy-haired illustrated couple in Where Did I Come From?, slotted together like a hippie yinyang with little red hearts floating up from their naked embrace, that struck us kids as strange and unfamiliar; a little too fraternally similar for comfort.

"The Playboy collection was a museum of girls, a taxonomy of girls. The pictures fascinated me and filled me with ontological terror at the same time."

This is how, in elementary school, I came to be sentimental about my grandfather's nudie magazines. Ribbon pigtails (like mine!), had a strangely static and hermetic quality that made the girls' nakedness look somehow artificial. They made me think of the taxidermied animals at the natural-history museums in Chicago and New York. It was like they were specimens, more lifelike than alive. That they were stripped of their clothes didn't bother me as much as that they were stripped of all context. They were isolated and frozen in time. Even the outdoor shots seemed to be taken behind glass. The girls' accompanying biographical squibs only added to this impression, resembling the plaques next to museum dioramas detailing an extinct animal's name, geographic provenance, "statistics" (height, weight, bust, waist, and hip measurements), and dietary patterns and mating behaviors, or "turn-ons" and "turn-offs." The Playboy collection was a museum of girls, a taxonomy of girls. The pictures fascinated me and filled me with ontological terror at the same time. I knew, because everybody knew, that only girls were "sexy," that "sexiness" was girls—it was exclusively female. This confused me, so I kept going back to the magazines, trying to figure it out. It made me uncomfortable in ways I couldn't begin to express.

The models' aura of stuffed-bunny obliviousness, by the way, was precisely the vibe Playboy was going for. In 1967, Hugh Hefner told the Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci that he'd called the models Bunnies because the rabbit, the bunny, in America has a sexual meaning; and I chose it because it's a fresh animal, shy, vivacious, jumping—sexy. First it smells you, then it escapes, then it comes back, and you feel like caressing it, playing with it. A girl resembles a bunny. Joyful, joking. Consider the kind of girl we made popular: the Playmate of the Month. She is never sophisticated, a girl you cannot really have. She is a young, healthy, simple girl—the girl next door . . . We are not not interested in the mysterious, difficult woman, the femme fatale who wears elegant underwear, with lace, and she is sad, and somehow mentally filthy. The Playboy girl has no lace, no underwear, she is naked, well-washed with soap and water, and she is happy.

I didn't read this as a kid, of course, but I still think the message got across. Playboy's "idea of woman" was a naked fairy-tale princess: a young, dumb, defenseless, trusting, easily manipulated woodland creature. She gave herself entirely because she was too inexperienced to know any better. She was a fresh animal, well washed with soap and water. She could not learn, grow, or change. She could not really exist in a temporal sense. All she could do was to try to preserve and display herself. Experience made her difficult. It got her banished to her witchy cottage in the forest. She had to remain a dumb bunny, an unconscious body, frozen in time and preserved in amber, for as long as she could in order to survive. The "sexy lady" is the only kind of lady that openly exists in the sunshine of the symbolic realm. She is the only kind of lady that warrants being looked at, paid attention to, or acknowledged. In order to be listened to, a lady should be nice to look at. There should be no doubt as to her sexual desirability, but this will undermine her argument, no matter how sophisticated. We are not interested in sadness, sophistication, or experience. We secretly believe that female subjectivity is filth.

When you are a kid—when I was a kid, anyway—you believe in superlatives and data, and find a great deal of comfort in this orderly vision of the universe. So you set out to rank and rate and sort and classify everything you can. When I was in first and second grade, I thought that the Miss America, Miss World, and Miss Universe pageants were actual statistical rankings of the prettiest women in the country, the world, the universe. (I wasn't sure how Miss Universe could claim the title without competing against aliens from other planets, but I was willing to suspend my disbelief.) I understood that being pretty wasn't the most important thing, as no doubt some adult had dutifully informed me at some point, but it was obviously the only thing that anybody cared about where girls were concerned. You surmised this just by existing. Being the prettiest was the pinnacle of womanly achievement. It ranked you, if you were pretty enough, as the number one girl in the universe. Yet if prettiness made you visible, it also made you strangely invisible. It made you recede into an undifferentiated, standardized mass.

"Playboy's 'idea of woman' was a naked fairy-tale princess: a young, dumb, defenseless, trusting, easily manipulated woodland creature."

Before Hugh Hefner came along, porn was furtive and hidden. After Hefner, it was everywhere; mainstream, pop, classy, cool. Hefner considered that his big innovation was realizing that Playboy wasn't actual porn so much as lifestyle porn. He wasn't selling pictures of girls, he was selling a particular male identity via consumption of girls as consumer objects. This identity was similar in many ways to the identity being sold to ladies in ladies' magazines, only with naked ladies themselves as the expendable products whose constant consumption would bring happiness. This is why Hefner reportedly worried less about competitors like Penthouse and Hustler than he did about "lad mags" like Maxim and FHM.

For all their surface differences, the Playmates didn't suggest individuality so much as variety, an endless cornucopia of consumer choices. As a second-grader, I could fully grasp the orgiastic appeal of beholding something like this. The pleasure of positioning oneself in front of a new 64-color crayon set, complete with built-in sharpener, was impossible to overstate. Like casting a proprietary eye over the display at Baskin-Robbins, it was a heady feeling that quickly gave way to entitlement. I felt nothing short of outrage when the number of flavors fell short of the promised 31. That I always chose the same flavor anyway, and wore out the same-color crayons while barely touching some of the others, was not the point. The possibility of infinite choice was the point. The too-muchness was the point. Knowing the Burnt Sienna was there at your fingertips. Empowering you was the point.

Of course, looking at naked girls in Playboy didn't make me feel powerful. On the contrary, it made me feel like I was getting a glimpse into a parallel universe where I was at once invisible and excruciatingly visible, negated and exposed. There was no inverse equivalent. I was unaware that just around that time, an academic named Laura Mulvey was coining the phrase "the male gaze." That language would remain unavailable to me for another two decades. At the time, all I had to help me make sense of it were things like the Frog and Toad story "Dragons and Giants," the one where Toad gets separated from Frog and runs into a giant snake at the mouth of a dark cave, and the snake sees him and says, "Hello, lunch."

__________________________________

Excerpted from YOU PLAY THE GIRL: On Playboy Bunnies, Stepford Wives, Train Wrecks, & Other Mixed Messages by Carina Chocano to be published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt in August 2017. Copyright © 2017 by Carina Chocano. Used by permission.


Carina Chocano
Carina Chocano's work has appeared in The New York Times Magazine, The New York Times, New York, Elle, Vogue, Rolling Stone, The California Sunday Magazine, Bust, The Washington Post, Vulture, The Cut, GOOD magazine, Texas Monthly, Wired, The New Yorker, The New Republic, and many others. She has been a film and TV critic at The Los Angeles Times, Entertainment Weekly, and Salon.com. Her book You Play the Girl will be published by Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt in August 2017. She lives in Los Angeles.

Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Wednesday, August 9, 2017

LRB · Marina Warner · Back from the Underworld: The Liveliness of the Dead


Back from the Underworld

Marina Warner

  • BuyThe Work of the Dead: A Cultural History of Mortal Remains by Thomas Laqueur
    Princeton, 711 pp, £27.95, October 2015, ISBN 978 0 691 15778 8

The work of the dead used to be intercession. It was a mutual striving; if we, who were still alive, prayed for them, they would do what they could for us. Chantries were established – and generously funded – to keep the work going on a daily basis, their members singing at the behest of the dead, and praying to those who, purified in the fires of the afterlife, could now ask God and Mary to reprieve those still suffering for their sins, and help us ahead of time for ours. But when this eschatological perspective weakened, the activity of the dead didn't come to a stop, which was surprising: the Reformation and the Enlightenment combined to close down (almost) indulgences and remission of sins, but the liveliness of the dead in their claims on us and their presence in the world didn't dim.

Secularism, reason, scepticism don't bring disenchantment, Thomas Laqueur argues in this monumental study, the harvest of more than ten years' concentrated exploring of archives, tombstones, battlefields and furnace design. Laqueur principally scrutinises developments since around 1700, mostly in England, but he places them in a very longue durée (he likes the phrase 'deep time') and embeds modern inventions, such as the urban garden cemetery, the war memorial in situ, and the crematorium, in a far-reaching and widely geographical cultural history that ranges from the Towers of Silence of the Zoroastrians, where the loved one was left to be pecked clean by vultures, to the tragedy of Antigone, who disobeys the law when she cannot accept that her brother Polynices should suffer a similar fate on the plain outside Thebes.

The Work of the Dead is packed with information, surprises, unaccustomed lore and learning, and Laqueur shows throughout a sturdy curiosity, as he digs unflinchingly around and into his chosen topic (in this respect it follows on from his previous magnum opus on the history of masturbation). He adopts the Annales school's panoramic sweep, punctuated by boreholes giving microscopically detailed analyses of samples from the soil of social history: he discusses the shocking exclusion of Dissenters, Catholics, suicides and unbaptised babies from their local parish churchyard, and the long acrimonious wrangles and even riots that sometimes ensued when vicars tried to impose their rules of admission, and parishioners rejected them. He quotes in close-up from a heart-wrenching sequence of letters between a farmhand, Emily Chitticks, and her sweetheart, Private Will Martin; five of the 23 letters she wrote were returned, inscribed KILLED. In one, she told him: 'I have dreamt that you were back home with me dear and the most strange thing about them, you are always in civilian clothes when I dream of you & and I have never seen you in those dear … I hope that will come true.' When he was killed, in March 1917, she began the long struggle to find the whereabouts of his body. Though bits of news raised her hopes, he was declared missing along with thousands of others in the Battle of the Somme. She asked to be buried with the bundle of their letters.

Burial practices and ceremonies that seem immemorial to us now were new-fangled and strange not that long ago, it turns out: it is not known who proposed the tomb of the Unknown Warrior in Westminster Abbey, and many were doubtful about the prospect (not British enough, or Protestant). But the process went ahead, with much ritual: bags of bones from four unidentified victims of the battlefield were placed on a table; then, at midnight, a general wearing a blindfold picked one lot of remains; they were sent under escort across the Channel on a destroyer, and from Dover 'guarded as the most precious of relics until the ceremonies on the next day'. Not since Henry V's bones were brought back from France (after his body had been boiled to clean them) can there have been such a solemn translation. The Cenotaph in the Mall – which is empty – was dedicated the same day. Edwin Lutyens only provided a sketch, as he thought it was going to be temporary. No one had thought this idea would catch on either (again too foreign, too Catholic). But it did, resoundingly. The idea of honouring the Unknown Soldier recurred around the same time everywhere, Laqueur tells us. Such monuments express the hope that no one will be left out: Old Hamlet will not return to call out reproachfully 'Remember me'; there will be no 13th fairy to disrupt the peace and ask for vengeance.

Laqueur's scrupulous historical foraging also brings centre stage some extraordinary characters who, in the name of progress, hygiene, classical ideals and ancestral custom, flung themselves into long disputes that eventually led to current, commonly held tenets about the attentions fitting to a corpse. William Price, d.1893, was an arch druid in Wales, a surgeon, a Chartist, a vegetarian, a philoprogenetive advocate of free love, who called his child, born in his late years, Jesu Grist (sic). When the baby died, he tried to burn him on a pyre, according to ancient Celtic custom (he claimed). He tried again, when another of his many children died. After each attempt, he was charged, but unexpectedly, he was in tune with the zeitgeist and found not guilty. The Daily Telegraph stated that it would be 'highly advantageous to the cause of sanitary reform if the fantastic tricks recently played by an eccentric Welsh octogenarian … became indirectly the means to bring … a little more common sense to bear … on the important subject of cremation'.

Yet, entertaining as all this is, in a macabre key, the dead are hard to think about – and, in many ways, to read about. Unlike animals, which Lévi-Strauss declared were not only good to eat but bon à penser, too, I found that I averted my eyes, so to speak, several times as I was reading this book. Not because of the infinite and irreversible sadness of mortality, or because of the grue, the fetor, the decay, the pervasive morbidity – though Laqueur's gallows humour about scientific successes in the calcination of corpses can be a bit strong – but because the dead present an enigma that can't be grasped: they are always there in mind, they come back in dreams, live in memory, and if they don't, if they're forgotten as so many millions of them must be, that is even more disturbing, somehow reprehensible. The disappeared are the unquietest ghosts. Simone Weil writes that the Iliad is a poem that shows how 'force … turns man into a thing in the most literal sense: it makes a corpse out of him.' But Laqueur is surely right to inquire why that thing, the 'disenchanted corpse … bereft, vulnerable, abject', is a very different kind of thing from the cushion I am sitting on or even my iPad (which keeps giving signs of a mind of its own). I have always liked Mme du Deffand's comment, when asked if she believed in ghosts. A philosopher and a free thinker, she even so replied: 'Non, mais j'en ai peur.' ('No, but I am frightened of them.')

The book keeps returning to the conundrum perfectly set by Diogenes, when he said that after his death, his body should be tossed over a wall for dogs to eat. This is logical, rational, perhaps even ecological (Laqueur discusses many suggestions about using mortal remains for compost and fertiliser), but no society has taken the Cynic philosopher's advice (the Parsee towers are a place apart), and when the dead are left in the street, the sight – the neglect – rightly inspires horror and shame in all who know of it. Yet, if you believe in a soul, why should the husk matter? And conversely, if you believe that there is nothing more, then the corpse is not a person either, let alone that person. But every instinct, every human feeling in the cultural world Laqueur writes about goes against Diogenes.

Since Derek Parfit's death, there has been discussion about his Buddhist sympathies, because he countered conventional ideas about the integrity of a person over time, and closes Reasons and Persons with a suggestive musing on a Buddhist term for an individual, 'santana, a "stream"'. It's interesting to contrast this idea with the picture that forms from Laqueur's scrupulous sifting of the archives: the work we feel the dead ask us to perform is bound up inextricably with our prevailing view of the person as an integer – not a stream. The manner of our leaving the world defines us as unique selves, continuously unified from birth to death. In this perspective, Laqueur's book presents a continuation of other mighty endeavours: Charles Taylor's Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity and Jerrold Seigel's The Idea of the Self, both studies in what it means to be an individual. In answer to this, the dwindling of trust in an immortal soul has shifted the onus onto the perishable body, with proportionately highly wrought standards of respect owed to that ambiguous thing.

In the 16th century, the medical cabinets of universities such as Bologna and Florence contained wax models of bodies for study; these models contained human body parts, and sometimes whole bodies were conserved. A pope had expressly given permission for such uses of the dead, in the interests of knowledge; yet in 18th-century England, Hogarth's horrific scene of an autopsy (where a dog is lapping up the discarded innards), shows that to be used for science was dreadful, fitting punishment of the damned in the here and now, and medical tomb-robbers set so much horror and disgust reverberating that Mary Shelley conceived her monster as made from different body parts. Since then, reverence for the mortal body in its final dissolution has been continuously rising; the reason lies in its compact with individuality, a compact reaffirmed by DNA, iris scanning and other forensic recognition techniques that presuppose absolute uniqueness.

This singular self has its habitation (the body) and a name, and these are attached in death to the arc of a story over time, which posthumous acts of memorialisation attempt to bring to an honourable and coherent conclusion. Laqueur uses the word 'dénouement' to describe this goal. He avoids the word 'closure', as used by therapists. Obsequies and customary rites have become necessary to what is more of a nouement – a tying up of loose ends. The playwright Timberlake Wertenbaker has spoken about the need for a 'Designated Mourner' in relation to current crises, someone who, as in many countries today (Greece and Egypt, for example), takes on the role – the bardic, priestly role – of reciting the life and deeds of the dead person. Obituaries are not, however, as old a custom as one might assume, Laqueur tells us, and the trend today is moving towards acts of public mourning which can travel far and wide online: the memorial which was set up at Tate Britain to Khadija Saye, the young artist-photographer who died with her mother in the Grenfell fire, and the ode that Ben Okri wrote the same night are instances.

If any part is missing in the triangulation of body, name and mourning ceremony an injury has been done. This is one reason for the miasma that hangs over Grenfell Tower and maddens the survivors. A tenant cries out: 'Why can't I have my family back?' 'We are doing our utmost best,' says one of the many volunteers, 'to get their loved ones back.' Forensic teams – police and others – have been conducting a 'finger-tip search' through the ashes to find remains which can then be analysed for DNA and restored to the bereaved. The blackened building, with its flayed grid and blind windows, may look like a ruin of war, but it also looms like a macabre charnel house chimney, a huge tomb of unidentified and unsolemnised dead. It stands like a stele, the ancient grave markers which were inscribed with the names of their occupants, often calling out to the passers-by: siste viator ('stay, wayfarer') – the voices of the dead imagined to be speaking still and demanding attention.

The dead establish community and cultural memory, and forms of disposal offer a vision of society that's both a testimony and a self-portrait. Grenfell Tower has become a monument to the precariat, in this country, now. In All the Names (1997), his poignant novel about the yearning to encompass everyone, José Saramago issues a warning. The protagonist tries to stop a nurse washing a minor scrape on his knee, but she says: 'No no, I have to clean them.' He replies: 'Once mine have healed, they'll leave nothing but a few small scars that will disappear in time.' To which the nurse answers: 'Ah, yes, wounds heal over on the body, but in the report they always always stay open, they neither close up nor disappear.'

*

In the course of the story Laqueur tells, death is a constant scandal against the living, but the wounds are becoming more visible. Tranquil, neighbourly country churchyards, such as the ones painted by Constable and elegised by Thomas Gray, were superseded by huge cemeteries in urban parklands, which no longer united the dead by faith or birth and dwelling place but according to the newer bonds of wealth, occupation and social status. Some of the book's most powerful passages turn to the killing fields and the enormous spooky cemeteries of the Somme created after the First World War was over. These entailed the exhumation of hundreds of bodies, the assiduous identification and reassembly of parts, and their reburial in solemn serried rows, to depict the war as awful, yet sublime, and its victims as heroic and their deaths worthwhile. Through these stately monuments and encyclopedic inventories, the nation cleaned up the story of the war. 'This constituted an aesthetic obfuscation of reality,' Laqueur recognises, 'But there was no alternative. As the history of sites of horror makes clear, they cannot remain as they were to become shrines to themselves. It was also impossible not to memorialise the dead of war.' The museums at Auschwitz and other concentration camps don't quite bear out his statement, as he knows (he has written powerfully about them), but the mud-churned, incinerated fields of the Somme couldn't be preserved as they were.

These cemeteries also established several principles that have become fundamental to the work of the dead in modern times: first a grave has to contain a body; when the body – the person – was lost, the name would sometimes make up for its absence, appearing on the Thiepval Memorial to the Missing, for example, among the long lists chiselled into stone to 'live for ever more'. Memorial tablets and cairns spread through all the countries involved in that war and the next: often marked out by bombshells, rockets and other weapons. But a new, sacralising feature was added to the honour paid to the dead: the cemeteries and memorials were built where the victims had fallen, or at least nearby. The place became part of the commemoration: as in medieval pilgrimage to the site of Thomas à Becket's murder, or modern pilgrimage to the Church of the Spilled Blood in St Petersburg, where the cobbled pavement on which Alexander II was shot and fatally wounded in 1881 is enshrined in situ in the new church's floor. In 2014, the artist Chloe Dewe Mathews travelled to the places in France where deserters had been executed and took a photograph at first light of the empty field; the resulting sequence, Shot at Dawn, is one of the most powerful acts of memory the centenary inspired. Hic jacet mattered, and still matters, in this new, secular form of ritual enchantment.

Some families resisted the vast new necropolises, and smuggled back their dead – in fishing boats, or rolled up in carpets – rather than let them lie in a corner of a foreign field, however much 'a body of England's' might consecrate and alter its character. But since then, the exact place of death has taken hold of people's imaginations: wayside shrines spring up, with cards and messages and bouquets and favourite objects attached to trees or motorway barriers or set against walls where a fatal accident or murder has taken place; the spot above the tunnel in Paris where Princess Diana died is now a cult site; and in London white bicycles, covered in flowers, are set up where a cyclist has died – as both memorial and protest.

The battlefield/graveyard can be moved and remade – on a smaller scale. Every year on Armistice Day, tiny tombs, decorated with poppies, regimental colours and badges, and bearing the names of all the soldiers who died in the various campaigns, are laid out all around Westminster Abbey, filling the lawns on either side of the path. These ceremonies echo earlier religious re-enactments – the Temple of Jerusalem rebuilt in replica, Calvary reprised in the Stations of the Cross. Laqueur reproduces in colour the IMAX style spectacular poppy installation, Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red; when the artists Paul Cummins and Tom Piper cascaded thousands of scarlet ceramic sculptures from the battlements of the Tower of London (888,246, to be precise, one for each of the fallen) to mark the centenary of the First World War, they imported the significance of massacre to a new site, and it met with huge popular acclaim. Alongside such new national rites, cinema plays an increasingly vivid role in bringing the dead before us again, and narrating the past: sometimes it is the recent past, as in the case of Apocalypse Now (1979); in other, more distant cases, it has the effect of closing the gap of time. Twelve Years a Slave and the current blockbuster Dunkirk follow in this memorial tradition, as does the TV historian Dan Snow, when he advocates 'augmented reality software' to help us relive Passchendaele. These are national epics, reckonings wrought with all the latest resources of 'full immersion' – the equivalent of re-enacting the Passion of Christ in Seville's Semana Santa with live performances by actors and maximum real-life verisimilitude in the images.

Some memorials try to include everyone, victims and perpetrators, from all sides of the conflict. Homer honours the dead on both sides in the Trojan War and he gives us more than two hundred names – Alice Oswald opens her fine 'excavation' of the Iliad, which is explicitly called Memorial, by listing them. But this list, horribly long as it is, does not remember all who died at Troy. The roll call of the fallen doesn't include women, for a start. Or children. By contrast, the Graves Registration Commission/War Graves Commission set out to name every single person who died in the First World War, and, often, the animals, too; as they compiled their records, they paid far more attention to the corpse of each soldier/ nurse/orderly/horse than the strategists had done to their living selves. Civilians are harder to count – they vanish from the registers for various reasons. As at Grenfell Tower, collateral damage doesn't show up in databases as accurately as enlisted men on army muster rolls. Laqueur quotes the spare, fierce poem that Zbigniew Herbert wrote after martial law was imposed in Poland in December 1981, which is called 'Mr Cogito on the Need for Precision'. The poem speaks far beyond the occasion of its making:

But in these matters
Accuracy is necessary
One cannot get it wrong
Even in a single case
In spite of everything
We are our brothers' keepers.

'We are our brothers' keepers,' and the way we can watch out for one another is by attending to the specificity of each life and person. The most surprising – to my mind at least – revelation in The Work of the Dead is that the precision of archiving by the clerisies of the past and the digital databases of the present are deeply entangled with the history of intimacy and personal value. Mr Cogito wants to know where someone's mortal remains might be, Laqueur writes, 'because beginning in the late 19th century ordinary people wanted to know … The massive records of the Great War bear witness to both the technology and the emotional infrastructure that made knowing possible and necessary.' Ordinary people wanted to know and they can know because a combination of skills has made it more feasible than ever before. It is very sad – and horrible – that the search for the body of Corrie McKeague, the RAF gunner who disappeared last year, has finally been called off, after tons of rubbish in the landfill where he was buried have been sifted unavailingly. Such an undertaking couldn't even have been thought of before current electronics (his final whereabouts were tracked on his phone). For the same reasons, it has become possible to demand retrospective interventions on the long dead. The exhumation of Salvador Dalí, to prove a paternity suit, exemplifies this trend (he was found to be whole and entire, his moustache still angled at ten past ten – a miracle!).

Science weirdly spurs on the pursuit of the disenchanted corpse, carrying us into invisible and impalpable dimensions of experience. The invention of telegraphy and photography were essential to psychic experiments to bring back the dead, and after the First World War many survivors visited high street mediums like Ada Deane and William Hope, to hear news from the other side. The pages of spirit photograph albums reveal how many varieties of affectionate ties held people together, as the bereaved sought to contact lost loved ones: siblings, same-sex friendships and intergenerational bonds are all caught by the absurd pathos of the ghost portraits and rapped out messages. Séances seem to have acted as therapeutic consolation: the dead reported they were very happy where they were, in the non-religious uplands of spiritualist heaven, according to the reports the revenants brought to the living. The anthropologist William A. Christian Jr has amassed an extraordinary collection of photographs collaged on postcards to circulate and prolong memories of the absent, the missing and the dead. His recent study, The Stranger, the Tears, the Photograph, the Touch: Divine Presence in Spain and Europe since 1500, supports Laqueur's accounts of the many ways new institutions, like the postal service, and new technologies, like photography, have been recruited to deal with death.[*]​* The dead can clamour more urgently for our attention today than they did because of contemporary advances, not in spite of them.

In his third part, 'Names of the Dead', Laqueur turns to 'necronominalism'. Parfit's thoughts again show up the contrast between humanist ideals of the individual self and the premises of the Buddha, who declared that a name is 'only a name, for no person is found there … There exists no Individual, it is only a conventional name given to a set to elements.' Opposing this view, the Mormons reign supreme, the champion archivists of people who have been and gone; in a volume filled with brain-toppling towers of numbers, these are among the most startling. The Utah genealogists aim to create a community in death, in the same way as a village churchyard did, but theirs – the Church of Latter Day Saints – is global. The Mormons perform retrospective baptisms, a practice that has caused protests when, for example, Jewish figures like Anne Frank have been made 'saints'. Nevertheless necronominalism is the order of existence here in the West, and our own magical thinking underlies the public chanting of the names of the victims of Aids or of 9/11 – the ritual strives both to exorcise the horror and to summon the vanished back to memory.

Laqueur's research for this book over the last decade couldn't take stock of the effect of social media on the culture of mortal remains, but he clearly anticipates the consequences of the unprecedented access to information that they offer. On the one hand, bureaucratic data-gathering and censuses act as forms of surveillance and control, abolishing privacy and individual rights, and on the other they offer unforeseen opportunities for pursuing personal lines of inquiry and crafting subjectivities and inclinations (a recent women's questionnaire I was sent included 26 different genders with a blank box if none of the above applied). At the same time a story can now move so fast and become so widely accepted that it sweeps away hints and traces of alternatives, and it's then tough to redraft and dislodge. Reckoning with these standardised fables convenues (as Voltaire quipped about history in general) sets a compelling task for thinkers and writers in all fields, not only history. Unearthing hitherto unheard voices and silenced stories has become a central stratagem of the living in relation to the hubbub of the endless data archive we live with. 'Not just some, but all writing of the narrative kind, and perhaps all writing, is motivated, deep down, by a fear of and fascination with mortality – by a desire to make the risky trip to the Underworld, and to bring something or someone back from the dead,' Margaret Atwood suggested in her fine Empson Lectures. The aim is often redress, redress achieved through imaginative acts of memory, through exhuming the dead, as in Zong!, a remarkable prose-poem written in 2008 by M. NourbeSe Philip, which takes off from the notorious incident in 1781 when the captain of the slave ship Zong threw 133 slaves overboard and then claimed insurance on their loss. Using only the words of the surviving legal report, Philip cuts them up, scrambles and rearticulates them to produce a chorale of voices, rising on the page as if from the sea, while along the bottom of the page, she runs a litany of names from the regions in Africa they might have come from – and to which she, as a Trinidadian-Canadian, also traces her descent. Zong! deliberately turns a dry judicial decision into an anthem, a multi-vocal lament and act of mourning and resistance to historical amnesia on behalf of a group of the utterly disappeared. She has performed it solo and also with a chorus, and the recitation takes on the character of a ceremony, a conjuration – again, a secularisation of an ancient mode of memorialising, and a very contemporary way of defining a life by the momentousness of its end.

In accordance with the fluid subjectivities offered by technology, the contemporary desire to be reunited with the body of the loved one has moved into a more personal, subjective key: the urn or small casket in which what's left might be placed is often taken home for the family to hold private, innovatory rituals – carrying them back to a country the dead left a long time ago, or scattering the ashes in a favourite spot – Laqueur mentions a group of friends choosing a tree they liked to pee against on camping trips. He is concerned with these continuities and innovations.

Bespoke funeral rites are increasingly available: Walt Disney was an early subject of deep freezing for eternity, a modern form of pharaonic dream; in 1996, two years after he died, the embalmed body of the artist Ed Kienholz, was provided with a dollar, a bottle of red wine, a pack of cards and the ashes of his dog, set up at the wheel of his vintage Packard, and then allowed to drift and fall into the grave to the sound of bagpipes. More soberingly, Laqueur's narrative also illuminates how and why the distressing struggle over the dying baby Charlie Gard was so acute. In respect to the dead and dying, personal feelings have been prevailing ever more strongly over institutional bodies' authority; social media, with some members of the press clamouring support, join forces to claim rights over the bodies of loved ones.

The book comes to its close with open-ended reflections on the new difficulties, such as the question of 'the right to die', and speculation about the protracted business of dying in the future. The past is prologue, and Laqueur's line of argument promises that increasing private pressure will determine the fate of mortal remains. In her tightly coiled new novel, Home Fire, Kamila Shamsie reimagines Antigone in relation to jihadism today.[†]​† If Creon had any support in the past, her dramatic reworking convinces us that, even in these extreme circumstances, twitter storms could fall upon him from every side; the call of the dead on the living for honour to be paid to the body, the seemingly indissoluble union of personhood and body in a supposed secular age, and the privatisation of social structures that used to help contain the passions of love and grief and desire mean that Antigone is more than ever a heroine of our time.


Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.

Why the novel matters

  Why the novel matters We read and write fiction because it asks impossible questions, and leads us boldly into the unknown. By  Deborah Le...