1871---1922 / 马塞尔·普鲁斯特
打开的是一些帆,和你一样
柔情蜜意
天气一直很冷
你努努嘴唇,抖落身上的雪
和满地的羽毛
等待就会有阳光从百叶窗流进来
田园里面的花开了,紫色的秋千架
和微风一起倾斜,小角度
满园子的葡萄,悄声突起
在钟声里面,意识康勃雷
供暖装置中昏昏欲睡,就可以
和堂西埃尔靠近
有时间我们再来聊聊菲德鲁斯
也许还有拉摩的侄子
如果时间真的允许
像你说的那样
1821---188 1/ 陀思妥耶夫斯基
“玛莎躺在桌子上,
我还能不能够和她见面?”
你说说,老伙计
这一生你都干了些什么
你的女人
出生,受难,审判,放逐
赎罪,赦免,受难,赎罪
别林斯基写信给果戈里
关你鸟事
总得让每个人有条路可走啊
多么绝望的呼喊
刑场装饰了你的梦,失而复得
于是上帝发配给你一辆马车
隔墙有耳,隔墙有耳
这话一定不能让尼古拉的亲信给听去
1882---1941 / 詹姆斯·乔伊斯
老弟,你拍拍我的肩膀
说出这些话
也许还有威廉·巴特勒·叶芝
爱尔兰,已经回不去了
栅栏。花骨朵。还有满街的警察
公墓里游荡的影子
去巴黎吧,沏一满壶咖啡
镉黄色的落地窗淌了满地
剩下来不多的时间
把那几本书写完
1883---1924 / 弗兰茨·卡夫卡
一只笼子在等待一只鸟
只有你才能说出这样的话
一根绳子踩着另一条绳子
一个圆推搡着另一半圆
约瑟夫大街
天空和同心圆广场
如果有下辈子
请记住,把费莉莎娶回家
图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子
一进去,就得住上四十年
你有几个四十年
没人信你是斯卡丹纳利(Scardanelli)
除了你自己
图宾根,西默尔
夕阳西下,你沿着纳卡河散步
把那些扇形的树叶缝上枝头然后再如数拆下
艾萨克·辛克莱已经离你而去
你失去了最后的保护者
黑格尔和谢林距离你只有几百码远
可是你已经无法回去
癫狂之歌,事件
沉静的四行诗
叙述从你这里开始
揆末十一月廿九,武汉,京广铁路武昌南段荒弃的小阁楼,杂草
- Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/08/2004
这一组小诗很不错的,就是读不太分明。 - Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/09/2004
呵呵,我也不知道为什么看了的人都这么说
主要是牵涉到了一些人物和事件~~ - Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/10/2004
你曾说要我帮你找一本什么书?神话的?
你要开始看原文, 能行吗?
奇平 wrote:
呵呵,我也不知道为什么看了的人都这么说
主要是牵涉到了一些人物和事件~~ - Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/11/2004
哦, 是列维斯特劳斯的《神话学》:) - posted on 09/12/2004
是这本书吗?这是从amazon copy来的书评, 看起来并不是一本容易读的书,如果你第一次读原文的话。 6、7年前,我被Joseph Campbell的 The power of Myth迷住了。 这本书深入浅出,文字极其优美。campbell是神话学研究里的著名学者,国内没有人介绍他。 但我倒是推荐你读这本。campbell的其他书也非常有趣的。
请查google看台湾是否有翻译的。
The Raw and the Cooked: Mythologiques (Raw & the Cooked)
Claude Lévi-Strauss's Mythologiques, of which this is volume 1, are brutally difficult to work through, endlessly fascinating once you get the hang of them, and ultimately not something one ought to imitate or emulate. But until you have read The Raw and the Cooked, at the least, you are not really entitled to speak about the study of myth, and certainly not about structural anthropology (or its weaknesses).
The whole book-the whole four volumes, actually-is structured according to a complex musical metaphor, and the Overture to The Raw and the Cooked explicates this metaphor in detail. You'll need to know something about serialism (i.e. Schoenberg) to understand it, but once you do you'll really begin to see what Lévi-Strauss is up to. He thinks that myth is not like poetry, and is more like music than ordinary language. I think his comparison is misguided, based on a misunderstanding of serialism, but it's essential to understand why he correlates myth and music to understand the project.
In the main part of the book, he goes on to select a "key myth," a somewhat arbitrarily-chosen tale from the Bororo, a people he has studied fairly intensively (and did some fieldwork among). He then begins a massive project of connecting this myth to other myths from South America, breaking down and analyzing all the little bits and pieces as he goes. The logic can be hard to follow at times; his little diagrams don't help much, and in fact he seems to see this and ditches them in later volumes. But if you lose the thread, you can lose track of the whole book.
Ultimately, he's going to link up a thousand-odd myths from both Americas, demonstrating how each transforms and adds to other themes, until we get a vast complex of American mythical thought laid out in a mesmerizing sort of crystalline web of relations.
In short, Lévi-Strauss thinks that myths are a way of thinking, using concrete objects, about such problems as self and other, social relations, kinship, cooking, culture and nature, and so forth. He argues that each myth demonstrates a particular thinking-through of such problems by what amounts to cultures as intellectual entities. This may seem hard to believe, but if you've read The Savage Mind, this is the bricoleur at work.
The big problem, as various people have noted, is that his readings are necessarily somewhat subjective; he could be breaking the myths down incorrectly, splitting up whole units or lumping discrete pieces. What we really see is Lévi-Strauss giving it a shot, not a conclusion. Indeed, he calls this a "prolegomenon to a science of mythology," which hits the nail on the head.
I doubt very much whether anyone ought to continue the work, correcting the readings on the basis of further fieldwork or computerized analysis, as he seems to want. Once you've read through this series, you really have to wonder whether it's worth going further, or whether there aren't more interesting questions to ask about mythology. But his point really does stand: myth cannot be taken as a bunch of moral tales and ritual foundations; it must be recognized as thought enacted, or action thought-through.
The big question he doesn't address is history; as in The Savage Mind, he wants to exclude the historical from analysis. Thus the next big step would be someone like Sahlins, who tries to build an appreciation of the historical into structural analysis. Nevertheless, these books really do deserve serious study. If you want to see what mythology really is about "in the raw," as it were, you need to read this. As far as I'm concerned, those who haven't read The Raw and the Cooked have no business saying that structuralism is dead, or that it's unhelpful; they don't know what they're talking about.
Lévi-Strauss is a genius, and if he goes in directions that maybe now seem a bit dated, let's remember when he wrote all this stuff (i.e. the 60s). But only the intellectually lazy can afford to pass over this essential moment in the study of myth and religion; we have to work through, not skip over.
- Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/12/2004
哦,是这个,谢谢玛雅:)
Joseph Campbell,是约瑟芬·坎贝尔吧,在这边我看到过他的书 - Re: 图宾根,荷尔德林塔或者褶子posted on 09/05/2006
顶上来再读。:)
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation