Here we are at the final séance.For the last time,my patient comrade,I ask you to make yourself comfortable upon the old green settee,to look up at the oaken shelves,and to bear with me as best you may while I preach about their contents.The last time!And yet,as I look along the lines of the volumes,I have not mentioned one out of ten of those to which I owe a debt of gratitude,nor one in a hundred of the thoughts which course through my brain as I look at them.As well perhaps,for the man who has said all that he has to say has invariably said too much.
Let me be didactic for a moment!I assume this solemn—oh,call it not pedantic!—attitude because my eye catches the small but select corner which constitues my library of Science.I wanted to say that if I were advising a young man who was beginning life,I should counsel him to devote one evening a week to scientific reading.Had he the perseverance to adhere to his resolution,and if he began it at twenty,he would certainly find himself with an unusually well-furnished mind at thirty,which would stand him in right good stead in whatever line of life he might walk.When I advise him to read science,I do not mean that he should choke himself with the dust of the pedants,and lose himself in the subdivisions of the Lepidoptera,or the classifications of the dicotyledonous plants.These dreary details are the prickly bushes in that enchanted garden,and you are foolish indeed if you begin your walks by butting your head into one.Keep very clear of them until you have explored the open beds and wandered down every easy path.For this reason avoid the text-books,which repel,and cultivate that popular science which attracts.You cannot hope to be a specialist upon all these varied subjects.Better far to have a broad idea of general results,and to understand their relations to each other.A very little reading will give a man such a knowledge of geology,for example,as will make every quarry and railway cutting an object of interest.A very little zoology will enable you to satisfy your curiosity as to what is the proper name and style of this buff-ermine moth which at the present instant is buzzing round the lamp.A very little botany will enable you to recognize every flower you are likely to meet in your walks abroad,and to give you a tiny thrill of interest when you chance upon one which is beyond your ken.A very little archaeology will tell you all about yonder British tumulus,or help you to fill in the outline of the broken Roman camp upon the downs.A very little astronomy will cause you to look more intently at the heavens,to pick out your brothers the planets,who move in your own circles,from the stranger stars,and to appreciate the order,beauty,and majesty of that material universe which is most surely the outward sign of the spiritual force behind it.How a man of science can be a materialist is as amazing to me as how a sectarian can limit the possibilities of the Creator.Show me a picture without an artist,show me a bust without a sculptor,show me music without a musician,and then you may begin to talk to me of a universe without a Universe-maker,call Him by what name you will.
Here is Flammarion's“L'Atmosphère”—a very gorgeous though weather-stained copy in faded scarlet and gold.The book has a small history,and I value it.A young Frenchman,dying of fever on the west coast of Africa,gave it to me as a professional fee.The sight of it takes me back to a little ship’s bunk,and a sallow face with large,sad eyes looking out at me.Poor boy,I fear that he never saw his beloved Marseilles again!
Talking of popular science,I know no better books for exciting a man's first interest,and giving a broad general view of the subject,than these of Samuel Laing.Who would have imagined that the wise savant and gentle dreamer of these volumes was also the energetic secretary of a railway company?Many men of the highest scientific eminence have begun in prosaic lines of life.Herbert Spencer was a railway engineer.Wallace was a land surveyor.But that a man with so pronounced a scientific brain as Laing should continue all his life to devote his time to dull routine work,remaining in harness until extreme old age,with his soul still open to every fresh idea,and his brain acquiring new concretions of knowledge,is indeed a remarkable fact.Read those books,and you will be a fuller man.
It is an excellent device to talk about what you have recently read.Rather hard upon your audience,you may say;but without wishing to be personal,I dare bet it is more interesting than your usual small talk.It must,of course,be done with some tact and discretion.It is the mention of Laing's works which awoke the train of thought which led to these remarks.I had met some one at a table d'h?te or elsewhere who made some remark about the prehistoric remains in the valley of the Somme.I knew all about those,and showed him that I did.I then threw out some allusion to the rock temples of Yucatan,which he instantly picked up and enlarged upon.He spoke of ancient Peruvian civilization,and I kept well abreast of him.I cited the Titicaca image,and he knew all about that.He spoke of Quarternary man,and I was with him all the time.Each was more and more amazed at the fulness and the accuracy of the information of the other,until like a flash the explanation crossed my mind.“You are reading Samuel Laing’s‘Human Origins’!”I cried.So he was,and so by a coincidence was I.We were pouring water over each other,but it was all new-drawn from the spring.
There is a big two-volumed book at the end of my science shelf which would,even now,have its right to be called scientific disputed by some of the pedants.It is Myers'“Human Personality.”My own opinion,for what it is worth,is that it will be recognized a century hence as a great root book,one from which a whole new branch of science will have sprung.Where between four covers will you find greater evidence of patience,of industry,of thought,of discrimination,of that sweep of mind which can gather up a thousand separate facts and bind them all in the meshes of a single consistent system?Darwin has not been a more ardent collector in zoology than Myers in the dim regions of psychic research,and his whole hypothesis,so new that a new nomenclature and terminology had to be invented to express it,telepathy,the subliminal,and the rest of it,will always be a monument of acute reasoning expressed in fine prose,and founded upon ascertained fact.
The mere suspicion of scientific thought or scientific methods has a great charm in any branch of literature,however far it may be removed from actual research.Poe's tales,for example,owe much to this effect,though in his case it was a pure illusion.Jules Verne also produces a charmingly credible effect for the most incredible things by an adept use of a considerable amount of real knowledge of nature.But most gracefully of all does it shine in the lighter form of essay,where playful thoughts draw their analogies and illustrations from actual fact,each showing up the other,and the combination presenting a peculiar piquancy to the reader.
Where could I get a better illustration of what I mean than in those three little volumes which make up Wendell Holmes'immortal series,“The Autocrat,”“The Poet,”and“The Professor at the Breakfast Table”?Here the subtle,dainty,delicate thought is continually reinforced by the allusion or the analogy which shows the wide,accurate knowledge behind it.What work it is,how wise,how witty,how large-hearted and tolerant!Could one choose one's philosopher in the Elysian fields,as once in Athens,I would surely join the smiling group who listened to the human,kindly words of the Sage of Boston.I suppose it is just that continual leaven of science,especially of medical science,which has from my early student days given those books so strong an attraction for me.Never have I so known and loved a man whom I had never seen.It was one of the ambitions of my lifetime to look upon his face,but by the irony of Fate I arrived in his native city just in time to lay a wreath upon his newly-turned grave.Read his books again,and see if you are not especially struck by the up-to-dateness of them.Like Tennyson's“In Memoriam”it seems to me to be work which sprang into full flower fifty years before its time.One can hardly open a page haphazard without lighting upon some passage which illustrates the breadth of view,the felicity of phrase,and the singular power of playful but most suggestive analogy.Here,for example,is a paragraph—no better than a dozen others—which combines all the rare qualities—
Insanity is often the logic of an accurate mind overtasked.Good mental machinery ought to break its own wheels and levers,if anything is thrust upon them suddenly which tends to stop them or reverse their motion.A weak mind does not accumulate force enough to hurt itself;stupidity often saves a man from going mad.We frequently see persons in insane hospitals,sent there in consequence of what are called religious mental disturbances.I confess that I think better of them than of many who hold the same notions,and keep their wits and enjoy life very well,outside of the asylums.Any decent person ought to go mad if he really holds such and such opinions…….Anything that is brutal,cruel,heathenish,that makes life hopeless for the most of mankind,and perhaps for entire races—anything that assumes the necessity for the extermination of instincts which were given to be regulated—no matter by what name you call it—no matter whether a fakir,or a monk,or a deacon believes it—if received,ought to produce insanity in every well-regulated mind.
There's a fine bit of breezy polemics for the dreary fifties—a fine bit of moral courage too for the University professor who ventured to say it.
I put him above Lamb as an essayist,because there is a flavor of actual knowledge and of practical acquaintance with the problems and affairs of life,which is lacking in the elfin Londoner.I do not say that the latter is not the rarer quality.There are my“Essays of Elia,”and they are well-thumbed as you see,so it is not because I love Lamb less that I love this other more.Both are exquisite,but Wendell Holmes is for ever touching some note which awakens an answering vibration within my own mind.
The essay must always be a somewhat repellent form of literature,unless it be handled with the lightest and deftest touch.It is too reminiscent of the school themes of our boyhood—to put a heading and then to show what you can get under it.Even Stevenson,for whom I have the most profound admiration,finds it difficult to carry the reader through a series of such papers,adorned with his original thought and quaint turn of phrase.Yet his“Men and Books”and“Virginibus Puerisque”are high examples of what may be done in spite of the inherent unavoidable difficulty of the task.
But his style!Ah,if Stevenson had only realized how beautiful and nervous was his own natural God-given style he would never have been at pains to acquire another!It is sad to read the much-lauded anecdote of his imitating this author and that,picking up and dropping,in search of the best.The best is always the most natural.When Stevenson becomes a conscious stylist,applauded by so many critics,he seems to me like a man who,having most natural curls,will still conceal them under a wig.The moment he is precious he loses his grip.But when he will abide by his own sterling Lowland Saxon,with the direct word and the short,cutting sentence,I know not where in recent years we may find his mate.In this strong,plain setting the occasional happy word shines like a cut jewel.A really good stylist is like Beau Brummell's description of a well-dressed man—so dressed that no one would ever observe him.The moment you begin to remark a man's style the odds are that there is something the matter with it.It is a clouding of the crystal—a diversion of the reader's mind from the matter to the manner,from the author's subject to the author himself.
No,I have not the Edinburgh edition.If you think of a presentation—but I should be the last to suggest it.Perhaps on the whole I would prefer to have him in scattered books,rather than in a complete set.The half is more than the whole of most authors,and not the least of him.I am sure that his friends who reverenced his memory had good warrant and express instructions to publish this complete edition—very possibly it was arranged before his lamented end.Yet,speaking generally,I would say that an author was best served by being very carefully pruned before being exposed to the winds of time.Let every weak twig,every immature shoot be shorn away,and nothing but strong,sturdy,well-seasoned branches left.So shall the whole tree stand strong for years to come.How false an impression of the true Stevenson would our critical grandchild acquire if he chanced to pick down any one of half a dozen of these volumes!As we watched his hand stray down the rank how we would pray that it might alight upon the ones we love,on the“New Arabian Nights,”“The Ebb Tide,”“The Wrecker,”“Kidnapped,”or“Treasure Island.”These can surely never lose their charm.
What noble books of their class are those last,“Kidnapped”and“Treasure Island”!both,as you see,shining forth upon my lower shelf.“Treasure Island”is the better story,while I could imagine that“Kidnapped”might have the more permanent value as being an excellent and graphic sketch of the state of the Highlands after the last Jacobite insurrection.Each contains one novel and admirable character,Alan Breck in the one,and Long John in the other.Surely John Silver,with his face the size of a ham,and his little gleaming eyes like crumbs of glass in the center of it,is the king of all seafaring desperadoes.Observe how the strong effect is produced in his case,seldom by direct assertion on the part of the story-teller,but usually by comparison,innuendo,or indirect reference.The objectionable Billy Bones is haunted by the dread of“a seafaring man with one leg.”Captain Flint,we are told,was a brave man;“he was afraid of none,not he,only Silver—Silver was that genteel.”O(jiān)r,again,where John himself says,“there was some that was feared of Pew,and some that was feared of Flint;but Flint his own self was feared of me.Feared he was,and proud.They was the roughest crew afloat was Flint's.The devil himself would have been feared to go to sea with them.Well,now,I will tell you.I'm not a boasting man,and you seen yourself how easy I keep company;but when I was quartermaster,lambs wasn't the word for Flint's old buccaneers.”So by a touch here,and a hint there,there grows upon us the individuality of the smooth-tongued,ruthless,masterful,one-legged devil.He is to us not a creation of fiction,but an organic living reality with whom we have come in contact;such is the effect of the fine suggestive strokes with which he is drawn.And the buccaneers themselves,how simple,and yet how effective are the little touches which indicate their ways of thinking and of acting.“I want to go in that cabin,I do;I want their pickles and wine and that.”“Now,if you had sailed along of Bill you wouldn't have stood there to be spoke twice—not you.That was never Bill’s way,not the way of such as sailed with him.”Scott’s buccaneers in“The Pirate”are admirable,but they lack something human which we find here.It will be long before John Silver loses his place in sea fiction,“and you may lay to that.”
Stevenson was deeply influenced by Meredith,and even in these books the influence of the master is apparent.There is the apt use of an occasional archaic or unusual word,the short,strong descriptions,the striking metaphors,the somewhat staccato fashion of speech.Yet,in spite of this flavor,they have quite individuality enough to constitute a school of their own.Their faults,or rather perhaps their limitations,lie never in the execution,but entirely in the original conception.They picture only one side of life,and that a strange and exceptional one.There is no female interest.We feel that it is an apotheosis of the boy-story—the penny number of our youth in excelsis.But it is all so good,so fresh,so picturesque,that,however limited its scope,it still retains a definite and well-assured place in literature.There is no reason why“Treasure Island”should not be to the rising generation of the twenty-first century what“Robinson Crusoe”has been to that of the nineteenth.The balance of probability is all in that direction.
The modern masculine novel,dealing almost exclusively with the rougher,more stirring side of life,with the objective rather than the subjective,marks the reaction against the abuse of love in fiction.This one phase of life in its orthodox aspect,and ending in the conventional marriage,has been so hackneyed and worn to a shadow,that it is not to be wondered at that there is a tendency sometimes to swing to the other extreme,and to give it less than its fair share in the affairs of men.In British fiction nine books out of ten have held up love and marriage as the be-all and end-all of life.Yet we know,in actual practice,that this may not be so.In the career of the average man his marriage is an incident,and a momentous incident;but it is only one of several.He is swayed by many strong emotions;his business,his ambitions,his friendships,his struggles with the recurrent dangers and difficulties which tax a man's wisdom and his courage.Love will often play a subordinate part in his life.How many go through the world without ever loving at all?It jars upon us then to have it continually held up as the predominating,all-important fact in life;and there is a not unnatural tendency among a certain school,of which Stevenson is certainly the leader,to avoid altogether a source of interest which has been so misused and overdone.If all love-making were like that between Richard Feverel and Lucy Desborough,then indeed we could not have too much of it;but to be made attractive once more the passion must be handled by some great master who has courage to break down conventionalities and to go straight to actual life for his inspiration.
The use of the novel and piquant forms of speech is one of the most obvious of Stevenson's devices.No man handles his adjectives with greater judgment and nicer discrimination.There is hardly a page of his work where we do not come across words and expressions which strike us with a pleasant sense of novelty,and yet express the meaning with admirable conciseness.“His eyes came coasting round to me.”It is dangerous to begin quoting,as the examples are interminable,and each suggests another.Now and then he misses his mark,but it is very seldom.As an example,an“eye-shot”does not commend itself as a substitute for“a glance,”and“to teehee”for“to giggle”grates somewhat upon the ear,though the authority of Chaucer might be cited for the expressions.
Next in order is his extraordinary faculty for the use of pithy similes,which arrest the attention and stimulate the imagination.“His voice sounded hoarse and awkward,like a rusty lock.”“I saw her sway,like something stricken by the wind.”“His laugh rang false,like a cracked bell.”“His voice shook like a taut rope.”“My mind flying like a weaver's shuttle.”“His blows resounded on the grave as thick as sobs.”“The private guilty considerations I would continually observe to peep forth in the man's talk like rabbits from a hill.”Nothing could be more effective than these direct and homely comparisons.
After all,however,the main characteristic of Stevenson is his curious instinct for saying in the briefest space just those few words which stamp the impression upon the reader's mind.He will make you see a thing more clearly than you would probably have done had your eyes actually rested upon it.Here are a few of these word-pictures,taken haphazard from among hundreds of equal merit—
Not far off Macconochie was standing with his tongue out of his mouth,and his hand upon his chin,like a dull fellow thinking hard.
Stewart ran after us for more than a mile,and I could not help laughing as I looked back at last and saw him on a hill,holding his hand to his side,and nearly burst with running.
Ballantrae turned to me with a face all wrinkled up,and his teeth all showing in his mouth…….He said no word,but his whole appearance was a kind of dreadful question.
Look at him,if you doubt;look at him,grinning and gulping,a detected thief.
He looked me all over with a warlike eye,and I could see the challenge on his lips.
What could be more vivid than the effect produced by such sentences as these?
There is much more that might be said as to Stevenson's peculiar and original methods in fiction.As a minor point,it might be remarked that he is the inventor of what may be called the mutilated villain.It is true that Mr.Wilkie Collins has described one gentleman who had not only been deprived of all his limbs,but was further afflicted by the insupportable name of Miserrimus Dexter.Stevenson,however,has used the effect so often,and with such telling results,that he may be said to have made it his own.To say nothing of Hyde,who was the very impersonation of deformity,there is the horrid blind Pew,Black Dog with two fingers missing,Long John with his one leg,and the sinister catechist who is blind but shoots by ear,and smites about him with his staff.In“The Black Arrow,”too,there is another dreadful creature who comes tapping along with a stick.Often as he has used the device,he handles it so artistically that it never fails to produce its effect.
Is Stevenson a classic?Well,it is a large word that.You mean by a classic a piece of work which passes into the permanent literature of the country.As a rule you only know your classics when they are in their graves.Who guessed it of Poe,and who of Borrow?The Roman Catholics only canonize their saints a century after their death.So with our classics.The choice lies with our grandchildren.But I can hardly think that healthy boys will ever let Stevenson's books of adventure die,nor do I think that such a short tale as“The Pavilion on the Links”nor so magnificent a parable as“Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde”will ever cease to be esteemed.How well I remember the eagerness,the delight with which I read those early tales in“Cornhill”away back in the late seventies and early eighties.They were unsigned,after the old unfair fashion,but no man with any sense of prose could fail to know that they were all by the same author.Only years afterwards did I learn who that author was.
I have Stevenson's collected poems over yonder in the small cabinet.Would that he had given us more!Most of them are the merest playful sallies of a freakish mind.But one should,indeed,be a classic,for it is in my judgment by all odds the best narrative ballad of the last century—that is if I am right in supposing that“The Ancient Mariner”appeared at the very end of the eighteenth.I would put Coleridge's tour de force of grim fancy first,but I know none other to compare in glamour and phrase and easy power with“Ticonderoga.”Then there is his immortal epitaph.The two pieces alone give him a niche of his own in our poetical literature,just as his character gives him a niche of his own in our affections.No,I never met him.But among my most prized possessions are several letters which I received from Samoa.From that distant tower he kept a surprisingly close watch upon what was doing among the bookmen,and it was his hand which was among the first held out to the striver,for he had quick appreciation and keen sympathies which met another man's work half way,and wove into it a beauty from his own mind.
And now,my very patient friend,the time has come for us to part,and I hope my little sermons have not bored you over-much.If I have put you on the track of anything which you did not know before,then verify it and pass it on.If I have not,there is no harm done,save that my breath and your time have been wasted.There may be a score of mistakes in what I have said—is it not the privilege of the conversationalist to misquote?My judgments may differ very far from yours,and my likings may be your abhorrence;but the mere thinking and talking of books is in itself good,be the upshot what it may.For the time the magic door is still shut.You are still in the land of faerie.But,alas,though you shut that door,you cannot seal it.Still come the ring of the bell,the call of the telephone,the summons back to the sordid world of work and men and daily strife.Well,that's the real life after all—this only the imitation.And yet,now that the portal is wide open and we stride out together,do we not face our fate with a braver heart for all the rest and quiet and comradeship that we found behind the Magic Door?
THE END
好了,我們來跟故去的作者進行最后一次對話吧。耐心的朋友,我最后一次請你在綠色的舊沙發(fā)上坐得舒服一點,抬頭看看上面的橡木書架,請在我對你講述它們上面的書籍時,盡量忍耐我的啰唆。這是最后一次了!然而,當我看到這一排排書的時候,我沒提到其中每十本里就有一本在我心中激起的感激之情,也沒講過當我的視線掃過它們時腦海里浮現的千頭萬緒,一點也沒講過。也許這樣倒好,因為假如一個人把該說的都說完了,那肯定是講得太多了。
暫時就讓我再多說教一會兒吧!我態(tài)度這么莊重—但是,可別叫我老學究!—那是因為我看到了那個小角落里放的我精選的書籍,它們構成了我的科學圖書館。我想說的是,如果讓我給剛踏上社會的年輕人一點建議,我會建議他每個星期留出一個晚上來閱讀科學類的書籍。如果他能堅持,從二十歲開始做起,那到了他三十歲的時候,一定會發(fā)現自己的頭腦已經得到了非同尋常的“武裝”,無論他走在什么樣的人生道路上,都會令他受益無窮。我建議讀科學類的書,并不是說他應該去讀那些老學究的舊書,或是因為研究鱗翅目的細分種類和雙子葉植物的分類方法而把自己弄得暈頭轉向。這些枯燥的細節(jié)知識就像是科學這座魔法花園里那些帶刺的灌木,如果你在出發(fā)散步的時候就一頭扎進去,那可真是太傻了。在你探索完了露天的花床和好走的小路之前,一定不要去靠近它們。為此,不要去看那些教科書,大眾科學很有魅力,但是那些書可不會吸引你或是培養(yǎng)你的興趣。你可別想著當那么多學科的專家。你更應該對一般規(guī)律有廣泛的認識,并且要理解它們之間的聯(lián)系。只要稍微讀一點書,就能讓人擁有一些地理知識,這些地理知識足以讓人覺得采石場和鐵路路塹也很有趣。不多的動物學知識就足以滿足你的好奇心,區(qū)分出在眼前這盞燈周圍飛舞的橘背燈蛾的學名和習性。只需要一點植物學知識,你就能認出散步時在路邊看到的每朵花,而當你碰到知識范圍之外的東西的時候,也能體會到好奇心帶來的興奮。稍稍讀點考古學的書,就能了解那些英國古墓的故事,或者能幫你拼湊出南方草原上散落的羅馬人遺跡的大致分布圖。了解一些天文學常識,當你仰望天空的時候,就會更專注。你可以將地球的兄弟行星從陌生的星斗中挑出來,它們都和你的星球一樣,在同一個星系里運行。由此你可以領略到宇宙運行的秩序、美感和壯麗,這一切都表明在物質世界背后肯定有神的存在。我不明白科學家怎么能是唯物論者,宗派論主義者又怎么能將造物主的能力給局限起來。有畫家,才能有畫;有雕塑家,雕塑才能出現;有音樂家,才能有音樂;你能找出沒有前者就有后者的例子嗎?要是你能,那再跟我談宇宙存在的背后沒有一個造物主,或者,隨你用什么名稱叫他。
這兒還有一本弗拉馬里翁的《大氣》,非常漂亮,紅色和金色的封面,雖然因為年歲太久有點褪色了。這本書有個來歷,讓我十分珍惜它。在非洲西海岸的時候,一個來自法國的年輕人把這本書給了我,當作治療的費用,后來他死于熱病。看到它就讓我想起了在那艘小船的鋪位上,那個年輕人臉色土黃,眼睛凸出,悲傷地看著我??蓱z的孩子,我想他再也看不到心愛的故鄉(xiāng)馬賽了!
說起大眾科學知識,我覺得塞繆爾·拉寧的書最能激發(fā)一個人最初的興趣,并且讓人了解某個學科大致的知識結構。
誰能想到,這些書里看到的這位睿智的學者、儒雅的夢想家,居然也在一家鐵路公司蠻有干勁地做著秘書的工作呢?很多科學上成就極高的人,最開始通常都是做著很乏味的日常工作。赫伯特·斯賓塞最初是鐵路工程師。華萊士是土地測量師。但是,像拉寧這樣一個擁有如此超凡的科學頭腦的人,居然繼續(xù)把生命投入到枯燥的日常工作中,直到年紀很大實在做不動了才停下來,但他的靈魂一直都能接受新鮮觀念,頭腦依然能吸收最新的知識成果,這真是令人敬佩。讀一讀他的書吧,會讓你成為一個更豐富的人。
跟人聊天時,談談最近讀的書是非常好的選擇。你可能會說這對聽眾來說有點太難了;但是,如果不想談話涉及太多隱私,我覺得這要比那些尋常的閑聊好得多。當然了,這需要一點技巧,你要很謹慎。正是因為談到了拉寧,才把我的思緒引到了這個話題上。我在某次工作餐,或是在某個其他的場合的時候,聽到某人說起了索姆河谷的史前遺跡。我知道所有相關的知識,也告訴了他我所知道的。然后,我提到了尤卡坦半島上的石頭廟宇,他很快就接上了這個話題,并且就此話題進行了進一步詳述。他提到了古老的秘魯文明,我對這方面的了解也跟他不相上下。我還引用了對的的喀喀湖的生動描繪,這個他也都知道。他又說起了第四紀人類,我也能一直跟上。我們對彼此擁有如此廣博而準確的知識感到震驚,直到我突然想到了為什么會這樣?!澳阍谧x塞繆爾·拉寧的《人類之起源》!”我大聲說道。他確實是在讀這本書,碰巧我也在讀。我們在給對方澆水呢,而這水都是剛從源頭汲來的。
在我的科學書架的頂頭處有兩本大書,可能現在的一些學究還在爭論,覺得不能把它們歸入科學門類。這套書就是邁爾斯的《人類的品性》。不管怎么樣,我認為這套書可能會在百年之后被認為是一部偉大的開山之作,從它將延伸出一整套科學體系。在這兩本書的封面和封底之間,見證了他無與倫比的耐心、勤奮、思考和公正,他博學的頭腦能將千萬個零散的細節(jié)整合起來,用一致性的系統(tǒng)將它們全都收攏在一張網當中。正如達爾文沉迷于動物學研究,總是充滿激情地尋找并收集新奇的物種一樣,邁爾斯也在人類精神的晦暗領域進行了深入研究。他提出的假說前所未有,以至于需要發(fā)明出一套新的命名法和術語來表達,例如超能感應、潛意識,其他的則都有實例可查,并以細致、嚴謹的文字表述了推導過程,這將一直具有里程碑式的意義。
在文學的任何一個分支中,帶一點科學思想和科學方法的作品都有極大的吸引力,不管它們離實際研究有多遠。例如,愛倫·坡的故事在很大程度上應歸功于此,但是就他的情況來說,那都是幻想罷了。儒勒·凡爾納嫻熟地運用了大量自然界的真實知識描繪各種不可思議的神奇事物,但卻讓人覺得可信,并且看得欲罷不能。然而,他的作品最優(yōu)美之處在于其中輕靈的敘述形式,許多有趣的想象場景都是從真實例子出發(fā),引出類比和證明,想象與現實交相呼應,兩者的結合給讀者帶來了一種特別的閱讀快感。
溫德爾·福爾摩斯不朽的三部曲《獨裁者》《詩人》和《早餐桌上的教授》,這三本小小的書最能說明我的觀點了。在這幾本書里,時常用典故或類比來補充微妙、文雅又細致的見解,顯示了作者廣博的知識面,準確度也很高。他的作品真是太棒了!他充滿了智慧,妙語連珠,心胸寬廣,那么寬容!假如我們死后在極樂世界能選擇自己喜歡的哲學家講課,就像古時在雅典那樣,我肯定會加入圍著這位波士頓賢者的人群當中,聽他那充滿人性、飽含仁慈的講演。我想應該是科學一直以來對我潛移默化的影響,尤其是我早年學生時代受到的醫(yī)學方面的教育,讓我一直對這方面的書有如此強烈的興趣。我從來沒有見過溫德爾,卻覺得從未如此了解和仰慕過一個人。我的人生愿望之一就是希望有一天能見到他本人,但是由于命運的捉弄,當我抵達他所在的城市時,只能在他剛立好的墓碑面前獻上一個花圈。你再去讀一讀他的書,看看有沒有被他書里超前的想法深深打動。對我來說,他的作品就像是丁尼生的《悼念集》,它綻放的時間超前了五十年。我們隨便翻到一頁讀一讀,其中都不乏精彩的段落,都能說明作者視野寬廣,遣詞靈活,所用的類比極為幽默,而且相當有啟發(fā)性,感染力十足。下面就有一個例子,跟許多其他段落一樣,結合了所有這些不可多得的優(yōu)點:
通常,精神病的發(fā)生是由于正常大腦超負荷運轉。對于運行良好的精神機體而言,如果突然有外力試圖讓其停止或是反方向運轉,不可避免就會折斷輪子或杠桿。而對于軟弱的精神機制來說,它根本無法聚集足夠的力量對自身造成傷害;蠢笨的人常常不會遭受“發(fā)瘋”的傷害。我們經常會看到有的人由宗教信仰引發(fā)精神紊亂被送進精神病院。坦白說,我覺得他們比許多在精神病院之外的人要好,那些人盡管保持了正常的神智,還在盡情地享受生活,但腦子里的想法跟病人一樣。任何一個正派人,要是腦子里盡是一些那樣的想法,不瘋才怪呢……任何野蠻、殘忍、粗野的觀念,都會讓大多數人,甚至所有人的生活陷入絕望。任何認為有必要根除我們易被控制的本能的觀念—無論你管它叫什么,無論信它的人是修道士、托缽僧還是教會執(zhí)事,如果這種觀念被接受了,它就會讓每一個冷靜清醒的頭腦變得瘋狂。
一位大學教授敢這么說話,真是給沉悶的五十年代帶來了一絲辯證法的清風,而且也見證了他本人的道德勇氣。
在散文方面,比起蘭姆,我更喜歡溫德爾的作品,因為我覺得他的文章里有實際知識,而且如實地反映了生活中的問題和事件,在這一點上,蘭姆這位精靈般的倫敦人有所欠缺。我并不是說蘭姆不具有那種難得的天資。那里有我收藏的《伊利亞隨筆集》,你看看那本書就知道我也經常讀,所以并不是說我不喜歡蘭姆,而更喜歡溫德爾。他們都寫出了絕妙的作品,但溫德爾·福爾摩斯總是能在我心里奏出某種旋律,讓我對他產生一種回應的震顫。
散文總是不太討人喜歡,除非作者的筆調足夠靈活,足夠嫻熟。它也讓人想起在學校讀書時的課堂練習—給你一個題目,看你能在這個題目下寫出什么來。就連我最崇敬的史蒂文森寫的散文—就算他的散文里有一些新穎的觀點和優(yōu)雅的措辭—讀者讀過幾篇之后也就很難繼續(xù)往下讀了。雖然散文創(chuàng)作有不可避免的難處,但還是可以做得非常好,他的《人與書》和《少男少女》就是極佳范本。
但是他的文風,真令人遺憾!啊,假如史蒂文森能意識到他自己就擁有天賜的文筆該多好,而且是那么優(yōu)美而有力,那他就不會煞費苦心地去學用別人的風格寫作了!關于這事有一則廣受贊譽的傳聞,說他如何模仿這位或那位作家,不斷變換風格,以期找到最佳的寫作方式。讀到這事真是太令人傷心了!最自然的才是最好的啊。當史蒂文森有意識地錘煉文風的時候,很多評論家給予了贊揚,但是我覺得這時候的他就像是一個明明天生有好看的鬈發(fā),卻非要把一頂假發(fā)戴在頭上的人一樣。當他寫得有點做作的時候,就失去了對文章的把控。但是只要他忠于自我,做回那個蘇格蘭低地的撒克遜人,使用直截了當的詞語和精練的短句,那么,我覺得近年來都找不出能與他匹敵的作家。在這種強有力又樸實的背景下,偶爾出現的歡快語句就像是經過切割的寶石。一位真正好的文體家就像是博·布倫美筆下衣著得體的紳士一樣—穿得那么考究,旁人無從品評。當你開始注意到一個人的風格的時候,就說明里面有些問題。它就是水晶里的一點瑕疵,把讀者的注意力從文本轉向了手法,從作者的主題轉向了作者本身。
不,我沒有愛丁堡的版本。如果你實在想要找出一個代表,我真的不想提什么建議。也許我更希望在零散的書里看他的文字,而不是看他的全套作品。他一半的作品要比很多作家全部作品更優(yōu)質,而且也代表了他本人不錯的水準。我相信那些尊重他的友人肯定得到了授權,并針對如何出版全集給出了建議,而且很可能是在他令人遺憾地離世之前就安排好了。但是,我覺得,通常情況下,一位作者應該經過很好的修剪之后,再讓他暴露在時間的風吹雨打中。那些軟弱的枝條、不成熟的嫩芽都應該被去掉,只留下強健、茁壯、挺過了風風雨雨的樹枝,這樣才能讓整棵樹在未來的歲月里挺拔不倒。如果我們愛讀書的孫輩從這整套書里隨便拿出一本書,真是太有可能對史蒂文森留下錯誤印象了!當我們看著他的手在書架上游走的時候,只能祈禱他的手最后能停在我們喜歡的那些書上,《新一千零一夜》《落潮》《打撈船》《綁架》或是《金銀島》都可以。這些書從來沒有失去過它們的魅力。
后面這兩本書—《綁架》和《金銀島》—真是這個類型中極為優(yōu)秀的作品。它們都在我下層的書架上閃閃發(fā)光呢!《金銀島》講的故事雖然更精彩一些,但是我認為《綁架》擁有更恒久的價值,因為它生動描繪了查理二世最后一次復辟之后蘇格蘭高地的情況。兩本書里各有一個與眾不同、令人敬畏的人物,一本里是艾倫·布瑞克,另一本里是高個兒約翰。當然了,約翰·西爾弗的臉跟火腿一樣大,兩只小眼睛像兩塊玻璃碎渣一樣在臉中間閃著光,他真是所有海上亡命徒的國王。通過他可以觀察作者如何制造出令人印象深刻的效果,作者很少通過敘述者的視角來說什么,而是通過對比,通過影射和間接引語。討人厭的比利·伯恩斯很害怕一個“只有一條腿的海上惡徒”。小說告訴我們弗林特船長是一個勇敢的人,“他可是誰都不怕,只怕西爾弗—西爾弗就是那么厲害”?;蛘撸€有約翰自己說的:“有的人怕皮尤,有的人怕弗林特,但是弗林特本人很怕我。雖然他怕我,但他也有值得驕傲的地方。弗林特的船員個個能打,是海上最厲害的一群人,就是魔鬼都怕跟他們一起出海。所以,現在,我跟你說吧。我不是個愛吹牛的人,你自己也看到了我跟我的伙計們相處得很好。但是,一旦我掌舵的時候,弗林特都怕的老海盜可就不是小羊羔了。”從各處的描寫和暗示中,我們漸漸看到了一個油嘴滑舌、冷酷無情、領導有方的獨腿惡魔。對我們來說,他不再是一個被小說家創(chuàng)造出來的虛構人物,而像是我們遇見的現實中活生生的人。作者就是用這樣細致而隱晦的筆法將這個人物描繪了出來。還有那幫海盜,作者也只用了簡單的幾筆就把他們思考和行事方式寫了出來,但非常有效?!拔沂呛芟脒M那個房艙,真想;我想要他們的腌菜和紅酒什么的?!薄奥犞?,如果你真和比爾一起出過海,你是不會站在那里,讓人給你講兩遍該做什么,你肯定不會。那絕對不是比爾的風格,也不是跟他一起出過海的人會干的事。”司各特在《海盜》一書里寫的那些海盜令人嘆服,但是缺少一點人情味,而我們在這本書里能找到它。約翰·西爾弗這個人物在關于海洋的小說中會一直占有一席之地,“這一點絕對不錯”。
史蒂文森深受梅瑞狄斯的影響,在《綁架》和《金銀島》這兩本書里也可以看出這位大師的影響。史蒂文森有時候會用一個古體詞或是很不常用的詞語,他描寫的文字通常很短、很有力,用的比喻非同尋常,他的人物說話也大都很短促。不過,盡管他們有這些相似點,但他們的個人風格還是很明顯的,足以自成一派。他們的不足,或者說他們的局限,從來不在行文中體現,而是在他們最初的觀念里體現。他們只刻畫生活的某一個方面,而且是非常奇怪、不同尋常的一面。書里沒什么跟女性相關的內容,這讓我們覺得簡直就是“男孩小說”的巔峰—我們小時候愛看的一便士一本的偵探小說的大集合。但是故事都很好看,新奇而生動,所以盡管它的視野有局限,仍然穩(wěn)固地在文學史上占據著一席之地?!遏敒I遜漂流記》對十九世紀的年輕一代產生了重大影響,《金銀島》完全可以對二十一世紀的年輕一代產生相同影響。局面完全在向那個方向發(fā)展。
現代的那些男性主義小說,通常都只描寫生活中艱辛而動蕩的部分,只關注客觀的部分而不管主觀的部分。這標志著對之前的小說濫用愛情主題的舊觀念的抗拒。以正統(tǒng)的視角來寫人生的這個階段,然后以傳統(tǒng)的婚姻結束,這簡直已經成了陳詞濫調,讓人厭煩,所以可以理解有時候作家會走向另一個極端,在他們筆下,這件事在男人生活中并沒有得到應有的重視。英國的小說,十本里有九本都是把婚姻當成生命中的圓滿和結束。但是我們知道,在現實生活中,真相并非如此。對于一個普通人來說,婚姻不過是他人生中的一件事而已,當然,很重要;但是,也只是許多重大事件中的一件。他會被許多強烈的情感左右;他的事業(yè),他的野心,他的友情,還有那些不斷出現的危險和苦難,這些都會削弱人的智慧和勇氣,他要與之搏斗。通常,愛情只能在他生活中扮演一個次要的角色。這世上有多少人根本沒有體會過愛情就過完了一生?而愛情被這么頻繁地當成生命中首要且最重要的事情,真是讓人反感;所以,毫不奇怪,有的流派就完全避開了與之相關的內容,因為這個話題已經被太多人濫用,史蒂文森當然就是這個流派的領袖。如