諾貝爾文學(xué)獎(jiǎng)今年不頒了！

It’s always exciting every year in October when the Nobel Prizes are announced. We get to witness the acknowledgement of some of humankind’s greatest minds in six fields – literature, medicine, physics, chemistry, economics and activism for peace.

每年10月諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)揭曉之際都總是激動(dòng)人心。我們能夠見(jiàn)證六大領(lǐng)域 —— 文學(xué)、醫(yī)學(xué)和生理學(xué)、物理學(xué)、化學(xué)、經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)以及和平活動(dòng)的杰出人物獲獎(jiǎng)。

This year, however, part of the excitement will be taken away, since there won’t be a Nobel Prize in literature due to the fact that the Swedish Academy – the institution that awards the prize – was involved in a sexual harassment scandal.

然而今年，這一令人激動(dòng)的獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)卻少了一項(xiàng)，由于諾貝爾文學(xué)獎(jiǎng)?lì)C獎(jiǎng)機(jī)構(gòu)瑞典文學(xué)院深陷性騷擾丑聞，諾貝爾文學(xué)獎(jiǎng)停頒一年。

People worry that a scandal like this will affect the reputation of the Nobel Prizes. But at the same time, we have to ask ourselves whether we really need these awards after all.

人們擔(dān)心，這樣的丑聞將會(huì)影響諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)的聲譽(yù)。但同時(shí)，我們不得不捫心自問(wèn)：我們真的需要這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)嗎?

According to Jana Gallus, an economist from the University of Zurich, Switzerland, one of the reasons that people give out awards is to establish a legacy. In the case of the Nobel Prizes, they encourage people to achieve more by acknowledging the hard work of top figures in different fields.

瑞士蘇黎世大學(xué)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家亞娜·加盧斯認(rèn)為，人們頒發(fā)這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)的一大原因在于留下遺產(chǎn)。就諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)而言，通過(guò)嘉獎(jiǎng)不同領(lǐng)域頂尖人物的辛勞工作，鼓勵(lì)人們?nèi)〉酶喑删汀?/p>

Awards may also help establish standards of what’s considered high quality. For example, if you’re having a hard time deciding which movie to watch, one of them having an Oscar under its belt will probably help you to make your mind up. And by reading the books that have won The Man Booker Prize or listening to songs that have been awarded a Grammy, you get an idea about what “great” literature and music look and sound like – at least in the eyes of judging panels.

這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)或許也有助于建立起被視作高質(zhì)量的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。打個(gè)比方，如果你對(duì)于看哪部電影感到難以抉擇，觀影備選中的一部奧斯卡得獎(jiǎng)影片或許能幫你做出決定。而通過(guò)閱讀一本“布克獎(jiǎng)”獲獎(jiǎng)書(shū)目，或者聽(tīng)首“格萊美”金曲，你就能明白什么才是“杰出的”文學(xué)作品和音樂(lè) —— 至少在評(píng)審團(tuán)的眼中。

Sure, awards can backfire. There was the #OscarsSoWhite movement in 2015 and 2016, when it turned out that all 20 actors nominated for two years in a row were white. There was also the #GrammysSoMale movement in January, when Alessia Cara was the only woman to win a solo Grammy this year. But still, it was these incidents that brought the problems of racism and gender inequality into the public eye once more. And with influential voices – like that of black actor Will Smith, who refused to attend the Oscars ceremony – the problems became more likely to be noticed and dealt with instead of being buried silently, again.

當(dāng)然，這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)也會(huì)遭到抵制。2015-2016年，奧斯卡連續(xù)兩年所提名的20位男演員都是白人，從而引發(fā)了#奧斯卡太白運(yùn)動(dòng)。今年1月還有#格萊美太男人運(yùn)動(dòng)，因?yàn)榘⑷R西婭·卡拉是今年唯一一位獲得格萊美單人獎(jiǎng)的女性。但至少，正是這些事件使種族歧視以及性別不平等的問(wèn)題反復(fù)進(jìn)入到公眾視野中。而那些具有影響力的聲音 —— 就像拒絕出席奧斯卡頒獎(jiǎng)禮的黑人演員威爾·史密斯那樣 —— 能讓這些問(wèn)題得到更多關(guān)注，并被妥善處理，而不是再一次被默默無(wú)視。

Maybe these awards do matter, and we do need them – just not while they are under the shadow of a sexual harassment scandal.

或許這些獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)的確十分重要，我們也的確需要它們 —— 但并不是這種籠罩在性騷擾丑聞陰影下的獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)。

So when it comes to this year’s Nobel Prize in Literature, I’m going to have to say: “No, thanks.”

所以對(duì)于今年的諾貝爾文學(xué)獎(jiǎng)，我要說(shuō)：“不， 謝謝。”