評論
打印
"The optimum population," said Mustapha Mond, "is modelled on the iceberg–eight-ninths below the water line, one-ninth above."
“人口最佳比例是”，穆斯塔法.蒙德說，“按照冰山模式——九分之八在水下，九分之一在水上。”
And they're happy below the water line?
水下的人會幸福嗎？
"Happier than above it. Happier than your friend here, for example." He pointed.
“比水上的人幸福。比你在這兒的兩位朋友快樂，比如。”他指著他們倆。
In spite of that awful work?
盡管做著那種可怕的工作！
Awful? They don't find it so. On the contrary, they like it. It's light, it's childishly simple.
可怕？他們并不覺得可怕。相反倒喜歡。因為清閑呀，簡單得像小孩的玩意。
No strain on the mind or the muscles. Seven and a half hours of mild, unexhausting labour,
不用訓練頭腦和肌肉。七個小時半不算繁重的勞動，
and then the soma ration and games and unrestricted copulation and the feelies.
然后有定量的唆麻、游戲、不受限制的性交和感官電影。
What more can they ask for? True, he added, they might ask for shorter hours.
他們還會有什么要求？不錯，他說下去，她們可能要求縮短工作日。
And of course we could give them shorter hours.
我們當然能夠給他們縮短。
Technically, it would be perfectly simple to reduce all lower-caste working hours to three or four a day.
從技術上講，要把低種姓人的工作日縮短為三四個小時可以不費吹灰之力。
But would they be any the happier for that? No, they wouldn't.
但是他們會因此而多一些幸福嗎？不，不會的。
The experiment was tried, more than a century and a half ago. The whole of Ireland was put on to the four-hour day.
一個半世紀多以前曾經做過一次實驗。愛爾蘭全部改成每天四小時。
What was the result? Unrest and a large increase in the consumption of soma; that was all.
結果如何？動蕩不安和更高的唆麻消費，如此而已。
Those three and a half hours of extra leisure were so far from being a source of happiness,
那多出來的三個半小時空閑遠遠不足以成為幸福的根源，
that people felt constrained to take a holiday from them.
卻使得他們不得不休唆麻假。
The Inventions Office is stuffed with plans for labour-saving processes. Thousands of them.
發明局里塞滿了減少勞動的計劃，有好幾千。
Mustapha Mond made a lavish gesture. And why don't we put them into execution?
穆斯塔法.蒙德做了一個手勢，表示很多。我們為什么不實行？
For the sake of the labourers; it would be sheer cruelty to afflict them with excessive leisure.
是為了勞動者的利益。拿過多的余暇折磨他們簡直就是殘酷。
It's the same with agriculture. We could synthesize every morsel of food, if we wanted to.
農業也一樣。只要我們愿意，每一口食物都可以合成。
But we don't. We prefer to keep a third of the population on the land.
但是我們不干。我們寧可把三分之一的人口保留在土地上，
For their own sakes–because it takes longer to get food out of the land than out of a factory.
那是為了他們好，因為從土地上取得食物比從工廠要慢。
Besides, we have our stability to think of. We don't want to change.
而且我們還得考慮到穩定，不想變。
Every change is a menace to stability. That's another reason why we're so chary of applying new inventions.
每一次變都威脅穩定。那是我們很不愿意應用新發明的又一個原因。
