Books and Arts; Book Review; The cold war; Feel of history;
The Atlantic and Its Enemies: A History of the Cold War. By Norman Stone.
Imagine that you are invited to lunch at Oxford University. Sherry, wine and port flow like the Isis, with facts, anecdotes, bons mots and sparkling insights swirling past in a bewildering but entertaining array. The conversation continues on a punt, then on a brisk walk around the university parks, then over tea, which slips into (more) sherry, and afterwards a splendiferous “high table” dinner. Late at night you wobble through the darkened streets, still talking, feeling pleasantly at one with the world. It is great fun, but no substitute for actually studying history.
想像一下,你被邀請到牛津大學享用午餐。雪利酒和波爾圖葡萄酒等各種酒如伊希斯河般源源不斷,席間,正史秩聞,乖語妙談和真知卓見雖不易領悟,卻也愉悅萬分。會談隨后在一葉輕舟上,大學公園的輕快散步時繼續,不經意間,茶將用盡,又悄悄喝起雪利,興致倍增,隨后就是奢華的“高端”晚宴。午夜時分,你微醉的穿過夜街,依然呢喃不止,已與世界渾然一體。雖說可以逗樂,但無法取代真正的歷究研究。
That is how reading Norman Stone’s book about the cold war feels. He has a terrific eye for detail, bringing to life everything from the ruins of Germany to Ronald Reagan’s White House with a wonderfully waspish turn of phrase: Nikita Khrushchev, unlike his colleagues, “did indeed have a human face, though pachydermic”. Sometimes it runs away with him. Boris Yeltsin is dismissed in barely a page as a “sinister clown”. He captures well the West’s weakness, as well as the seemingly powerful challenge that eastern-style socialism posed to Western freedom.
閱讀諾曼·斯通與冷戰有關的著作時,會有類似感覺。他觀察入微,以優雅刻薄的筆觸真實再現了從戰后德國廢墟到羅納德·里根主政白宮的歷史:尼基塔·赫魯曉夫不像他的幕僚,“雖然有些厚臉皮,倒也長得人模人樣的”,有時也會撕破臉皮。,在Norman Stone看來,鮑里斯·葉利欽不過是個“邪惡的小丑”,書中他用了不足一頁就把葉利欽概括過去了。 在對西方國家弱點和來自東部社會主義對西方民主強有力挑戰的描述上,他的把握恰到好處。
At the end of this work you will know a lot about Europe, about the cold war and about Mr Stone himself. But the book has a careless air. The prose reads as if it had been dictated rather than written, and was then sent straight to the printers. The word “besides” appears with alarming frequency as a way of linking page-long paragraphs. Colloquialisms that would be charming once become grating and lazy when you meet them page after page. Episodes that normally count as rather important, such as the Polish shipyard strikes in 1980, pass in a blur, whereas hobby-horses such as the decline of British universities get an energetic ride.
看完以后,對于歐洲,冷戰或者是斯通本人,你都會了解更多。但這本書卻有些草率,它看起來更像是口述后直接交付印刷廠。用“besides”將長達一頁的段落連接起來,其使用頻率多到驚人。許多口語,如果只用一次,宛如神來之筆,但如果連篇累牘則讓人難忍,徒生惰怠。 一些通常被認為比較重要的事件,如1980年波蘭碼頭工人大罷工,只是一筆帶過,而作者喜歡的話題如英國大學衰退,卻是大書特書。
Nor is there any sign of research. When Mr Stone does not know a fact, he shrugs his shoulders. The reason why Russian immigrants poured into occupied Estonia and Latvia in the Soviet era, but not into Lithuania, is an interesting historical question which affects the present. He recounts it, adds “for whatever reason” and moves on. Teresa Toranska, a Polish author, wrote a magnificent book called “Them”, based on interviews with dinosaur communists. Mr Stone refers to her book but cannot be bothered to name it or her. Instead of footnotes, there is a section called “further reading”. For a polyglot, he is remarkably careless in his spelling of names. Diacritical signs are distributed at random. Experts and lay readers alike will feel increasingly short-changed.
此書也看不到研究的任何跡象。當Stone先生對某件史實不清時,只能無奈的含糊其辭。在蘇維埃時代,俄羅斯移民涌入已被占領的愛沙尼亞和拉脫維亞,而沒有去立陶宛。其原因何在? 這個有趣的歷史問題影響著當今世界。他對于這一史實進行了復述,只是加上“不管什么理由”之后,就寫作下文。波蘭作家Teresa Toranska在對瀕臨滅絕的共產黨魁采訪基礎上創作了巨著《他們》。斯通在參考了該書,但對于作者和書名卻只字不提。書中用名為“進一步閱讀”的章節,取代了大量的腳注。作為一個通曉多國語言的人而言,他在人名拼寫的馬虎程度,令人驚訝。書中不時出現一些變音符號。不管是內行還是外行的讀者,都陡增被騙的感覺。
Most annoying of all is the lack of a conclusion: the book ends with a garbled account of the downfall of Margaret Thatcher and the limp observation that the 1980s were by far the most interesting part of the post-war era. Mr Stone’s colossal talents and his epic subject surely deserve better.
最令人不解的還是書中并沒有任何的結論,書中結尾處,作者斷章取義地敘述了瑪格麗特·撒切爾政府垮臺,并草率地斷言戰后最為有趣的一段歷史便是20世紀80年代。毫無疑問,斯通滿腹珠璣,題材可歌可泣,應是上乘之作才對。