Notes of a Proustian
原文網址:http://blog.udn.com/le14nov/150968823
列印日期:2020/12/04
Excerpt:《石黑一雄諾貝爾獎獲獎演說》
2020/09/27 06:33:13
Excerpt:《石黑一雄諾貝爾獎獲獎演說》

……如果可以的話,就算我的「諾貝爾訴求」吧!要讓整個世界變好是難事,但是至少讓我們考慮一下,我們如何為我們自己的小角落,這個「文學」的小角落做好準備,我們讀書、寫書、出版書、評論書、對它譴責批判和褒揚授獎。如果我們在不確定的未來要扮演重要的角色,如果我們要從今日的寫作者和明日的寫作者身上得出最好的結果,我相信我們應該要更加的多元。我指的有兩個特別的地方。
首先,我們應該擴大我們共通的文學世界,納入更多我們的菁英第一世界文化的舒適圈之外的聲音。我們應當更努力地去搜尋,去發掘如今未知的文藝文化的珍寶,不管這些作家是住在遙遠的國度,或是在我們自己的社區裡。第二點,我們必須努力,不要對什麼是構成好的文學,做出太過狹隘或保守的定義。下一個世代將會帶來各種新的、有時令人迷惑的方式,來訴說重要和美好的故事。我們應該對它們開放心胸,特別是在文類和形式上,如此我們才能培養並禮讚當中最好的作品。在這個日趨分裂的危險時刻,我們必須要傾聽。良好寫作和良好閱讀將打破藩籬。甚至我們可以找到新的想法,一個偉大人性的願景,可以讓我們共同來支持推動。
——
石黑一雄,〈諾貝爾獎獲獎演說〉

截至目前,只讀過《浮世畫家》和《長日將盡》這兩本小說,恰巧在圖書館發現上海譯文出版的這本小書《石黑一雄諾貝爾獎獲獎演說》。

不意外地,這篇演說相當好看,既是石黑一雄小小的回憶錄,也提及創作的一些心路歷程;然而意外地,他特別提到了普魯斯特。

印象所及,2014年諾貝爾文學獎得主蒙迪安諾 (Patrick Modiano) 被瑞典學院喻為「當代的普魯斯特」;當代作家約翰厄普代克 (John Updike) 則是將2006年諾貝爾文學獎得主奧罕帕慕克 (Orhan Pamuk) 與普魯斯特相提並論;至於2001年的奈波爾(V. S. Naipaul)自己在諾貝爾頒獎典禮上三度提到普魯斯特的作品《駁聖伯夫》(Against Sainte-Beuve)……

或許,每一位有志於文學創作者,甚或是以諾貝爾文學獎為目標者,總是要先解決關於普魯斯特「影響的焦慮」吧!



https://www.books.com.tw/products/CN11594626
石黑一雄諾貝爾獎獲獎演說
作者:石黑一雄
出版社:上海譯文出版社
出版日期:2018/09/01
語言:簡體中文

《石黑一雄諾貝爾獎獲獎演說》是2017年諾貝爾文學獎得主英國作家石黑一雄在瑞典學院發表的獲獎演說。在這篇演講中,石黑一雄回憶了他文學創作的心路歷程。石黑一雄以一種輕鬆謙虛的語調,講述了他創作生涯中幾個具有啟示意義的轉折點。在演說的很后,石黑還對當代文學提出呼籲,呼籲以更多元化的態度拓展文學界,以更開放的心態對待文學體裁和形式。 本書為中英雙語讀物,讀者不但能夠欣賞到中文版的獲獎演說,更能直接賞讀該篇演講的英語原文,進一步領略諾獎得主石黑一雄的文字魅力。


Excerpt
https://www.mirrormedia.mg/story/20171208int_ishiguro_nobel_reception/
【諾貝爾文學獎得主石黑一雄獲獎演說全文】二十世紀夜——與其他小突破
翻譯:謝樹寬 (2017.12.10 14:06)

三年半之後的1983年春天,羅娜和我已經在倫敦,住在一棟高窄樓頂樓的兩間房,這房子本身就矗立城市最高點之一的小山丘上。附近有個電視台的電塔,當我們聽著轉盤的唱片時,如幽魂般的廣播聲音有時會間斷入侵我們的音箱。我們的起居室沒有沙發或扶手椅,只有擺著靠枕的兩張毯子。另外還有個大桌子,白天我用來寫作,晚上我們一起吃飯。它說不上豪華,但我們喜歡住在這裡。我在前一年已經出版了第一本小說,同時我也寫了一個即將在英國電視播出的短片劇本。
有一段時期我對自己的第一部小說算是合理程度地感到自豪,不過到了這個春天,有種微微不滿的心情開始出現。問題是這樣的。我的第一部小說和我第一個電視劇本太過相似了。類似的不是主題,而是它們的方法和風格。我越加以審視,就越覺我的小說像一個劇本——對話加上場景指示。這本來還不成問題,不過現在我希望的是我寫的小說只有在紙頁上才能展現應有效果。如果打開電視機就可以得到差不多相同的體驗,那麼為什麼還需要寫小說呢?在電影和電視的強大威力下,書寫的虛構如果不能提供某種獨一無二、其他形式無法做到的東西,它要如何能存活?
這段期間,我感染了病毒在床上躺了幾天。當我病情有了起色不想整天躺著睡覺時,我發現在我的被子上干擾我好一陣子的沉甸甸物品,原來是普魯斯特的《追憶似水年華》的第一部。書在那兒,於是我就開始讀了起來。我仍然持續的發燒症狀也許是原因之一,不過〈序幕〉和〈貢布雷〉的段落讓我完全振奮起來。我反覆地閱讀。除了這些段落文字的純粹美感之外,我也深深著迷於普魯斯特從一個故事引導到下一個故事的方式。事件和場景的排序並不是按照一般時間序的要求,也不是基於線性的情節。取而代之的是各種逸散的思緒聯想,以及出沒不定的記憶,它們似乎牽引著作品從一段故事到另一段故事。有時我自己也不禁好奇,為什麼這兩個看似不相關的片刻會並置在敘事者的心中?我突然找到了我第二部小說一個刺激、更加自由的寫作方式:一個可以在紙頁上創造豐富內容,同時在任何屏幕上都無法捕捉的內在動作。如果我能夠根據敘事者思緒的聯想和飄移的記憶來行走文章段落,我的創作應該可以像抽象畫家一樣,在畫布上選擇安排形狀與色彩。我可以把兩天前的場景並置在另一段二十年前的場景,邀請讀者來想像這二者之間的關係。我開始思考,或許我可以用這樣的方式,呈現出籠罩在任何人對自我與對過去的看法上許多層次的自欺與否定。

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/2017/ishiguro/25124-kazuo-ishiguro-nobel-lecture-2017/
Kazuo Ishiguro – Nobel Lecture
7 December, 2017
My Twentieth Century Evening – and Other Small Breakthroughs

Spring 1983, three and a half years later. Lorna and I were now in London, lodging in two rooms at the top of a tall narrow house, which itself stood on a hill at one of the highest points of the city. There was a television mast nearby and when we tried to listen to records on our turntable, ghostly broadcasting voices would intermittently invade our speakers. Our living room had no sofa or armchair, but two mattresses on the floor covered with cushions. There was also a large table on which I wrote during the day, and where we had dinner at night. It wasn’t luxurious, but we liked living there. I’d published my first novel the year before, and I’d also written a screenplay for a short film soon to be broadcast on British television.
I’d been for a time reasonably proud of my first novel, but by that spring, a niggling sense of dissatisfaction had set in. Here was the problem. My first novel and my first TV screenplay were too similar. Not in subject matter, but in method and style. The more I looked at it, the more my novel resembled a screenplay – dialogue plus directions. This was okay up to a point, but my wish now was to write fiction that could work properly only on the page. Why write a novel if it was going to offer more or less the same experience someone could get by turning on a television? How could written fiction hope to survive against the might of cinema and television if it didn’t offer something unique, something the other forms couldn’t do?

Around this time, I came down with a virus and spent a few days in bed. When I came out of the worst of it, and I didn’t feel like sleeping all the time, I discovered that the heavy object, whose presence amidst my bedclothes had been annoying me for some time, was in fact a copy of the first volume of Marcel Proust’s Remembrance of Things Past (as the title was then translated). There it was, so I started to read it. My still fevered condition was perhaps a factor, but I became completely riveted by the Overture and Combray sections. I read them over and over. Quite aside from the sheer beauty of these passages, I became thrilled by the means by which Proust got one episode to lead into the next. The ordering of events and scenes didn’t follow the usual demands of chronology, nor those of a linear plot. Instead, tangential thought associations, or the vagaries of memory seemed to move the writing from one episode to the next. Sometimes I found myself wondering: why had these two seemingly unrelated moments been placed side by side in the narrator’s mind? I could suddenly see an exciting, freer way of composing my second novel; one that could produce richness on the page and offer inner movements impossible to capture on any screen. If I could go from one passage to the next according to the narrator’s thought associations and drifting memories, I could compose in something like the way an abstract painter might choose to place shapes and colours around a canvas. I could place a scene from two days ago right beside one from twenty years earlier, and ask the reader to ponder the relationship between the two. In such a way, I began to think, I might suggest the many layers of self-deception and denial that shrouded any person’s view of their own self and of their past.