《苏菲的世界删减部分》

Author Avatar
neko 11月11日
  • 在其它设备中阅读本文章

2010.12.1

 在blogbus的访问统计暴涨中,我才突然发现是这篇文章的访问激增的结果。然后随便谷歌百度一下,立刻囧了:首先这篇文章两年前左右就被转到豆瓣上,当然转时没链接我的地址,所以我没发现。现在这文又被转了,因为有链接,于是我发现了……

 我之所以囧,是因为这篇东东的翻译是我当时英语垃圾一个明证,而如今竟成了一个传播最广泛的翻译,我实在是害人不浅。。。所以我刚刚无法忍受良心的煎熬,重新修正了这翻译中的各种瑕疵。

 也希望所有转载的童鞋能自己再亲自校对和理解一遍,毕竟这个世界上对马克思的误读已经够多了。

我是分隔四年的一条线

无数天的荒废后,重读《苏菲的世界》终于读到“马克思”,这个我第一次看就知道中文版肯定有所删节的地方,特别是结尾非常唐凸:
“听起来是很棒,但实际的情况是怎样呢?后来真的发生革命了吗?”
“马克思主义造成了社会上很大的变动。毫无疑问的,社会主义已经大致改善了社会上不人道的现象。无论如何,我们所生活的社会已经要比马克思的时代更加公平、更团结。这一部分要归功于马克思和整个社会运动。” 然后书就跳到下一章“达尔文”去了,完全没有苏菲与艾伯特对话的过渡。
我在网上找到了英文版,与书逐句对比才终于找出删节的相关部分的内容:与我国马克思主义观点相异的内容。文章主体有小句子性的删节,比如中文版那句“据说马克思本人是到一八四零年代中期才变成一个‘马克思主义者’”后还应该有一句“but even after that he could at times feel it necessary to assert that he was not a Marxist(但即使在那之后,他可能有时会感到有必要声明自己不是一个马克思主义者)”西西,这一句话是作者想说明后世的马克思主义不全是属于马克思想法的主义了。
这些零星的删节我就不理睬了,关键是结尾部分的大篇幅删除很值得一看。我在这里贴出英文原版,有兴趣的同学可以一起读读一个挪威哲学教师对马克思主义完整的看法,我估计这代表大部分正统西方哲学家观点。
(注:根据王王的提议,英文版后跟了我自己翻译的中文,只是按照我自己的理解来译,是我第一次翻译英语文章,相信很烂而且错误百出,建议有能力的自己读英文版)

(接中文版倒数第二段):
"It all sounds wonderful, but what actually happened? Was there a revolution?"

"Yes and no. Today, economists can establish that Marx was mistaken on a number of vital issues, not least his analysis of the crises of capitalism. And he paid insufficient attention to the plundering of the natural environment--the serious consequences of which we are experiencing today. Nevertheless . . ."

"Nevertheless?"

"Marxism led to great upheavals. There is no doubt that socialism has largely succeeded in combating an inhumane society. In Europe, at any rate, we live in a society with more justice--and more solidarity--than Marx did. This is not least due to Marx himself and the entire socialist movement."

"What happened?"

"After Marx, the socialist movement split into two main streams, Social Democracy and Leninism. Social Democracy, which has stood for a gradual and peaceful path in the direction of socialism, was Western Europes way. We might call this the slow revolution. Leninism, which retained Marxs beief that revolution was the only way to combat the old class society, had great influence in Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa. Each in their own way, both movements have fought against hardship and oppression."

"But didnt it create a new form of oppression? For example in Russia and Eastern Europe?"

"No doubt of that, and here again we see that everything man touches becomes a mixture of good and evil. On the other hand, it would be unreasonable to blame Marx for the negative factors in the so-called socialist countries fifty or a hundred years after his death. But maybe he had given too little thought to the people who would be the administrators of communist society. There will probably never be a promised land. Mankind will always create new problems to fight about."

"Im sure it will."

"And there we bring down the curtain on Marx, Sophie."

"Hey, wait a minute! Didnt you say something about justice only existing among equals?"

"No, it was Scrooge who said that."

"How do you know what he said?"

"Oh well--you and I have the same author. In actual fact we are more closely linked to each other than we would appear to the casual observer."

"Your wretched irony again!"

"Double, Sophie, that was double irony."

"But back to justice. You said that Marx thought capitalism was an unjust form of society. How would you define a just society?"

"A moral philosopher called John Rawls attempted to say something about it with the following example: Imagine you were a member of a distinguished council whose task it was to make all the laws for a future society."

"I wouldnt mind at all being on that council."

"They are obliged to consider absolutely every detail, because as soon as they reach an agreement--and everybody has signed the laws--they will all drop dead."

"Oh . . ."

"But they will immediately come to life again in the society they have legislated for. The point is that they have no idea which position they will have in society."

"Ah, I see."

"That society would be a just society. It would have arisen among equals."

"Men and women!"

"That goes without saying. None of them knew whether they would wake up as men or women. Since the odds are fifty-fifty, society would be just as attractive for women as for men."

"It sounds promising."

"So tell me, was the Europe of Karl Marx a society like that?"

"Absolutely not!"

"But do you by any chance know of such a society today?"

"Hm ... thats a good question." "Think about it. But for now there will be no more about Marx." "Excuse me?" "Next chapter!"(这才是艾伯特反讽风格的跳转)

我的翻译(-____-!~):

“听起来是很棒,但实际的情况如何呢?后来真的发生革命了吗?”

“可以说发生了,也可以说还未发生。今天,除了他关于资本主义危机的分析外,经济学家还可以确证马克思在一些重要问题上犯了错误。另外他没有重视人类对大自然资源的掠夺——我们今天正在面临其严重后果。然而……”

“然而什么?”

“马克思主义造成了社会上很大的变动。社会主义已经大致改善了社会上不人道的现象。至少在欧洲,我们已经生活在一个比马克思时代更加公平、更加团结的社会中。这很大程度上归功于马克思和整个社会运动。”

“这其中发生了什么?”

“马克思之后,社会运动分裂成两股潮流:社会民主主义和列宁主义。社会民主主义代表一条渐进并和平通向社会主义的道路,也正是西欧所选择的道路。我们或者把它称作慢性革命。而列宁主义继承马克思暴力革命是唯一途径的信念,在东欧、亚洲和非洲有广泛的影响力。两股潮流在各自的征途上都困难重重,抵抗镇压。

“但是这难道不是形成了一种新型的镇压?比如说在俄国和东欧?”

“无庸置疑,在这里我们又一次看到人类所涉及的每一件东西都变成了善恶的两面体。不过没有道理因为那些在马克思死后五十或者一百年里的“所谓社会主义国家”中的消极成分而指责马克思本人。但是他也许没有对那些将成为共产主义社会领导的人们给予充分的考虑。很可能从来就没有一块真正的‘乐土’,人类总是为自己制造新的麻烦。”

“我相信会有的。”

“现在我们结束马克思的内容吧,苏菲。”

“嘿,等等!你刚才不是说什么公平只存在于平等之中吗?”

“不,那是‘吝啬鬼’(注:本章前面提到的一个文学人物)说的。”

“你怎么知道他说了什么?”

“好吧,这样看——你和我有同一个作者。事实上我们总是紧密联系,而不只是相互不经意的旁观者。”

“又是你可恶的反讽!”

“双重,苏菲,那是双重反讽。”

“回到公平的话题。你说马克思认为资本主义是一种不公平的社会形式。那你如何定义一个公平的社会?”

“一个叫约翰·罗尔斯的哲学家试图举例说明:想想你是一个特别议会的一员,你们的任务是为新的社会制定法律。”

“我一点也不介意加入那个议会。”

“那个议会的人们必须完全考虑到每个细节,因为一旦他们达成一个共识,他们每个人都签署法律使之生效后,他们就会立刻全部挂掉。”

“噢……”

“但他们很快会在他们立法所设计的那个新社会中复活。而关键一点在于,他们将不知道自己在那个社会中处于一个怎样的位置。”

“哈,我明白了。”

“那是一个绝对公平的社会。它将会在平等中诞生。”

“男性和女性呢?”

“当然也没有差别。没有人知道他们以男性还是女性的身份复活。因为各自的机会都是百分之五十,所以社会对于女性和男性将同样美好。”

“听起来充满希望呢。”

“那么告诉我,卡尔·马克思生活的欧洲是那样的社会吗?”

“完全不是!”

“但是你现在万一知道了有这么一个社会呢?”

“唔……好问题。”

“想想吧。不过我们不会再谈论马克思了。”

“什么?”

“下一章!”

转自 https://web.archive.org/web/20140218220834/http://sgzxy.blogbus.com/logs/6296455.html

正常的网站大约是不能访问了
所以我这里贴出来的是时光机的地址

你以为我为什么这么匆忙
应为我现在是再团委摸鱼啊 不能被发现 -v-