第3段
For the truth is much stranger even than it appears in the formal doctrine of the sin of pride. It is not only true that humility is a much wiser and more vigorous thing than pride. It is also true that vanity is a much wiser and more vigorous thing than pride. Vanity is social—it is almost a kind of comradeship; pride is solitary and uncivilized. Vanity is active; it desires the applause of infinite multitudes; pride is passive, desiring only the applause of one person, which it already has. Vanity is humorous, and can enjoy the joke even of itself; pride is dull, and cannot even smile. And the whole of this difference is the difference between Stevenson and Mr. George Moore, who, as he informs us, has "brushed Stevenson aside." I do not know where he has been brushed to, but wherever it is I fancy he is having a good time, because he had the wisdom to be vain, and not proud. Stevenson had a windy vanity; Mr. Moore has a dusty egoism. Hence Stevenson could amuse himself as well as us with his vanity; while the richest effects of Mr. Moore's absurdity are hidden from his eyes.
事實遠比關於驕傲這罪的正式教義所揭示的更加怪異，因爲不僅謙卑比驕傲更為明智和有活力，虛榮亦然。虛榮是一種社交性的情感，幾乎可說是一種朋友情誼；而驕傲則是孤獨而野蠻的。虛榮是主動的，渴望著無數人的掌聲；驕傲則是被動的，只渴望著一個人的掌聲，而這掌聲他早已獲得。虛榮充滿幽默感，能欣賞自身的笑話；而驕傲則沈悶無趣，連微笑都做不到。而這兩者間的整體差異，就體現在Stevenson與喬治·摩爾先生間的差別上，如同摩爾先生所言，他已將Stevenson拋到九霄雲外，全然置之不理。我不知道他被拋往何方，但不論在哪，我想他應該相當愉快，因為他夠聰明，選擇了虛榮而不是驕傲。Stevenson的虛榮如舒緩涼風，摩爾的自高自傲則佈滿灰塵。正因如此，Steven能以虛榮自娛，同時也娛樂我們，但摩爾的荒謬之行所產生的最偉大效果，卻連他自己也看不見。
第4段
If we compare this solemn folly with the happy folly with which Stevenson belauds his own books and berates his own critics, we shall not find it difficult to guess why it is that Stevenson at least found a final philosophy of some sort to live by, while Mr. Moore is always walking the world looking for a new one. Stevenson had found that the secret of life lies in laughter and humility. Self is the gorgon. Vanity sees it in the mirror of other men and lives. Pride studies it for itself and is turned to stone.
若我們把這莊重嚴肅的愚蠢，拿來跟Stevenson歌頌自己的著作並責罵批評他的評論家時所展用出的快樂呆傻相比，我們應不難猜出為何至少Stevenson能找到最終賴以為生、奉為圭臬的哲學信念，但喬治·摩爾一直在世上四處遊走，尋找新的信念。史蒂文森明白生命的秘密存於笑聲與謙卑之中。我們的自我就是那蛇髮女妖。虛榮透過他人的鏡子看見自我，並因此生存；而驕傲將自我當作研究對象，最終石化死亡。
第5段
It is necessary to dwell on this defect in Mr. Moore, because it is really the weakness of work which is not without its strength. Mr. Moore's egoism is not merely a moral weakness, it is a very constant and influential aesthetic weakness as well. We should really be much more interested in Mr. Moore if he were not quite so interested in himself. We feel as if we were being shown through a gallery of really fine pictures, into each of which, by some useless and discordant convention, the artist had represented the same figure in the same attitude. "The Grand Canal with a distant view of Mr. Moore," "Effect of Mr. Moore through a Scotch Mist," "Mr. Moore by Firelight," "Ruins of Mr. Moore by Moonlight," and so on, seems to be the endless series. He would no doubt reply that in such a book as this he intended to reveal himself. But the answer is that in such a book as this he does not succeed. One of the thousand objections to the sin of pride lies precisely in this, that selfconsciousness of necessity destroys selfrevelation. A man who thinks a great deal about himself will try to be manysided, attempt a theatrical excellence at all points, will try to be an encyclopaedia of culture, and his own real personality will be lost in that false universalism. Thinking about himself will lead to trying to be the universe; trying to be the universe will lead to ceasing to be anything. If, on the other hand, a man is sensible enough to think only about the universe; he will think about it in his own individual way. He will keep virgin the secret of God; he will see the grass as no other man can see it, and look at a sun that no man has ever known. This fact is very practically brought out in Mr. Moore's "Confessions." In reading them we do not feel the presence of a cleancut personality like that of Thackeray and Matthew Arnold. We only read a number of quite clever and largely conflicting opinions which might be uttered by any clever person, but which we are called upon to admire specifically, because they are uttered by Mr. Moore. He is the only thread that connects Catholicism and Protestantism, realism and mysticism—he or rather his name. He is profoundly absorbed even in views he no longer holds, and he expects us to be. And he intrudes the capital "I" even where it need not be intruded—even where it weakens the force of a plain statement. Where another man would say, "It is a fine day," Mr. Moore says, "Seen through my temperament, the day appeared fine." Where another man would say "Milton has obviously a fine style," Mr. Moore would say, "As a stylist Milton had always impressed me." The Nemesis of this selfcentred spirit is that of being totally ineffectual. Mr. Moore has started many interesting crusades, but he has abandoned them before his disciples could begin. Even when he is on the side of the truth he is as fickle as the children of falsehood. Even when he has found reality he cannot find rest. One Irish quality he has which no Irishman was ever without—pugnacity; and that is certainly a great virtue, especially in the present age. But he has not the tenacity of conviction which goes with the fighting spirit in a man like Bernard Shaw. His weakness of introspection and selfishness in all their glory cannot prevent him fighting; but they will always prevent him winning.
我們有必要花些時間研究摩爾的這個缺陷，因為這確實是他那些佳作中的軟肋。摩爾先生的「自我中心」不單是道德上的瑕疵，更是一個存在已久、影響深遠的美感瑕疵。如果摩爾不是對自己這麼感興趣，我們或許會覺得他更有趣。我們彷彿正被引領參觀收藏優美畫作的藝廊，但畫家卻以某種無謂且突兀的慣例，在每一幅畫中都呈現同一人物的同樣神貌。「摩爾遠眺大運河」、「蘇格蘭迷霧中的摩爾」、「爐火旁的摩爾」、「月光下的摩爾殘像」等等永無止境的系列畫作。他必定會辯解說，在這樣一本書中，他的本意就是要展露自我。但真相是，在這樣一本書中，他並未成功達到其目標。而這正是對傲慢之罪的千百種批評之一：過度專注自我，導致無法自我認識/揭露（self-revelation）。一個太過關注自己的人，會試圖八方玲瓏、面面俱到，在各方面都追求吸睛的成就，奢想成為一部文化百科全書，而在這虛假的普世主義中（universalism），他真實的人格反而消失了。將思想放在自己身上，致使一個人試圖成為宇宙；試圖成為宇宙，則會導致一個人變成什麼都不是。但倘若，一個人神智還夠清楚，只思考宇宙，他會以自己個人的方式去思考它。他將保有原初的上帝奧秘；他將看到旁人眼睛看不見的翠綠草地，看到旁人未曾見過的太陽。在摩爾《告白》這本書中，以上這事實非常實際地體現。閱讀書中文字時，我們感受不到像薩克萊（Thackeray）或馬修·阿諾德（Matthew Arnold）那樣輪廓鮮明的性格。我們讀到的只是一些任何聰明人都說得出口，相當聰明卻又相互矛盾的觀點，但這些觀點卻又抬舉為特別值得欽佩，因它們出自摩爾之口。他或該說他的名字，是天主教與新教、寫實主義與神秘主義之間的唯一連結。即使對於他不再信奉的觀點，他也沉醉其中，並期望我們也如此。即使在文章無需有「我」之處，他也強行放入「我」，甚至不顧如此做會削弱平實陳述的力道。一般人會說：「今天天氣很好。」摩爾會說：「以我的性情來看，今天的天氣看來不錯。」一般人會說：「彌爾頓顯然文筆極佳。」摩爾會說：「身為一名講究文筆的作家，彌爾頓總是令我欣賞。」這種自我中心精神的因果報應，就是毫無成效。摩爾啟動許多有趣的運動，但在追隨者都還沒開始跟從前，他就已經將其拋棄。即使當他站在真理這一邊時，他也像那些虛偽之徒一樣反覆無常。即使尋得了現實，他也無法尋得安寧。他具有一個所有愛爾蘭人都有的愛爾蘭特質——好鬥。這特質無疑是一種美德，尤其在這個時代。但他缺乏像蕭伯納（Bernard Shaw）這類人身上展現出的那種，與戰鬥精神相輔相成，對信念的堅持韌性。他那光芒四射的的內省與自我中心弱點，雖然無法阻止他戰鬥，但永遠會阻止他獲勝。
留言
張貼留言