tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89283672024-03-23T18:26:57.490+00:00北海.尋道.我愛丁堡my edinburgh affairs: flirting between the transcendent and the mundaneYam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.comBlogger444125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-17388782645818621922011-03-29T18:16:00.004+01:002011-03-29T18:29:37.979+01:00本網誌精選內容已結集出版<div style="text-align: center;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VL-C9-5N2G0/TZIVDrqnX-I/AAAAAAAAA_A/xS4qz5a3XDo/s1600/edibook.jpg"><img style="float: left; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; cursor: pointer; width: 543px; height: 733px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VL-C9-5N2G0/TZIVDrqnX-I/AAAAAAAAA_A/xS4qz5a3XDo/s400/edibook.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589553240525463522" border="0" /></a><br /></div><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />任志強 《我愛丁堡》 香港:突破出版社,2010年10月初版。<br /><br />【<a href="http://soloveworld.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/%E3%80%8A%E6%88%91%E6%84%9B%E4%B8%81%E5%A0%A1%E3%80%8B%E6%9C%AC%E5%91%A8%E9%9D%A2%E4%B8%96/">詳細介紹在此</a>】<br /><br />香港讀者,請到各突破書廊或各大書店搜購。<br /><br />感謝支持 :)Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-27958861863844282142009-02-01T16:11:00.004+00:002009-02-01T16:18:03.161+00:00牛,一<span style="font-size:130%;">是日,2009年2月1日,寫下『<a set="yes" linkindex="26" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2009/01/terminating-my-edinburgh-affairs.html">緣盡愛丁堡</a>』剛好一個月,又適逢農曆己丑(牛)年正月初七,人日,我在<span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://soloveworld.wordpress.com/"><span style="font-weight: bold;">那邊</span></a></span>開始beta運作。<br /><br />有興趣者,請移玉步。</span>Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-27358170861839605742009-01-01T17:46:00.001+00:002009-01-01T17:47:45.890+00:00緣盡愛丁堡 :: terminating my edinburgh affairs<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">As my journey in doctoral study has come to a formal end with the graduation ceremony a month ago, so should this blog which was intended as my journal in the journey. </font><font color="#808080">See you some other time, somewhere else. </font></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SV0Bgwbtu2I/AAAAAAAAA1Y/An3zgQqnX74/s1600-h/P1020387%5B5%5D.jpg"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" border="0" alt="P1020387" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SV0Bh4VPpnI/AAAAAAAAA1c/PGhAcclwxAE/P1020387_thumb%5B3%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="408" height="310"></a> </p> <p> </p> <p>一個月前,重『回』愛丁堡,參與那個眾人都看重的典禮 ... </p> <p>當曾經每天可以隨時<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/06/room-with-some-view.html">自由進出的熟悉地方</a>都變成access denied,</p> <p>當坐在曾經住了三年半的『<a target="_blank" href="http://herowu0501.blogspot.com/2008/10/blog-post.html">無聊齋</a>』客廳,身份變了客人,</p> <p>當發現<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/10/last-night-on-rainbow.html">曾經喜愛的館子</a>不論服務和食物都褪了色,</p> <p>我就清楚知道,我已經不再屬於這塊/那塊地方,</p> <p>縱使情在、人在。</p> <p>《北海.尋道.我愛丁堡》原是我在此間/彼方求學問道的心路歷程見聞思緒。如今,道我還要尋,丁堡我仍愛,海卻不再北。</p> <p>如是,網誌也就應該結束。</p> <p>空間虛擬,人情真摯。</p> <p>有緣再聚。</p> <blockquote> <p><strong>未了的話:</strong>我欠下尚未完成的巨著 — <a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/search/label/roadtodoctorate">『神學博士路遙遙』系列</a>,還是會繼續寫下去的;只是那日子那時辰連父也不知道,屆時自會有適當渠道發放。</p></blockquote> <p align="right">【告別篇(五);終】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-33138690541452684062008-12-31T19:01:00.001+00:002009-01-01T14:42:15.216+00:00終極盤點 :: stocktaking complete<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">As far as I am concerned, my supervisor Dr Jolyon Mitchell is quite a good coach for doctoral study. Though not a giant of any academic discipline, his breadth of knowledge in the field and breadth of human connection are both impressive. More importantly, he has genuine interest and concern over his students' research projects, and is at the same time encouraging and critical. Above all these, my whole journey of doctoral study is one of divine grace, from the beginning till the end. </font></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SVvBiHExmbI/AAAAAAAAA1Q/L6F-L2-G4_U/s1600-h/P1020086%5B5%5D.jpg"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" border="0" alt="P1020086" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SVvBix9ZgDI/AAAAAAAAA1U/BhAt8qUrvC4/P1020086_thumb%5B3%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="414" height="315"></a> </p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080" size="1">【John Knox statue in front of New College Library】</font></p> <p> <font color="#808080">【<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/stocktaking-continued.html">上文</a>提要】</font></p> <p><font color="#808080">第三,我的終點雖是原先意想不到的,卻跟原來的願望頗為吻合。</font></p> <p> </p> <p>第四,對我來說,吾師麥佐人博士是個相當好的教練。</p> <blockquote> <p>幾年前我開始受業其門下時,麥佐人老師並非甚麼高山仰止著作等身的大師,現在也不是。他只是在『媒體、宗教/神學、文化』這門新興的跨學科研究的小圈子裡稍具名氣(要比『薄有名氣』稍為厚一點)而已。</p> <p>當然,正如任何老師一樣,吾師並非完美超人,他不是甚麼都懂,更不是甚麼都精通。可是他對『媒體與宗教/神學』的涉獵驚人地寬廣 —— 包括學科的範疇和行內的人脈都是。我在博士論文的前言裡,說他對『電影與宗教/神學』具有百科全書般的知識(encyclopaedic knowledge),並非溢美抬舉,而是我的衷心之言。</p> <p>然而對我這個博士生來說,最重要的是,他真正挑動我去做我自己認為重要的研究,對我選定的研究課題有真實的興趣和關注;既對我的疏忽和缺漏不留情面,卻在適當時候對我的強項表達充份信心;在我低沉迷惘的階段把我拉出困局,當我『以為自己已經得著了』的時刻推我『撼頭埋牆』讓我看到自己的死結。</p> <p>(假如閣下遇過或者聽聞過不少名震天下才高廿斗著作等身但是根本不懂得甚至從來不怎麼理會學生的『大師』,你就知道我老師多麼難能可貴了。)</p></blockquote> <p> </p> <p>第五,最終來說,一切一切,從頭到尾,只能說是上主的恩典。</p> <blockquote> <p>仍是那句老話:不敢依靠自己的義,唯靠上主的恩;我就是拾取聖桌下的零碎,也是不配;唯獨主永無更改,常施憐憫 ... </p> <p>如是,對於這一切,我都用信心領受,心中感謝。</p></blockquote> <p align="right">【告別篇(四);待續】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-66544563844415580012008-12-31T17:09:00.001+00:002008-12-31T19:05:27.963+00:00繼續盤點 :: stocktaking continued<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">Although my doctoral study has led me to an endpoint which I was never able to foresee when I started the journey, somehow I have still fulfilled what I hoped to accomplish — I point toward a much neglected local-contextual approach to the study of theology and popular culture, and my conclusions do have implications for Christian praxis in the media. </font> </p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SVunSRUMgOI/AAAAAAAAA1I/TzbtzstYmwg/s1600-h/P10200986.jpg"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" border="0" alt="P1020098" src="http://lh6.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SVunTKiut8I/AAAAAAAAA1M/8qj8CQn9Dok/P1020098_thumb4.jpg?imgmax=800" width="407" height="312"></a> </p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080" size="1">【<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/02/angelo.html">Angelo</a> in </font><font color="#808080" size="1"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.lib.ed.ac.uk/resbysub/virtourdiv7.shtml">David Welsh Reading Room</a></font><font color="#808080" size="1">, </font><font color="#808080" size="1"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.lib.ed.ac.uk/sites/newcoll.shtml">New College (Divinity) Library</a></font><font color="#808080" size="1">】</font></p> <p> </p> <p><font color="#808080">【<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/stocktaking.html">上文</a>提要】</font></p> <p><font color="#808080">第一,我讀博士的過程,完全是一次真正的學習經驗,是連串不斷發現的歷程。第二,我的學習經驗和發現歷程,不止於論文的寫作與內容,也關乎我對神學的看法和對信仰的認知。... </font></p> <p> </p> <p>第三,雖說是個不斷發現的學習過程,最後到達了一個自己意想不到的終點,而且我對神學和信仰的領會已經跟原先很不一樣,但是,我到達的終點,卻跟原來的願望還算是頗為吻合的。</p> <blockquote> <p>我最初的願望,在宏觀的層次來說,是建構一套適切於媒體泛濫時代的『普及文化神學』(a theology of popular culture for an age of media saturation);在實踐層次上,是為基督徒對影音媒體的參與整理出一套應用神學(an applied theology for Christian engagement in the audiovisual media)。</p> <p>那完全是我過去多年的傳媒與文化工作、和從前納納雜雜的(自以為)所謂神學反思的延伸。</p> <p>幸好我很快就學懂,這種超級宏觀鋪天蓋地救國救民拯救全宇宙的思維,是不適宜也不應該拿來做博士研究的。於是,從前看為有益的、可誇的,現在都看作糞土。</p> <p>當摒棄了不著邊際的高大空談,從宇宙漫游回到自己的球場的中圈的某一點,才懂得深入個別媒體的獨特性格(particularities),細看媒體在特定歷史時空下跟社會文化情景的互動(interactions with specific sociocultural circumstances),認真看待基督信仰和神學在不同的本土處境實況裡的體現(contextual manifestations)。</p> <p>如是這般,我走上了一條絕對徹底全情投入毫無保留地本土化處境化實況化的路,嘗試(只敢說是嘗試而已)透過一種媒體在一個狹小的歷史時空裡的敘述,和民間對那些媒體敘述的引伸挪用,探視小民之間隱而未現又若隱若現而且集體共有的焦燥無奈惶恐與渴望,作為建構本地應用處境神學(applied contextual theology)的資源,並且籍此挑戰(interrogate)基督教在那個歷史時空下的公共領域(包括流行媒體)裡所流露的信仰表達。</p> <p>當然,我結果並沒有建構出一套放諸四海皆準的『普及文化神學』(因為我相信那根本不可能存在),但卻為這個工程提出了一個備受忽略(而我認為很重要的)本土處境進路,而所勾畫幾點緊扣社會情境的綱領,也對當下的基督教媒體事工有引申含義(implications)。</p> <p>故曰,信念雖已不同,終點和起點仍舊互相呼應。</p></blockquote> <p align="right">【告別篇(三);待<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/stocktaking-complete.html">續</a>】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-90184210113622705712008-12-18T15:15:00.001+00:002008-12-31T17:18:47.859+00:00結束盤點 :: stocktaking<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">My PhD study was totally a learning experience and a journey of discovery in the real sense. When I started, I only had a vague idea of where I am heading, and things only began to fall into places when I launched into my final chapter. It was also a revamp of my own theological outlook. I now regard any theological expression to be necessarily contextual, particular, and mediated, among other things. </font></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh3.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SUppBdrj7zI/AAAAAAAAApc/LqRB7_LBuVY/s1600-h/P1020127%5B4%5D.jpg"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" border="0" alt="P1020127" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SUppCFslEMI/AAAAAAAAApg/HRswVnU7E68/P1020127_thumb%5B2%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="394" height="298"></a> </p> <p align="center"> <font color="#808080" size="1">【part of my cardboard bookshelves back in Edinburgh】</font></p> <p><font color="#808080">【<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/looking-back-from-endpoint.html">上文</a>提要】 </font></p> <p><font color="#808080">事隔大半年,當日那份艱苦極致頓然鬆一口氣、既激動又空洞的感覺早已消化了。到現在才問感受,我只能abstract出幾點 ... </font></p> <p> </p> <p>第一,我讀博士的過程,完全是一次真正的學習經驗,是連串不斷發現的歷程。</p> <blockquote> <p>有些人從一開始(甚或尚未正式開始)就已經很知道自己論文的結構、研究的路向、主要論點,甚至預計會達到怎樣的結論。我知道有些人,特別是搞系統神學的,會從結論開始,倒轉來寫,有些則從中間開始向首尾擴散,有些甚至可以幾章同步進行。</p> <p>我可不是。我開始的時候,只有一個很『大致』的取向(或者應該說是願望),一路見步行步,摸著石頭過河 ... 噢,不是的,我只是摸著石頭玩水,繞來繞去,根本未知道對岸在哪裡,連對岸是否存在都不能肯定,談不上『過河』。即是說,我是一面寫一面推論摸索、一面發展自己論點的,而不是把心中早已有的一套東西寫出來。</p> <p>於是,我中段之前寫的幾章,過程都猶如水銀瀉地,四處狂抓。有人以為我為資料不足而苦惱,非也,其實我的材料非常豐富,中間main body那幾章,每章都夠材料可以寫出幾倍的篇幅,甚至想過把任何其中一章發展成整份論文。</p> <p>我一直掙扎的,是要找尋一個取捨的準則,也就是一個能夠貫串整份論文的題旨(overarching motif)。</p> <p>因此我永遠感激我的<a target="_blank" href="http://kakashi2007.pixnet.net/blog">卡卡西</a>同學,是他在那年<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/07/some-happy-moments-and-weird-experience.html">夏天</a>,不經意一句『或許<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/07/liminal-people-preface-to-unsystematic.html">liminality</a>也可以成為神學的主題』,叫我<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/07/liminal-people-preface-to-unsystematic.html">猛然醒悟</a>。水銀從此不再瀉地,宇宙力量從此聚焦,劇情由是急轉直下,原以為最困難的神學整合部份,成了寫得最快最順暢的一章,and things automatically fall into places。</p></blockquote> <p>第二, 我的學習經驗和發現歷程,不止於論文的寫作與內容,也關乎我對神學的看法和對信仰的認知。譬如說:</p> <blockquote> <p>基督教神學<u>必然而且只能</u>是屬於處境(contextual)的;</p> <p>任何宗教信仰的表達,<u>必定</u>孕育自特定的社會、文化、歷史、政治、經濟條件(social, cultural, historical, political, economic particularities)而無法脫離;</p> <p>所有宗教信仰的表達和教導,都是媒體中介(mediated)的;沒有媒體,就沒有organised religion(or any religion for that matter);</p> <p>等等等等 ......</p></blockquote> <blockquote> <p>這些以及其他相關或不相關的看法,有些在我尚未計劃讀博士之前已經傾向如此,或許多年前首度讀神學的時候已經開始傾孕育;但更大程度上,都得歸功/歸咎過去幾年在愛丁堡的潛修。(要歸功還是歸咎,視乎閣下立場。)起碼,沒有幾年的博士研究,沒有經歷過愛丁堡這個五湖四海九流十家又intense的神學環境,沒有把自己暴露於殿堂級的高手面前殺到一頸血,我大概還未懂得如此表述(articulate)這些看法。</p></blockquote> <p align="right">【告別篇(二);待<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/stocktaking-continued.html">續</a>】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-61077589582061242832008-12-16T13:02:00.001+00:002008-12-31T17:15:23.219+00:00終點回望 :: looking back from the endpoint<blockquote></blockquote> <p align="justify"><font color="#808080">I am that kind of person who is often unable to articulate special feelings at moments that other people consider special. Looking back at the extremely trying period of climbing the peak, I would of course not be void of feeling. My strongest emotion, however, had come out at the moment when I submitted my thesis back in April, when I felt like crying ... </font></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SUemy3e12dI/AAAAAAAAApU/C9b0lHRR-7Q/s1600-h/DSC00920%5B4%5D.jpg"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" border="0" alt="DSC00920" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SUemzgFu_QI/AAAAAAAAApY/CLSpPLQ2KT8/DSC00920_thumb%5B2%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="398" height="301"></a> </p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080" size="1">【inside McEwan Hall, 11am, 4 December 2008: photo by Ben Wu】</font></p> <p>我大概是那種『看天天都是一樣』的人,很少對某些時刻或者日子有特殊感覺。</p> <p>只是,適逢那個很多人都認為重要、特別的日子,總會被問到『有甚麼感受』之類的問題。畢竟曾經抖出了畢生力量攀完一大片山嶺,對那翻山越嶺的艱苦歷程,當然不會沒有感受。</p> <p>只不過我最強烈的感受,並不在正式畢業那天,而是在交出論文那一刻 ... </p> <blockquote> <p>2008年4月7日星期一下午4時40分左右,我從休謨大樓的大學印務中心接過新鮮熱辣剛印好釘裝好的論文(真是暖的),從地庫走上一樓『人文及社會科學院』研究院辦公室,在論文的責任聲明頁上簽了名(我簽中文,嘻,而且是刻意練習過好多次的),交到那位專門負責神學研究生的小姐手中。</p> <p>離開休謨大樓,離開大學本部,路經<a target="_blank" href="http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF-8&t=h&layer=x&g=bristo+square+edinburgh&ll=55.94598,-3.18831&spn=0.00286,0.006909&z=17">Bristo Square</a>和佇立其旁的『麥邀雲堂』(<a target="_blank" href="http://websiterepository.ed.ac.uk/explore/places/buildings/mcewanhall.html">McEwan Hall</a>,即舉行畢業典禮的地方),一路向<a target="_blank" href="http://websiterepository.ed.ac.uk/explore/places/buildings/newcollege.html">神學院</a>走去。</p> <p>那刻,腦袋大概是空白的,心裡卻湧出一股想哭的衝動。</p> <p>那刻,很想就此拿起手機打個電話回香港,說,我交了,我想哭。只是想到彼方那時已是夜深,也就無謂吵醒香港市民了。</p></blockquote> <p>事隔大半年,當日那份艱苦極致頓然鬆一口氣、既激動又空洞的感覺早已消化了。到現在才問感受,我只能abstract出幾點 ... </p> <p align="right">【告別篇(一);待<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/12/stocktaking.html">續</a>】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-41496968619428921602008-11-26T17:47:00.001+00:002008-11-26T17:56:27.056+00:00popular media confronts Christianity ...<p>In the encounter between the two, </p> <p>popular media <font size="4"><font size="5">confronts</font><strong> </strong></font>Christianity <p>to <font size="5">reconsider / revisit / rediscover</font> <p>certain <font size="5">long-neglected</font> aspects of Christian faith and theology: <ol> <li><font size="3">the emotive (non-rational) side of the Christian FAITH </font></li> <li><font size="3">the material / body aspect of Christianity</font></li> <li><font size="3">the vulgarity of faith </font></li> <li><font size="3">irreverent expressions of faith </font></li> <li><font size="3">the dialogical (interactive) essence of Christian faith expressions</font></li> <li><font size="3">the narrative quality of Christianity (Christianity as story) </font></li> <li><font size="3">the essentially contextual nature of theology</font></li> <li><font size="3">the transient (ad-hoc) nature of theological constructions </font></li> <li><font size="3">the marginal identity of the Church</font></li> <li><font size="3">the mediated nature of religious faith (including Christianity)</font></li></ol> <blockquote> <p>[proposed as a tentative conclusion to <em>Media, Popular Culture, and Christianity</em>, offered at the Divinity School of Chung Chi College, the Chinese University of Hong Kong -- probably the first-ever course of its kind offered in a theological school in East Asia]</p></blockquote> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-12838132025363543362008-11-19T16:47:00.002+00:002008-11-20T08:41:17.909+00:00舞臺震撼 :: stage struck<p align="justify"><span style="color:#808080;">The Hong Kong premier of the Broadway musical <em><a target="_blank" href="http://jekyll-hyde.com/">Jekyll & Hyde</a></em> was, surprisingly, performed by a group of ordinary students from an ordinary secondary school. Though far from being impeccable, these teenagers have put up an extremely impressive show, under the coaching of a professional production team. More importantly, the whole project is a tremendous learning experience for the whole school, which can form the basis of much further community learning in many aspects. Above all, the experience of <a target="_blank" href="http://www.culture-making.com/">culture-making</a> would be invaluable for these kids. </span></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://25th.stmc.edu.hk/musical.html"><img style="border-width: 0px;" alt="image" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_KmENpDi7c3A/SSRDPKGXFmI/AAAAAAAAAo4/6f1IQwsrAI0/image19.png?imgmax=800" width="473" border="0" height="275" /></a> </p> <p align="left">早前看了這個音樂劇,蠻感動,而且蠻激動。</p> <p align="left">感動和激動的,不是戲本身,而是整件事情,as a project。</p> <p align="left"><em><a target="_blank" href="http://jekyll-hyde.com/">Jekyll and Hyde</a></em>是曾經瘋魔紐約百老匯、多次獲獎的音樂劇,從未在香港上演過。</p> <p align="left">敝教會連結著的<a target="_blank" href="http://www.stmc.edu.hk/en/">中學</a>,慶祝創校廿五周年,膽粗粗由同學們擔綱演出,一句講嗮:勁到爆。</p> <p align="left">固然,<a target="_blank" href="http://www.xanga.com/fonghenry">導演</a>和主要的幕後班底都是專業的外援,但是,我自己身為一個在香港出生、在香港長大、在普通香港中學畢業的香港仔,看著臺上這群同樣是在一所普通香港中學讀書的普通中學生,以如此專業舞臺水平演出這套唱、做都相當高難度的音樂劇,震撼難以形容。</p> <p align="left">尤其是,我從前所讀的那間普通中學,跟他們這間普通中學,是同一個辦學團體的,就更叫我這個『算盤校友』(或稱『表校友』)倒瀉七味粉 —— 既讃嘆且羨慕兼妒忌。</p> <p align="left">要從雞蛋挑骨頭,當然可以挑得到。譬如說,我會嫌部份同學的英語發音未夠圓潤漂亮,有些對白吐字不夠清晰;又譬如說,我會嫌他們整體的的口音,美國色彩稍濃(其實可能是TVBese 又名Pearlish accent),跟故事場景(十九世紀倫敦)不吻合。</p> <p align="left">但是他們感情的拿捏、位置timing的準繩、唱腔功架的收放,水平之高叫人無話可說。我沒有真正在百老匯看過百老匯音樂劇(赤貧神學生,只能用幾塊錢學生票在波士頓看Broadway cast、在愛丁堡看London cast),不敢比較;但是我敢說,目下香港本地主流媒體裡那些所謂『演藝界』人士,沒有多少位有這樣的歌唱水平。</p> <p align="left">我尤其喜愛那位演<a target="_blank" href="http://photo.xanga.com/fonghenry/3506b220132508/photo.html#">Emma</a>的中三同學(我看的是日場<a target="_blank" href="http://25th.stmc.edu.hk/mus-main.php?option=cas">Cast J</a>),她放開懷抱的唱、做,那口亮麗的英語,用句老土成語,繞樑七日。</p> <p align="left">請注意,他們是實牙實齒句句現場唱的,音樂是自家同學校友組成的管弦樂團演奏的,不是夾口型,不是播soundtrack。</p> <p align="left">除了同學在臺前幕後的努力,學校師長的膽量與識見也叫人感動。</p> <p align="left">或許很多人都會著眼於付出了多少 —— 嘩,用了很多錢吧?噢,投入了很多人力啦?然而,動員師生一起籌備、排演一套英語音樂劇,在正式的演藝場地,公開售票演出,所得到的收獲,又豈止是那三天四場的掌聲,或者那其實不會很多的門票收入?</p> <p align="left">如果校長老師能夠好好harness的話,那差不多整整一年的經驗,絕對是凝聚校內群體意識最好的種籽,而且收割期可以遠遠超過一年。</p> <p align="left">未來一大段日子,學校還可以用這套劇做跳板,提升同學的英語學習、文學熏陶、文化眼界、音樂修養;也由於<em>Jekyll and Hyde</em>的故事<a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Case_of_Dr_Jekyll_and_Mr_Hyde#Analysis">題旨</a>,讓師生可以借此探討人性本質、善惡爭持、甚至科技的可能與極限,等等等等,大堆涉及生命、宗教、倫理的課題。整個學校的community learning,都可以常常refer back to this common experience as their resource,一套戲,有排玩。</p> <p align="left">在這一切之上,我覺得最重要的,是讓中學生親身經歷了一次很intensive的<a target="_blank" href="http://www.culture-making.com/">『創造文化』(culture making)</a>歷程,大概沒有比這更有效、更根本而且all in one的文化教育、媒體教育、生命教育、和社會教育(education for being a member of a society)了。</p> <p align="left">謝謝同學、老師、和校長,叫我這個辦學團體裡的小小薯,亦感榮然。</p> <p align="left"></p>Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-86961637894042840152008-11-13T17:09:00.001+00:002008-11-13T17:09:10.721+00:00相輕 :: despising one another<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">An old Chinese saying has it: 'the literate persons tend to despise one another'. The same seems to be true for theologians, who often (unconsciously) regard those from a different academic background or takes a different approach to theology as less capable, and their work less important. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">........................................</font></p> <p>【近恭聽某本土神學講座,對照近期所讀網誌,憶起昔日友儕之間閑聊,積積埋埋,有感 ... 】</p> <p>在外地學成回歸的,覺得一直在本土訓練的稍欠跨文化眼界。</p> <p>本地訓練成材的,覺得外地回歸的滿腦袋西方理論欠缺本地觸覺。</p> <p>鑽研傳統西方神學的,覺得搞本色/本土/處境/實況神學的,泛泛空談,沒有深入扎根。</p> <p>做本土神學的,覺得研究西方神學的,老是處理跟自己沒有關係的問題,脫離實況。</p> <p>深入傳統經典以建構本色神學的,覺得專注當代處境的,刻舟求劍,過眼雲煙,沒有長遠價值。</p> <p>著眼當下處境以建構本土神學的,覺得鑽傳統經典的,迷戀已逝去的歷史,沒有現實意義。</p> <blockquote> <p>神學人,本質上畢竟也是文人,故亦相輕。</p> <p>吁,惜哉。</p></blockquote> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-31434543711476960622008-11-05T17:24:00.001+00:002008-11-05T17:52:14.764+00:00布殊教中史 :: history text books come alive<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">I suddenly realise that GW Bush is a living embodiment of a whole bunch of Chinese idioms which were used to describe bad emperors in history. Thank you, Mr Outgoing President, for bringing alive all these expressions which only appear in secondary school text books. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">.............................</font></p> <p align="left"><strong>在位八年,</strong></p> <p><strong>窮兵竇武,</strong></p> <p><strong>征戰連年,</strong></p> <p><strong>國庫空虛,</strong></p> <p><strong>民怨沸騰,</strong></p> <p><strong>天災人禍,</strong></p> <p><strong>人神共憤。</strong></p> <p><strong>豺狼當道,</strong></p> <p><strong>民心思變,</strong></p> <p><strong>官逼民反,</strong></p> <p><strong>起義功成,</strong></p> <p><strong>普天同慶。</strong></p> <p>快要卸任的現任美國總統,竟然令這一大堆中學課本裡形容中國歷史上無能昏君末路王朝的成語,活現眼前 —— 只差外戚跋扈、宦官濫權派不上用場。</p> <p>服。</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-2850222729361029772008-11-04T02:53:00.001+00:002008-11-04T03:00:47.649+00:00虛擬與群體 :: being virtual and communal<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">Is the unity of space and place a necessary condition for Christian fellowship, as Wong Kam Ming has argued in his recent <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bpl/heyj/2008/00000049/00000005/art00006">critique of virtual church</a>? </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">.............................</font></p> <p> 『<a target="_blank" href="http://www.com.cuhk.edu.hk/conference/cw2008/Site/Blank.html">香港文化與社會</a>』研討會上,蔡寶瓊嘗試從前任製衣工人的經歷提取對全球化下道德困惑的啟示,說:全球化把社會都變成一個個獨立求存的個人(stand-alone individuals),如是,道德/倫理的建立將會變得不可能,因為倫理by definition是必需要在社群內建構的。</p> <p>又令我想起 Wong Kam Ming 對『虛擬教會』(virtual church)的批判。(沒有直接關係,只是我的自由聯想。)</p> <p>Wong 說:教會其中一個最重要的元素,是團契生活(fellowship);而團契生活的必要條件,是成員相聚於同一空間,虛擬教會的本質卻與此相悖。<font size="1">【see: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bpl/heyj/2008/00000049/00000005/art00006">Wong Kam Ming, 'Christians Outside of the Church: An Ecclesiological Critique of Virtual Church', <em>Heythrop Journal</em> 49.5 (September 2008): 822-840</a>.】</font></p> <p>只是,『同一空間』真的是團契/群體相交的必要條件嗎?(請注意,我真的是在問問題,而非把既有立場包裝成問題。)</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-91106598406853379472008-10-24T04:53:00.001+01:002008-10-24T04:55:28.139+01:00禮義廉 :: shame on us<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">A report from the UN says that the economic divide in Hong Kong is the worst among all Asian cities and is comparable to that in an average Latin American city. </font> <p align="center">...................................</p> <p>當新聞媒體都被金融海嘯佔據,天天報導乜乜指數狂瀉幾多點,哪家大企業又虧損了幾多百億,誰人身家又蒸發了幾多億 ... </p> <p>當高檔食肆慨嘆生意大不如前,從五六個客人消費幾萬,到現在每人消費千元以下 ... </p> <p>當尊貴特首為那既不算敬老也不能養老的區區每月一千元,堅持要審查老人家那所剩無幾的資產 ... </p> <p>煩請看看今早<strong><a target="_blank" href="http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/081024/4/8vr5.html">這段</a></strong>《明報》即時新聞。</p> <p>恭喜香港囉,原來我們已經成為亞洲之冠,成績大大超越北京,而且直逼拉丁美洲水平 —— 如果直逼的是足球水準、人民的音樂文化素養、或者神學上的創意膽色(theological creativity and boldness),那倒不錯。可惜不是。</p> <p>借用近日聽來的一句話:成何體統!</p> <p>節錄:</p> <blockquote> <h3>香港貧富懸殊全亞洲最嚴重 <img src="http://hk.l.yimg.com/hk.yimg.com/i/nws/partner/mp.gif" width="21" height="21"></h3></blockquote> <blockquote> <p> 明報 10月24日 星期五 08:20</p></blockquote> <blockquote> <p>聯合國人類住區規劃署發表年度報告,指香港是全亞洲貧富懸殊最嚴重的城市,其堅尼系數高於0.4警戒線。... </p></blockquote> <blockquote> <p>... 在發展中地區,亞洲城市的平等程度最高,其平均基尼系數為0.39。<strong>亞洲最不平等的城市是香港,其基尼系數高達0.53。</strong>從全球來看,非洲和拉丁美洲仍然是城市不平等程度最嚴重的地區。<strong>拉美城鎮地區的平均基尼系數是0.5,</strong>南非和納米比亞的城市基尼系數分別高達0.73和0.62。... </p></blockquote> <p>___________ <p>Credit: 本篇中文標題,取材自<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/1923-2008-xie-jin.html">謝晉導演</a>《舞臺姐妹》(1965) 其中一個過場鏡頭。</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-86873338873952321352008-10-18T19:37:00.001+01:002008-10-19T09:26:42.471+01:00謝晉 1923 - 2008 :: Xie Jin<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">Back in the 1980s when I used to watch quite a lot of mainland Chinese films, <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xie_Jin"><strong>Xie Jin</strong></a> was my favourite Chinese director. He passed away at his place of birth after attending the 100th anniversary of his alma mater. Seems that his own life journey has embodied one of the key themes of his films — to return home. </font></p> <p> </p> <div style="padding-bottom: 0px; margin: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; float: none; padding-top: 0px" id="scid:5737277B-5D6D-4f48-ABFC-DD9C333F4C5D:d1b3819f-d844-481d-a961-43df36642829" class="wlWriterSmartContent"><div><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SHtKU-UKDGA&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SHtKU-UKDGA&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object></div><label style="font-size:.8em;">a scene from Two Stage Sisters 舞臺姐妹 (1965)</label></div> <p> </p> <p><a target="_blank" href="http://baike.baidu.com/view/65790.htm"><strong>謝晉</strong></a>(1923.11.23 - 2008.10.18)。</p> <p>八十年代當我看不少中國(大陸)電影的年代,曾經是我非常喜愛的中國導演。</p> <p>《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/9322/"><strong>舞臺姐妹</strong></a>》(1965)在暗湧不絕的文革前夕,是不可多得的人性戲劇。</p> <p>《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/3493/"><strong>天雲山傳奇</strong></a>》(1980)是文革之後傷痕電影的代表作。還記得當年對<a target="_blank" href="http://www.cnmdb.com/upload/images/title/2005/12/04/20055262246.jpg">馮晴嵐</a>這個人物很是神往。(我是看了這部戲才懂得讀這個『嵐』字的 —— 謝謝文蘭芳老師。)</p> <p>《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/2721/"><strong>牧馬人</strong></a>》(1982)非常刻意地流露著一股我現在已經吃不消的愛國情懷,但當年竟然去戲院看了三次(是旺角南華戲院),有幾句對白,現在還背得出來。</p> <p>到了《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/380/"><strong>高山下的花環</strong></a>》(1984),感覺已經沒有那麼深刻。</p> <p>記憶中最後看謝晉的電影,應該是《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/9490/"><strong>老人與狗</strong></a>》(1993),很灰,很沉,只覺得,謝晉失去了原來的動力。</p> <p>我變了,對於謝晉後來的電影已經提不起興趣 —— 尤其是《<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/9490/"><strong>鴉片戰爭</strong></a>》(1997)。(不過我倒覺得那部曾被港英政府禁映廿多年的<a target="_blank" href="http://hk.cnmdb.com/title/8163/"><strong>《鴉片戰爭》(1959)</strong></a>十分精彩。)</p> <p>話說回來,我跟謝晉前輩在工作上也曾經有差不多擦身而過的經驗 —— 十多年前,我們拍過一系列關於中國城市文化轉變的紀錄片,上海大學影視學院曾經在籌備階段給我們很大幫忙,當時的院長,正是謝晉。可惜,那時一直只跟副院長對口,無緣拜訪或者跟前輩碰面。</p> <p>謝晉回到他出生的地方(浙江上虞),參加過他母校春暉中學一百周年校慶,然後就去了,像是以自己生命的開始和終結,呼應他電影裡的重要題旨。</p> <p>落葉,歸根。</p> <p> </p> <p><u>延伸</u>:<a target="_blank" href="http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC34folder/XieJinInt.html">Interview with Xie Jin</a> (<em>Jump Cut</em> 34, March, 1989, pp. 107-109)</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-10235646518390789612008-10-16T17:37:00.001+01:002008-10-16T17:42:37.084+01:00耶穌默片 :: silent Jesus film<p align="justify">Christian stories, including that of the life of Jesus, was a very popular subject matter in the early years of the cinema. </p> <p align="justify">One of the earlier (certainly not THE earliest) cinematic representations of the life of Jesus in the silent film era was <em><a target="_blank" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0002199/">From the Manger to the Cross</a></em>. It was filmed on location in Palestine —— something that most of the other Jesus films all through the decades did not manage to do. </p> <p align="justify">Some day, I hope to do a course on the Jesus Film genre (working title: 'Jesus in the Cinema'; or 'The Gospel According to the Screen'). I've done some work in the area but perhaps not substantial enough to offer a full course yet. Any potential student out there? </p> <p align="justify"> </p> <p align="justify"> <div style="padding-bottom: 0px; margin: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; float: none; padding-top: 0px" id="scid:5737277B-5D6D-4f48-ABFC-DD9C333F4C5D:e5e19f1a-a019-4993-beba-a79ac848c7f2" class="wlWriterSmartContent"><div><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://uk.youtube.com/p/57888E939814AF67" /><embed src="http://uk.youtube.com/p/57888E939814AF67" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></div><label style="font-size:.8em;">From the Manger to the Cross (USA, 1912), dir. Sidney Olcott, approx. 71 mins.</label></div></p> <p align="justify"> </p> <p align="justify"> </p> <p align="justify"></p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-28130788914526088892008-10-13T09:28:00.001+01:002008-10-14T03:43:17.934+01:00以圖為辱 :: the humiliation of the image<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">The flip side of <a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/idolisation-of-word.html"><strong>the idolisation of the (human) word</strong></a> is the humiliation of the image. As some have pointed out, the word and the image should not be a matter of either/or. Unfortunately, centuries of Reformed Theology, as well as a whole century of Chinese Protestantism, have been embedded in this kind of either/or mentality which is in essence an exclusive 'fundamentalist' mindset. They often tend to look for THE best choice and refuse to be inclusive of a range of possibilities. Hence the exaltation of the word entails the suspicion against the visual image. This idolisation of the word, I suspect, can trace its root to the Reformation notion of <em>Sola Scriptura</em>, which affirms the Biblical text as THE revelation of the Divine, and therefore there is no other salvation besides the text (the word). </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">........................................</font></p> <p><a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/idolisation-of-word.html">把文字神聖化/偶像化</a>的另一面,就是對影像或圖像的壓制、踐踏、甚至妖魔化。</p> <p>誠如<a target="_blank" href="http://weblog.xanga.com/lilbowmike/677563370/3077237034---22294259912000623384.html">風火同學指出</a>,影像和文字本來就應該是並行並存的,根本不必硬要二選其一。而且也正如<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/idolisation-of-word.html?showComment=1223701020000#c2890175458458632549">Alan同學所imply</a>,人類世界其實並沒有『最』適合盛載或傳達上主真理的載體。站在這立場上,表述信仰,本來就應該是百花齊放,圖文並存的。(我甚至會說,是『圖文並茂』的,意思即是,影像和文字媒體不但應該並用,更是兩者都要大力開拓,茂盛地發展的。)</p> <p>但是可惜得很,數百年來的改革宗神學,以至百多年來的(新教)華人教會,在這方面卻自困於一套非此即彼、非白即黑、非友即敵的思維,即是典型的either/or mentality。骨子裡,這其實是一套非常fundamentalist的思維方式,相信世界有所謂『最乜乜最物物』(例如最正確、最適合、最理想...),因此也就講究基督徒對咩咩咩的『應有』看法/態度,十分攞命。</p> <p>因此我同意kc同學的批評,那個『是否只有文字才足以盛載啟示』的問題其實很fundamentalist —— 這裡的fundamentalist非指宗教上的原教旨/基要主義,而是指一種對待事情/問題的態度。</p> <p>從好的方面看,這種fundamentalist quest代表一份探本尋源的精神,不容隨便過關的簡易答案;從不那麼好的一面看,那種姿態卻是非常排他的 —— 正因為它誓要找出『最』的,那麼凡不是『最』的,都會看成是『差』的、『不好的』(即是『惡』的),就算不是『惡』的,也總是『次好』的、『欠佳』的、『有問題』(problematic)的。</p> <p>在教會的場景裡,這種fundamentalist quest,也無可避免地貫注在神學視野和信仰氣質之中。於是,對待世界、處理問題的fundamentalistic態度,跟宗教上的fundamentalism也就難以分割。 </p> <p>由於改革宗神學以至百多年來的新教華人教會,早已把文字視為至尊,基於上述的fundamentalist眼光,影像媒體就被當成跟文字對立、搶奪注意和資源的對手了。(The visual image is regarded as the opponent which competes with the word for attention and resources.)</p> <p>如是,縱使影像和各種影音媒體已經在教會群體之間大行其道,教會其實只不過是基於現實環境而『容許』、『忍受』其存在,接受它在特定處境下的特殊功用而已;在深層的知識論層次(epistemological level),仍無法賦予、確認、或接受它跟文字可以有平衡的、對等的關係。</p> <p>何以如此? 只因為他們相信文字本身(word in itself)具有『救贖功能』,那是影像或其它媒體所沒有的。簡單來說,那套邏輯大概是這樣的:既然神的話都在聖經裡,即是說神選擇了用文字作為啟示自己的媒介;文字既是神的選擇,肯定有其特殊的神聖地位,一定是優於其他媒體的。</p> <blockquote> <p>假如閣下讀到上面這幾句覺得想笑,我只能說,我所敬佩的同輩文字工作者、尊敬的基督教傳播界前輩、景仰的神學工作者(不是同一個人),都曾經說過類似的話。</p></blockquote> <p>往上追溯,那也許跟宗教改革『唯獨聖經』(sola scriptura)的傳統有關。『唯獨聖經』把上主的道、神的啟示、真理的表述,都鎖定在聖經的文本(text)裡面。文本以外,別無拯救。</p> <p>而且宗教改革既是抵抗/抗議/抗衡羅馬天主教的(所以Protestantism其中一個 [現在不太流行的] 翻譯是『抗羅宗』),很自然就把流行於天主教會的聖像/圖像都一概摒棄掉了。</p> <p>我本身從事影音傳播工作多年,曾經長時期負責領導某基督教機構的影音事工,對香港和各地華人基督教圈子在這方面的行情,自問頗為熟悉。長話短說,我相信自己摸到了那個ceiling,那個絕大部份人未必會意識到的、也未必在意的,在影像媒體之上的無形ceiling。</p> <p>我不忿,所以我讀書。</p> <p>【未講完,不過已經太長了;希望有精力有時間可以『待續』】</p> <p> </p> <p><u>前文</u>:<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/idolisation-of-word.html">以文為尊 The Idolisation of the Word</a></p> <p><u>連結</u>:不惑:<a target="_blank" href="http://edinburghscraps.blogspot.com/2008/10/blog-post_5782.html">閱讀與電影</a></p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-70279374916656529852008-10-10T09:20:00.001+01:002008-10-13T09:45:28.652+01:00以文為尊 :: the idolisation of the word<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">In a recent class discussion on 'Image and Visual Culture', there was a heated discussion on the question of whether human words (as opposed to visual images) are the sole / primary carrier of the Divine Word (or revelation). While some who are embedded in the visual culture consider this an insignificant or obsolete question, others regard the word as a more supreme carrier when compared to visual images. This latter stance, I would argue, is a product of post-enlightenment modernism, with its bias toward human reason. Unfortunately, this kind of idolisation of the (human) word is so common in the Christian churches at least over the last century or so. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">...............................................</font></p> <p>在探討『影像與視覺文化』的課堂上拋出一個問題,引起了頗熱烈的討論。</p> <p><strong>『只有文字才足以盛載上主的真理(啟示)嗎?』</strong></p> <blockquote> <p>有人浸淫於影像媒體多時,深知影像是這一代的given reality,直指這是個多餘的問題,根本沒有討論價值。</p> <p>有人來自映像豐富的信仰傳統,覺得這個問題很fundamentalist。</p> <p>有人抗議這個fundamentalist的批評,覺得這是需要深思的問題。</p> <p>有人沉浸於學術理性多時,以影像為比較原始(primal)的媒介,文字才跟較高層次的復雜思維匹配。</p></blockquote> <p>如果所謂fundamentalist不是指宗教上的基要主義/原教旨主義,而是指一份『要找出最根本定義、追隨最基本原則』的精神,那麼,我絕對認同這個問題非常fundamentalist。它的fundamental之處在於它背負著一份探本尋源的精神,要確定甚麼才是最適合盛載上主真理的載體(carrier),而拒絕任何溫溫吞吞的『差不多先生』式答案。 </p> <p>但是如果fundamentalist在這裡的意思是指基督教基要主義的話,我就無法同意這是個fundamentalist的問題了 —— 除非閣下認為Karl Barth是個基要派,幾百年來的改革宗神學也全屬基要派。 </p> <p>假如因為影像媒體既已大行其道,而認為這是個無需討論的多餘問題,實在非常危險,因為它『以實然為應然』(takes what is as what ought to be),是徹底的實效主義 —— 『通街都係,人人係咁,仲駛乜反思咁多?』</p> <blockquote> <p>推進一步來說,這種看法也反映咱們神學上的無根(theological uprootedness),對千百年來教會傳統裡的神學討論感到難以理解,更加答不上口。需知道,對影像的歧視、恐懼、抗拒、打壓,是幾百年來改革宗神學的主流 ,也是近百年來現代華人(新教)教會(包括香港)的集體潛意識。一天不好好處理這個根本問題(fundamental question),一天影像媒體在教會裡都只會是沒有名份的私生子 —— 『係呀,影像媒體好重要,你地俾心機做啦,不過唔好忘記,文字先至係最重要架,千祈唔好因為發展影像媒介而分薄文字工作D資源呀,唔好拖垮文字事工呀。』</p> <p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.fuller.edu/academics/faculty/william-dyrness.aspx">William Dyrness</a> 在 <em><a target="_blank" href="http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521540735">Reformed Theology and Visual Culture</a></em> 裡,正是要處理這個改革宗神學的歷史鬱結。</p></blockquote> <p>至於說影像是比較原始的媒介,那是很難有異議的。從人類文明演進的角度來看,的確是先用圖像,後發明文字;從人類感官認知的角度,影像也是比較容易(或傾向)訴諸原始本能慾望的。然而也正因如此,影像和文字在人類對世界的探知、思索中,扮演了不同的角色,而且肯定是互補而非互相排斥的。</p> <p>可是,如果因為文字跟影像有不一樣的特性/長處,譬如直線邏輯(linearity)、有利於表達抽象概念和進行理性思辨、甚或對某些人來說能夠激發想像等等,就以文字為比較優越的媒體,其實只是出於啟蒙運動之後的現代世界(post-enlightenment modernism)那份『罷黜百家,獨尊理性』的偏見。就表現來說,那是對文字的過度抬舉;在深層裡,那是(也許不自覺地)把歐洲啟蒙運動鎖定為人類文明的巔峰。</p> <blockquote> <p>影像自有其限制,但文字亦然。文字或長於抽象理性,表述具體事物卻怎也不及影像來得直截了當;影像固然受制於一個框架/鏡頭(frame/shot),然而文字其實也受制於那句句子;文字的直線邏輯(linearity),能使人一步一步的推論思考,但是也等於它難以盛載/表述非直線的多元化多層次經驗,只能把一切壓成一條又一條直線,逐一鋪排。 </p></blockquote> <p>再推進一步,如果認定文字是比較優越的媒介,因而假定那它才是盛載真理(或說上主的道)最恰當最基本甚至最絕對的媒體,把人的文字跟上主的道看成渾然天成(intermingling human words and Divine Word), 那恐怕是把文字放上了一個神聖的高度,是把它偶像化了。</p> <p>如果Jacques Ellul把影像媒體的勃興說成是t<a target="_blank" href="http://books.google.com.hk/books?id=9ST9rgGgO1sC&dq=the+humiliation+of+the+word&hl=en&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0">he humiliation of the Word</a>,我倒想說,把文字推到至尊無上的位置,是the idolisation of the (human) word。</p> <p>而非常不幸,在近百多年的現代基督教會歷史中,這種對文字的膜拜,比比皆是。</p> <p> </p> <p><u>延續</u>:<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/10/humiliation-of-image.html">以圖為辱 The Humiliation of the Image</a></p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-28013882536720584922008-10-03T09:24:00.001+01:002008-10-04T14:29:43.945+01:00當年本周舊舊事 :: same week that year<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">It was exactly 5 years ago this week that I arrived at Edinburgh and began my doctoral study. (Edinburgh still followed the old semester calendar in those days and research students were supposed to start on 1 October.) I had no idea what to expect, and was ready to quit any time, but eventually managed to live through almost 5 tough but rewarding years. It is total divine grace, from beginning to end. </font></p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh3.ggpht.com/yamje1/SOXYFLKRz1I/AAAAAAAAAns/7R9ZLVySTpc/s1600-h/Div%20School%20from%20Princess%20Garden%5B6%5D.jpg"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" border="0" alt="Div School from Princess Garden" src="http://lh5.ggpht.com/yamje1/SOXW2gzxj4I/AAAAAAAAAnw/HwqW7LJt6bc/Div%20School%20from%20Princess%20Garden_thumb%5B4%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="408" height="315"></a> </p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080" size="1">【New College and adjacent buildings </font><font color="#808080" size="1">viewed from Princes Street Garden, October 2003】</font></p> <p>這兩天驀地發覺,原來五年前,2003年,這一周正是我到達愛丁堡的第一周。</p> <p>當年的這個星期,日子跟今年是一樣的 —— 星期一是9月29日,星期五是10月3日。</p> <p>那是愛丁堡大學實行舊學期制度的最後一年,大學十月第二周才開課,而研究生就由10月1日正式入學。</p> <p>我藝不高,人卻膽大,而且多年前第一次留學經驗告訴我,早到是沒用的。(到現在我仍然維持這個看法,仍然會勸諸位準備要『遊』的『子』不用太早動身;就算要到步後才找地方住,也不要太早,否則可能徒然多找一次。)</p> <p>於是,我定意在Fresher's Week(迎新周)才到達。</p> <p>還清楚記得,我在9月28日晚上跟當時家裡六個大狗小狗逐一擁抱拍照,我萬般不捨,狗狗不知何事。9月29日(星期一)早上到達愛丁堡,下午到了神學院,the rest is history。</p> <p>我帶的行李超級簡單,只有一件寄艙的中型行李,和一件比手提電腦稍大一點的手提行李,帶著幾千英鎊,完全是游牧裝備。裡面的衣,我現在仍在穿(其中一件T恤,我此刻正穿著);裡面的電腦,就是現在這部<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2007/02/angelo.html">Angelo</a>(不過當時還沒叫Angelo)。</p> <p>那時到愛丁堡,戰戰兢兢,根本不知前景如何,多少抱著姑且一試的心情。這個傻仔有否能力繼續讀下去是個unknown,其他各方面的條件能否讓我讀到完成更是九萬個unknowns。</p> <p>這一切,彷如昨天(不,是彷如今早凌晨),原來已經是五年前的舊事了。五年裡,快慰的時候多,挫敗的時候更多,只是很少寫出來罷了。</p> <p>從十月一日第一次見老師開始到遞交論文的四年半裡,除了最後大半年之外,我大概不下十七、八次認真地想過放棄。結果沒有,結果完成了,而且(似乎)完成得相當漂亮,and I am glad I have done it。</p> <p>仍是那句:不敢依靠自己的義,唯靠上主的恩。</p> <p> </p> <p><strong><u>相關前文</u>:</strong></p> <ul> <li><a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2003/09/day-one-in-edinburgh.html">日落波士頓. 日出希斯魯. 頻撲愛丁堡</a>(2003年9月29日) <li><a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2003/10/blog-post.html">初入校門深似海</a>(2003年10月10日) <li><a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2003/12/blog-post.html">簡單,平靜,充實,快樂</a>(2003年12月)</li></ul> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-39141140202180788662008-10-01T18:31:00.001+01:002008-10-02T18:50:08.126+01:00四川地震北京奧運三聚氰胺神舟七號 :: that's China<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">While China has always made people ambivalent, seldom do we see a juxtaposition as 'dramatic' as this year's. The Sichuan earthquake was catastrophic (especially the massive number of young victims resulting from poorly built school buildings), the Olympics was impressive, the contaminated milk is provoking, the space walk is arresting. But with so many children at risk, where are the Olympic hopefuls and space heroes of future generations? </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">........................................</font></p> <p>中國,向來都是這樣一幅混雜難名的圖像。</p> <p>就像《少林足球》裡面所編織構想出來的那塊地方,既是令人目眩的國際大都會,也是貧窮匱乏的小農鄉鎮,兩者並存,同樣真實。故事場景雖虛構,卻指向現實中國的精神和物質面貌。【題外:絕大部份評論以為該片故事場景是上海,不確。】</p> <p>面對中國,從來就不可能不百感交雜。</p> <p>只是,今年的中國,</p> <p>踏著豆腐渣校舍的頹垣為英雄喝彩,</p> <p>踩在因腎石呻吟的嬰孩頭上漫步太空,</p> <p>國慶,又似乎比百感交雜更要再雜得多。</p> <p>我們十五年後的奧運英雄怎麼了?</p> <p>我們三十年後的太空人又怎樣了?</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-65628219681448647442008-09-20T15:59:00.001+01:002008-09-20T16:03:02.187+01:00媽媽八十八 :: mom at 88<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">Our whole family celebrated my mother's 88th birthday last night. I was perhaps the most excited person on the spot, since I hadn't been able to take part in this celebration over the past few years when I was away from home. I presented to her a priceless gift -- a small paragraph from my PhD thesis, framed. (See below for content.)</font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">........................................</font></p> <p>昨天農歷八月二十日,家母生日。</p> <p>一家人上館子大吃大喝,媽也大吃。(感激大家姐和大哥的安排,超豐富的。)</p> <p>如果近年的『歷史重構』沒有錯誤的話,老媽應該是八十八歲了。Amazing!</p> <p>這幾年老媽生日,我都不在香港,所以昨晚其實我的感覺最特別、最興奮,可能家人都沒留意。</p> <p>我還煞有介事的預備了一份『秀才人情』,是把我的博士論文前言部份的最後一段,加上中文撮譯,印出來,框起來,送給媽媽。此刻無價。</p> <p>謹公諸於世:</p> <p align="center">_______________________________________________________________</p> <blockquote> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/yamje1/SNUPs7x7vqI/AAAAAAAAAnc/JPbwvucMjYE/s1600-h/image%5B6%5D.png"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" border="0" alt="image" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/yamje1/SNUPvK3WWzI/AAAAAAAAAng/GMbCnw0DEfQ/image_thumb%5B4%5D.png?imgmax=800" width="121" height="121"></a> </p></blockquote> <blockquote> <p align="justify">While my mother may not fully understand what I study, I nonetheless owe my earliest exposure to film, media, and theology to her. My earliest memory of cinema-going was watching a foreign film with her, and I can still remember its translated Chinese title was 《霸海奪金鐘》; she bought our first television set at home, on which I watched numerous old Cantonese films; and when I asked how the world came into existence, 'created by God' was her answer even though she was not a practising believer of any religion at that time. I am thankful that, despite her gradually deteriorating physical health in recent years, she is able to witness the endpoint of my doctoral study. <p align="justify">To my beloved mother, Madam Leung Ching Chun, I therefore dedicate this thesis. <p align="center"><font size="1"><i>extracted from </i><i>page vi in</i><i> </i><i>Yam </i><i>Chi-Keung's </i><i>Doctor of Philosophy</i><i> thesis </i><i>completed</i><i> at</i></font> <p align="center"><font size="1"><i>the School of Divinity, the University of </i><i>Edinburgh, 2008</i></font> <p align="center">******************** <p><b>家母或許對我所讀的未必完全了解,卻是最先讓我接觸電影、傳媒、和神學的第一人。我對戲院的最早記憶,是跟她去看一部中譯《霸海奪金鐘》的外語片。家裡第一部電視機是她買的,從中我看了無數舊粵語電影。她那時雖然不信仰任何宗教,竟跟童年的我說,世界是上帝創造的。近年她的身體健康縱使漸不如前,仍能見證到我這博士研究的終點,為此我感恩無盡。</b> <p><b>如是,謹將此論文敬獻給摯愛的母親 — 梁靜珍女士。</b> <p align="center"><font size="1"><i>摘自任志強於</i><i>2008</i><i>年在愛丁堡大學神學院完成的哲學博士論文,第</i><i>vi</i><i>頁</i></font> <p align="center"><em><font size="1">______________________________________________________________________________</font></em></p></blockquote> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-72857025287765265012008-09-14T18:30:00.001+01:002008-09-14T18:30:14.335+01:00風花雪 :: under the same full moon<p align="center">Happy Mid-Autumn</p> <p align="center"><a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/yamje1/SM1KI01ERtI/AAAAAAAAAnU/sFmGMRwncvM/s1600-h/P1020177%5B4%5D.jpg"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" border="0" alt="P1020177" src="http://lh6.ggpht.com/yamje1/SM1KJdYHr-I/AAAAAAAAAnY/ATwtGKZMeT8/P1020177_thumb%5B2%5D.jpg?imgmax=800" width="390" height="295"></a> </p> <p align="center">家好月圓夜,謹以一枚首次『自行研製』的柚皮燈籠,</p> <p align="center">祝願所愛的平安愉快。</p> <p align="center">也遙祝北海各學弟妹(包括將會再度成為北海學弟的),</p> <p align="center">和潛心苦讀的各地遊子,</p> <p align="center">勁爆研究力量,在地如同在天。</p> <p align="center">阿們。</p> <p align="center"></p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-88613422896827253302008-09-14T17:58:00.001+01:002008-09-15T04:31:11.585+01:00出人意表與大快人心 :: surprised and glad<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">In the recent Legislative Council election in Hong Kong, I am surprised by and happy about 2 things. (1) The detrimental blow to the Liberal Party -- a party which I think is ambiguous in everything and has no real stance, and thus deserve to lose. (2) The rise of the radical democrats -- the government is just reaping the fruit of its own stupidity and political brutality. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">........................................</font></p> <p>今年立法會選舉結果,最少有兩樣事情讓我覺得出人意表同時又大快人心。</p> <p>(我回香港不久,又不是個密切留意選情的人,所以我的出人意表,或許對很多其他人來說只是意料中事。我又是個有明顯取向的人,所以我的大快人心,或許對某些人來說是慘不忍睹。)</p> <p>一自由黨慘敗,二是激進民主派抬頭。</p> <p>田少和周梁敗得如此不堪,我初時有點錯愕,但很快就從內心深處滲出一份踏實的快感。</p> <p>多年來,自由黨身為立法局/立法會內的『主要』(???)政黨,冇理念冇立場冇自覺,慘敗根本是活該。相比起來,其他主要政黨,你喜歡也好厭惡也好,認同也好鄙視也好,總有其立場和理念;你選它,你很清楚自己在做甚麼。但是假如你選自由黨,你根本不知道其實是在支持甚麼。</p> <p>自由黨一直宣稱代表工商界利益,但它試圖代表的,其實只不過是一小撮大商家大財團的利益。</p> <p>香港作為一個商業掛帥的極端資本主義社會,營商維生的(即填occupation一欄會寫merchant或者businessman/woman的),隨時超過人口十份一;再加上在這群商人周圍,依賴一般商貿活動糊口的,分分鐘佔了人口一半或以上。</p> <p>他們正是香港工商界的骨幹和大多數,自由黨甚麼時候有代表過他們的利益?如果有,如果他們覺得它有,自由黨就不會落得如此收場。 </p> <p>關於激進民主派,我雖不完全認同他們在議會內走激進路線(也許我年紀真的大了),也沒有把票投給他們,但是我清楚知道,他們的支持者絕非限於爛命一條nothing to loose的基層,或者傳媒裡stereotyped了的搞屎棍,或者不知天高地厚的年輕人。</p> <p>如果中大政治行政系鬍鬚強和馬嶽是對的話,也如果我的直覺觀察是對的話,支持毓民、支持長毛、支持社民連的,包羅了甚多中產的、專業的、高學歷的選民。</p> <p>社民連人氣急升(取了總選票的10%),激進民主派在議會裡抬頭,根本是政府打橫行造就出來的。</p> <p>打茅波者,人亦打其茅波。抵死!</p> <p align="right">【票後胡言,之三,完喇掛】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-53721081949022607632008-09-12T08:08:00.001+01:002008-09-12T08:13:30.169+01:00神奇配票論 :: organised voting<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">When the pan-democratic camp performed much better than many expected in this Hong Kong Legco election, they and some commentators said it was because the voters organised their votes so nicely. Is that ever possible? Can anyone really 'organise' a large number of votes to support a specific candidate? Are we talking about the pro-democratic camp here?</font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">......................................</font></p> <p>很慶幸我大跌眼鏡。很慶幸。</p> <p>不是說笑,直至投票當日我仍然以為(我素來支持的)泛民主派會大敗。觀乎他們選戰期間毫無默契(或許應該說是拒絕有默契),互爭票源,偶然唔覺意望下電視選舉論壇,又見自相攻擊不遺餘力,真是覺得今次唔輸至奇,冇眼睇。</p> <p>結果不如所料,泛民沒有大敗,反而各人得票頗為平均,最後整體成績超出預期,都不知應該說是好彩還是奇跡。 </p> <p>評論的和當選的都說,是選民『自行配票』成功,贊嘆選民配票智慧之高,更勝他們的選舉工程的籌算;而某些名單第二位未能當選,又是因為配票未夠完善,諸如此類。</p> <p>我對這種神奇配票論感到非常抓頭。更準確來說,其實我完全無法理解甚麼叫『配票』—— 好像有人手上控制著一大批選票,可以讓他隨時隨意按需要動用來支持誰一樣,你話神唔神奇?</p> <p>那些一直傳說有『死忠票』、『鐵票』的陣營,我不敢說。</p> <p>但是評論員啊評論員,學者啊學者,飯民啊飯民,請不要侮辱選民好嗎?多年來against all odds consistently支持民主派的,雖然未必很高學歷高收入更未必專業,但絕大部份都是讀多左幾毫子書,有意見有主見有態度有期望的,而且(根據中大政治行政系鬍鬚強計算)consistently佔了投票選民六成左右。</p> <p>選民的行為,有如市場動向,除了難以預測,更是無法控制的,不是嗎?</p> <p>如果有人試圖『配』我的『票』,我大概會投訴他企圖干預他人選舉、試圖賄選、或者破壞選舉秩序。</p> <p>選舉,正常情況下,不是應該投票給我最想他勝出的那個人,就這麼簡單嗎?配甚麼票?</p> <p>不過話說回來,這種令人費解的配票思維或者配票論,大概是那扭曲的比例代表制的產物。有畸形的制度、環境,自然造就畸形的思想、行為。這是我多年前讀我的心愛書<em><a target="_blank" href="http://www.amazon.com/Shantung-Compound-Story-Women-Pressure/dp/0060631120">Shantung Compound</a></em>所學到的功課。</p> <p align="right">【票後胡言,之二】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-71555448177652129132008-09-11T07:44:00.001+01:002008-09-11T08:11:05.719+01:00小民的冷感 :: indifference of a nobody<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">The Legislative Council election in Hong Kong last Sunday marked the first time ever that I seriously thought of not voting -- for no special reason, simply because of the learned helplessness developed from the stifling political atmosphere. No matter how we vote and who we vote for, it doesn't make a real difference. </font><font color="#808080">This I believe is the crux of the low turn-out rate at the poll. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">.....................................</font></p> <p>自從1991年香港立法局/立法會開始有直選以來,我今年第一次認真地閃出過『不去投票』的念頭。</p> <p>沒有很特別的原因,只是覺得好冇癮,冇心機。</p> <p>我素來支持的泛民主派表現欠佳,甚至某些時刻令人心痛,是冇癮之一。</p> <p>立法會整體表現冇乜,是更大的冇癮。</p> <p>然而最核心的冇癮,是被面前這個政治死局吹脹,你投乜票都冇乜用。when it doesn't really make a difference, why bother?</p> <p>這是過去多年來,尤其是 (尤!其!是!)回歸以來所累積的learned helplessness (學來的無力感)。</p> <blockquote> <p>Learned helplessness的心理學實驗是這樣的:當一隻/一群白老鼠發現無論做甚麼,結果都一樣,無論怎樣閃來跳去,都避不開『被電擊』的命運時,他就會坐下來甚麼都不做,坐以待電,費事跳。</p></blockquote> <p>雖然我最終都決定投票,而且投給上屆支持的同一人,但我很明白傳媒在街頭訪問那些『投來冇用』的論調。</p> <p>不論我選了誰,結果都是一樣的;不論民意如何,結局都是一樣的。話之你點武,政府打橫行,中央夾硬來。吹脹。</p> <p>投票率低不是沒有原因的。</p> <p align="right">【票後胡言,之一】</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8928367.post-50580755110307169772008-09-08T07:12:00.001+01:002008-09-08T07:39:44.210+01:00書事 :: book matters<p align="justify"><font color="#808080">It appears that somebody out there is taking the <strong><a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/09/for-whom-school-bell-tolls.html">course</a></strong> which I mentioned earlier and calls for help about the amount of readings -- and the amount of money needed to buy those books. I would suggest that the basic <em>biblionomics</em> in these situations is to make use of library resources as much as possible. What's more, as far as I know, the quantity of readings in that course can hardly be considered 'surprisingly huge' (as somebody claims). </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">.....................................</font><br></p> <p> </p> <p>根據極可靠線報傳來消息,一名自稱『年輕有型的神學家』的人士上了我早前提及的<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/09/for-whom-school-bell-tolls.html">那個神學課程</a>,令有關那課程的部分資料在某個圈子裡曝了光,負責教的那個人的身份也稍為露了玄機。</p> <p>我有理由相信,這位『年輕有型的神學家』極可能即是幾天前曾經在此留言的『<a target="_blank" href="http://yamje.blogspot.com/2008/09/for-whom-school-bell-tolls.html?showComment=1220533860000#c5218333955450480384">風火劍塚</a>』,因為兩者同樣提及『因著上司的介紹』,連用詞都一樣,沒有這麼巧合吧!</p> <p>據他所說,那位教的人原來是位主教呢!嘩!(他說,『因著上司的介紹,今個學期上了一科前xxxx主教的神學課程。』See? WOW!)</p> <p>不過那位朋友慨嘆,那科『Core Text books卻出奇地多』,恐怕買到窮,『戶口跌落得零元』,於是四出張羅借書。</p> <p>說到這裡,不如『年老S嘜神學人』插插嘴吧。</p> <p>有學者認為,按一般高級學位course descriptions的理解,那位前主教列出的core texts,應該是指整個課程的主要/基本參考,而不是用來當教科書(text books)那樣讀的,大可稍安。</p> <p>一位曾經橫跨美蘇(格蘭)兩國數家學府、現從事研究和教學工作的神學人指出,如此數量的指定閱讀,在類似程度的碩士課之間,絕不能說是『出奇地多』,反而可算輕微地偏少;而且假如只有那些core texts,再沒有加上每周的指定或者推薦閱讀,那就是嚴重偏少了。咁點?請頂硬上好了。</p> <p>書,其實也不用捧著書目就急於搜購,不如先盡量利用圖書館的資源,確認對自己有長久使用價值的,才投入巨款購入也無妨,這可說是買書的基本經濟學。回說那個名單裡面的書,其實除了一本因為出版了只不過兩三個月,圖書館還未及購入,其他的,就算中大暫時沒有,都在香港高校圖書聯網(<a target="_blank" href="http://hkall.hku.hk/search~S0">HKALL</a>)內可以找得到,別輕舉妄動啊!</p> Yam 飲者http://www.blogger.com/profile/01176501753647146840noreply@blogger.com3