作家拉什迪遇袭重燃言论自由辩论_OK阅读网
双语新闻
Bilingual News


双语对照阅读
分级系列阅读
智能辅助阅读
在线英语学习
首页 |  双语新闻 |  双语读物 |  双语名著 | 
[英文] [中文] [双语对照] [双语交替]    []        


作家拉什迪遇袭重燃言论自由辩论
The Stabbing of Salman Rushdie Renews Free Speech Debates

来源:纽约时报    2022-08-18 09:30



        Two years ago Salman Rushdie joined prominent cultural figures signing an open letter decrying an increasingly “intolerant climate” and warning that the “free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted.” It was a declaration of principles Mr. Rushdie had embodied since 1989, when a fatwa by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Supreme Leader of Iran, calling for his murder, made him a reluctant symbol of free speech.
        两年前,萨尔曼·拉什迪与著名文化界人士一起签署了一封公开信,谴责日益“狭隘的氛围”,并警告说“信息和思想的自由交流是自由社会的命脉,但现在日渐受到制约”。自1989年以来,拉什迪一直是这样一种宣言的化身,当时伊朗最高领导人阿亚图拉·鲁霍拉·霍梅尼下达追杀他的命令,使他被动地成为言论自由的象征。
        The letter, published by Harper’s Magazine in June 2020 after racial justice protests swept the United States, drew a backlash, with some denouncing it as a reactionary display of thin-skinnedness and privilege — signed, as one critic put it, by “rich fools.”
        这封信于2020年6月发表于《哈泼斯杂志》(Harper’s Magazine),当时种族正义的抗议刚刚席卷美国。该信引起了强烈反对,有人认为它体现了一些思想倒退者的优越感和对批评的过分敏感——正如一位评论家所说,签署该信的是“有钱的傻子”。
        The reaction dismayed Mr. Rushdie, but didn’t surprise him. “Put it like this: the kinds of people who stood up for me in the bad years might not do so now,” he told The Guardian in 2021. “The idea that being offended is a valid critique has gained a lot of traction.”
        这种反应让拉什迪感到沮丧,但并不惊讶。“这样说吧:在糟糕的年代为我挺身而出的那些人现在可能不会这样做了,”他在2021年告诉《卫报》。“受到冒犯本身被认为是一种正当的批评,这已经是个日渐被接受的观念了。”
        Last Friday, after Mr. Rushdie was stabbed roughly 10 times onstage at a literary event in western New York, many wondered if the fatwa handed down more than three decades ago in response to his novel “The Satanic Verses” had reached its gruesome, belated conclusion.
        拉什迪上周五在纽约西部的一次文学活动中遇袭,在讲台上身中约10刀,许多人想知道,30多年前为回应他的小说《撒旦诗篇》(The Satanic Verses)而颁布的教令是否已经以这种令人毛骨悚然的、迟来的方式得到了执行。
        Writers swiftly denounced the attack, as did the leaders of Britain, France and the United States. But almost as quickly, the attack became the latest flash point in the roiling 21st-century debate over free speech, liberal values and “cancel culture.”
        作家们迅速谴责了这次袭击,英、法、美等国领导人也是如此。但这次袭击几乎以同样快的速度成为21世纪关于言论自由、自由价值观和“取消文化”的激烈辩论的最新热点。
        Speaking on BBC Newsnight on Friday, the British columnist Kenan Malik suggested that while Rushdie’s critics had “lost the battle,” they had “won the war.”
        周五,英国专栏作家凯南·马利克在BBC《新闻之夜》(Newsnight)上表示,尽管拉什迪的批评者“输掉了这场战斗”,但他们“赢得了这场战争”。
        “The novel, ‘The Satanic Verses,’ continues to be published,” he said. But “the argument at the heart of their claim, that it is wrong to give offense to certain people, certain groups, certain religions, and so on, has become much more mainstream.”
        “小说《撒旦诗篇》继续在出版,”他说。但“他们声称的核心论点——即冒犯某些人、某些群体、某些宗教等是错误的——已经变得更加主流。”
        “To a degree,” he said, “you could say that many societies have internalized the fatwa and introduced a form of self-censorship in the way we talk about each other.”
        “在某种程度上,”他说,“你可以说许多社会已经内化了这个追杀令,并在我们谈论彼此的方式中引入了某种自我审查。”
        The American writer David Rieff suggested on Twitter that “The Satanic Verses” would run afoul of “sensitivity readers” if it were submitted to publishers today. “The author would be told that words are violence — just as the fatwa said,” he wrote.
        美国作家大卫·里夫在Twitter上表示,如果《撒旦诗篇》是在今天提交出版,将会与“敏感读者”发生冲突。“作者会被告知——就像教令所说的那样——语言即暴力,”他写道。
        When “The Satanic Verses” was published in 1988, the battle lines over free speech were not as neat as some may remember. The novel, which fictionalized elements of the life of the Prophet Muhammad with depictions that offended many Muslims and were labeled blasphemous by some, inspired sometimes violent protests around the world, including in India, where at least a dozen people were killed in 1989 after the police fired at Muslim demonstrators in Mumbai, where Mr. Rushdie had been born into a prosperous liberal Muslim family in 1947.
        当《撒旦诗篇》于1988年出版时,围绕言论自由的战线并不像某些人记忆中的那么整齐。这部小说虚构了先知穆罕默德的人生故事,其描写冒犯了许多穆斯林,被一些人贴上了亵渎的标签,还在世界各地引发了有时涉及暴力的抗议活动,包括在印度——1989年孟买警方向穆斯林示威者开枪后,至少十几人死亡。孟买是拉什迪的出生地。1947年,他出生在那里一个富裕的自由派穆斯林家庭。
        In the West, the defense of Mr. Rushdie was hardly universally robust. Former president Jimmy Carter, writing in The New York Times in 1989, denounced the fatwa but charged Rushdie with “vilifying” the Prophet Muhammad and “defaming” the Quran.
        在西方,对拉什迪的辩护并非铁板一块。前总统吉米·卡特1989年在《纽约时报》上撰文谴责了追杀拉什迪的教令,但指责拉什迪“诋毁”先知穆罕默德和“诽谤”古兰经。
        The British writer Roald Dahl called Mr. Rushdie “a dangerous opportunist.” The British novelist John Berger suggested Mr. Rushdie withdraw the novel, lest it unleash “a unique 20th-century holy war” that would endanger bystanders who were “innocent of either writing or reading the book.”
        英国作家罗尔德·达尔称拉什迪为“危险的机会主义者”。英国小说家约翰·伯格建议拉什迪撤回这部小说,以免它引发“一场20世纪特有的圣战”,危及那些“既没有写这本书也没有读这本书”的旁观者。
        At the same time, there were some defenses from the Muslim world. The Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz found the book insulting, but signed a letter defending Mr. Rushdie’s right to publish. And in a 1991 article, the Syrian intellectual Sadiq Jalal al-Azm accused Western liberals of having a patronizing view of Muslims.
        与此同时,穆斯林世界也发出一些辩护。埃及小说家纳吉布·马福兹认为这本书具有侮辱性,但签署了一封信,捍卫拉什迪的出版权。在1991年的一篇文章中,叙利亚知识分子萨迪克·贾拉拉勒-阿兹姆指责西方自由主义者居高临下地看待穆斯林。
        “Perhaps the deep seated and silent assumption in the West,” he wrote, “remains that Muslims are simply not worthy of serious dissidents, do not deserve them and are ultimately incapable of producing them.”
        “也许西方根深蒂固但并不声张的假设仍然认为,穆斯林根本不配拥有严肃的异见人士,不配拥有这样的人,而且最终也没有能力产生这样的人,”他写道。
        In 1990, Rushdie made a carefully worded statement of apology, in a futile attempt to have the fatwa lifted (a move he later regretted). In the years after the fatwa, Rushdie lived under tight security in London, as several of his translators and publishers were attacked, some fatally.
        1990年,拉什迪发表了一份措辞谨慎的道歉声明,徒劳地试图解除教令(他后来后悔这样做)。在该教令下达后的几年里,拉什迪一直在伦敦,生活严密的安保之下,而他的几名翻译和出版商遭到了袭击,其中一些是致命的。
        In 1998, after the Iranian government stated it no longer backed the fatwa, he moved to New York City, where he became a fixture in literary and social circles, popping up at parties, events and in the media (including a cameo on “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” where he counseled Larry David, who had also run afoul of the ayatollahs, on “fatwa sex”).
        1998年,在伊朗政府宣布不再支持该教令之后,他搬到了纽约,在那里成了文学界和社交圈的常客,频频出现在派对、活动和媒体上,包括客串出演《消消气》(Curb Your Enthusiasm),在该剧中就“教令性爱”向同样与阿亚图拉存在过节的拉里·戴维提供建议。
        But as the fatwa (which was never officially rescinded) seemed to fade in significance, the conversation over free speech shifted, particularly in the United States. The notion that offensive speech is “violence” gained ground, as younger progressives increasingly critiqued the principle of free speech as too often providing cover for hate speech. “Free speech” became a rallying cry of conservatives, who used it as a weapon against liberals they accuse of wanting to censor opposing views.
        但是,教令(它从未被正式废除)的重要性似乎逐渐减弱之际,有关言论自由的讨论发生了转变,尤其是在美国。随着年轻进步人士越来越多地批评言论自由原则经常为仇恨言论提供掩护,攻击性言论属于“暴力”的概念越来越流行。“言论自由”成为保守派的战斗口号,他们把它作为反对自由派的武器,指责自由派想要审查异议。
        Tensions over free speech were thrown into high relief in 2015, when the writers group PEN America decided to present an award for courage to the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, which had continued publishing after French Muslim terrorists murdered 12 staff members in an attack on its offices.
        2015年,美国笔会决定向法国讽刺杂志《查理周报》(Charlie Hebdo)颁发勇气奖,这让围绕言论自由的紧张局势变得更加明显。该杂志在法国穆斯林恐怖分子袭击其办公室并杀害12名工作人员后继续出版。
        Six writers withdrew as hosts of PEN’s annual gala over concerns about the award, on the grounds that the magazine had trafficked in racism and Islamophobia. More than 140 prominent writers subsequently signed a letter protesting the honor.
        由于对该奖项的担忧,六名作家放弃了主持该笔会年度晚会的机会,理由是该杂志宣扬种族主义和恐伊斯兰情绪。140多名著名作家随后签署了一封信,抗议这一奖项。
        Mr. Rushdie’s reaction to the protest was blunt. “I hope nobody ever comes after them,” he told The New York Times. (On Twitter, he called the six writers who withdrew, some of whom were good friends, an obscene name and labeled them “Six Authors in Search of a bit of Character.”)
        拉什迪对抗议活动的反应很直率。他在接受《纽约时报》采访时表示:“我希望永远没有人找他们麻烦。”在Twitter上,他用脏话称呼退出的六名作家(其中有几个人是他的好朋友),还说他们是“六个在寻找点个性的作家”(此处为意译。原文取用了路伊吉·皮兰德娄的剧作《六个寻找剧作家的剧中人》[Six Characters in Search of an Author]并做了反转,可直译为“六个寻找剧中人的剧作家”。——译注)。
        After last week’s attack, many writers and world leaders rushed to express solidarity with Mr. Rushdie. President Emmanuel Macron of France hailed him as the embodiment of “freedom and the fight against obscurantism” against “the forces of hatred and barbarism.”
        上周的袭击事件发生后,许多作家和世界领导人纷纷表示声援拉什迪。法国总统埃马纽埃尔·马克龙称赞他是“自由和反对蒙昧主义”的化身,反对“仇恨和野蛮势力”。
        Hadi Matar, a 24-year-old New Jersey man, was arrested at the scene and charged with second-degree attempted murder and assault with a weapon. Law-enforcement officials have not publicly stated what motivated the attack, which Mr. Rushdie’s family said had left him with “life-changing injuries.”
        24岁的新泽西州男子哈迪·马塔尔当场被捕,被控二级谋杀未遂和持械伤人。执法官员没有公开说明袭击的动机。拉什迪的家人说,袭击给他带来了“改变人生的伤害”。
        But in literary circles, some observers saw a reticence in some quarters to name the specific forces that had long targeted Mr. Rushdie.
        但在文学界,一些观察人士发现,在某些领域,有些人不愿具体说出多年来一直在针对拉什迪的那些势力。
        In an email, the writer Thomas Chatterton Williams, one of the organizers of the Harper’s letter, said he had been impressed by the response from many writers, if struck by the “comparatively muted response” from “many of the voices who have dominated conversations around justice and oppression since the summer of 2020.”
        《哈泼斯杂志》公开信的组织者之一、作家托马斯·查特顿·威廉姆斯在一封电子邮件中说,许多作家的回应给他带来触动,并且对“自2020年夏天以来主导着有关正义和压迫的对话的许多声音”在此事上“较为平淡的反应”感到震惊。
        He wrote on Twitter after the attack on Friday: “Words are not violence. Violence is violence. That distinction must never be downplayed or forgotten, even on behalf of a group we deem oppressed.”
        周五袭击事件后,他在Twitter上写道:“言论不是暴力。暴力才是暴力。这种区别永远不能被淡化或遗忘,即使当我们在为一个我们认为受压迫的群体发声时。”
        But some close to Mr. Rushdie expressed reluctance to immediately use the attack as fodder for highly-politicized polemics on free speech. In an interview, Hari Kunzru, a British-born novelist who said he had faced four separate court cases in India stemming from his participation at a public reading of “The Satanic Verses” in 2013, declined to comment on Mr. Rushdie’s role in shifting free speech debates.
        但一些与拉什迪关系密切的人表示,他们不希望急于用这次袭击为高度政治化的言论自由辩论提供素材。在接受采访时,英国出生的小说家哈里·昆兹鲁拒绝就拉什迪在改变言论自由辩论中的作用置评。昆兹鲁说,他在印度面临四起独立的诉讼,起因是他在2013年参加了《撒旦诗篇》的公开朗读。
        He cited both the rawness of his emotions, and the way free speech has been “weaponized by people who don’t actually have a genuine commitment to it.”
        他说一来他此时的心情还很乱,二来也因为言论自由“被那些实际上没有真正致力于此的人用作武器”。
        Mr. Rushdie, for all his full-throatedness, “never wanted to be a symbol,” Mr. Kunzru said, citing “the horrible irony of this inventive, playful writer” being defined for many by “this dreadful, somber threat.”
        拉什迪虽然竭力发声,但他“从来不想成为一个象征”,昆兹鲁说,他说,许多人提到“这位富有创造力的、风趣的作家”只能想到“这个可怕、阴郁的威胁”,这是一种骇人听闻的讽刺。
        The Mexican novelist Valeria Luiselli, another close friend of Mr. Rushdie, expressed dismay at how quickly the online conversation zoomed to politics — “though Salman would have been right there fighting,” she said, laughing, “and defending his points.”
        拉什迪的另一位密友、墨西哥小说家瓦莱里娅·卢塞利对网络对话如此迅速地转变为政治表示失望——“尽管萨尔曼肯定会在那里战斗,”她笑着说,“并且捍卫自己的观点。”
        Some who weighed in said the stakes are simply too high — and too personal. After the attack, Roya Hakakian, an Iranian American writer who in 2019 was warned by the Federal Bureau of Investigation that she had been targeted by Iran, took to Twitter on Saturday to assail what she said was a lack of swift condemnation from U.S. government officials.
        一些参与讨论的人则说,这是一个太过重大且关系到自身的问题。袭击发生后,伊朗裔美国作家罗亚·哈卡吉安周六在Twitter上发出抨击,认为美国政府官员没有做出迅速的谴责,2019年她曾收到美国联邦调查局的提醒,称她已成为伊朗的目标。
        (On Saturday, President Biden issued a statement denouncing the “vicious” attack and hailing Mr. Rushdie as a symbol of “essential, universal ideals.” It was followed on Sunday evening by a more sharply worded statement from Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, the first from a U.S. government official to cite Iran.)
        (周六,拜登总统发表声明,谴责这次“恶毒”的袭击,称赞拉什迪是一个“根本的、普世的理想”的象征。周日晚间,国务卿安东尼·布林肯发表了一份措辞更为尖锐的声明,这是美国政府官员首次提到伊朗。)
        In an interview on Sunday, Ms. Hakakian, who came to the United States as a refugee in 1984, said that the heart of the Rushdie case is “being able to say that we, as writers, as novelists, as thinkers, can absolutely take on any issue we want in our works — and that includes Islam.”
        在周日的一次采访中,1984年以难民身份来到美国的哈卡吉安说,拉什迪这件事的核心是“我们作为作家、小说家、思想家应该能够放心地在我们的作品中充分探讨任何我们想探讨的问题——这包括伊斯兰教。”
        But “nobody is saying that,” she said. Instead, “people are paying lip service to free speech.”
        但是“没有人这么说,”她说。相反,“人们只是在口头上支持言论自由。”
        In his recent autobiographical novel “Homeland Elegies,” the American writer Ayad Akhtar reflects on the complex meanings of the “Satanic Verses” controversy for Muslim readers and writers, including himself.
        美国作家阿亚德·阿赫塔尔在最近的自传体小说《国土挽歌》(Homeland Elegies)中,反思了《撒旦诗篇》争议对包括他自己在内的穆斯林读者和作家的复杂含义。
        In an email on Sunday, Mr. Akhtar, who is PEN America’s current president, said the attack on Mr. Rushdie is “a reminder that ‘harms’ of speech and the freedom of speech do not, cannot, hold equal claims on us.”
        在周日的电子邮件中,现任美国笔会主席的阿赫塔尔说,对拉什迪的袭击“提醒我们,言论的‘伤害’和言论自由对我们不是、也不可能是同样重要的”。
        “While we may rightly acknowledge that speech can harm,” he said, “it’s in the terrible culmination of Salman’s dilemma that we see the paramount value, the absolute centrality of freedom of thought and the freedom to express that thought.”
        “我们可以明确言论会造成伤害,这没有错,”他说,“但正是在萨勒曼身处的困境最终发展到这可怕的高潮时,我们看到,思想自由和表达这种思想的自由具有最高价值和绝对核心地位。”
        For many, defending Mr. Rushdie and “The Satanic Verses” against his would-be assassins may be easy, Mr. Akhtar said. But the defense also “has to apply where we have less unanimity, where we are more implicated.”
        阿赫塔尔说,对很多人来说,为拉什迪和《撒旦诗篇》辩护可能很容易。但这种辩护也“必须适用于与我们意见不那么一致的地方,以及与我们牵涉较多的地方”。
        “That’s what it means,” he said, “for it to be a principle.”
        “这就是它的涵义,”他说,“如果我们要把它作为原则的话。”
        
        
   返回首页                  

OK阅读网 版权所有(C)2017 | 联系我们