Week 3：An excerpt from "Woody Allen on Faith, Fortune Tellers and New York"

Woody Allen on Faith, Fortune Tellers and New York

By DAVE ITZKOFF

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/15/movies/15woody.html

 “To me,” Mr. Allen said, “there’s no real difference between a fortune teller or a fortune cookie and any of the organized religions. They’re all equally valid or invalid, really. And equally helpful.”

Mr. Allen spoke with Dave Itzkoff about his new film, how its themes resonate in his life and whether he has made his last movie in New York. These are excerpts from that conversation.

Q. The ideas of psychic powers and past lives, or at least people who believe in them, are central to your latest film. What got you interested in writing about them?

A. I was interested in the concept of faith in something. This sounds so bleak when I say it, but we need some delusions to keep us going. And the people who successfully delude themselves seem happier than the people who can’t. I’ve known people who have put their faith in religion and in fortune tellers. So it occurred to me that that was a good character for a movie: a woman who everything had failed for her, and all of a sudden, it turned out that a woman telling her fortune was helping her. The problem is, eventually, she’s in for a rude awakening.

Q. What seems more plausible to you, that we’ve existed in past lives, or that there is a God?

A. Neither seems plausible to me. I have a grim, scientific assessment of it. I just feel, what you see is what you get.

Q. How do you feel about the aging process?

A. Well, I’m against it. [laughs] I think it has nothing to recommend it. You don’t gain any wisdom as the years go by. You fall apart, is what happens. People try and put a nice varnish on it, and say, well, you mellow. You come to understand life and accept things. But you’d trade all of that for being 35 again. I’ve experienced that thing where you wake up in the middle of the night and you start to think about your own mortality and envision it, and it gives you a little shiver. That’s what happens to Anthony Hopkins at the beginning of the movie, and from then on in, he did not want to hear from his more realistic wife, “Oh, you can’t keep doing that — you’re not young anymore.” Yes, she’s right, but nobody wants to hear that.

Q. Has getting older changed your work in any way? Do you see a certain wistfulness emerging in your later films?

A. No, it’s too hit or miss. There’s no rhyme or reason to anything that I do. It’s whatever seems right at the time. I’ve never once in my life seen any film of mine after I put it out. Ever. I haven’t seen “Take the Money and Run” since 1968. I haven’t seen “Annie Hall” or “Manhattan” or any film I’ve made afterward. If I’m on the treadmill and I’m scooting through the channels, and I come across one of them, I go right past it instantly, because I feel it could only depress me. I would only feel, “Oh God, this is so awful, if I could only do that again.”

Week 2：地海故事集前言節錄 (B)

自從我開始執筆寫地海的故事到現在，可想而知，我一直在改變；這對讀者們來說也是一樣。所有的時代都會經歷變動；然而，我們身處的時代，遭遇到道德與精神層面迅速的劇變。典型搖身一變成為難以擺脫的負擔；一目了然的事物不再單純；混沌與優雅畫上等號；人們普遍認知的真理，變成少數人老舊的思想。

這令人擔憂。儘管我們喜愛閃爍著迷人閃光的電子產品，我們也對永恆不變的事物存有依戀。

我們珍惜始終不變的古老故事。亞瑟王在亞瓦隆(Avalon)作永恆的夢；比爾博(Bilbo)可以自由地「到那兒又回來」，而「那兒」總是那心愛、熟悉的夏爾(Shire)；唐吉軻德花了老半天出發殺向磨坊……如此這般，人們朝奇幻的國度尋求穩定性，古老的真理，永恆的純樸。

而資本主義的磨坊不間歇地供應著。供給滿足需求。奇幻文學成為商品，一種產業。

經過商品化的奇幻文學毫無投資風險：它不發明什麼，只進行模仿和瑣碎化。該產業的運作過程，便是將古老故事中所蘊含的智慧和道德底蘊抽離，將故事情節暴力化，將主人翁變成玩偶，將述說真相的文字變成灑狗血的陳腔濫調。英雄們揮舞著劍、雷射槍、魔杖，宛如機械性行動的採礦工人，大賺一把。艱深的道德抉擇受到消毒、變得可愛、變得安全。故事作者用熱情醞釀的構思，一一遭到複製、公式化處理、降格成玩具、用亮彩的模具包裝、用廣告宣傳、賣掉、摔破、扔掉、可代替的、可替換的。

將奇幻文學商品化的人，他們所仰賴並利用的，正是兒童和成人讀者無遠弗屆的想像力。想像力賦予這些死去的東西新生─算是某種暫時性的生命。

想像力和萬物相同：它存於當下，與真實的改變共生、受真實的改變影響、以真實的改變為生。如同一切我們所做的、所擁有的事物，它可以被吸收成為我們的一部分，或是被丟到一邊，但它不會因為受到商業化和道德說教的利用而遭到消滅。任何一個帝國的存續時間必然少於一塊大陸的存在。即使征服者將所佔領的森林綠地變成荒野沙漠，雨水仍將降臨，河流仍會出海。充滿變動、虛假的「從前從前」的故事，是人類歷史的一部分，也在萬花筒般繽紛多彩的世界地圖上被我們當作國家一般看待，且愈有名的故事流傳就愈久。

長久以來，人們同時居住在真實與虛構的世界中，但我們和祖先的生活方式是截然不同的。魔幻的魅力會隨著年齡增張和時代所改變的。

我們現在所知的亞瑟王有好幾個，通通都是真的；當比爾博還活著的時候，夏爾仍然受到無可挽回的改變；唐吉軻德騎著馬到了阿根廷，遇見波赫士(Jorge Luis Borges)。「改變得越多，一樣的就越多。」

我很開心能回到熟悉的地海，看到它仍在那兒，有所變化且持續改變著。我之前以為會發生的事情落空了，人們(或事物)的改變和我之前想的也有出入，而我在自以為相當熟悉的島嶼上迷路了。

那麼以下是我的探索和發現：地海故事集，是我為了一直以來喜歡這個地方的人、或覺得可能喜歡這個地方的人、和願意接受以下假設的人而寫：物換星移：不能太相信作者與巫師：龍的意圖無人能解。

Week 2： 地海故事集前言節錄（M）

當我在寫作地海系列的這段時間，我有所改變，當然地海的讀者也是。世界的每分每秒都有所不同，但是我們所經歷的是在道德跟心靈上，巨大而急遽的轉變。起源成為里程碑，眾多的單純變為複雜，混亂日趨優雅，眾所皆知的事實卻變成某些人心目中的陳舊思想。

這令人非常不安。當我們沈浸在短暫而攫目的靈光一閃時，也渴望著永恆不變。

我們會因為老故事的不變而珍惜它們。亞瑟在阿瓦隆（Avalon）長眠（註1)。比爾博（Bilbo）可以去到「那裡然後回來」（註2)，而「那裡」永遠是他鍾愛而熟悉的夏爾（Shire）。堂吉軻德（Don Quixote）的啟程總只為擊敗風車……人們在奇幻的國度中探求安定、古老的真理以及不變的單純。

而資本主義的工廠提供了這些原料。市場供需平衡。奇幻成為了商品，一種產業。

商品化的奇幻不冒任何風險：它什麼都不創造，只會模仿以及俗化。他們剽竊老故事中那些聰穎有原則的奧妙之處，把原本老故事中的動作描寫變成暴力，角色變成了玩偶，說實話也改為濫情的老生常談。英雄們刻板地舞弄著他們的劍、雷射武器跟法杖，像是台採收著利益的聯合收割機。令人十分不安的道德抉擇被掃除，讓故事變的可人且安全。偉大說書人的熱情創見被複製、定型，淪落成為閃亮塑膠模造的玩具，被廣告，被販賣，被損毀，被丟掉；可被取代，可相互取代。

商品化的奇幻仰賴且剝削的是擁有無邊想像力的讀者，無論孩童或成人，他們短暫地賦予這些無聊事物某種生命形式。

現在，想像力一如所有生物存活著，它靠著、隨著真實的改變延續生命。就像我們所做及所擁有的，它會成為主流，也會受到鄙視。但是它會從商業化及說教話語的利用中存活。土地會比帝國長命。征服者會離開一個曾是森林及草地的沙漠，但是雨水終將來臨，百川終將歸海。「很久很久以前……」的國度是不穩定的、善變的、不真實的，但它跟人類歷史和思想的某部份一樣，是建立在我們無常的版圖上的國度，而某些能持續更長久。

我們都在現實跟想像的國度中定居已久。但是在這兩個國度裡我們並未以我們父母或祖先的方式生活。故事的魔力會隨著年紀還有時代改變。

現在，我們認識一堆不同的亞瑟王，他們全是真的；夏爾在比爾博的一生中不斷在改變。堂吉軻德騎去了阿根廷然後在那裡遇到了波赫士（Jorge Luis Borges）「萬物變化無窮，萬物終歸諸於本。」（” plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.”）

當我重回地海，發現它還以我十分熟悉的型態存在時，我十分興奮，然而他們已有改變，而且持續在變動。過去我所預期會發生不是真正發生的，人們不再是過去我所認知的那個樣子或性格。我在自以為瞭若指掌的島上迷路。

以下是我的探勘與探索報告：地海故事對於那些長久熱愛或認為他們可能喜歡地海的，以及那些願意接受這些假設的人：萬物變化：作者跟巫師不是永遠能被信任：沒人有辦法形容龍的樣子。

註1：阿瓦隆(Avalon）是亞瑟王傳奇中的重要島嶼，亞瑟王死後，他的同母異父的姐姐莫甘娜(Morgan le Fay)用小船將他的遺體運來並埋葬於此。（From Wikipedia）

註2："There and Back Again"是魔戒三部曲前傳《哈比人歷險記》的副標題，內容記述哈比人比爾博與巫師甘道夫和13個矮人旅行橫越中土大陸，尋找一個被惡龍搶佔的屬於矮人珍貴寶物的探險故事。（From Wikipedia）

Week 2：An excerpt from the Foreword of Tales from Earthsea (地海故事集) by Ursula K Le Guin

In the years since I began to write about Earthsea I've changed, of course, and so have the people who read the books. All times are changing times, but ours is one of massive, rapid moral and mental transformation. Archetypes turn into millstones, large simplicities get complicated, chaos becomes elegant, and what everybody knows is true turns out to be what some people used to think.

It's unsettling. For all our delight in the impermanent, the entrancing flicker of electronics, we also long for the unalterable.

We cherish the old stories for their changelessness. Arthur dreams eternally in Avalon. Bilbo can go "there and back again," and "there" is always the beloved familiar Shire. Don Quixote sets out forever to kill a windmill... So people turn to the realms of fantasy for stability, ancient truths, immutable simplicities.

And the mills of capitalism provide them. Supply meets demand. Fantasy becomes a commodity, an industry.

Commodified fantasy takes no risks: it invents nothing, but imitates and trivializes. It proceeds by depriving the old stories of their intellectual and ethical complexity, turning their action to violence, their actors to dolls, and their truth- telling to sentimental platitude. Heroes brandish their swords, lasers, wands, as mechanically as combine harvesters, reaping profits. Profoundly disturbing moral choices are sanitized, made cute, made safe. The passionately conceived ideas of the great storytellers are copied, stereotyped, reduced to toys, molded in bright-colored plastic, advertised, sold, broken, junked, replaceable, interchangeable.

What the commodifiers of fantasy count on and exploit is the insuperable imagination of the reader, child or adult, which gives even these dead things life—of a sort, for a while.

Imagination like all living things lives now, and it lives with, from, on true change. Like all we do and have, it can be co-opted and degraded; but it survives commercial and didactic exploitation. The land outlasts the empires. The conquerors may leave desert where there was forest and meadow, but the rain will fall, the rivers will run to the sea. The unstable, mutable, untruthful realms of Once-upon-a-time are as much a part of human history and thought as the nations in our kaleidoscopic atlases, and some are more enduring.

We have inhabited both the actual and the imaginary realms for a long time. But we don't live in either place the way our parents or ancestors did. Enchantment alters with age, and with the age.

We know a dozen different Arthurs now, all of them true. The Shire changed irrevocably even in Bilbo’s lifetime. Don Quixote went riding out to Argentina and met Jorge Luis Borges there. Plus c'est la meme chose, plus fa change.

It's been a joy to me to go back to Earthsea and find it still there, entirely familiar, and yet changed and still changing. What I thought was going to happen isn't what's happening, people aren't who—or what—I thought they were, and I lose my way on islands I thought I knew by heart.

So these are reports of my explorations and discoveries: tales from Earthsea for those who have liked or think they might like the place, and who are willing to accept these hypotheses: things change: authors and wizards are not always to be trusted: nobody can explain a dragon.