【導(dǎo)讀5】如何閱讀莎士比亞

5 - How to Read Shakespeare

5 – 如何閱讀莎士比亞

In this final episode of our introductory course, we discuss some strategies for approaching Shakespeare. Whichever of his plays you read, this episode offers ways to enhance your experience.

今天是我們先導(dǎo)課的最后一期。本期節(jié)目，我們將會(huì)探討一些閱讀莎士比亞作品的技巧。不論你讀的是他的哪一部戲劇，今天這期節(jié)目中介紹的閱讀技巧都將會(huì)增強(qiáng)你的閱讀體驗(yàn)。

One of the most distinctive and difficult parts of Shakespeare’s work is the language. So the first thing to know is that his language doesn’t usually reflect how people speak--not in the 1600s and certainly not now. It’s not supposed to be like ordinary language. It’s language elevated into art.

莎士比亞作品中，最具特色就是語(yǔ)言，但同時(shí)，語(yǔ)言也是最難的部分。所以，我們首先要明確，莎士比亞所運(yùn)用的語(yǔ)言往往沒(méi)有反映人們是如何說(shuō)話的，那既不是17世紀(jì)人們的語(yǔ)言，當(dāng)然也不是現(xiàn)在人的。那不是普通的語(yǔ)言，而是升華成了藝術(shù)的語(yǔ)言。

Emma Smith: So my sense is one of the things people enjoyed about going to the theater in Shakespeare's time was to have. And it's that take experience, particularly a sort of heard experience, which was quite unlike what they heard around them the rest of the time.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以，我覺(jué)得在莎士比亞那個(gè)年代，人們愛(ài)去劇院看戲的一個(gè)原因就是為了獲得一種體驗(yàn)，尤其是一種聽(tīng)覺(jué)上的體驗(yàn)。他們?cè)趹騽≈新?tīng)到的語(yǔ)言與他們?cè)谌粘Ｉ钪新?tīng)到的語(yǔ)言很不一樣。

That’s Emma Smith, Professor of Shakespeare Studies at the University of Oxford.

這位是艾瑪·史密斯，牛津大學(xué)莎士比亞研究院教授。

Emma Smith: So the theater isn't really realistic. It doesn't hold up a mirror to people's ordinary lives. It's something heighten. It's something exalted. It's something to aspire to, I guess. It if it always feels. Yeah. Feels to be a little bit like opera or something like that.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以戲劇不是完全寫實(shí)的，它不會(huì)像鏡子那樣如實(shí)地反映人們的日常生活，它表現(xiàn)的是某種被拔高、被升華了的內(nèi)容。我認(rèn)為，它表現(xiàn)的是人們向往的一些東西，感覺(jué)像是，有點(diǎn)兒像是歌劇之類的。

That's not, you know, so they're not naturalistic in that way. But the language that Shakespeare uses then is a language of poetry as well as a language of sometimes a language of everyday speech

所以，這樣看的話，它們并不寫實(shí)。莎士比亞當(dāng)時(shí)運(yùn)用的是詩(shī)意的語(yǔ)言，但同時(shí)他的語(yǔ)言有時(shí)又很日常。

Shakespeare wrote much of his drama in poetic verse. We have to listen to it differently than we would read a contemporary novel because Shakespeare is poetry.

莎士比亞在創(chuàng)作戲劇時(shí)，運(yùn)用了大量詩(shī)意的韻文。我們聽(tīng)?wèi)騽r(shí)的感受不同于讀一本當(dāng)代小說(shuō)，因?yàn)樯勘葋喌淖髌菲鋵?shí)就是詩(shī)歌。

Emma Smith: Often it's in verse, unusually unrhythm verse, although not always, and that first we call blank verse or iambic pentameter and iambic pentameter means the pentameter part is five what we calls, five feet in a line. And the feet go unstressed-Stress: da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM. That's how the pentameter is usually discussed. And that means the stress of the language is moving along. The most important point in the line is not the first syllable because that's unstressed, but maybe the last one because that's where the energy of the mind is going.

艾瑪·史密斯：有時(shí)是以韻文的形式，偶爾會(huì)使用自由詩(shī)，雖然這種情況不常見(jiàn)。第一種韻文我們稱它為“無(wú)韻詩(shī)”或者“五步抑揚(yáng)格”，五步抑揚(yáng)格的意思就是這種詩(shī)每行有五個(gè)音步，每個(gè)音步的第一個(gè)音節(jié)輕讀，第二個(gè)音節(jié)重讀，節(jié)奏是這樣的“噠噠（第一個(gè)“噠”讀得輕且快，重音落在第二個(gè)“噠”上，之后的幾個(gè)“噠噠”也這樣讀），噠噠，噠噠，噠噠，噠噠”，這就是我們常說(shuō)的五音步詩(shī)行。這意味著語(yǔ)言的重音在移動(dòng)，它是會(huì)動(dòng)的。詩(shī)行中最重要的并不是第一個(gè)音節(jié)，因?yàn)樗恢刈x，最重要的應(yīng)該是最后一個(gè)音節(jié)，因?yàn)樗枷氲牧α慷俭w現(xiàn)在了這個(gè)音節(jié)上。

Try listening for this iambic pentameter--the pattern of unstress-stress, five times per line. For example, we can hear it in Romeo’s famous line: “But soft! What lightthrough yonder window breaks?” or, if I exaggerate it, “But soft! What lightthrough yonder window breaks?” That’s the underlying poetic structure of Shakespeare’s verse. Of course, poetry doesn’t just mean writing to a metrical pattern. It also means using words in unusual ways. Shakespeare employs lots of figurative language, conveying abstract ideas in unexpected physical images. Sometimes those images are so complex, it’s hard to fully comprehend them on first hearing. But that’s fine. You don’t need to understand every word precisely. It’s just as important to experience them: to experience their rhythm and sound.

讓我們來(lái)試著聽(tīng)一聽(tīng)五步抑揚(yáng)格，感受一下它的“先輕讀再重讀”的這種表現(xiàn)節(jié)奏，這種輕重節(jié)奏每行會(huì)重復(fù)五次。比如，羅密歐有一句著名的臺(tái)詞，就運(yùn)用了五步抑揚(yáng)格，讓我們來(lái)聽(tīng)一聽(tīng)這句臺(tái)詞：“但是，輕一點(diǎn)/是什么光/從那遠(yuǎn)方的/窗戶中照進(jìn)來(lái)？”用漢語(yǔ)表達(dá)出來(lái)可能稍微有些奇怪，所以我再夸張一點(diǎn)讀出來(lái)這句臺(tái)詞就是：“但是，輕一點(diǎn)/是什么光/從那遠(yuǎn)方的/窗戶中照進(jìn)來(lái)？”莎士比亞的韻文中都帶著詩(shī)歌的結(jié)構(gòu)。當(dāng)然，詩(shī)歌不僅僅意味著要運(yùn)用格律，也意味著要用不同尋常的方式來(lái)遣詞造句。莎士比亞運(yùn)用了大量的比喻性語(yǔ)言，用人們意想不到的具體意象來(lái)傳遞抽象概念。有時(shí)，那些意象過(guò)于復(fù)雜，人們?cè)诘谝淮温?tīng)見(jiàn)的時(shí)候，甚至都無(wú)法完全理解它們。但沒(méi)關(guān)系，大家不需要精準(zhǔn)理解每一個(gè)單詞。重點(diǎn)是去要感受它們，去感受這些單詞的節(jié)奏和聲音。

Emma Smith: Sometimes I feel as if the experience of going to a Shakespeare play in performance is more like going to a concert of whatever music you like, really, than it is like going to a lecture. That's to say the words themselves are not the only form of meaning, and that sometimes we need them to sort of wash over us and to think this is really beautiful or this is really harsh or this is really abstract or this is really romantic or something we don't need to understand every single bit so far.

艾瑪·史密斯：我有時(shí)候覺(jué)得，看一場(chǎng)莎劇演出，更像聽(tīng)了一場(chǎng)喜歡的音樂(lè)會(huì)，真的，不大會(huì)覺(jué)得是聽(tīng)了一場(chǎng)演講。也就是說(shuō)，意思、內(nèi)涵不是單詞的唯一形式，我們要沉浸到單詞中，感受它們的美、它們的殘酷、它們的抽象以及它們的浪漫，我們目前真的不需要理解每一個(gè)單詞的意思。

Emma Smith: Nobody ever understood all of Shakespeare. Some of what's difficult about Shakespeare's language is difficult because we don't have the same words for things or we don't have the same language, doesn't work in quite the same way.

艾瑪·史密斯：也沒(méi)有人能完全理解莎士比亞。理解莎士比亞所使用的文風(fēng)的難點(diǎn)在于，我們不會(huì)用莎士比亞所使用的那些詞匯來(lái)描述同一件事情，或者說(shuō)我們的語(yǔ)言和莎士比亞的不同，它們起作用的方式不一樣。

But some of the language is difficult because Shakespeare seems to have invented a word or he's picked out quite a specialized word because he likes the sound of it and he's brought it in or he's on some quite abstract flight of fancy that none of us can really follow. And nobody who went to the theater in the 1590s would have been able to follow every single word. So I think people who get into Shakespeare for the first time need to be easy on themselves and about their expectations.

莎士比亞語(yǔ)言之所以這么難，另一個(gè)原因在于他似乎還會(huì)造新的詞，他甚至還會(huì)因?yàn)橄矚g一些特殊單詞的發(fā)音而去運(yùn)用這些詞，他會(huì)在寫作中引入這樣的單詞，有時(shí)我們完全跟不上他那種極其抽象的異想天開。16世紀(jì)90年代那會(huì)兒，去劇院看莎劇的那些人，也沒(méi)有誰(shuí)是能夠完全理解劇中的每一個(gè)單詞。所以，我認(rèn)為，第一次接觸莎劇的人應(yīng)該，應(yīng)該放輕松，不要給自己定太高的預(yù)期。

Another thing to keep in mind is that if sometimes you feel like the language is really hard to understand, that may be exactly the point.

大家還需要記住的一點(diǎn)就是，有時(shí)你可能會(huì)覺(jué)得劇中的語(yǔ)言真的很難理解，別擔(dān)心，這也許就是莎士比亞想要追求的效果呢。

Emma Smith: I think is it fair to say that Shakespeare's language sometimes is difficult, but not always. And that means that sometimes the difficulty is a way that Shakespeare kind of encodes the fact that his characters are not being straightforward. They're choosing to talk in a difficult or convoluted way because they can't be honest about what it is this that is happening or what it is that they're doing.

艾瑪·史密斯：我覺(jué)得莎士比亞的語(yǔ)言有時(shí)的確有難度，不過(guò)這種情況也不會(huì)特別多見(jiàn)。這種“難”在某種程度上是因?yàn)樯勘葋喿隽思用芴幚恚幌ＭP下的角色一眼就被看穿。這些角色說(shuō)的話晦澀難懂，因?yàn)樗麄儫o(wú)法坦誠(chéng)說(shuō)出正在發(fā)生的事情或他們當(dāng)下正在做的事情。

It's not a deficiency in you. So it's not because you're too stupid to understand what this means. It's that for various reasons. This is quite difficult. And some of those difficulties are often quite useful in understanding what's happening in the play.

這不是你的問(wèn)題，不是你不夠聰明，無(wú)法理解這些話。導(dǎo)致這種情況的原因很多。而且，一些不好理解的地方相反會(huì)幫助你理解劇情的發(fā)展。

Just as Shakespeare’s language is different from real life conversation, it’s important to remember that his characters are different from real life people.

莎士比亞不僅使用的語(yǔ)言不同于日常對(duì)話，我們還要注意，他筆下的角色也和現(xiàn)實(shí)中的人們不一樣。

Emma Smith: So a lot of our reading habits and our expectations about how stories told are based on our experience of novels and novels have tended to the 19^th century to deliver us a.. And to be the way of exploring so psychologically deep or complicated characters. Characters in interaction. So I think the novel is the great sort of stage. If you like for character, sometimes bringing those assumptions to drama of Shakespeare's is a little bit unhelpful.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以，我們的許多閱讀習(xí)慣，我們關(guān)于故事敘述方式的預(yù)期主要源自我們閱讀小說(shuō)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，19世紀(jì)之后的小說(shuō)傾向于進(jìn)行深入的心理探索，探索復(fù)雜的人物角色，這些角色互相影響。所以，我認(rèn)為小說(shuō)也是一個(gè)很了不起的舞臺(tái)。但是，如果你很關(guān)注人物角色，有時(shí)在看莎劇時(shí)，代入這樣的假設(shè)，卻會(huì)不利于你理解戲劇。

Many of Shakespeare’s characters do have the lifelike complexity and psychological depth of characters in novels. But others don’t--and they’re not meant to.

莎士比亞筆下不少角色也有著小說(shuō)角色那樣真切的復(fù)雜性和心理深度。但是，其他的角色卻不是這樣的，作者也無(wú)意于這樣描寫他們。

Emma Smith: I think then there are lots of characters in Shakespeare who are actually stereotypes, and we tend to think of stereotype as a negative word. But I think Shakespeare or Shakespeare's audience are quite interested in those kinds of figures

艾瑪·史密斯：我覺(jué)得，實(shí)際上，莎士比亞筆下很多人物角色都是有固定模式的，我們一聽(tīng)到“固定模式”這個(gè)詞，就很容易就覺(jué)得它是一個(gè)消極詞匯。但我認(rèn)為，莎士比亞本人，或者莎士比亞的受眾們卻對(duì)這類人物相當(dāng)感興趣。

Some characters don’t portray a unique personality, but instead represent some larger universal idea. The merry, fat knight Falstaff is a memorable character precisely because he’s a symbol for comic mirth and appetite. And some characters aren’t important for their character, or personality, at all, but rather for how they help change and drive the story.

一些角色并沒(méi)有鮮明的性格特點(diǎn)，相反，他們代表的是一些更加廣泛的概念?？鞓?lè)的胖騎士福斯塔夫就是這樣一個(gè)角色，他的形象令讀者印象深刻，恰恰就是因?yàn)樗砩媳憩F(xiàn)出的喜感和胃口好這些特征。一些角色的重要性不在角色本身，也不在他們的性格特點(diǎn)，而是在于他們幫助改變并推進(jìn)了故事的情節(jié)發(fā)展。

Emma Smith: It would be interesting to think not so much how would this character behave if they were a real person in my world? But what would the play be like without this character or if this character were different? Why does the play need the character to be this way? And sometimes that produces an interesting turnaround in how we see Shakespeare as being a little bit more plot driven than character driven.

艾瑪·史密斯：我們不需要過(guò)多地猜測(cè)如果把這些角色放到現(xiàn)實(shí)世界，他們會(huì)怎么行事。不過(guò)，倒是可以假想一下，如果沒(méi)有這個(gè)角色或者這個(gè)角色的性格特點(diǎn)和原來(lái)不一樣的話，故事情節(jié)又會(huì)怎么發(fā)展。這樣我們就可以知道為什么這個(gè)角色在劇中是這個(gè)樣子。想想這些問(wèn)題，會(huì)很有意思。有時(shí)，這些思考還會(huì)改變我們對(duì)莎劇的看法，我們會(huì)去思考莎劇真的是劇情推動(dòng)大于角色推動(dòng)嗎？這些都太有趣了。

So some of Shakespeare’s characters are close to “real life” people. But some are more like symbols or stereotypes. And others have a structural function: they echo or amplify or bring out different aspects of an idea or another character’s personality.

所以，在莎士比亞筆下，的確有一些很貼近“現(xiàn)實(shí)生活”中的人物的角色，但有些角色則更像是符號(hào)或固定模式。此外，還有一些角色，他們?cè)趧≈邪l(fā)揮著結(jié)構(gòu)性作用，呼應(yīng)、闡明甚至引出某個(gè)觀點(diǎn)或另一個(gè)角色性格的不同側(cè)面。

Emma Smith: So it can be quite interesting to think where the characters on the stage might be sort of Externalisation exterior versions of the voice in your own head that you might be arguing with somebody, which is really an internal document. But one of the ways to show it on the stage is to put it out onto someone else.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以，試想一下，舞臺(tái)上的角色也許在某種程度上，以一種迷人的方式外化了你內(nèi)心與別人的爭(zhēng)論，說(shuō)出了你內(nèi)心的話語(yǔ)。這真的很有意思。然而，在舞臺(tái)上，作者卻是通過(guò)另外的某個(gè)角色展露出你的這種心聲。

In Hamlet, for example, other characters reflect different aspects of Hamlet’s personality, different paths he considers following. One of these characters is Prince Fortinbras. Like Hamlet, he has a father who’s been killed; and like Hamlet, he’s seeking revenge for his father’s death. But he uses armies and decisive actions of war, while Hamlet strikes indirectly at his enemy with a play. When Hamlet sees Fortinbras’s army, it’s an occasion for him to wonder whether he’s pursuing the right course--should he be behaving more like Fortinbras? It’s almost as if Fortinbras is Hamlet in an imagined parallel life--not a character who is given a lot of personality in his own right, but who gives Hamlet the chance to see a part of himself in action that he hasn’t allowed himself to live out. So it’s useful to ask yourself how your understanding of some other character would be different without this one.

例如，在《哈姆雷特》這部劇中，其他角色反映出了哈姆雷特性格的不同側(cè)面，反映出了他所思考的另一種行事方式。福丁布拉王子就是這樣一個(gè)角色。同哈姆雷特一樣，福丁布拉的父親也是被謀殺的，他也在籌劃為父親復(fù)仇。但是，福丁布拉的復(fù)仇方式很直接，他動(dòng)用軍隊(duì)、果斷向敵人開戰(zhàn)，而哈姆雷特則選擇通過(guò)表演一出戲劇的方式來(lái)間接克敵。當(dāng)哈姆雷特看見(jiàn)福丁布拉的軍隊(duì)時(shí)，他也一度懷疑自己的做法是否正確，他是否要像福丁布拉一樣呢？此時(shí)，在想象的平行世界里，哈姆雷特變成了福丁布拉，而福丁布拉不再是一個(gè)被賦予了獨(dú)特個(gè)性的角色，他的存在是為了讓哈姆雷特有機(jī)會(huì)看到他曾經(jīng)一度壓抑著的內(nèi)心。所以，大家很有必要問(wèn)一問(wèn)自己，如果沒(méi)有這個(gè)角色的襯托，你對(duì)于某一個(gè)角色的理解是否會(huì)不一樣。

That brings us to a larger question about the plays’ structure: well, how all the elements of the play are put together. One element is plot. Shakespeare's plays often deploy not just one plot but two.

于是，我們可以提出有關(guān)戲劇結(jié)構(gòu)的一個(gè)更宏大的問(wèn)題，那就是，戲劇的所有元素是被如何組合在一起的？其中有一個(gè)元素就是情節(jié)。很多時(shí)候，莎劇情節(jié)的發(fā)展不是單線的，而是由雙線的。

Emma Smith: So lots of Shakespeare plays have what's called a double plot that I have a plot and a subplot. And that's one really basic way to look. How do those interact? What usually happens is that they're being alternated at the beginning and then they become intertwined.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以，莎士比亞創(chuàng)作的很多戲劇是雙線發(fā)展的，一條主線，一條副線。這是我們要關(guān)注的一個(gè)基本點(diǎn)，我們要關(guān)注這兩條線是如何互相影響的。這兩條線一般都是在一開始的時(shí)候，交替著出現(xiàn)，之后隨著劇情的發(fā)展慢慢互相糾纏互相影響。

In King Lear, for example, both King Lear and Gloucester struggle to see the truth about their children. Thinking about their two stories together might help you see new things about each character. Similarly, you might see new things in a scene if you think about other scenes that it is contrasted with.

例如，在《李爾王》這部戲劇中，李爾王和葛羅斯特都努力想看清自己孩子們的真面目。如果你結(jié)合著看他們倆的故事的話，你也許能在這兩個(gè)角色中看到新的東西。類似地，如果你在看某一場(chǎng)戲的時(shí)候，腦中想著與之相對(duì)應(yīng)的另外幾場(chǎng)戲，那么你也許也會(huì)有新的發(fā)現(xiàn)。

Emma Smith: It could be useful, really useful to think about a step back a bit from a scene and think, what does this look like? Other a lot of people on stage all yammering away together. Or is this quite a quiet scene or a domestic scene or a solo scene? And then what happens? What happens next?

艾瑪·史密斯：這很管用，真的很管用，你從一幕劇中稍稍脫離出來(lái)，想一想，這是怎么一會(huì)事兒？例如舞臺(tái)上有一大群人在哭泣。你可以思考一下，這是一場(chǎng)很安靜的戲嗎？還是說(shuō)這一場(chǎng)家庭戲？又或者說(shuō)這是一場(chǎng)獨(dú)角戲？發(fā)生了什么？接下來(lái)又會(huì)發(fā)生什么？

Romeo and Juliet opens with a fight in the streets between two feuding families. Probably every actor in the company would be onstage. But then the stage clears and that’s when Romeo enters. Romeo’s quiet, intimate first scene contrasts with the gigantic brawl, just as his love for Juliet will contrast with their families’ mutual hatred.

《羅密歐與朱麗葉》這部劇的開場(chǎng)就是兩個(gè)敵對(duì)家庭的一次街頭打斗。這場(chǎng)戲非常熱鬧，劇團(tuán)的每個(gè)演員說(shuō)不定都要上臺(tái)演出。之后，舞臺(tái)清場(chǎng)，羅密歐走上舞臺(tái)。羅密歐的初次登場(chǎng)安寧又平靜，和剛才喧鬧的打斗形成了鮮明對(duì)比，這種對(duì)比就像是他對(duì)朱麗葉的愛(ài)和他們兩個(gè)家族之間的仇恨一樣，形成了巨大的反差。

Famously, Romeo’s love affair with Juliet goes awry because she takes a potion that makes her appear dead. The plan is that Juliet will wake in her family tomb and run away with Romeo. We the audience know the plan--but tragically, Romeo does not. When Romeo sees Juliet and believes that she really is dead, we get a wrenching moment of dramatic irony.

我們都知道，羅密歐與朱麗葉的愛(ài)最終是以悲劇告終的。因?yàn)椋禧惾~喝下了讓她假死的藥水，按照她的計(jì)劃，她將在家族的墓中醒來(lái)，然后再與羅密歐私奔。作為觀眾，我們很清楚這個(gè)計(jì)劃，但很不幸的是，羅密歐并不知道，所以，當(dāng)羅密歐看到朱麗葉時(shí)，就以為她真的已經(jīng)死去了，那一刻，我們深切感受到了戲劇性反諷的悲愴。

Emma Smith: Often we talk about Shakespeare using dramatic irony, and that's the technique by which audiences know no more than the characters. So , we've been talking about how Shakespeare might be difficult, but one way in which Shakespeare is really easy is it does tell us what we need to know. We don't tend to need to work it out in plot terms. So whereas some of his contemporary writers might do a big reveal, a big kind of wow kind of moment. I didn't see that coming at the end. Shakespeare almost never does that.

艾瑪·史密斯：我們常說(shuō)，莎士比亞運(yùn)用戲劇性反諷，這是他的一種技巧，指的是關(guān)于劇情，觀眾們了解的情況和劇中角色一樣多。所以我們會(huì)說(shuō)莎劇很不好懂，但是換個(gè)角度看，莎劇真的不難，因?yàn)樗嬖V了我們那些我們需要知道的內(nèi)容，我們不需要根據(jù)劇情來(lái)進(jìn)行推測(cè)。但莎士比亞同時(shí)期的其他作家也許會(huì)在他們的戲劇里來(lái)個(gè)大揭秘，讓我們突然之間恍然大悟。但在莎劇中，到結(jié)尾都不會(huì)有這樣的情況，莎士比亞從不這么做。

We often think of the ending as the key to the story, the most suspenseful or dramatic moment. But in Shakespeare, that moment tends to come somewhere else.

我們總認(rèn)為結(jié)尾是故事的關(guān)鍵，是最具懸念或最戲劇化的時(shí)刻。但在莎劇中，這樣的時(shí)刻往往并不出現(xiàn)在戲劇的結(jié)尾處。

Emma Smith: One thing about the way play’s structure, which I found interesting, is to think about what happens in the middle. So we tend to focus quite a lot on what happens at the end. And, you know, clearly, if we're going towards weddings, we're in a comedy or for going towards death, we're in a tragedy and that seems definitive. But quite often the very middle of the plays or the middle of at three is a really important scene, a really important encounter or really important piece of plot, that sort of seesaws the play into the kind of conclusion that it's going to have.

艾瑪·史密斯：我覺(jué)得關(guān)于這些戲劇的結(jié)構(gòu)很有趣的一點(diǎn)是，我們要關(guān)注在戲劇的中間部分發(fā)生了什么。我們習(xí)慣于關(guān)注戲劇的結(jié)尾。大家都知道，很清楚地，如果在結(jié)尾我們看到了婚禮場(chǎng)景，那這就是喜??；如果看到的是死亡、戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)這類的場(chǎng)景，那這就是在悲劇。這似乎已經(jīng)是定律了。但很多時(shí)候，戲劇的中間，或者三部曲的中間一部才是真正重要的地方，一次關(guān)鍵性的沖突，或者是一個(gè)關(guān)鍵情節(jié)，諸如此類的內(nèi)容，將最終決定故事的發(fā)展和走向。

When you’re reading a play by Shakespeare, look for a climactic scene right around the middle. This is a dramatic moment of action that serves as a point of no return. Until now, we might have been able to imagine different ways the action could unfold. But here, some significant choice is made, and the play’s future course is set.

所以，當(dāng)你在讀莎劇的時(shí)候，要在戲劇的中間部分去尋找故事的高潮場(chǎng)面。這個(gè)高潮場(chǎng)面最終決定了故事的走向。在讀到這個(gè)場(chǎng)景之前，我們都還可以設(shè)想故事不同的展開方式。但是一旦讀到了這里，主人公會(huì)做出一些關(guān)鍵性決定，故事的脈絡(luò)也最終定型。

This climactic moment often helps determine another key part of the play’s structure: its genre. Genre refers to the type of story we’re watching. In Shakespeare’s plays, the basic genres are history, tragedy, and comedy.

這個(gè)高潮場(chǎng)面往往還決定了戲劇結(jié)構(gòu)的另一個(gè)關(guān)鍵性因素，這個(gè)因素就是戲劇的流派。戲劇流派指的是我們所閱讀的戲劇的類型。莎劇的基本流派分為歷史劇、悲劇和喜劇。

Emma Smith: I think the generic labels in the Folio are actually quite simple. If things are getting better and people are getting married at the end, it's a comedy. If things are getting worse and they're dead at the end, it's a tragedy. If it's based on English Chronicle sources, it's a history

艾瑪·史密斯：我覺(jué)得第一對(duì)開本中的戲劇流派分類其實(shí)是很簡(jiǎn)單的。如果事情朝著好的方向發(fā)展，劇中角色最終結(jié)婚了，那這就是一部喜劇。如果事態(tài)不斷惡化，在劇末，很多角色都死了，那這就是一部悲劇。如果戲劇取材于英國(guó)歷史的話，那這就是一部歷史劇。

Emma Smith: Question of genre affects how we appreciate a play, I guess. It shapes what we expect and our expectations are. One of the ways we find a play enjoyable, comfortable, uncomfortable… But I don’t think the genre of Shakespeare is fixed, I think almost all the players have elements of mixed genre elements.

艾瑪·史密斯：戲劇流派的劃分問(wèn)題，影響著我們對(duì)戲劇的欣賞。它決定了我們的期待和預(yù)期。其中一點(diǎn)就在于，這樣的話，我們?cè)谝徊繎騽≈懈惺艿降氖强鞓?lè)，還是舒服，又或者是不舒服，就都被固化了。但我覺(jué)得，幾乎每一部戲劇，其實(shí)混合了各個(gè)流派要素。

Emma Smith: So I think looking at the ways, particularly tragedy and comedy are in tension, are really interesting … But in lots of ways, you know, we can have very similar encounters in both comedy and tragedy.

艾瑪·史密斯：所以我認(rèn)為關(guān)注戲劇中展現(xiàn)的沖突方式是很有趣的，尤其是悲劇和喜劇的沖突方式。但是，很多時(shí)候，我們會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)在喜劇和悲劇中，其實(shí)有一些十分類似的沖突。

Genre in Shakespeare is complex. His tragedies often include elements of comedy and vice versa-- we can find a marriage in a tragedy, or a death in a comedy. So as you’re watching, think about which characters and plotlines seem to be driving the play towards a comic or a tragic conclusion. At which point does the genre become clear? For how long does it seem like the story could still go either way?

莎劇的流派其實(shí)很復(fù)雜。他的悲劇會(huì)包含一些喜劇元素，喜劇也會(huì)包含一些悲劇的元素。悲劇中，會(huì)有婚姻；喜劇中，也會(huì)有死亡。所以，在看劇的時(shí)候，可以思考一下是哪些角色或線索在推動(dòng)著故事的喜劇或悲劇結(jié)局。戲劇流派類型是在哪個(gè)節(jié)點(diǎn)變得明確的？故事流派仍未明確的情況會(huì)持續(xù)多久？

Of course, even at the play’s conclusion, there might still be elements that seem like they could go “either way”. Their meaning isn’t fully determined. These are elements we have to interpret. When a man proposes to a woman at the end of a play and she is silent, do we interpret her silence as consent or refusal? Or simply confusion? There are many important questions like that, which the plays themselves don’t answer. Where we do find answers is in performance. But what a performance gives is not the answer. It’s an answer. And there can be as many answers to the questions in Shakespeare’s plays as there are thoughtful performances.

當(dāng)然，即便故事到了結(jié)尾，有些情節(jié)似乎也還是可能朝著悲劇或喜劇的“任一方向”發(fā)展。這些情節(jié)的意義依舊不明確，我們還需要對(duì)它們做一定的解讀。在故事的結(jié)尾，一位男子向一位為女子求婚，但是女子卻沉默沒(méi)有說(shuō)話，此時(shí)，我們?cè)撊绾谓庾x她的沉默呢？她是答應(yīng)了還是拒絕了呢？還是說(shuō)連她自己也不確定？有很多這樣問(wèn)題，我們?cè)趧≈姓也坏酱鸢?，只能通過(guò)演員的表演來(lái)尋求解答。但是一場(chǎng)演出給到的并不是那個(gè)唯一確定的答案，那只不過(guò)是一種可能性罷了。從這么多有著深刻思考的演出中，我們就可以看出對(duì)于莎劇中這些問(wèn)題的解答真的是多種多樣的。

Emma Smith: One of the things I think I love about Shakespearian performance is the way actors and directors. Can bring out things that you hadn't noticed or things you haven't thought were important or just things that hadn't registered before.

艾瑪·史密斯：我覺(jué)得，我愛(ài)莎劇演出的一個(gè)原因還在于演員和導(dǎo)演。他們可以展現(xiàn)出那些你從未注意過(guò)、從未想過(guò)的重要內(nèi)容，或者是那些之前從未表現(xiàn)過(guò)的東西。

And I think once you watch the couple, once you watch the couple, you can see that there isn't going to be a right or a perfect or a complete version of the play. There are going to be different interpretations which bring out different things and want to make different kinds of statements. It's as if the script of the play has a whole load of potential plays within it. .

我覺(jué)得，如果你去看過(guò)幾次演出，或者說(shuō)一旦你看過(guò)好幾場(chǎng)演出的話，你就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，沒(méi)有哪一次的演出會(huì)是最恰當(dāng)、最完美、最完整的。不同的解讀會(huì)呈現(xiàn)出不同的內(nèi)容，會(huì)想要表達(dá)出不同的聲音。就好像戲劇文本包含了一大堆潛在的戲劇內(nèi)容一樣。

This might seem like an unsettling thought. Do these urgent questions really have no definite answer? But this open quality of the plays--the way that each script contains lots of different potential plays--is one of the reasons why reading Shakespeare is so rewarding. There’s no single right interpretation because there’s no single easy answer to the questions the plays ask. What’s the best way to pursue political change? What makes a good ruler? What makes a good marriage? Through new readings and performances, we rehearse different answers, different versions of the story, so we can add our own insights to what the plays have to share.

這個(gè)想法也許會(huì)令人感到困擾。一些緊要問(wèn)題真的就沒(méi)有明確的答案了嗎？但是我們要知道，每個(gè)文本都包含了許多不同的潛在劇情，正是這樣一種不確定的開放性使得閱讀莎士比亞能讓我們獲益匪淺。對(duì)于戲劇中的問(wèn)題，沒(méi)有唯一的正確答案，因?yàn)閷?duì)這些問(wèn)題的回答本來(lái)就不唯一。尋求政治變革的最佳途徑是什么？?jī)?yōu)秀的君主需要具備哪些品質(zhì)？好的婚姻需要什么？通過(guò)不斷推陳出新的閱讀文本和戲劇表演，我們給出了不同的回答和不同的故事版本，所以，我們都可以往戲劇解讀中，加入我們自己的見(jiàn)解。

Emma Smith: The one thing I do feel is that directors are not trying to give us the Shakespeare. That's not possible. They are giving us their Shakespeare.

艾瑪·史密斯：我能感受到，莎劇的導(dǎo)演們沒(méi)有試圖告訴我們什么是真正的莎士比亞，因?yàn)閴焊筒豢赡?。他們只是給了我們他們理解的莎士比亞。

And when you read, and wonder, and question, and interpret, when you investigate one answer and investigate another, what you’ll find is your Shakespeare. Just as Shakespearean actors and directors create something new each time they produce a version of a play, you too can create something new each time you explore one of Shakespeare’s works. And we hope that you enjoy the exploration.

在你閱讀、思考、提問(wèn)和解讀的過(guò)程中，在你追尋一個(gè)又一個(gè)的答案的旅途里，你所找到的將是一個(gè)屬于你自己的那個(gè)莎士比亞。就像莎劇的演員和導(dǎo)演們每次演出時(shí)，都能呈現(xiàn)新的內(nèi)容一樣，你也可以在每一次對(duì)莎士比亞作品的探索中，發(fā)現(xiàn)新的內(nèi)容。我們希望你們可以享受這個(gè)探索過(guò)程。