Chapter Ⅳ 接过墨客的衣钵摇旗呐喊（2）（2/2）
《最震撼人心的声音》作者：姜宇 2017-02-11 10:27
e of Old Times is “Dark”.
对这二者我都没有任何更多的信息。
In each case I had no further information.
在前者，显然是有人在找一把剪刀，并向另一个人查问剪刀在哪里，他怀疑很可能是另一个人偷了它。但是我知道他说话的对象根本对剪刀不感兴趣, 对问题本身也不在意。
In the first case someone was obviously looking for a pair of scissors and was demanding their whereabouts of someone else he suspected had probably stolen them. But I somehow knew that the person addressed didn’t give a damn about the scissors or about the questioner either, for that matter.
“深色的”这个词我用来描述某人的头发, 一个女人的头发, 是对一个问题的回答。在这两种情景下, 我发现我自己被迫继续下去。视觉上所发生的是一个极其缓慢的淡化, 从阴影到光亮。
“Dark” I took to be a description of someone’s hair, the hair of a woman, and was the answer to a question. In each case I found myself compelled to pursue the matter. This happened visually, a very slow fade, through shadow into light.
我总是在开始一出戏剧的时候将人物定为A、B和C。
I always start a play by calling the characters A, B and C.
在《回家》这出戏里，我看见一个人走进空荡荡的房间，质问那个坐在丑陋的沙发里读报纸上赌马经的年轻人。我怀疑A是父亲，B是他的儿子，但我没有证据。好在这不久就被证实了，这个B（后来成为兰尼）对A说（后来成为麦克斯）：“爸，我是不是能换个话题? 我想问点事儿。我们刚才吃的晚餐叫什么来着? 你管它叫什么来着? 你为什么不买只狗呢? 你是狗厨师。真的, 你以为你是在为很多狗做饭。”既然B管A叫“爸”，那对我来说他们是父子关系就是合理的假设了。很清楚A是个厨师，而且他的厨艺好像不怎么样，这是否意味着没有母亲这个角色呢? 我不知道。但是, 当时我告诉我自己，我们的开始绝不可能知道我们的终结。
In the play that became The Homecoming I saw a man enter a stark room and ask his question of a younger man sitting on an ugly sofa reading a racing paper. I somehow suspected that A was a father and that B was his son, but I had no proof. This was however confirmed a short time later when B (later to become Lenny) says to A (later to become Max), “Dad, do you mind if I change the subject? I want to ask you something. The dinner we had before, what was the name of it? What do you call it? Why don’t you buy a dog? You’re a dog cook. Honest. You think you’re cooking for a lot of dogs.” So since B calls A “Dad” it seemed to me reasonable to assume that they were father and son. A was also clearly the cook and his cooking did not seem to be held in high regard. Did this mean that there was no mother? I didn’t know. But, as I told myself at the time, our beginnings never know our ends.
对这二者我都没有任何更多的信息。
In each case I had no further information.
在前者，显然是有人在找一把剪刀，并向另一个人查问剪刀在哪里，他怀疑很可能是另一个人偷了它。但是我知道他说话的对象根本对剪刀不感兴趣, 对问题本身也不在意。
In the first case someone was obviously looking for a pair of scissors and was demanding their whereabouts of someone else he suspected had probably stolen them. But I somehow knew that the person addressed didn’t give a damn about the scissors or about the questioner either, for that matter.
“深色的”这个词我用来描述某人的头发, 一个女人的头发, 是对一个问题的回答。在这两种情景下, 我发现我自己被迫继续下去。视觉上所发生的是一个极其缓慢的淡化, 从阴影到光亮。
“Dark” I took to be a description of someone’s hair, the hair of a woman, and was the answer to a question. In each case I found myself compelled to pursue the matter. This happened visually, a very slow fade, through shadow into light.
我总是在开始一出戏剧的时候将人物定为A、B和C。
I always start a play by calling the characters A, B and C.
在《回家》这出戏里，我看见一个人走进空荡荡的房间，质问那个坐在丑陋的沙发里读报纸上赌马经的年轻人。我怀疑A是父亲，B是他的儿子，但我没有证据。好在这不久就被证实了，这个B（后来成为兰尼）对A说（后来成为麦克斯）：“爸，我是不是能换个话题? 我想问点事儿。我们刚才吃的晚餐叫什么来着? 你管它叫什么来着? 你为什么不买只狗呢? 你是狗厨师。真的, 你以为你是在为很多狗做饭。”既然B管A叫“爸”，那对我来说他们是父子关系就是合理的假设了。很清楚A是个厨师，而且他的厨艺好像不怎么样，这是否意味着没有母亲这个角色呢? 我不知道。但是, 当时我告诉我自己，我们的开始绝不可能知道我们的终结。
In the play that became The Homecoming I saw a man enter a stark room and ask his question of a younger man sitting on an ugly sofa reading a racing paper. I somehow suspected that A was a father and that B was his son, but I had no proof. This was however confirmed a short time later when B (later to become Lenny) says to A (later to become Max), “Dad, do you mind if I change the subject? I want to ask you something. The dinner we had before, what was the name of it? What do you call it? Why don’t you buy a dog? You’re a dog cook. Honest. You think you’re cooking for a lot of dogs.” So since B calls A “Dad” it seemed to me reasonable to assume that they were father and son. A was also clearly the cook and his cooking did not seem to be held in high regard. Did this mean that there was no mother? I didn’t know. But, as I told myself at the time, our beginnings never know our ends.