¡¶¾¼Ãѧ¼Ò¡·¶ÁÒë²Î¿¼ Translated & Edited by Chen Jilong
[2]and the like: µÈµÈ£¬ÖîÈç´ËÀà
[3]latch on to: Ã÷°×£¬Á˽⡣latchµÄ±¾ÒåΪ¡°×¥×¡£¬Õ¼ÓУ¬²åÉϲåÏú¡±¡£ [4]rest with: ÔÚÓÚ£¬¹éÊôÓÚ£¬È¡¾öÓÚ
Å×שÒýÓñ£º
£¨1£© ±¾¾äÖÐcried foulÓ¦¸ÃÈçºÎ·ÒëºÏÊÊ£¿Õâ¾ä»°±ÊÕßÒëΪ¡°´óÉù¼²ºôʳƷ¹«Ë¾´Ë¾Ù´¿Êô·¸¹æ¡±Í×µ±·ñ£¿ÄѵÀÕâÀïcry foul¾ÍÊDZÈÈü³¡ÉϲÃÅС°º°·¸¹æ½ÐÍ£¡±£¿
£¨2£© big-sellersÖеÄsellerÊÇÏúÊÛÉÌ»¹ÊÇÏúÊÛÉÌÆ·£¿bigÊÇÖ¸´óÐ͵ϹÊÇÏú·ºÃµÄ»òÕ߯äËü£¿
£¨3£© lightÔÚÕâ¸ö¾ä×ÓÀïµÄÒâ˼²»Ó¦¸ÃÊÇ¡°ÇáµÄ¡±°É£¿ÎÒ²ÂÏëÓ¦¸ÃÊÇ¡°ÔÉ«µÄ£¬»ùÉ«µÄ£¬Ç³É«µÄ¡±£¬ÄúÈÏÎªÄØ£¿
£¨4£© builderÊÇ¡°½¨ÔìÕß¡±»¹ÊÇ¡°Ôö½à¼Á¡±£¿±È½Ïרҵ£¬ÇëÖ¸½Ì¡£
£¨5£© ÎÒ˼À´ÏëÈ¥£¬Ò²ÕÒ²»³ö±È¡°Õâ¸öÊý×Ö±¾Éí¾ÍÒѾÔã¸â͸¶¥¡±¸üºÃµÄÒë·¨ÁË£¬»òÐí»¹ÕæÓиüºÃµÄ£¿ £¨6£© Come on, guys! ËÄܰÑÕâ¾ä·Òë¸üΪÌùÇС¢¸üΪͨ´ïÄØ£¿
£¨7£© Ô½ÒëÔ½ÔΣ¬ÎÒÐÄÀïÃ÷°×Õâ¸öself-reportingµÄÒâ˼£¬¿ÉÊǵ½µ×Ôõô±í´ï³öÀ´²Å×¼È·ÄØ£¿ £¨8£© in image terms£¬É¶Òâ˼£¿ÎҾͲ»Å×שÁË£¬ÃâµÃÔÒ×Å×Ô¼º£¬ºÇºÇ£¡
£¨9£© scale up°´±ÈÀýÔö¼Ó£»scale down°´±ÈÀýËõ¼õ£¬ÄÇôscale backÄØ£¿ÎÒÏ룬Ӧ¸Ã¸úscale down ²î²»¶à°É£¿
£¨10£© do one¡¯s bits ÎÒÔڴʵäÉÏûÓв鵽ÏàÓ¦µÄ¶ÌÓ²»¹ý¡°bit¡±Ò»´Ê±¾ÉíÊÇ¡°ÉÙÐí¡±Ö®Ò⣬ÎÒÏëÒëΪ¡°¾¡??Ãౡ֮Á¦¡±Ó¦µ±²»»µ£¬Äú¿´ÄØ£¿
TEXT 4
A question of standards Ò»¸ö¹Øºõ±ê×¼µÄÎÊÌâ
Feb 9th 2006
From The Economist Global Agenda
More suggestions of bad behaviour by tobacco companies. Maybe Ò²Ðí£¬Ñ̲ݹ«Ë¾¶ÔÄÇЩ²»Á¼ÐÐΪӦ¶àÌáµã½¨Òé
ANOTHER round has just been fought in the battle between tobacco companies and those who regard them as spawn of the devil. In a paper just published in the Lancet, with the provocative title ¡°Secret science: tobacco industry research on smoking behaviour and cigarette toxicity¡±, David Hammond, of *Waterloo University[1] in Canada and Neil Collishaw and Cynthia Callard, two members of Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada, a lobby group, criticise the behaviour of British American Tobacco (BAT). They say the firm considered manipulating some of its products in order to £¨1£©make them low-tar in the eyes of officialdom while they actually delivered high tar and nicotine levels to smokers.
Ñ̲ݹ«Ë¾ÓëÄÇЩÊÓÆäΪ¡°Ä§¹íÖ®×Ó¡±µÄÈËÖ®¼ä¸Õ¸ÕÓÖ½øÐÐÁËÐÂÒ»ÂֵĽ»·æ¡£Ð½ü³ö°æµÄ¡¶ÁøÒ¶µ¶¡·¿¯µÇÁËһƪÌâÄ¿ÆÄ¾ßÉ¿¶¯ÐÔµÄÂÛÎÄ¡¶ÃØÃÜ¿ÆÑСª¡ªÑ̲ÝÒµ¿ªÕ¹¶ÔÎüÑÌÐÐΪºÍÏãÑ̶¾ÐÔµÄÑо¿¡·£¬×÷ÕßÊǼÓÄôóÎÖÌØÂ³´óѧµÄ´÷ά?¹þÃɵÂÒÔ¼°¼ÓÄôóÒ»¸öÃûΪ¡°ÎÞÑ̼ÓÄôóҽʦ¡±ÓÎ˵ÍŵÄÁ½Ãû³ÉÔ±Äá¶û?¿ÆÀïФºÍÐÁÎ÷æ«?¼ÓÀµÂ¡£ËûÃǶÔÓ¢ÃÀÑ̲ݹ«Ë¾µÄÐÐΪÌá³öÁËÅúÆÀ£¬³Æ¸Ã¹«Ë¾Äâ¶ÔijЩÑ̲ݲúÆ·½øÐд¦Àí£¬ÆóͼÈüල²¿ÃÅÎóÒÔΪÆä½¹Óͺ¬Á¿µÍ£¬¶øÊµ¼ÊÉÏÕâЩ²úÆ·ÈÔ»áʹµÃÑÌÃñÎüÊÕ¸ßŨ¶ÈµÄ½¹ÓͺÍÄá¹Å¶¡¡£
Page 11 of 37
¡¶¾¼Ãѧ¼Ò¡·¶ÁÒë²Î¿¼ Translated & Edited by Chen Jilong
It was and is no secret, as BAT points out, that people smoke low-tar cigarettes differently from high-tar ones. The reason is that they want a decent dose of the nicotine which tobacco smoke contains. They therefore *pull[2] a larger volume of air through the cigarette when they *draw on[3] a low-tar rather than a high-tar variety. £¨2£©The extra volume makes up for the lower concentration of the drug. ÕýÈçÓ¢ÃÀÑ̲ݹ«Ë¾ËùÖ¸³ö£¬ÈËÃÇÎüµÍ½¹Óͺ¬Á¿ÏãÑ̵ĸоõ²»Í¬Óڸ߽¹Óͺ¬Á¿ÏãÑÌ£¬ÕâÔÚ¹ýÈ¥ºÍÏÖÔÚ¶¼²»ÊÇÊ²Ã´ÃØÃÜ¡£ÕâÊÇÒòΪËûÃÇÐèÒªÑ̲ÝÖк¬ÓÐÊÊÁ¿Äá¹Å¶¡£¬³éµÍ½¹ÓÍÆ·ÖÖµÄÏãÑÌʱËùÎüÈëµÄ¿ÕÆøº¬Á¿Ò²Òò´Ë±È³é¸ß½¹ÓÍÆ·ÖÖµÄÏãÑÌʱ¸ß£¬£¨ÒëÕß×¢£ºÒ²¾ÍÊÇ˵£¬Äá¹Å¶¡º¬Á¿¹ý¸ß£¬Ñ̾ͺÜÄÑÎü£¬²»ÈÝÒ׳éµÃ¶¯¡££©¶øÕâ¸ß³öÀ´µÄ¿ÕÆøº¬Á¿Ò²ÃÖ²¹ÁËñ«ÐÔÎïÖÊ£¨Äá¹Å¶¡£©µÄ²»×ã¡£
But a burning cigarette is a complex thing, and that extra volume has some unexpected consequences. In particular, a bigger draw is generally a faster draw. £¨3£©That pulls a higher proportion of the air inhaled through the burning tobacco, rather than through the paper sides of the cigarette. This, in turn, means more smoke per unit volume, and thus more tar and nicotine. The nature of the nicotine may change, too, with more of it being in a form that is easy for the body to absorb.
²»¹ý£¬Ò»Ö§µãȼµÄ¾íÑÌ¿ÉÊÇÒ»¸ö¸´ÔÓµÄÍæÒâ¶ù£¬²¢ÇÒ¿ÕÆøÁ¿Ôö¼ÓÒ²»á´øÀ´ÒâÏë²»µ½µÄ½á¹û£¬ÌرðÊǵ±ÎÒÃÇ´ó¿ÚÎüÑÌʱÍùÍù»áºÜ¿ì³éÍêÒ»Ö§ÑÌ£¬´ËʱËùÎüÈëµÄ¿ÕÆø¸ü¶àÀ´×ÔÓÚȼÉÕµÄÑ̲ݶø·Ç¾íÑÌÖ½²à¡£Òò¶ø£¬Õâ¾ÍÒâζ×Åÿ¶àÎüÒ»¿Ú¿ÕÆø£¬¾Í»á¶àÎüÒ»¿Ú½¹ÓͺÍÄá¹Å¶¡¡£¶àÊýÄá¹Å¶¡¶¼ÒÔÒ»ÖÖÒ×±»ÈËÌåÎüÊÕµÄÐÎʽ´æÔÚ£¬Òò´ËÄá¹Å¶¡µÄÐÔÖÊÒ²¿ÉÄÜ·¢Éú¸Ä±ä¡£
According to Dr Hammond and his colleagues, a series of studies conducted by BAT's researchers between 1972 and 1994 quantified much of this. The standardised way of analysing cigarette smoke, as *laid down[4] by the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), which regulates everything from computer code to greenhouse gases, uses a machine to make 35-millilitre puffs, drawn for two seconds once a minute. The firm's researchers, by contrast, found that real smokers draw 50-70ml per puff, and do so twice a minute. £¨4£©Dr Hammonds's conclusion is drawn from the huge body of documents disgorged by the tobacco industry as part of various legal settlements that have taken place in the past few years, mainly as a result of disputes with the authorities in the United States. ¾Ý¹þÃɵÂÒ½Éú¼°ÆäͬÊÂÃdzƣ¬Ó¢ÃÀÑ̲ݹ«Ë¾µÄÑо¿Ô±ÒÑÓÚ1972Äêµ½1994Äê¼äͨ¹ýһϵÁÐÑо¿¶ÔÉÏÊö´ó²¿·ÖÎÊÌâ½øÐÐÁ˶¨Á¿¼ì²â¡£¾íÑÌÑ̳¾·ÖÎöµÄ±ê×¼·½·¨£¬ÊÇÓɹú¼Ê±ê×¼»¯×éÖ¯£¨ISO£¬¸Ã×éÖ¯¿É¶Ô°üÀ¨¼ÆËã»ú´úÂëºÍÎÂÊÒÆøÌåÔÚÄÚµÄËùÓÐÎÊÌâ×÷³ö¹æ¶¨£©Öƶ¨µÄ£¬´Ë·¨ÀûÓÃһ̨»úÆ÷Åç·¢³ö35ºÁÉýµÄÑÌÎí£¬ÊÜÊÔÕßÿ·ÖÖÓÎüÒ»´Î¡¢Ã¿´Î³ÖÐø2Ãë¼´¿ÉÎüÍê¡£ÒÔ´ËΪ¶ÔÕÕ£¬Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾Ñо¿Ô±·¢ÏÖ£¬ÕæÕýµÄÑÌÃñÿ·ÖÖÓ2´Î¼´¿ÉÎüÍê50ÖÁ70ºÁÉýÑÌÎí¡£¹þÃɵÂÒ½ÉúÊÇ´ÓÑ̲ÝÒµÌṩµÄ´óÁ¿ÎÄÏ×ÖеóöÕâÒ»½áÂ۵ġ£¹ýÈ¥¼¸ÄêÑ̲ÝÒµÓëÃÀ¹úµ±¾ÖÒ»Ö±½©³Ö²»Ï£¬ËìÇ©ÊðÁ˸÷Àà·¨ÂÉÐÒé¡£×÷ΪÆäÖеÄÒ»ÏîÄÚÈÝ£¬Ñ̲ÝÒµ±»ÆÈ¹°ÊÖ½»³öÕâЩÎÄÏס£
Dr Hammond suggests, however, the firm went beyond merely investigating how people smoked. A series of internal documents from the late 1970s and early 1980s shows that BAT at least thought about applying this knowledge to cigarette design. A research report from 1979 puts it thus: ¡°There are three major design features which can be used either individually or in combination to manipulate delivery levels; filtration, paper permeability, and filter-tip ventilation.¡± A conference paper from 1983 says, ¡°The challenge would be to reduce the mainstream nicotine determined by standard smoking-machine measurement while increasing the amount that would actually be absorbed by the smoker¡±. Another conference paper, from 1984, says: ¡°£¨5£©We should strive to achieve this effect without appearing to have a cigarette that cheats the league table. Ideally it should appear to be no different from a normal cigarette...It should also be capable of delivering up to 100% more than its machine delivery.¡±
²»¹ý¹þÃɵÂÒ½Éú±íʾ£¬Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾Ëùµ÷²éµÄ²»½ö½öÈËÃǵÄÎüÑÌ·½Ê½¡£Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾ÉÏÊÀ¼Í70Äê´úÄ©¡¢80Äê´ú³õ
Page 12 of 37
¡¶¾¼Ãѧ¼Ò¡·¶ÁÒë²Î¿¼ Translated & Edited by Chen Jilong
µÄһϵÁÐÄÚ²¿ÎÄÏ×±íÃ÷£¬¸Ã¹«Ë¾ÖÁÉÙÔø¿¼Âǹý½«Õâһ֪ʶÓÃÓÚ¾íÑÌÉè¼Æ¡£1979ÄêµÄÒ»·ÝÑо¿±¨¸æÉÏÕâÑù˵µÀ£º¡°¿É·Ö±ð»òÁªºÏÓ¦ÓÃÓëÉè¼ÆÓйصÄÈý¸öÒªËØ£¬¼´¹ýÂË¡¢Ñ̾í°ü×°Ö½µÄͨ͸ÐÔÒÔ¼°¹ýÂË×ìµÄÍ¨ÆøÐ§¹û£¬À´¿ØÖƽ¹ÓͺÍÄá¹Å¶¡µÄÊÍ·Åˮƽ¡£¡±1983ÄêÒ»·Ý»áÒéÂÛÎÄÒ²Ìáµ½£¬¡°¹Ø¼üÔÚÓÚ£¬ÒªÔÚÌá¸ßÎüÑÌÕßÄá¹Å¶¡Êµ¼ÊÎüÊÕÁ¿µÄͬʱ£¬¼õÉٿɱ»±ê×¼¼ì²â·½·¨²â¶¨µ½µÄº¬Á¿¡£¡±1984ÄêÁíÒ»·Ý»áÒéÂÛÎÄ˵£º¡°ÎÒÃÇÓ¦µ±Å¬Á¦´ïµ½ÕâһЧ¹û²¢ÄÜÔÚ¼ì²âÖÐÃÉ»ì¹ý¹Ø¡£ÀíÏ뻯µÄ½á¹ûÊÇ£¬ÕâÖÖÏãÑÌ¿´ÉÏÈ¥Ó¦ÓëÒ»°ãÏãÑÌÎÞÈκβîÒì?? ²¢ÇÒÊͷŵÄÄá¹Å¶¡¼°½¹ÓÍÁ¿Òª±È»úÆ÷Êͷŵĸ߳ö100%¡£¡±
None of the documents discovered by the three researchers shows that BAT actually did redesign its cigarettes in this way, and the firm denies that it did. However, BAT's own data show that some of its cigarettes delivered far more nicotine and tar to machines which had the characteristics of real smokers than to those which ran on ISO standards. In the most extreme example, in a test carried out in 1987, the ¡°real smoking¡± machine drew 86% more nicotine and 114% more tar from Player's Extra Light than the ISO machine detected, although smoke intake was only 27% higher.
ÈýÃûÑо¿ÈËÔ±·¢ÏÖµÄÎÄÏ×ÖÐûÓÐһƪ±íÃ÷Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾È·Ôø²ÉÓÃÕâÖÖ·½·¨¶ÔÆäÉú²úµÄ¾íÑ̽øÐÐÁ˸ÄÁ¼£¬¶øÇҸù«Ë¾Ò²Ê¸¿Ú·ñÈÏÕâô¸É¹ý¡£Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾ÄÚ²¿×ÊÁÏÏÔʾ£¬ÆäÉú²úµÄijЩ¾íÑÌÏò»úÆ÷£¨¾ßÓÐʵ¼ÊÎüÑÌÕßÌØÕ÷£©ÊͷŵÄÄá¹Å¶¡ºÍ½¹ÓÍÁ¿Ô¶Ô¶³¬³öISO±ê×¼¡£×îΪ¼«¶ËµÄÀý×ÓÊÇ£¬ÔÚ1987Äê½øÐеÄÒ»ÏîʵÑéÖУ¬¡°ÕæÎüÑÌ¡±»úÆ÷´ÓPlayer's Extra LightÅÆ¾íÑÌÖÐÎüÊÕµÄÄá¹Å¶¡ºÍ½¹ÓÍÁ¿±ÈISOÒÇÆ÷ʵ¼Ê¼ì²âµ½µÄÁ¿·Ö±ð¸ß³ö86%ºÍ114%£¬¶øÑÌÎíÉãÈëÁ¿½ö¸ß27%¡£
£¨6£©Regardless of how this [b][color=#0000FF]*came about[5], the irony is that low-tar brands may have ended up causing more health problems than high-tar ones.[/color][/b] As one of BAT's medical consultants put it as early as 1978, ¡°Perhaps the most important determinant of the risk to health or to a particular aspect of health is the extent to which smoke is inhaled by smokers. If so, then deeply inhaled smoke from low-tar-delivery cigarettes might be more harmful than uninhaled smoke from high-tar cigarettes.¡± The firm, meanwhile, points out that the ISO test has been regarded as unreliable since 1967, and says its scientists have been part of a panel that is working on a new ISO standard. ²»¹ÜÊÂÊµÕæÏàÊÇÔõÑùµÄ£¬¾ßÓзí´ÌÒâζµÄÊÇ£¬µÍ½¹Ó;íÑ̾¹È»±È¸ß½¹Ó;íÑÌ¿ÉÄܸüÓÐËðÓÚ½¡¿µ¡£ÕýÈçÒ»ÃûÓ¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾Ò½Ñ§¹ËÎÊ1978ÄêËùÑÔ£¬¡°Ò²Ðí£¬ÎüÑÌÕßÎüÑÌʱµÄÉîdz¶ÈÊÇΣ¼°½¡¿µ»òÕß½¡¿µÄ³Ò»Ìض¨·½ÃæµÄ×îÖØÒª¾ö¶¨ÐÔÒòËØ¡£Èô¹ûÕæÈç´Ë£¬´ÓµÍ½¹Ó;íÑÌÖÐÉîÉîÎüÈëµÄÑ̶ÔÈ˵ÄΣº¦¿ÉÄܱȸ߽¹Ó;íÑÌÖÐδ±»ÎüÈëµÄÑ̸ü´ó¡£¡±Óë´Ëͬʱ£¬Ó¢ÃÀ¹«Ë¾Ö¸³ö£¬×Ô1967ÄêÒÔÀ´£¬ISOµÄÊÔÑéÒ»Ö±¶¼±»ÈÏΪÊDz»¿É¿¿µÄ¡£²¢ÇÒÑÔ³ÆÆä¹«Ë¾µÄ¿ÆÑ§¼ÒÃÇÒѼÓÈëijÆÀ¹ÀίԱ»á£¬ÕýÔÚÑо¿Öƶ¨ÐµÄISO±ê×¼¡£
×¢ÊÍ£º
[1]Waterloo£ºÔÚ±ÈÀûʱÖв¿¿¿½ü²¼Â³Èû¶ûµÄ³ÇÕò£¬ÎªÄÃÆÆÂØ1815Äê6ÔÂ18ÈÕÔâµ½¾ö¶¨ÐÔʧ°ÜµÄ¡°»¬Ìú¬¡±£»¶øÔÚ¼ÓÄô󰲴ïÂÔÊ¡¶«Äϲ¿ºÍÃÀ¹úÒ°¢»ªÖݶ«±±²¿¸÷ÓÐÒ»×ù³ÇÊУ¬Ò»°ãÒëÃûΪ¡°ÎÖÌØÂ³¡±£¬ÒÔÊ¾Çø·Ö¡£ [2]pull: ÉîÎü; ¶ÔÑÌ»òÒûÁÏ´ó¿ÚµÄÎü»òºÈ [3]draw on: ÎüÊÕ [4]lay down: ¹æ¶¨£¬Öƶ¨ [5]come about: ·¢Éú
Å×שÒýÓñ¡ª¡ªÇë¶ÔÎÄÖл®Ïß¶Ì¾ä¸ø³öÄúµÄÒë·¨£¨¶ÔÓ¦ÐòºÅ£©£º
£¨1£© make them low-tar in the eyes of officialdom
£¨2£© The extra volume makes up for the lower concentration of the drug.
£¨3£© That pulls a higher proportion of the air inhaled through the burning tobacco, rather than through the paper sides of the cigarette.
Page 13 of 37
¡¶¾¼Ãѧ¼Ò¡·¶ÁÒë²Î¿¼ Translated & Edited by Chen Jilong
£¨4£© Dr Hammonds's conclusion is drawn from the huge body of documents disgorged by the tobacco industry as part of various legal settlements that have taken place in the past few years, mainly as a result of disputes with the authorities in the United States.
£¨5£© We should strive to achieve this effect without appearing to have a cigarette that cheats the league table. £¨6£© Regardless of how this came about, the irony is that low-tar brands may have ended up causing more health problems than high-tar ones.
TEXT 5
Stuff of dreams ÃÎÏëµÄ¾«´â
Feb 16th 2006 | CORK AND LONDON From The Economist print edition
£¨ÒëÕß×¢£º±¾ÎÄÊǹØÓÚ»Õ¹µÄÆÀÂÛ¡££©
Two exhibitions show how a pair of 18th-century painters, James Barry and Henry Fuseli, inspired the modern visual ¡ïromance with[1] the gothic Á½¸ö»Õ¹Õ¹Ê¾µÄÊÇ£¬Á½Î»18ÊÀ¼Í»¼Ò¡ª¡ªÕ²Ä·Ë¹?°ÍÀïºÍºàÀû?¸»ÈûÀû¡ª¡ªÈçºÎ»½ÆðÁËÏÖ´úÈË´ÓÊÓ¾õÉ϶ԸçÌØÊ½ÒÕÊõµÄã¿ã½¡£
THIS spring the bad boys of British art are ¡ïmaking a comeback[2]. Not Damien Hirst and his friends, but the original ¡ïenfants terribles[3]¡ª¡ïHenry Fuseli[4] (1741-1825) and James Barry (1741-1806)¡ªwho aimed, above all, to depict extremes of passion and terror in what they called the new art of the Sublime. ½ñ´º£¬Ó¢¹úÒÕÊõ½çµÄ»µº¢×ÓÔٴηÛÄ«µÇ³¡ÁË¡£ÎÒÃÇ˵µÄ²»ÊÇ´ïÃ×¶÷?ºÕË¹ÌØºÍËûµÄÅóÓÑÃÇ£¬¶øÊǺàÀû?¸»ÈûÀû£¨1741-1825£©ºÍղķ˹?°ÍÀ1741-1806£©£¬ÕâÁ½Î»¡°Ã§×²ÉÙÄꡱµÄʼ×÷Ù¸Õߣ¬ËûÃǵÄÊ×ҪĿ±ê¾ÍÊÇÒªÓÃËùνµÄ
¡°ÐÂÅɸßÉÐÒÕÊõ¡±È¥Ãè»æ¼«¶È¼¤ÇéÓë¿Ö²À¡£
Barry and Fuseli are hardly household names; indeed since Victorian times they have been virtually ignored. But in the late 18th century, Fuseli, and for a short time Barry also, were prominent members of the young Royal Academy of Arts (RA) and influential professors of painting there. Barry's ¡ïfall from grace[5] was the most dramatic, but there is much to admire in this irascible Irish artist who, like Fuseli, once taught William Blake. Barry's prolific historical paintings demonstrate his ambition to rival the painters of antiquity and the Renaissance and to practise what the then president of the RA, Sir Joshua Reynolds, always preached¡ªthat history painting was the noblest form of art. £¨1£©But Barry found it hard to be bound by rules, and he turned history and myth into a series of ¡ïtableaux[6] that were at once oddly expressionistic and deeply personal.°ÍÀïºÍ¸»ÈûÀûÕâÁ½¸öÃû×ÖËã²»ÉϼÒÓ÷»§Ïþ£¬Êµ¼ÊÉÏ×Ôά¶àÀûÑÇʱ´úÒÔÀ´£¬ÊÀÈ˶ÔËûÃÇÒѾ²»ÎŲ»ÎÊ¡£²»¹ý£¬ÔÚ18ÊÀ¼ÍÍíÆÚ£¬¸»Èû
Page 14 of 37
¡¶¾¼Ãѧ¼Ò¡·¶ÁÒë²Î¿¼ Translated & Edited by Chen Jilong
ÀûÔø¾ÊÇÔçÆÚ»Ê¼ÒÃÀÊõѧԺ£¨RA£©µÄ½Ü³ö»áÔ±ºÍÆÄ¾ßÓ°ÏìÁ¦µÄ»Ê¦£¬°ÍÀïÔøÒ»¶ÈÒ²ÊÇÈç´Ë¡£°ÍÀïµÄʧ³èÓÚÖÚ×ÓÚÏ·¾çÐÔ£¬µ«¸ú¸»ÈûÀûÒ»ÑùÔø¸øÍþÁ®?²¼À³¿Ë´«ÊÚ¹ý¼¼ÒÕµÄÕâλÐÔÇ鱩ÔêµÄ°®¶ûÀ¼ÒÕÊõ¼Ò£¬»¹ÊÇÓµÓÐÐí¶àÈÃÈ˾´ÅåµÄµØ·½¡£ËûµÄÖÚ¶àÀúÊ·ÐÔ»×÷¶¼±íÃ÷£¬ËûÈÈÍûÓë¹Å´úÒÔ¼°ÎÄÒÕ¸´ÐËʱÆÚµÄ»¼ÒÏ࿹ºâ£¬Ê¼ÖÕÐÅ·îÀúÊ·»ÄËÊÇ×îΪ×ð¹óµÄÒÕÊõÐÎʽ£¬¶øÕâǡǡҲÊǻʼÒÃÀÊõѧԺµ±Ê±µÄÔº³¤Ô¼ÊéÑÇ?À×ŵ×ȾôÊ¿ËùÒ»Ö±³«µ¼µÄ¡£µ«ÊÇÀúÊ·»ÊÜÖÆÓÚ¹ý¶àÔ¼ÊøÈðÍÀï¸Ðµ½ÄÑÒÔ½ÓÊÜ£¬Ë콫ʷʵÓëÉñ»°ÈÚΪһÌ壬²¢ÓÃһϵÁÐÎę̀ÔìÐͼÓÒÔ±íÏÖ£¬Ëæ¼´³ÉΪÓëÖ÷Á÷¸ñ¸ñ²»ÈëµÄ±íÏÖÅÉ£¬²¢´òÉÏÁËÉîÉîµÄ¸öÈËÖ÷ÒåÀÓÓ¡¡£
His melodramatic ¡°King Lear Weeping over the Body of Cordelia¡± and his sexually charged ¡°¡ïJupiter and Juno on Mount Ida[7]¡±, now both part of a retrospective of the artist's work in Cork, £¨2£©proved too full of feeling for a British audience raised on portraits and landscape paintings. His only loyal patron was Edmund Burke, who had ¡ïcoined[8] a theory of the Sublime.
°ÍÀïµÄÇé¾°»¡¶ÀáÈ÷¿ÆµÙÀûÑÇÍöÌåµÄÀî¶ûÍõ¡·ÒÔ¼°ËûÄÇ·ùÑóÒç×ÅÐÔ°®µÄ¡¶°¬´ï·åÉϵÄÖì±ÓÌØºÍÖìŵ¡·£¬ÏÖÒѳÉΪ¿Æ¿Ë³Ç£¨°®¶ûÀ¼Äϲ¿¸Û¿Ú³ÇÊУ©ÒÕÊõ¼Ò×÷Æ·»Ø¹ËÕ¹µÄÒ»²¿·Ö¡£ÕâÁ½·ù»×÷±íÃ÷Ó¢¹ú¹ÛÖÚ¶ÔФÏñ»ºÍ·ç¾°»Í¶×¢Á˼«´óµÄÈÈÇé¡£°£µÂÃÉ?²®¿ËÊÇΨһ×ÔʼÖÁÖÕ×ÊÖú°ÍÀïµÄÈË£¬ÕýÊÇËû´´Á¢ÁË¡°¸ßÉÐÒÕÊõ¡±ÀíÂÛ¡£
Barry felt he was a persecuted soul, and he painted himself as various ill-fated characters, most bizarrely ¡ïPhiloctetes[9], the sailor whom Odysseus abandoned on the island of Lemnos because he smelled so bad. As if that weren't enough, Barry also incited his RA students to revolt and then allegedly accused Reynolds of financial impropriety. When he became too unbearable, Barry became the first artist to be expelled by the academy. °ÍÀïÈÏΪ×Ô¼ºµÄÁé»êÊܵ½ÁËãÞº¦£¬±ã½«×Ô¼º»³ÉÐÎÐÎɫɫ³äÂú»ÞÆøµÄÈËÎÆäÖÐ×îΪ¹ÖÒìµÄÊÇ·ÆÂÞ¿Ë߯߯˹£¬ÄÇλÓÉÓÚ³ôÆøÑ¬Ìì¶ø±»°ÂµÂÐÞ˹ÅׯúÔÚÀûķŵ˹µºÉϵÄË®ÊÖ¡£ËƺõÕ⻹²»¹»£¬°ÍÀﻹ¹Ä¶¯ËûÔڻʼÒÃÀÊõѧԺµÄѧÉúÔì·´£¬¶øÇÒ¾Ý˵ºóÀ´ÉõÖÁÖ¸¿ØÀ×ŵ×ÈÔÚ²ÆÕþÉÏ´æÔÚÎ¥·¨ÎÊÌâ¡£°ÍÀï±äµÃÔ½À´Ô½ÈÃÈËÈÌÎÞ¿ÉÈÌ£¬ÓÚÊdzÉÁ˵ÚÒ»¸ö±»Ñ§Ôº¿ª³ýµÄÒÕÊõ¼Ò¡£
Barry knew Fuseli, and £¨3£©he makes a minor appearance in ¡°Gothic Nightmares: Fuseli, Blake and the Romantic Imagination¡±, the ¡ïbrainchild[10] of an engaging British ¡ïpolymath[11], Sir Christopher Frayling, who heads the Arts Council of England and the Royal College of Art. Sir Christopher has long been fascinated by the horror ¡ïgenre[12]¡ªhe once presented a popular television programme on the topic¡ªand his favourite painting is Fuseli's ¡°The Nightmare¡± (pictured above), an unsettling image of a sleeping maiden, with an ¡ïincubus[13] ¡ïperched[14] on her stomach and a ¡ïghoulish[15] horse peering through a curtain.
°ÍÀïÈÏʶ¸»ÈûÀû£¬×÷ÎªÌØÑû¼Î±ö²Î¼ÓÁË¡¶¸çÌØÊ½ÃÎ÷Ê¡ª¡ª¸»ÈûÀû¡¢²¼À³¿ËºÍÀËÂþÖ÷Òå»ÃÏë¡·»Õ¹¡£ÄǴλչÊÇÓÉÓ¢¸ñÀ¼ÒÕÊõÀíÊ»áºÍ»Ê¼ÒÒÕÊõѧԺÖ÷ϯ¡¢¸»ÓÚºÅÕÙÁ¦µÄÓ¢¹úÈË¿ËÀï˹Íи¥?¸¥À×ÁÖ¾ôÊ¿²ß»®µÄ¡£¿ËÀï˹Íи¥¾ôÊ¿³¤ÆÚÒÔÀ´³ÕÃÔ¿Ö²ÀÒÕÊõ¡ª¡ªÔøÒÔ´ËΪÖ÷ÌâÍÆ³öÒ»µµÆÄÊÜ»¶ÓµÄµçÊÓ½ÚÄ¿¡ª¡ªËû×îÖÓ°®µÄ»×÷ÊǸ»ÈûÀûµÄ¡¶ÃÎ÷Ê¡·£¨ÉÏͼ£©£¬»ÖÐÃè»æµÄÊÇһλÊì˯µÄÅ®ÈË£¬¸¹²¿ÉÏÆÜÏ¢×ÅÒ»¸öÃÎÒù¶ñ¹í£¬¶ø²¼Á±ºóÃæÒ»Æ¥³¤µÃÏñʳʬ¹íÒ»°ãµÄÂíÕý̽ͷ¿úÊÓ£¬Õû·ù»¿´ÁËÈÃÈ˸е½ÐÄÉñ²»Äþ¡£
Sir Christopher sees this painting, together with Fuseli's scenes from Milton and Shakespeare, as part of a search for national myths in the late 18th century. £¨4£©Indeed, his interpretation illuminates an Enlightenment world that hovered between reason and ¡ïbigotry[16], and where a quasi-scientific interest in the ¡ïoccult[17] and the emerging genre of the novel fed a public that was hungry for ¡°tales of wonder¡±.
¿ËÀï˹Íи¥¾ôÊ¿ÈÏΪ£¬¸»ÈûÀûµÄÕâ·ù»ÒÔ¼°È¡²ÄÓÚÃܶû¶ÙºÍɯʿ±ÈÑÇ×÷Æ·µÄÄÇЩ»×÷£¬ÄËÊÇ̽Ѱ18ÊÀ¼ÍÃñ×åÉñ»°µÄÒ»²¿·Ö¡£ÊÂʵÉÏ£¬ËûµÄÕâÒ»ÆÀעΪ¾À²øÔÚÀíÖÇÓëÆ«¼ûÖ®¼äµÄ¡°½Ì»¯ÊÀ½ç¡±´øÀ´ÁËÊï¹â¡£ÔÚÕâÑùÒ»¸ö¡°½Ì»¯ÊÀ½ç¡±ÖУ¬¶ÔÐþÃîÖ®ÊÂµÄ°ë´ø¿ÆÑ§ÐÔµÄÈȳϺÍÓ¿ÏÖ³öµÄÏà¹ØÐ¡ËµÁ÷ÅÉ£¬ÈôóÖÚ¶Ô¡°¾ªãµ¹ÊÊ¡±µÄ¿ÊÇóµÃµ½Á˼«´óÂú×ã¡£
Page 15 of 37