Thursday, July 28, 2005

也來寫龍應台--視野從反思「視野從跨越而來」而來

不知是不是因為「樹大招風」(或曰「人怕出名豬怕肥」),最近不時聽到人們對龍應台的不滿、非議。

今天在《明報》讀到馬傑偉題為「龍應台」一文,內容是關於他一位台灣朋友對《讀書》七月號一篇批評龍氏的文章感到雀躍,並說:「她的文章寫得好、寫得快,能討好讀者,也有明星效應,但至於觀點、內容,並不經得起考驗。」

我暫不敢說龍氏文章的觀點、內容是否真的不經得起考驗,但最近的確對她越來越有所保留--雖不至於不屑如我對某李氏大教授,但總開始質疑:她說了很多,但實際做了有幾多呢?她對香港的了解其實有多深呢?

上星期我到了書展(呃……其實應是「人展」,因為我見到的盡是人頭,幾不見書……),聽了她的「視野從跨越而來」的講座。因為開始對龍氏有不良的觀感,所以對講座不抱期望。再加上由於場外人頭湧湧,過於熱血沸騰;場內則冷氣呼呼,溫度過低,因而感到有點煩悶,索性學著某位我尊敬的老師坐著閉目養神,決心抵著寒溫,細心聽聽龍氏的演講。

龍氏首先談了「視野如何從跨越而來」(確實內容忘掉了),然後談到香港的身份認同,繼而講及「如果我是香港人」。

「如果我是香港人」這部份,大抵是我記得最清楚的一個部份,也是我最不滿的部分。

她說,如果她是香港人的話,會叫兒子好好認識香港/中國(?)的文化(按:不太記得她怎樣說,但我應該認識香港文化與中國文化是有別的)。如何認識呢?就是孔子、老子、莊子等經典逐字細讀(按:如朋友的補充,總之是中國的高雅文化)。

那我可慘了,我一下子不配成為香港/中國人。我讀過的古文經典,大多是源是中學時代的中國語文科和中國文學科,課餘我頂多看看金庸、衛斯理、亦舒……我家兩老更無望成為香港/中國人了,字又不懂多個,如何看孔子、老子、莊子呢?

那一刻,我想起馬國明先生《路邊政治經濟學》中的「街頭掠影」,然後想起灣仔、小販、魚蛋、砵仔糕……(繼而便飢寒交迫囉 ~~~)我想,要真正認識香港,其中不能不認識這些街頭文化啊。

她又說,如果她是香港人的話,會叫兒子好好學好廣東話,因為廣東話是香港的本土語言,也是比普通話更精彩生動的語言。

那一刻,我感到不以為然,因為我覺得她這說法,過於簡單,也欠缺作為(前)文化局局長、文化教授應有的批判性。

記起我曾經引用龍氏的論點,寫了一篇批評中大重英輕中的語文政策的文章。後來再細想,特別是看到一位老師的文章之後,我便覺得我當時的觀點過於輕率及欠缺批判性。老師的文章,節錄如下:


[T]he dominance of Cantonese in Hong Kong, as much as the dominance of English, is the result of colonialism.British colonialism have led to the negligence of Putunghua education and the raising of several generations of HK Chinese that are poor speakers of Putunghua, thus rendering them unable to communicate with the majority of the Chinese population and their fellow Chinese citizens. The recognition of this historical shame should have obligated us to greatly expand the use Putunghua instead of Cantonese as the medium of instruction in CUHK and all levels of schooling.

At the same time, we should be critically aware of the fact that Cantonese is not even the indigenous language of Hong Kong, and that the dominance of Cantonese is the outcome of a historical process of hegemony and homogenization that is arguably no less violent than British colonialism. Just think of all the new migrants who even today are regarded as less “Hong Kong” and discriminated against by the majority of HK Chinese because they cannot speak accentless Cantonese. The original inhabitants of HK were the Tankas and the Hakkas, who each spoke their own dialect. The majority of the population here are migrants or their offsprings and descendants. Although Cantonese speaking people have constituted the majority of them, there have always been a significant number of migrants from various places in China, whose mother tongues are not Cantonese. In fact, as recently as the 1950s, Hong Kong was a multiethnic society consisting of multiple linguistic communities, such as Shanghaiese, Chiuchauese, Fujianese, Toisanese, Shantungese, Hunanese, Ningpoese, Hakkas, Tankas, and many more. On top of that, there are non-Chinese ethnic groups who have lived in Hong Kong for generations, and whose ancestors came from Britain, Portugal, Russia, Central Asia, India, Southeast Asia, among other places. If the logic of decolonization means a total rejection of what was culturally imposed on us, we should have rediscovered either our Chineseness by fully adopting Putunghua as the official spoken language, or our multicultural roots by giving due regard to the rights and heritages of all linguistic communities. Either way, the hegemony of Cantonese should be questioned and de-legitimized.

(Eliza Lee, An Open Letter to the Students of CUHK)



簡單來說,廣東話不是香港的本土語言--其實香港是移民社會,而來自五湖四海的移民,本是說多種不同的語言。廣東話成為香港的主流語言,其中一個原因是英國殖民統治刻意抑制普通話在香港的使用。同時,廣東話的語言暴力其實不亞於英語,因為它不時也成為歧視和壓迫他者(如新移民)的工具。

我引用老師文章的目的,固然不是要排斥廣東話,而是希望我們應對廣東話如同我們對英語一樣,有相當的批判性。

後來,在答問期間,龍氏說不出深水(土步)的鴨寮街來,我內心立刻有點雞蛋裡挑骨頭地質疑:其實你有沒有去過深水(土步)呢?還是只從港大沙灣徑25號宿舍遠眺香港,然後寫文章、來演講呢?其實,你對香港的認識有多深呢?

這或許是我草率寫下的文章,還請指正。


6 Comments:

At 7/30/2005 9:38 pm, Blogger 日不落 said...

昨天問馬生對龍應台的看法。他說,儘然他不完全認同龍氏的觀點,但感到她真切關懷香港,很是難得。而且,香港社會不會聽誰說什麼,只會看誰在說。同一句說話,出自你和我口,當然是沒有效用,但出自龍氏哩,則有明星效應。所以,龍氏效應,對香港的確有正面影響。

馬生所言甚是。其實,我自從寫了這文之後,也想,龍應台畢竟不是本地人,我對她是否太苛刻呢?

馬後炮:一直覺得,龍應台雖為外地人,但對香港事務及見解,比很多本地人關切、獨到,這已是很值得欣賞,亦足以令本地人汗顏。

 
At 8/04/2005 2:18 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

龍應台當然有她的限制。將她的觀點看得比天還高固沒必要,但她來港後好幾篇文章提出的問題,卻確是值得我們深思。

香港實在太少太少這類文章(即從文化和價值的層面去檢視自身)。想來也不意外,如果你有讀陳冠中的近作《我這一代香港人》的同名文章,便會看到「香港人」幾乎是沒有這種文化資源去思考這些問題的。是否符合經濟效益,可以創造多少個就業職位,能否提升香港的競爭力,如何才可成為國際一流......才是香港人思考所有問題的參照系!

龍應台在香港,我想她最終會感到寂寥的。

我們這些香港人,如何吸收龍應台的一些優點,然後大家一起繼續好好想下去寫下去,也許更有意思。PC匆匆

 
At 8/08/2005 12:00 pm, Blogger 日不落 said...

PC 及 xyz zero:

謝謝你們的留言。

其實我不是完全否定龍氏的,而且我是肯定她在香港的影響力、她對香港的關懷。

請看我回 Tale 兄的留言。

 
At 8/21/2005 6:31 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cantonese should have been the local language as it has always been the language of southern Canton Province. It was only because there were so many immigrants from different parts of China, so we think that Cantonese was not 'original'. We can say that the dominance of Cantonese makes these 'foreign Chinese' lose their mother tongue, but we can't say that Cantonese is not the local language of HK. Just like we can't say that in Toronto, English is not the local language just because it is full of Cantonese native speakers now.

Not 100% of HK people are immigrants. Or, we should say, from prehistoric time, ALL human beings are immigrants if you like. It only depends on which point in history we take at the dividing line.

And, to read more is always good. I haven't read a lot of Chinese classics as well, and I am sure that my Chinese is not very, very good. Just, without reading, how can we learn more about the others' opinions and feelings?

I would say that, as an academician, having such a high requirement to her own children is nearly normal, while not only experts are real HK people, just she brings it to another level. Some people love HK so much but they don't know, they don't aware, and they can't explain it, and I guess that's why Long claims reading to be one way to understand all the meanings and sentiments behind.

I would say, everybody has a different view and feeling towards HK, I am sure. How you understand and see HK must be very different from how I do. ROOT was what Long trying to mention, indirectly, when she talked about all the ancient Chinese classics. We have to see the whole trend to understand what is going on. Culture is not made up in one day. Of course, you can't demand everybody to be so knowledgeable. She was only putting it to maximum.

 
At 8/21/2005 6:35 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

AND, I have to choose between a course taught by Mr. Ma Kwok Ming and another one. I am really confused, as both topics interest me a lot, in fact, the other topic interests me even more. I have heard of Mr. Ma for so long already, I really want to listen to his opinions directly. Any suggestion???

(You can send me a message through In-media if you are a member, otherwise I will visit your weblog again anyway. Thanks a lot!)

 
At 8/21/2005 8:31 pm, Blogger 日不落 said...

Frostig:

First of all, many thanks for visiting my blog, and your comments!

Yes, I am a member of In-media. But I don't know where I should put my reply. So, I reply you here.

I am not sure what courses you are choosing between. But I have to say that Mr. Ma's course is worthy of taking. Or, you may sit in his class and enrol the other one.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home