dans la solitude des champs de coton

知道Tim Henman意外地提早離開溫布頓後，想起來的剛好是這首歌（還有晚幾天的Serena Williams）。這首歌真棒，知道的方式跟我這幾年「學」新歌的形式一樣：逛某家店，然後剛好聽到的店家廣播。Garbage太好認，聽到以後加上歌 詞咕狗一下就出來了，然後，再回去翻專輯發行時的Time Out，對一下...XD (還好那時候好像是四月底，所以大概只翻了兩本就有...)

Henman下場後接著的那一天，剛好是某個團的海德公園演唱會，買了票不想去聽，但是看到別人興奮地準備演唱會事宜，突然之間想去聽場Garbage現場。在Time Out上看過Garbage在Brixton Academy的廣告，只是當然不知道錯過沒。果然依照往例，沒有用各種方式提醒的各種場合，絕對錯過。。。

然後開始想聽【You Look So Fine】。這種時候只能靠Limewire了。



改天把我跟y跟Federer合照的照片放上來。（好啦，是旗幟上面飄揚的身影而已。。。）

這幾天熱昏了，是在倫敦的這幾個六月裡遇到的不可思議的高溫。

不光自己昏地暈頭轉向，怕熱的牡丹花也是受害者。明明早上才從花市買來，含苞待放（但已嬌艷欲滴），拿回來，曬了點太陽，下午就大喇喇地（啪ㄘ啪ㄘ地）全面綻開，接著，晚上，就有花昏倒了。。。這絕對不是開玩笑，明明健康富彈性的花瓣，幾個小時間，軟啪啪地將謝未謝。還好年年都有牡丹花，知道他們只要急救得體及時，一下就能恢復，第二天早上終於還我大方的花朵！不過，這批牡丹大概vase life還是不免縮短了。

有個下午看起來涼了點，就把冰庫裡剩下的雞送進烤箱烤掉。這麼熱吃烤雞，總得應變一下不可過膩，可是檸檬沒了，只能用橘子代替，順手剪了二十餘支陽台上的薄荷葉，塞到雞胸裡，看能不能解解熱。天熱人也懶，明明窗台上薄荷青青翠翠健康極了（我養的植物耶，開玩笑），到了Waitrose還是拿了罐人家剁好、在紅酒醋裡醃好的薄荷醬，回來拌著各式各樣的東西吃。

天氣熱了也忘東忘西。各式各樣優待券擺著就到期了，甚至想起來也忘了帶出門。免費的電影票不知道收在那裡，連要看那一部都忘記，雖然記得時間地點，找不到票怎麼進場？還有，盼了好久的戲，竟然也首演了：我的偶像耶，應該不會忘的阿。（不過看了這報導我才恍然大悟，導演先生以前會做某些選擇原來是跟他的教育背景有關。昏。不要誤會，我是一定會去看Rosalind的。）

（照片是The Guardian上面的，黑色的是羅沙琳。 XD ）

只有這種送上門的、跟氣候配合得宜的東西記得。Figleaves應該是全英國最好最體貼的網路商店了吧，沒事就有各種讓人心癢的促銷，還有為客戶量身訂做的心理測驗。。。哈哈，我是classic chic，跟楷特步蘭奇小姐同一型 XD：

You are all about elegant style. Immaculately groomed from head to toe, you make timeless classics a staple of your wardrobe and always look to maintain your own identity. With a sophisticated social life you definitely know how to enjoy the finer things in life.

還有溫布頓，在不算太遙遠的SW19展開，但是這麼熱連去野餐都嫌麻煩。這幾天又要花不該花的時間在Roger Federer的報導上面了。（希望Hewitt可以打進semis，誰叫溫布頓這樣排讓他沒辦法打finals。Roddit最好被掛love啦。大家都知道我不欣賞他的game，沒有錯。）

---
結果老爺爺的評論一下就出現了。這年頭評論當然沒有人在看真的。（我只知道我是一定會去看羅沙林的 XD...連老爺爺都在第一段就說明白，為了羅沙林，其他都可以原諒。）

我知道這是第五次用同樣的標題。不過這篇會多一點，雖然不是現在。 開頭第一段（以及翻譯）先。

My name is Kathy H. I’m thirty-one years old, and I’ve been a carer now for over eleven years. That sounds long enough, I know, but actually they want me to go on for another right months, until the end of this year. That’ll make it almost exactly twelve years. Now I know my being a carer so long isn’t necessarily because they think I’m fantastic at what I do. There are some really good carers who’ve been told to stop after just two or three years. And I can think of one carer at least who went on for all of fourteen years despite being a complete waste of space. So I’m not trying to boast. But then I do know for a fact they’ve been pleased with my work, and by and large, I have too. My donors have always tended to do much better than expected. Their recovery times have been impressive, and hardly any of them have been classified as ‘agitated,’ even before fourth donation. Okay, maybe I am boasting now. But it means a lot to me, being able to do my work well, especially that bit about my donors staying ‘calm.’ I’ve developed a kind of instinct around donors. I know when to hang around and comfort them, when to leave them to themselves; when to listen to everything they have to say, and when just to shrug and tell them to snap out of it.

我的名字叫凱西H。我今年三十一歲，而且我已經當了超過十一年的看護人。聽起來夠久了，我知道，但事實上他們要我多做八個月，到今年底為止。這樣的話，就差不多正好有十二年了。我現在知道，當一個看護人這麼久，不一定表示他們認為我做得很棒。有一些真的很棒的看護人，只做了兩三年之後就被通知停做。我也至少可以想到，有個看護人做了滿滿的十四年，即使根本就只是浪費名額。所以，我不是在自誇。不過，我也知道，事實上，他們對我的工作很滿意，大致上來說，我也必須這樣。我的捐獻人總是傾向於做得比預期的好。他們的復原時間讓人印象深刻，而且幾乎沒有一個歸類到「燥動」，就算是在第四次捐獻之前。好，也許我現在是自誇。但，把工作做好，尤其是讓我的捐獻人都能保持「平靜」，對我來說很重要。我已經發展了一些直覺。我知道甚麼時候要跟他們在一起、安慰他們，什麼時候要讓他們獨處：什麼時候聆聽每一件事，什麼時候只要聳聳肩然後告訴他們忘記這個吧。

看起來夠像一堆用簡易英文寫成的青少年Blog吧！不只這樣，裡面還有一堆文法可能有誤、待商確的句子。石黑先生自己在訪問裡提到（連結以後給），他的小說不會有美麗的句子，信手拈來都會是名言佳句，像是，普魯斯特，或者是Javier Marias。（後者是我舉的例子，前者是他說的，為甚麼我老記得這些跟論文無關的細節呢？）

像這樣看似用初階英文寫成的粗糙文字，怎麼會吸引人，讓諸多書評紛紛給予美評？（如果有人不幸看到宋姓教授寫的相關文章，不用懷疑，這位教授過度用功，凡事都可後殖民。）

我想我下星期不太會有心情聽演唱會，尤其New Order最近這張專輯我又無言以對，想想，先看看有沒有人要買票？

是下星期五在海德公園。Wireless Festival的一部分，聽說暖場的不賴（當然我是一定直接等到主團出現才會進場那種。。。）

非常確定的是，依照慣例，所以你想聽到的New Order/Joy Devision名歌（七零八零九零還有本世紀）統統都會出現。尤其一定會有True Faith, Love Will Tear Us Apart, Bizarre Love Triangle, Regret, Crystal 等等等。還可以見到五四三NO/JD板的可愛板主 chant喔！（那個，票好像是在她那裡，有人要買的話我們再商量要怎麼交票...）

如果是愛死NO或JD的人當然是去聽一下，不會後悔的啦。在海德公園聽演唱會本身就已經很讚了！

要買票的請跟我說。

又，哎呀我的天，貼出連結以後才發現New Order之前是 MOBY!!! 記得之前好像不是看到這樣的line-up還有 Psychodelic Furs!!! (這是怎樣，大家都要重組嗎？)Graham Coxon是聽說一定讚的啦。天阿，那這樣這一張票價還真回本！！！不過我還是不太有心情，除非有Chemical Brothers 或Prodify。有誰在倫敦要跟我買票的嗎？


ps. 我現在有了個應該滿好用的留言板所以懶得寫信給我的就不用煩惱沒有可以回應的entry直接點留言板就好。還是有rss的，所以我一定會看到！！

早上經過Greenland Dock，划船俱樂部之前已經擠滿車子：停車場滿了不說，還佔用不少居民專用停車位，另外更有巨型的、專門運輸船的車子（中英文我都不知道名字...）。俱樂部裡面才熱鬧，大清早的，大人小孩，人人興高采烈，還有販售水上活動服飾的店家在俱樂部裡面擺攤！

我想是個划船比賽吧！

沒錯，已經有給艘船推到dock裡了！還不是普通的船喔，這些船可都是有龍頭的！！！

難不成有龍舟競賽嗎？（原來端午節到了阿？）

從花市買完花回家（三把牡丹花十鎊，還遇到其中一個攤子跳樓大拍賣任何兩束賣五鎊，所以又多買了thistle跟百合--"five bunches for a tenner? "老闆問，我很有理性地答："oh, I am afraid I don't have that much space home..."），就聽到dock傳來鼓聲震震，出去看看也好。

是的，真的是龍舟競賽，不過好迷你，競賽船道僅僅幾百公尺，一次五隊。有幾隊還是小朋友司鼓呢！從小到大沒到過龍舟競賽現場，沒想到竟然在倫敦家旁邊看到了。。。

就這樣白天斷斷續續地傳來鼓聲、加油聲、及大會報告聲。不過今天的天氣可不像端午，時晴時陰，最冷可能不到十度，跟想像中頂著大太陽的龍舟真是大異其趣。


晚上，住在農村培養第二第三專長的某人剛好丟訊息給我，告訴我她的端午節在剪羊毛與煙燻魚之中度過，真是讓我嫉妒阿！（然後才知道端午節是昨天。）

一邊吃早餐一邊看的訪問：

But Cocteau once claimed that "style" is for some people a complex way of saying simple things and for others a simple way of saying complex things. For Brook, theatre is very much the latter; and, in a late work like Tierno Bokar, he is seeking, in his own phrase, to "go beyond" the immediate present. Brook treats theatre less as a product than as a process: a collaborative means of exploring life's mystery. Which is precisely what makes him unique.

但是我對老爺爺的完成品還是興趣不大。倒想看他怎麼排戲，這才是重點。

黑體也適用於 Deleuze。最大的不同是，很多不明究理（而且說話比較大聲）的人認為是前者，那他就算怎麼看都是後者也只能成為前者了。倒是用deleuze就能解決Peter Brook引起的爭議，也不必向Bharucha借刀，跳入另外一種難以抽身的爭議裡，只能選邊站。

One reason that Deleuze takes the theater as model for his theory of singular events lies in the fact that as a performing art (mine: opposed to seeing theatre as a mimetic art, which is, a representational apparatus to our world), the theater is based on presence, on actions and events happening live in front of our eyes, without always inciting us to attribute to them a representational status. This presentational, as opposed to representational, character is precisely what Deleuze needs for his theater of singular events, for these events form series of differences that cannot be reduced to a stabilizing identity behind them. But doesn't the theater nevertheless try to somehow represent a world? (Puchner, 2002)

現在正在寫接著這問題的部份（沒有很直接回答不過也差不多）。一直難產。上星期竟然不知道為甚麼，答應這禮拜弄出來給老闆看，一邊講其實心裡一邊想，wow, I will never make it。。。自討沒趣。。。（眼看著又要見她了。。。）

While Derrida’s insistence that any form of presence is forever interrupted and displaced in a chain of signifiers is derived from the fact that text displaces presence, Deleuze’s understanding of singular events is based on the precarious form of presence that characterizes live human bodies on a stage.

We can thus trace back the difference between Derrida’s (and Benjmain’s) textualism and Deleuze’s theatricalism not to a simple opposition between text and theater, but to a difference within the field of drama, namely the difference between the purely textual closet drama (mine: Mallarm’s unstagable plays for example) and the antitextual theater of the avant-garde (mine: this point is an oversimplification but beyond my capacity at this moment though will definitely come back to this (years?) later).

同樣一篇文章裡的後面兩段。（read: this blog is boring, especially for a Derrida fan. And, don't come anymore or skip any DG entry.）

上個月吧（還是上上月？），看到伊莎貝拉阿言德的訪問，提到她答應寫Zorro的神奇過程。阿言德提到，在加州，如果她自己上街購物，看起來「不過是另一個拉丁裔女人」罷了。（這篇訪問應該是The Guardian上面的，不難找。）

我的朋友X有一次跟我聊到紐約居大不易，尤其是不容易找到好的neighbourhoods, 最怕的是有”amigos“住附近。 但是如果這些”amigos”是伊莎貝拉或賈西亞之類的，那他們還是”amigos”嗎？

一邊可以張掛賈西亞海報，一邊對著”amigos”進行種族歧視：賈西亞如果沒去騎摩托車，他就「不過是另一個拉丁裔男人」罷了。

以上是剪貼下面這幾段時漂進來的。以下才是重點。

這就是著名的（被超級濫用的）游牧主體：
（沒有人必須知道頁數吧？）
As opposed to the images of both the migrant and the exile, I want to emphasize that of the nomad. The nomad does not stand for homelessness, or compulsive displacement; it is rather a figuration for the kind of subject who has relinquished all idea, desire, or nostalgia for fixity. This figuration expresses the desire for an identity made of transitions, successive shifts, and coordinated changes, without and against an essential unity. (Braidotti, 1994)


作者繼續自述：
Deleuze is no Romantic. Nor is he prone to the theoretical orientalism that plagues so much of the deconstructivist generation. He does not suggest that ‘homelessness’ and “rootlessness’ are the new universal metaphors of our times. This level of generalization is not much help. What he does theorize, however, is a non-unitary yet politically engaged and ethically accountable nomadic subject. What Deleuze does attempt is to de-territorialize the fixity and scramble the unitary structure of the classical view of the subject. Nomadology stresses the need for a change of conceptual schemes altogether, an overcoming of the dialectic of majority/minority or master/slave. (Braidotti, 2002)

For the real-life minorities, however, the pattern is different: women, blacks, youth, post-colonial subjects, migrants, exiles and homeless may first need to go through a phase of ‘identity politics’ – of claiming a fixed location. His is both inevitable and necessary because, as I have often argues, you cannot give up something you have never had. Nor can you dispose nomadically of a subject-position that you have never controlled to begin with. The ‘Molar’ line – that of Being, identity, fixity and potestas – and the ‘Molecular’ line – that of becoming, nomadic subjectivity and potentia – are absolutely not the same. (ibid.)


Ps. Nadal也是拉丁裔…

So, I beg you, don’t refuse to tell me what it is you want so much, for which you’ve let your eye meet mine; if it’s a matter of not wounding your dignity the least little bit, well , speak it as though you were speaking to a tree, or facing the wall of a prison, or in the solitude of a cotton field where you are out walking, naked, at night; tell me without meeting my eye. For the only true cruelty of dusk, of this hour where we both now stand, is not that one man might wound the other, or mutilate him, torture him, tear head and limb apart, or even make him cry; the true, terrible cruelty is the one by which some man or beast cuts the other off, like…dot…dot...dot in the middle of a sentence, or, having first met his eye, then turns away, as though that had been a mistake, like having just started a letter and then screwing it up after writing no more than the date.

因此不要拒絕告訴我，拜託幫個忙，讓你發燒的目標，這個你看著我的目的，不要拒絕告訴我這個理由；還有假使這涉及不傷害你的尊嚴，好，說出這個理由就像對著一棵樹告白，或者是面對著監獄的牆壁，或者是在棉花田裡散步的孤寂，赤身裸體，於深夜時分；甚至不要看著我告訴我這個理由。真正可怕的殘忍是人或獸讓對方的動作做了一半，人或獸打斷對方就像是在一個句子中間使用省略符號一樣，在注視過對方以後自己回轉身子，人或獸因此犯了一個視線上的錯誤，一項判斷的錯誤。一種錯誤，彷彿一封才剛起頭的信，日期剛剛才填上馬上就被人粗魯地揉掉。

by Bernard-Marie Koltes

這就是blog名字的來源，也是我之後的目標之一。

How can I stop loving a brilliantly written play as such?
（當然，要對照法文版修，以上中英文翻譯著重的地方不相同我想大家都看得出來，跟本不像是同一個人說的話，甚至有語意相左處。 XD ）

（但兩個本抓到的形狀倒是一致的。形狀，真是十分德勒茲的說法，也只有德式說法才能解決「我們怎麼看一個劇本」這種提問。我已經不知道還有別的閱讀劇本的方式，如果必得說「閱讀」的話。）

竟然有Marin Alsop的專訪！看過她指揮的人要忘記真的很難很難，讓我覺得該去買她錄的那張布拉牡斯。

出門前看到上則新聞，回家後看到這一個；

今年的布客獎得主出來了！！記得這位作家是因為他上兩本小說是那種我看了名字就想買的，可惜還沒真看過。（最近還在享受被【Your Face Tomorrow】慢慢折磨的快感，而且反正沒時間看閒書。。。）

另外，關於Lilac。（有人的blog只開放給會員留言，希望我這樣寫會看到。 XD）

Lilac很漂亮，我也非常喜歡觀賞滿樹滿街的lilac，深深淺淺的紫，怎麼看都美。但是，lilac開始凋謝，恩，特殊氣味就出現了，而且一直飄散在空氣裡直到夏天的尾巴。。。所以我實在是喜歡不起Lilac。。。（在更之前，有人問我有沒有討厭的花，這是我給的答案。）或者這樣說，我喜歡看lilac在照片裡櫥窗裡跟各種裝飾用，喜歡走在盛開的lilac下，但只要花開始變色，那，lilac還是照片好。不然這樣子講，lilac盛開時真的很香很美，但只要有一小朵開始枯萎，（真的，只要有一小朵）喔，我會立刻忘了lilac的美好，可能只有剪之而後快。
（我記得有一家我很愛的巧克力專賣店，在慢哈噸小島上的Christopher Street，也是叫Lilac，連包裝都是淡淡的紫色。）

說到花，今年的Chelsea Flower Show已經結束了。去年有款白牡丹得到gold medel，今年我還沒空關心呢！剛好家裡收到Crocos的新目錄，哇，他們又得獎了！！！（還好我家沒花園，不然看到crocus特漂亮的各式育種，錢可能會飛快地不見。。。）今年我最喜歡的是Merrill Lynch Garden。

然後Nadal跟Federer大戰在明天。反正我得去山上，看不到。

六月就這樣疲累地開始了。六月總是如此。