By+Tracy+Kidder+&+Richard+Todd

優(yōu)秀的回憶錄兼?zhèn)洹霸姟迸c“真”的雙重因素，令人神往，發(fā)人深思?；貞涗浭遣皇莻ト嘶蛘咧辽偈敲说膶兕I(lǐng)域？對(duì)于回憶錄作家來說，如何才能統(tǒng)轄你內(nèi)心充滿矛盾的多個(gè)自我？如何傳達(dá)對(duì)于過去經(jīng)驗(yàn)的當(dāng)下理解？美國普利策獎(jiǎng)和國家圖書獎(jiǎng)獲獎(jiǎng)作家特雷西·基德爾攜手長期合作編輯理查德·托德，在《妙筆生花：非虛構(gòu)寫作的藝術(shù)》一書里，為回憶錄的實(shí)踐者和愛好者提供了精辟的文體剖析和寫作指南。作者不是泛泛枚舉回憶錄的寫作技巧，而是扎根于自身40年來寫作和編輯非虛構(gòu)作品的實(shí)踐心得，同時(shí)廣征博引，其間自有中國讀者耳熟能詳?shù)拿颐?，但更多的是?duì)美國當(dāng)代非小說類文學(xué)作品進(jìn)行巡禮和審視。

Memoir beckons1. Although the form dates back at least to Saint Augustine2， it holds a particular allure for contemporary writers. Ideas about privacy and decorum3 have changed generally； even in daily life， Americans seem to expect more and more self-revelation from themselves and others. Authors who would once have felt obliged to wrap their own stories in the gauze of a roman à clef now feel entitled，4 or compelled， to speak to the reader without disguise. It feels more honest. And it can seem beguilingly5 easy， at least until one tries.

“Write about what you know，” writers are told， and its logical to conclude that what you know best is yourself. In fact， you may know too much. In honest moments we understand ourselves as creatures of great contrariety6. Many selves compete inside. How to honor this knowledge without descending into gibberish or qualifications worthy of a chairman of the Federal Reserve？7 How to preside over your own internal disorder？ Finding the “I” that can represent the pack of you is the first challenge of them memoirists.

Postmodern wisdom has not helped， having cast the very idea of self， any self， into doubt. In his memoir， Self-Consciousness， John Updike writes： “That core ‘Ithat we imagine to be so crystalline and absolute within us can also be attacked and analyzed as a construct that human society bestows.”8 Updike resists this idea， with evidence that ranges from the mundane to the spiritual：the private quirks that endure through a lifetime，9 mingled with the sense that one also has a soul. He concludes with a definition of self that is universal and undeniable： “that window on the world that we cant bear to think of shutting.”

To place yourself on the page is in part selfdiscovery， in part self-creation. The act feels like what a lump of clay must feel like to the hands of a sculptor. This is all you have to work with， but you know theres a face in there somewhere. You write a paragraph in the first person. You read it over. You meet—as if for the first time， though the face does look familiar—the person who speaks the words you have written. You think， Thats not me. This guy sounds downright10 mean. You pull out his fangs. Oh， no. Now hes getting mushy11 on us. Writers want to be engaging， and it is easy to try to purchase charm at the expense of honesty， but the ultimate charm lies in getting the face more right than pretty.endprint

Memoir， fortunately， doesnt have to take on the burden of total self-representation. It can be confined to a time， to a relationship， to a side of ones self that doesnt pretend to encompass the whole， to a story. Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant12 is one classic example. Grant omits many important facts of his life： his drinking bouts； the means of his extraordinary rise， from working as a clerk in a dry goods store to commanding all the Union forces； his disastrous presidency； his humiliation and bankruptcy； the fact that he was writing his book in great pain from throat cancer， knowing his death was imminent.13 But the book is cited as one of the very few presidential autobiographies that deserves to be regarded as literature， for its lucid14 and dramatic account of the authors Civil War campaigns. One of Grants biographers， Edmund Wilson， pointed out that the book has the unlikely effect of keeping the reader in suspense—“actually on edge to know how the Civil War is coming out.”15

Memoirs， its said， were once the province of people like Grant， the great or at least the famous， for whom selfpresentation is already an accomplished fact. Now the genre has opened， opened wide to writers with no prior claim on the readers imagination. The current abundance of new and recent memoirs can feel overbearing， and even alarming， a symptom of spreading self-absorption.16 But if the democratization of the form has helped to create that oversupply， it has also produced some distinguished books. Often they tell the sorts of stories that Grant didnt tell， stories that on the surface， anyway， dont reflect kindly on themselves.

Confession as a means of reconstructing the self can have a keyhole-like fascination for the reader. Perhaps every memoir should reveal something the author doesnt reveal in daily life. But confession carries various risks. A sly vanity can lurk in a recitation of misdeeds， a reveling in ones colorfulness：17 Oh， what a bad girl I was！ Or one can end up presenting a much too limited concept of the self. Some， though not all， recent stories of addiction fall into this trap and leave the reader thinking，“Theres more to everyone than the love of vodka.”

How the writer conveys present knowledge of past experience is a delicate problem for all memoirists. The question of how much to reveal in constructing a self on the page merges into the fundamental question of how much to interpret and how much simply to describe. When to comment on the past， when simply to portray it in all its starkness18 and let it speak for itself？ It can be tempting to disown19 the past only to celebrate the present self. What a fool I was！ （But how clever I am now to see it.） And all the while the reader knows that previous selves are not so easily discarded.endprint

Self-exploration， including confession， almost always involves other people. Some of them are bound to be offended by an honest memoir. But the good and honest memoir is neither revenge nor selfjustification， neither selfcelebration nor self-abnegation20. It is a record of learning. Memoirs， by definition， look backward. They are one response to Kierkegaards21 dilemma that life can only be understood backward but must be lived forward. Memoirs survey a past with the benefit of the knowledge that experience has yielded. With The Education of Henry Adams 22， Henry Adams created the perfect title. Every memoir worth reading could be called The Education of the Author. The “I” has been somewhere and it now knows something that it didnt， and that is a thing of value for writer and reader alike.

Here are some basic rules of good behavior for the memoirist：

Say difficult things. Including difficult facts.

Be harder on yourself than you are on others. The Golden Rule23 isnt much use in memoir. Inevitably you will not portray others just as they would like to be portrayed. But you can at least remember that the game is rigged24： only you are playing voluntarily.

Try to accept the fact that you are， in company with everyone else， in part a comic figure.

Stick to the facts.

回憶錄令人心馳神往。盡管這種文體至少可以回溯到圣奧古斯丁時(shí)期，卻對(duì)當(dāng)代作家格外具有誘惑力。關(guān)于隱私和體統(tǒng)的觀念已經(jīng)普遍發(fā)生了變化；即使是在日常生活里，美國人似乎也期望自己和他人能夠越來越多地表露自我的本來面目。曾經(jīng)感到有義務(wù)把自己的故事喬裝成一篇影射小說的作者，現(xiàn)在感到自己可以不帶偽裝地跟讀者說話，不但有權(quán)利這么做，而且還非得這么做不可。這么做感覺更誠實(shí)。這么做看似容易，至少在下筆嘗試以前看來是這樣，其實(shí)不然。

“你了解什么，就寫什么，”作家被如是告誡，合乎邏輯的結(jié)論就是你最了解的莫過于你自己。實(shí)際上，你可能自我了解得太深了。在誠實(shí)的時(shí)刻，我們把自己理解為充滿矛盾性的生物。多個(gè)自我在內(nèi)心互相競爭。怎么樣才能尊重這點(diǎn)認(rèn)識(shí)，而不至于讓自己墮落到胡說八道，或者瞎謅的資質(zhì)和美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)主席旗鼓相當(dāng)？怎么樣才能統(tǒng)轄你本人內(nèi)心的雜亂無序？找到可以代表你這個(gè)集合體的第一人稱敘事者“我”，是回憶錄作家面臨的第一挑戰(zhàn)。

后現(xiàn)代式的智慧質(zhì)疑自我的觀念本身，包括任何形式的自我，因此對(duì)作者沒什么幫助。在回憶錄《自我意識(shí)》里，約翰·厄普代克寫道：“那個(gè)被我們想象成在我們內(nèi)心深處透明而純粹的核心‘自我也可能受到攻擊，被解析為人類社會(huì)所賦予的一種構(gòu)造物。”厄普代克抗拒這種觀念，他的證據(jù)跨越了從世俗到精神的廣闊領(lǐng)域：既有持續(xù)一生的個(gè)人怪癖，也混雜著自我也擁有靈魂的意識(shí)。在結(jié)尾，他把無所不在而又無可爭辯的自我定義為“那扇世界之窗，將它關(guān)上的想法讓我們無法忍受?！?/p>

把你自己寫進(jìn)作品，部分是自我發(fā)現(xiàn)，部分是自我創(chuàng)造。這一行為，感覺猶如一位雕塑家手里捧著一團(tuán)黏土。你必須用于創(chuàng)作的素材全都在這兒了，可是你知道在這堆材料里的不知道什么地方有著一張面孔。你用第一人稱寫了一段。你把這段讀了一遍。你和那個(gè)說著你筆下話語的人物相遇，仿佛是有生以來第一次，雖說那張面孔看起來的確很熟悉。你想，這可不是我。聽起來這家伙刻薄至極。你拔掉他的毒牙。啊呀，不好。這會(huì)兒他又在我們面前表現(xiàn)得感情脆弱。作家們無不希望自己的作品引人入勝，很容易為了吸引讀者而犧牲誠信，可是作品的終極吸引力卻在于恰如其分地描摹這張面孔，而不是一味美化它。

幸運(yùn)的是，回憶錄不必承受全面表現(xiàn)自我的負(fù)擔(dān)?？梢园阉窒抻谝欢螘r(shí)間，一段關(guān)系，不必自命涵括整體的自我的一個(gè)側(cè)面，或者一個(gè)故事?！队壤魉埂. 格蘭特個(gè)人回憶錄》就是一個(gè)經(jīng)典范例。格蘭特省略了自己一生當(dāng)中的很多重要事實(shí)：他的多次縱飲；他如何神奇地崛起，從紡織品商店店員成為南北戰(zhàn)爭中的北軍統(tǒng)帥；他災(zāi)難性的總統(tǒng)任期；他的恥辱和破產(chǎn)；他在寫這本書的時(shí)候，正處于喉癌的極大痛苦當(dāng)中，知道自己大限將近?？墒沁@本書卻被譽(yù)為寥寥無幾的稱得上有文學(xué)價(jià)值的總統(tǒng)自傳之一，因?yàn)樗逦挥袘騽⌒缘赜浭隽俗髡呓?jīng)歷的南北戰(zhàn)爭中歷次戰(zhàn)役。格蘭特的傳記作者之一埃德蒙·威爾遜指出，這本書出人意料地始終讓讀者處于懸念當(dāng)中，“居然焦灼不安地渴望知道，南北戰(zhàn)爭究竟會(huì)出現(xiàn)什么結(jié)果?！眅ndprint

據(jù)說，回憶錄一度是格蘭特之類偉人或者至少是名人的專屬領(lǐng)地，對(duì)他們來說，自我表現(xiàn)已經(jīng)是既成事實(shí)。如今，這個(gè)體裁已經(jīng)對(duì)公眾開放，對(duì)于以前無權(quán)調(diào)動(dòng)讀者想象力的作家們，大門是洞開的。時(shí)下新鮮出爐的回憶錄層出不窮，可能會(huì)讓人覺得盛氣凌人，甚至令人驚恐不安，這正是自戀癖廣為傳播的一種癥候?？墒?，這種文體的民主化一方面造成了它的過度供給，另一方面也催生了一些杰出的著作。它們經(jīng)常講述格蘭特沒有講述過的故事類型，這類故事至少在表面上對(duì)自我的表現(xiàn)并不友善。

自白作為一種重構(gòu)自我的手法，可能對(duì)讀者產(chǎn)生了一種類似從鎖眼里偷窺他人的誘惑力。也許每一篇回憶錄都應(yīng)該泄露作者在日常生活中沒有泄露的某些秘事?？墒亲园子卸嘀仫L(fēng)險(xiǎn)。詳述自己的不端行為可能狡黠地隱含了某種自負(fù)，對(duì)自身多姿多彩性的洋洋自得：啊呀，我是個(gè)不折不扣的壞女孩！或者到頭來，人們表現(xiàn)出來的自我觀念可能過于狹隘。近來一些（盡管不是所有）有關(guān)不良嗜好的故事就掉進(jìn)了這種陷阱，讓讀者不禁想：“除了個(gè)個(gè)都貪戀杯中物以外，這些人總該有點(diǎn)兒別的什么出奇之處吧？”

對(duì)于所有的回憶錄作家來說，如何傳達(dá)對(duì)于過去經(jīng)驗(yàn)的當(dāng)下理解，是一個(gè)需要審慎處理的問題。在文字里創(chuàng)造一個(gè)自我時(shí)應(yīng)該泄露多少的問題，融入了闡釋和純粹描寫應(yīng)該各占多少比例的根本性問題。什么時(shí)候應(yīng)該對(duì)過去作出評(píng)論，什么時(shí)候只需按照原樣如實(shí)描繪，讓過去自我展現(xiàn)？僅僅是為了頌揚(yáng)當(dāng)下的自我就聲明與過去脫離關(guān)系，可能對(duì)作者很有誘惑力。我那時(shí)真是個(gè)不折不扣的傻瓜?。墒乾F(xiàn)在我看穿了這一點(diǎn)，多聰明?。。┛墒亲允贾两K讀者都知道，以前的各個(gè)自我并不是說拋開就能拋開的。

自我探索，包括自白，幾乎總是涉及其他人物。這些人物有的必然會(huì)被一部說實(shí)話的回憶錄激怒?？墒莾?yōu)秀而誠實(shí)的回憶錄既不是報(bào)仇雪恥，也不是自我辯護(hù)，既不是自我頌揚(yáng)，也不是自我克制。它是學(xué)習(xí)歷程的記錄。顧名思義，回憶錄回顧以往。它們是對(duì)克爾凱郭爾式兩難困境“生活必須朝前走，可是理解生活必須朝后看”的一種回應(yīng)?；貞涗泴徱曇欢芜^往歲月，經(jīng)驗(yàn)產(chǎn)生的知識(shí)給它帶來了優(yōu)勢?！逗嗬啴?dāng)斯的教育》是亨利·亞當(dāng)斯給自己的回憶錄擬定的完美標(biāo)題。每一部值得閱讀的回憶錄都可以被稱為《作者的教育》。 這個(gè)“我”已經(jīng)去過了某個(gè)地方，現(xiàn)在懂得了以前不懂的一些東西，這一點(diǎn)對(duì)于作者和讀者同樣富有價(jià)值。

以下是回憶錄作家應(yīng)遵守的一些良好品行的基本規(guī)則：

寫難寫的東西。包括難寫的事實(shí)。

對(duì)自己比對(duì)他人更加嚴(yán)厲。“推己及人”的黃金定律并不怎么適用于回憶錄。無可避免地，你不會(huì)按照他人的意愿來刻畫他們的形象。可是你至少可以記住，這是一場受到操縱的游戲：只有你在自愿地玩它。

努力接受這一事實(shí)：你和任何其他人一樣，在一定程度上是個(gè)喜劇人物。

忠于事實(shí)。

1. beckon： 誘人，有吸引力。

2. Saint Augustine： 圣·奧古斯?。?54—430），古羅馬基督教神學(xué)家，他的《懺悔錄》被稱為西方歷史上第一部 “自傳”。

3. decorum： // 有禮，得體。

4. gauze： 紗布，薄紗；roman à clef： novel with a key的法語表達(dá)，指影射真人實(shí)事的小說。

5. beguilingly： // 有欺騙性地。

6. contrariety： // 矛盾性。

7. gibberish： 胡言亂語；the Federal Reserve： 美國聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)蓄系統(tǒng)（The Federal Reserve System），簡稱美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)，負(fù)責(zé)履行美國中央銀行的職責(zé)。

8. John Updike： 約翰·厄普代克（1932—2009），20世紀(jì)美國最偉大的小說家之一，兩度獲得普利策小說獎(jiǎng)；crystalline： 清澈透明的，水晶般的；bestow： // 給予，賦予。

9. mundane： // 世俗的；quirk：怪癖，古怪的性格。

10. downright： 完全地，徹底地（強(qiáng)調(diào)令人不快或負(fù)面的品質(zhì)或行為）。

11. mushy： 感傷的，感情脆弱的。

12. Ulysses S. Grant： 尤利西斯·S. 格蘭特（1822—1885），美國南北戰(zhàn)爭北軍總司令、第18任美國總統(tǒng)（1869—1877），其暮年出版的回憶錄受到公眾、軍事歷史學(xué)家和文學(xué)批評(píng)家一致贊賞。

13. drinking bout： 縱飲，狂飲酒會(huì)；dry goods store： 在美國，dry goods store銷售紡織品、成衣等商品，在零售業(yè)區(qū)別于hardware store（五金店）和grocery store（食品店）；Union force： 美國南北戰(zhàn)爭時(shí)期的聯(lián)邦軍（北軍）；imminent： 即將發(fā)生的，臨近的。

14. lucid： 易懂的，表達(dá)清楚的。

15. Edmund Wilson： 埃德蒙·威爾遜（1895—1972），美國文學(xué)批評(píng)家和社會(huì)批評(píng)家，下面的引文出自其著作《愛國者之血：美國內(nèi)戰(zhàn)文學(xué)研究》（1962）；on edge： 緊張不安的，急切的。

16. overbearing： 傲慢的，專橫的；self-absorption： 自戀，一心只想著自己。

17. lurk： 暗藏，潛伏；revel in...： 陶醉于……，以……為樂。

18. starkness： 簡易，樸素。

19. disown： （因感到羞恥等而）與……脫離關(guān)系。

20. abnegation： 克己，放棄。

21. Kierkegaard： 索倫·克爾凱郭爾（1813—1855），丹麥哲學(xué)家，存在主義哲學(xué)之父。

22. Henry Adams： 亨利·亞當(dāng)斯（1838—1918），美國歷史學(xué)家，兩代亞當(dāng)斯總統(tǒng)的后裔，回憶錄獲1919年普利策獎(jiǎng)（傳記類）。

23. the Golden Rule： 指“人應(yīng)具有同理心”的黃金法則，積極面為“推己及人”，消極面為“己所不欲，勿施于人”。

24. rig：（以不正當(dāng)手段）操縱，控制。endprint