司馬勤

這次，我們來談?wù)勊囆g(shù)作品中的“不死之身”這個話題。125年前，吸血鬼德古拉伯爵（Count Dracula）在文學(xué)歷史的長河中誕生，至今他還是十分活躍。去年，這位吸血僵尸在英國廣播電視臺（BBC）的迷你劇集中以主角身份出現(xiàn)；上個月，他更是在圣達(dá)菲歌劇院（Santa Fe Opera）的一部新歌劇中“重生”。

可是，以上兩次“重現(xiàn)”都不是你平常熟悉的公爵。英國廣播電視臺的監(jiān)制史蒂芬·莫法特（Steven Moffat）與編劇馬克·蓋特利斯（Mark Gatliss）將“酷不列顛”（Cool Britannia，是媒體用來描繪1990年代英國文化界繁榮景象的用詞）風(fēng)格注入布拉姆·斯托克（Bram Stoker）的經(jīng)典小說，就跟十年前他們把亞瑟·柯南·道爾（Arthur Conan Doyle）的《福爾摩斯》（Sherlock）翻新“變酷”如出一轍。在圣達(dá)菲，約翰·科里利亞諾（John Corigliano）與馬克·阿達(dá)莫（Mark Adamo）也在他倆曾取得成功的創(chuàng)作手法上再接再厲——換句話說，把兩個看起來毫不相干的概念糅合在一起，靜觀它們碰撞出來的火花。此次他們合作的歌劇《吶喊之主》（The Lord of Cries）的萌芽，源于阿達(dá)莫留意到斯托克的小說與古希臘歐里庇得斯（Euripides）的劇作《酒神的女祭司們》（The Bacchae）有相似之處。

確實，有些人真的這樣想，認(rèn)為吸血鬼這個主題對于歌劇這樣嚴(yán)肅的藝術(shù)形式來說太輕浮了。說實在的，這個項目的確令我聯(lián)想到《傲慢與偏見與僵尸》（Pride and Prejudice and Zombies）?？上У氖?，這本跨門類大雜燴小說（后來更是拍成電影）的喜劇效果到頭來并不盡如人意。《吶喊之主》的作曲科里利亞諾已經(jīng)囊獲了美國作曲家可以贏得的所有大獎（除了艾美獎以外他統(tǒng)統(tǒng)榜上有名）；阿達(dá)莫同樣擁有著卓越的藝術(shù)成就，同時擔(dān)任編劇兼作曲，作品備受贊譽(yù)。因此，這部新歌劇顯然不只是一個宣傳噱頭，也不是基于一部青少年迷上的暢銷小說的創(chuàng)作。它值得認(rèn)真嚴(yán)肅地對待——我采取了與觀賞其他歌劇同樣的方法，就是事前做好功課。

過去幾個月，我在清理自己孩提時代的書房時，恰好找到這些原始資料——不只是《德古拉》，還有十幾本屬于不同系列的19世紀(jì)哥特式小說，更有1970年代恐怖電影改編的小說集以及研究不同年代不同文化中吸血鬼傳說的社會歷史文獻(xiàn)。莫法特與蓋特利斯的電視劇提醒了我，于是又找來勞倫·埃斯特爾曼（Loren Estleman）創(chuàng)作的《嗜血公爵歷險記》（Adventures of the Sanguinary Count）——那是一本描述德古拉遇上福爾摩斯的小說。這些書籍的外殼因為時間久遠(yuǎn)，大部分都已體無完膚，可是那本《酒神的女祭司們》的書脊卻猶如新書一樣。

盡管只屬于青少年文學(xué)的品位，這些在老家發(fā)現(xiàn)的藏書卻讓我對《吶喊之主》有了更深的理解。故事別出心裁的主軸硬把德古拉與古希臘酒神狄俄尼索斯（Dionysus）扯在一起。本來以為很荒謬，但我錯了：從匈牙利學(xué)者加布里埃爾·羅尼（Gabriel Roney）引述荷馬（Homer）史詩《奧德賽漂流記》（Odyssey）的文章里，我才得知奧德修斯在人世與冥界之間游蕩時遇上了亡靈，那些亡靈只能在飲血之后才有能量開口說話。古代作家界定鬼魂與女巫時都有些含混不清，但那些亡靈的特質(zhì)聽上去有點像吸血鬼。

不久之前，《紐約客》（New Yorker）的樂評人亞里斯·羅斯（Alex Ross）列出了寥寥可數(shù)的幾部“吸血鬼歌劇”目錄：首部——1812年的《吸血鬼》（I Vampiri）為意大利作曲家西爾維斯特羅·帕爾馬（Silvestro Palma）之作——比斯托克出版的小說早了85年；以1999年由菲利普·格拉斯（Philip Glass）為托德·勃朗寧（Tod Browning）執(zhí)導(dǎo)的1931年黑白電影《德古拉》新編的配樂而告終。羅斯的總結(jié)是：科里利亞諾與阿達(dá)莫合作的歌劇“在這個領(lǐng)域里差不多沒有對手”。

阿達(dá)莫可能會堅持，他的劇本根本算不上是吸血僵尸的故事。德古拉這個名字在劇本里幾乎沒有提及，編劇把斯托克故事的敘事情節(jié)做了很大的改動。但是從宏觀上來說，我最近研究的“吸血僵尸文獻(xiàn)”里，讓我看清楚改編工作需要留意的事項。

***

我們先談?wù)勀ㄌ睾蜕w特利斯。他們制作的《福爾摩斯》十分成功，但《德古拉》卻令人失望。原因何在？19世紀(jì)的類型小說水平參差不齊。柯南·道爾筆下那位偵探人物，是經(jīng)過4部小說以及56則短篇故事慢慢提煉出來的，因此，任何添加（或現(xiàn)代化版本）都有可能被視為第57則故事?！兜鹿爬返谋尘皠t截然不同：那是一本結(jié)構(gòu)精密的小說，里面的細(xì)節(jié)在過去百多年來嚇怕了不少讀者。莫法特和蓋特利斯最大的錯誤，就是搞不清“圣典”（canon）與“圣經(jīng)”（scripture）的區(qū)別。我們經(jīng)常會拿圣典出來進(jìn)行重新評估；但若是你想改動圣經(jīng)的內(nèi)容？那肯定會碰壁！

有趣的是，使我另眼相看的其中一個案例，是埃斯特爾曼的小說（《嗜血公爵歷險記》的副題是“福爾摩斯對抗德古拉”）。斯特爾曼沒有改動斯托克故事里任何情節(jié)，他所補(bǔ)充的是德古拉在倫敦的短暫日子里的遭遇。這部小說所帶出的幽默效果源自不同行文風(fēng)格的碰撞。斯托克筆下的人物說話時往往自高自大，會用上夸張的維多利亞式的華麗辭藻；而福爾摩斯與華生兩人的對話，則具有柯南·道爾式的冷靜和理性。福爾摩斯跟喬納森·哈克（Jonathan Harker）見面時，屢次勸告他要冷靜下來、梳理好眼前的事實。

讓我們回到新歌劇《吶喊之主》吧。阿達(dá)莫沒有像莫法特和蓋特利斯那樣把故事移植至現(xiàn)代，也沒有用更新的現(xiàn)代文化觸覺替換歷史細(xì)節(jié)。事實上，他把目光投向過去。相比吸血鬼小說，歐里庇得斯的《酒神的女祭司們》在歌劇范疇里存在了相當(dāng)長的一段時間，成績可見一斑。三位風(fēng)格迥異的作曲家曾套用《酒神》的故事（無論是原著還是進(jìn)行了改編）撰寫歌?。嚎_爾·西曼諾夫斯基（Karol Szymanowski）的《羅杰爾王》（King Roger，1924）；漢斯·維爾納·亨策（Hans Werner Henze）的《酒神的女祭司們》（The Bassarids，1965）；還有哈里·帕奇（Harry Partch）的《法院公園的啟示》（Revelation in the Courthouse Park，1960）。這些作品都沒有納入經(jīng)典劇目范疇，所以阿達(dá)莫在兩方面占上優(yōu)勢：故事情節(jié)大家都熟悉；沒有任何教條牽制編劇。所以，他的任務(wù)就是先把《德古拉》小說整個敘事的骨干拆散，然后重新拼起那些光禿禿的“骨頭”（可以這么說），以適應(yīng)歐里庇得斯的故事輪廓。

這就是為什么在斯托克小說里擔(dān)任精神病院駐院醫(yī)生的約翰·蘇厄德博士（Dr. John Seward），現(xiàn)在被提升為精神病院院長（還有，蘇厄德的父親本是倫敦市長；當(dāng)父親突然去世后，兒子成了只缺少正式名分的市長）。露西·韋斯特拉（Lucy Westenra）本來是蘇厄德畢生最愛，在歌劇里卻成為哈克夫人，因而精簡了斯托克原著里露西未婚夫亞瑟與喬納森夫人米娜兩個角色（在希臘戲劇中，除了弗洛伊德式的“本我”以外，不能容納人格理論的其他元素）。因為底比斯（Thebes）的國王潘休斯（Pentheus）不承認(rèn)狄俄尼索斯為神，狄俄尼索斯于是設(shè)了個死亡陷阱給他。在維多利亞時期的倫敦，酒神再現(xiàn)（歌劇劇本里只描述他為“陌生人”），將矛頭對準(zhǔn)了蘇厄德醫(yī)生，因為蘇厄德不承認(rèn)他為那個地方（精神病院的前身是個修道院）的合法主人。喬納森·哈克與范海辛教授（Van Helsing）——在改編自斯托克小說的各個作品版本里，他們都是推動劇情發(fā)展的重要人物——兩人的戲份刪減了，只提供旁白或背景歷史。歌劇結(jié)尾（與最終寓意）跟歐里庇得斯的作品最為接近，令人毛骨悚然，性別角色發(fā)生了明顯的逆轉(zhuǎn)：為了與怪物搏斗，蘇厄德最終自己也變成了怪物。

因為以上提到的各點，我十分同情那些冀望吸血僵尸能有多點戲份的粉絲群。熟悉原始資料未必是優(yōu)勢，除非你愿意接納阿達(dá)莫的游戲規(guī)則。在《吶喊之主》里，神秘的陌生人乘搭一艘名為“賽墨勒”（Semele）的船只，這剛好就是酒神母親的名字。斯托克小說里的船名是德墨忒爾（Demeter），一個完全不同的母親形象。我發(fā)現(xiàn)阿達(dá)莫為酒神其中一個隨從取名阿加埃（Agave），于是立刻翻查書籍，確定那正是底比斯國王潘休斯母親的名字，而不是編劇故意起了捉弄之意，找來圣達(dá)菲本土釀酒植物龍舌蘭（agave）來命名。

然而，歌劇里最重要的元素仍然是音樂。科里利亞諾為阿達(dá)莫劇本譜寫的音樂，就像一個充滿自信的聲響世界。樂隊一開始聽起來十分單薄，伴奏演唱旋律時只用了一件樂器（為了模仿古希臘時期誦唱的效果）。到了狂歡作樂的段落，科里利亞諾營造的氣氛就像他當(dāng)年為肯·羅素（Ken Russell）的電影《變形博士》（Altered States）配樂中最著名的“幻覺”場景那樣。歌劇里的主導(dǎo)動機(jī)很少用于特定的角色，而是用于反復(fù)出現(xiàn)的情感狀態(tài)?？评锢麃喼Z此前的歌劇《凡爾賽的幽靈》（The Ghosts of Versailles）里，創(chuàng)作了故意調(diào)侃羅西尼與莫扎特風(fēng)格的旋律。在這里，抒情的樂段顯然保留了他自己的個人風(fēng)格。

但問題是，第一幕時長差不多90分鐘。這一兩年來，大部分的歌劇整場演出都不超過90分鐘?？梢钥s短一點嗎？也許可以。但高男高音安東尼·羅斯·科斯坦佐（Anthony Roth Costanzo）扮演的酒神簡直精彩絕倫。我猜，就算他只是在臺上誦讀電話簿，大家也必定被他迷住。這個歌劇架構(gòu)令我想起惠士釗（美國作曲家Stewart Wallace的中文名）的《接骨師之女》（The Bonesetters Daughter）：譚恩美撰寫的劇本借用了中國戲曲敘事手法，把故事里全部的敘述性資料都鋪墊在第一幕里。這樣，第二幕就可以輕松順暢地發(fā)展。

絕大部分的歌劇制作都希望帶領(lǐng)觀眾進(jìn)入“暫時信以為真”的狀態(tài)?？墒菍?dǎo)演詹姆斯·達(dá)拉（James Darragh）故意逆向而行。舞臺上簡約的布景讓我們流暢地游走于古希臘與維多利亞時代的倫敦。這個制作拒絕讓我們沉浸于故事，直至歌劇的最后一刻：阿達(dá)莫的故事到達(dá)無可避免的高潮，科里利亞諾的音樂也到達(dá)最震撼的一刻。

Talk about undead. For a guy whose literary life began 125 years ago， Count Dracula shows no signs of slowing down. Last year， he got his own BBC miniseries； last month， he was again revived in a new work at Santa Fe Opera.

In neither case， though， was it the Count you thought you knew. For the BBC， showrunner Steven Moffat and writer Mark Gatliss gave Bram Stokers novel the same “Cool Britannia” treatment they gave to Arthur Conan Doyle a decade ago in Sherlock. In Santa Fe， John Corigliano and Mark Adamo likewise returned to methods that worked well for each of them before—namely， rubbing two seemingly disparate ideas together and pondering the sparks. Their opera， The Lord of Cries， first took root when Adamo noticed similarities between Stokers novel and Euripides play The Bacchae.

Some might—indeed， some did—find vampires too frivolous a subject for a serious art form like opera. And to be honest， the project does have a whiff of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies， a genre-crossing mashup novel （later a film） that was never as funny as it shouldve been. But Corigliano has garnered nearly every award （except an Emmy） that an American composer can win. Adamo has an impressive track record of his own， writing both music and texts for a well-regarded body of stage works. So this was clearly not a publicity stunt， or juvenile fan fiction. It deserved to be taken seriously—and like most operas， called for some research beforehand.

As it happens， Id recently stumbled onto much of that source material while cleaning out my childhood library—not just Dracula， but dozens of vampirerelated volumes from collections of 19th-century gothic fiction to novelizations of 1970s horror films to social histories of vampire myths through different centuries and cultures. Bringing Moffat and Gatliss to mind， I even found a copy of Loren Estlemans Adventures of the Sanguinary Count， where Dracula meets Sherlock Holmes. Most of these books were falling apart at the seams； strangely enough， my copy of The Bacchae was barely cracked.

Adolescent literary tastes notwithstanding， my new discoveries did rather put The Lord of Cries in context. The main conceit of the show， linking Dracula to the ancient Greek god Dionysus， seemed much less ridiculous after reading Hungarian scholar Gabriel Roneys citations from Homers Odyssey， where in Limbo （the space between the living world and Hades） Odysseus encountered spirits of the dead who could only summon the energy to speak after drinking blood. The ancient writers were a bit vague in codifying their various ghosts and witches， but those spirits sound a bit like vampires to me.

More recently， New Yorker critic Alex Ross itemized the admittedly limited genre of “vampire opera，”starting with Silvestro Palmas I Vampiri from 1812—some 85 years before Stokers novel was published—and ending with Philip Glasss 1999 score for Tod Brownings film Dracula from 1931. Corigliano and Adamos opera， he concluded， “has the field mostly to itself.”

Adamo would probably argue that his libretto isnt really a vampire story at all. Draculas name is barely spoken， and the text plays quite fast and loose with Stokers narrative details. But looking at the bigger picture， the “vampire corpus” Ive encountered lately does offer some clear pointers regarding adaptations about what works and what doesnt.

***

Lets start with Moffat and Gatliss， who scored brilliantly with Sherlock and delivered a rather disappointing Dracula. The reason？ Not all 19th-century genre fiction is created equal. Conan Doyles detective evolved over the course of four novels and 56 stories， so any addition （or modernization） could potentially fall in line as the 57th. Dracula， on the other hand， is a carefully constructed novel whose details have haunted readers for generations. Moffat and Gatlisss biggest mistake was in confusing canon with scripture. Canons frequently come up for re-evaluation； you mess with scripture at your own risk.

Funnily enough， one of the more charming examples came from Estlemans novel （subtitled “Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula”）， which changed none of Stokers details but rather filled the gaps during Draculas documented time in London. Much humor was derived from clashing prose styles. Stokers characters would speak in high-blown Victorian verbiage while Holmes and Watson conversed in Conan Doyles cool， analytical prose. Most of Holmess interactions with Jonathan Harker involved telling him to calm down and stick to the facts.

But back to Lord of Cries. Unlike Moffat and Gatliss， Adamo didnt try to update the story， or simply replace period details and sensibilities with modern equivalents. In fact， he went backward. Compared to vampire fiction， Euripides Bacchae has a longer operatic track record， having been set （or adapted） by composers as diverse as Karol Szymanowski （King Roger， 1924）， Hans Werner Henze （The Bassarids， 1965） and Harry Partch （Revelation in the Courthouse Park， 1960）. None of these have made it into the standard repertory， so Adamo has the best of both worlds： general audience familiarity with the basic story， with no inhibiting doctrine. For him， it was all a matter of pulling apart Draculas narrative skeleton and rearranging the bare bones （so to speak） to fit Euripidess story arc.

Which is why Dr. John Seward， originally a staff psychiatrist in Stokers novel， is now upgraded to head of the asylum （and after the death of his father，the actual mayor of London， he becomes “the mayor of London in all but name”）. Or how Lucy Westenra， the love of Sewards life， comes to be married to Jonathan Harker， eliminating both Lucys fiancéArthur and Jonathans wife Mina from Stokers story （Greek drama having little room for Freudian character-types beyond the id）. Much as Dionysus devises a violent death for the Theban king Pentheus for failing to acknowledge his divinity， his incarnation in Victorian London （referred to mainly as The Stranger） targets Seward for failing to recognize his legal claim on Carfax Asylum， formerly Carfax Abbey. Harker and Van Helsing—driving forces in most Stoker adaptations—are reduced mostly to offering commentary or backstory. The ending （and message） remains chillingly close to Euripides， with a telling reversal of gender roles： by going after the monster， Seward becomes the monster himself.

After all this， I do have some sympathy for listeners who expected to see more of their favorite vampire. Familiarity with the source material was not always an asset here， unless you were ready to play Adamos game. In Lord of Cries， the mysterious Stranger arrives in London on a ship called the Semele， which was the name of Dionysuss mother （Stoker had named it the Demeter， a quite different mother figure）. Seeing that Adamo had one of Dionysuss followers named Agave， I actually checked to see if this was really the name of Pentheuss mother and not some clever Santa Fe reference to the local plant they use to make tequila.

In opera， though， what really matters is the music， and here Corigliano fashioned Adamos retooled storyline into an assured world unto itself. Starting from a thin orchestral texture， with voices often accompanied by single instruments （mimicking the style of classical Greek oration）， Corigliano builds into full-on Bacchanals reminiscent of the hallucination scene in his score to Ken Russells film Altered States. Various leitmotifs are used less for specific characters than for recurring emotional states， and unlike his previous opera The Ghosts of Versailles， where Coriglianos music often veered into cheeky riffs on Rossini and Mozart， his lyrical voice here remained clearly his own.

The problem， though， is that the first act ran nearly 90 minutes， more than most opera performances these days in their entirety. Could it have been shorter？ Probably， but finding places to cut wasnt exactly helped by countertenor Anthony Roth Costanzo， whose breathtaking performance as Dionysus wouldve kept listeners riveted if hes been reading the phonebook. Structurally， it reminded me of Stewart Wallaces opera The Bonesetters Daughter， where Amy Tans libretto drew similar influences from Chinese opera， squeezing in most of the expository material before intermission and letting the conclusion unfold smoothly in Act II.

Where most opera tries to suspend disbelief， the director James Darragh seemed to aim for the reverse. With a minimalist setting seamlessly morphing between ancient Greece and Victorian London， the production practically cultivated incredulity until the final moments， when Adamos story reaches an inevitable climax and Coriglianos score packs its final punch.