Sunday, November 01, 2009

Book vs. Movie: A Clockwork Orange

Clockwork Orange 几年前试尝读过,读不下去,觉得太难了,好多字都看不懂。

租了电影来看,觉得电影的视觉艺术很棒,配乐也好。

今年年初把书又拿出来读了,终于读完了。才知道我不认识的字都是作者 Anthony Burgess 自己发明的,要根据语法和上下文来猜测。但因为很多是俄文的字根,我自然看得很困难。从网上找到一个“字典”,才看懂了。觉得作者真是天才。

然后又看了电影。Kubrick 当然是天才,视觉艺术的天才。

发现书和电影所要表达的东西非常不同。

故事大致是这样的(书和电影略有不同)。第一部:一个在生活在未来英国社会的青少年 Alex,有严重暴力倾向。他和朋友每天晚上出门,打砸抢奸,无恶不作。后来遭同伙出卖,在一次作案中被警察抓住,送进监狱。第二部:为了早日出狱,他要求接受 aversion therapy。几天之后,他“治愈”了,变得完全不能忍受任何暴力。第三部:出狱之后,他遭受同伙的报复,家人的抛弃,以前受害者的欺负,却因失去自卫能力,想自杀都不行。最后政府为了搞宣传,又把他治回原状。他又开始暴力的生活了。

可是,书比电影多出一章。这第21章使得两部作品的寓意有很大差异。

书的结尾是这样的:Alex 回到暴力的生活后,又过了一段时间,忽然感到暴力很无聊,意识到“that human energy is better expended on creation than destruction. Senseless violence is a prerogative of youth, which has much energy but little talent for the constructive.” 他就结束暴力生涯,结婚,生子,"and perhaps even create something... "做了一个正常的社会公民。

电影虽然是在英国拍的,Kubrick 却选择用了美国小说的版本,没有最后一章的内容。

我读书和看电影,最大的收获是读了作者 Burgess 写的前言,主要是关于最后一章的。据 Burgess 说,他的书在美国发表的时候,出版社让他把最后一章删掉:

My New York publisher believed that my 21st chapter was a sellout. It was veddy veddy British, don't you know. It was bland and it showed a Pelagian unwillingness to accept that a human being could be a model of unregenerable evil. The Americans, he said in effect, were tougher than British and could face up to reality. Soon they would be facing up to it in Vietnam. My book was Kennedyan and accepted the notion of moral progress. What was really wanted was a Nixonian book with no shred of optimism in it. Let us have evil prancing on the page and, up to the very last line, sneering in the face of all the inherited beliefs, Jewish, Christian, Muslim and Holy Roller, about people being able to make themselves better. Such a book would be sensational, and so it is. But I do not think it is a fair picture of a human life.

I do not think so because, by definition, a human being is endowed with free will. He can use this to choose between good and evil. If he can only perform good or only perform evil, then he is a clockwork orange--meaning that he has the appearance of an organism lovely with colour and juice but is in fact only a clockwork toy to be wound up by God or the Devil or (since this is increasingly replacing both) the Almighty State. It is as inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil. The important thing is moral choice. Evil has to exist along with good, in order that moral choice may operate. Life is sustained by the grinding opposition of moral entities....

印象最深的是作者的这段话:

The 21st chapter gives the novel the quality of genuine fiction, an art founded on the principle that human beings change. There is, in fact, not much point in writing a novel unless you can show the possibility of moral transformation, or an increase in wisdom, operating in your chief character or characters. Even trashy bestsellers show people changing. When a fictional work fails to show change, when it merely indicates that human characters is se, stony, unregenerable, then you are out of the field of the novel and into that of the fable or the allegory. The American or Kubrickian Orange is a fable; the British or world one is a novel.

最好笑的是,因为电影比书更出名,在作者把第21章加上后,很多读者/观众都来信询问。作者说,他的后半生大部分时间就是在 Xeroxing statements of intention and the frustration of intention,给读者回信,解释为什么书比电影多出一章来--while both Kubrick and my New York publisher coolly bask in the rewards of their misdemeanour. :)

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Book: The Power of One by Bryce Courtenay

Quote:

In this world are very few things made from logic alone. It is illogical for a an to be too logical. Some things we must just let stand. The mystery is more important than any possible explanation. The searcher after truth must search with humanity. Ruthless logic is the sign of a limited mind. The truth can only add to the sum of what you know, while a harmless mystery left unexplored often adds to the meaning of life. When a truth is not so important, it is better left as a mystery. p.263

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Movie/Book: Into the Wild

5/24/08
昨晚看了电影 Into the Wild,才知道这个人,这家人的事。一边看,一边想,我们能从这个故事学到什么。这个孩子是不是教育失败?

首先,他完全没有按照父母的意愿生活,逃离家庭,不承认父母,心中没有一点对父母的感激。按草叶的准则,他是一个失败的人生。

可是,他独立自主,自力更生,虽身无分文,却过了两年快乐的流浪生活。用浮生和风子的准则,他快乐,喜欢自己选择的生活,是一个成功的人生。

他虽然没有给社会创造很多财富,却给遇到的人带来快乐。他给父母家人带来的是痛苦和悔恨,他的故事给我们外人带来思考和启发。从社会的角度来看,他的人生是有价值的。

最后,他不能按照他的意愿生存下去。他临死前意识到,happiness only real when shared,死之前想念家人,说明他自己选择的道路是不成功的,而且他也意识到了。那么,人生中短暂的快乐,不能决定人生的成功,可是,要多久的快乐才能算成功?十年二十年三十年?后半生?是不是在死的时候,才能对整个人生的成败下定论?再有,谁来下定论?作父母的,是要把子女培养成父母认为是成功的,还是子女自己认为是成功的,或是社会认为是成功的,才算成功?

这个问题越讨论越艰难。

另外,按七月所说,给孩子空间,如果孩子不需要父母,没有信号,父母就不要去打扰他,让孩子自然成长?可是,谁决定孩子需不需要父母?也许孩子的超级独立,是一种对父母需要的表现?电影中的男孩,如果父母能读到他给的信号,能创造一个交流的渠道,是否可以避免悲剧?

当然,电影 version中,最后这个男孩能得到大智慧,父母因为挫折而改变了自己的人生态度,在高一层次上,是否算是一种成功?不论道路多么艰辛曲折,在最后能够醒悟,能够与世界和解,能够认命,make peace with the world,一生也算可以算是完满的。

想到最后,还是觉得,人生道路有各种各样的,没有什么成功和失败,只有不同。每个人只能为了自己最终的内心安详而生活,只能为自己的幸福负责。自己喜欢怎么做,就怎么做吧。最终的心态是最重要的。子女的人生是他们的, 他们也要自己找到健康的心态。做父母的,给子女的影响最大,所以首先要调整好自己的心态,以身作则,能帮就多帮一些。心要大,要开。智慧是快乐成功的唯一要素。

我每次想问题,想到最后,得到的都是一样的结论。怎么回事?:)


11/6/08
昨天我看了这本书。我觉得书比电影好。电影只是讲 Chris McCandless 的 misadventure,但书里写了不少其他人对 Alaska wilderness 的向往和追求,尤其作者年轻时有过类似的 Alaska 冒险的经历,读起来觉得很真切。

我也有 Alaska 情结。在美国读大学的时候,同学跟我说,要想赚钱,就趁暑假去 Alaska 打鱼,男生打鱼,女生在 cannery 工作,一个夏天可以挣五六千块钱呢。因为夏天日子长,每天要工作 10-12 个小时,但剩下时间都是自由的。我就特别向往,向往那种别样的生活。可惜大学我只过了一个暑假,上了好多课,没机会去。研究生的时候,我约了女友一起开车去 Alaska 玩一个月。临走那天她才说不想去了。后来我就更向往了,特别想开车去逛 3 个月。我不想坐 cruise,也许要等孩子长大一些,才能圆了我的阿拉斯加梦,但肯定跟年轻时的那种去冒险的感觉又不一样了。

因为是真事,是报告文学,所以才更令人感慨,感慨生命在青春时的脆弱。

Labels:

Book: The Brethren by John Grisham

前两天刚读了 The Brethren by John Grisham,小说的一个重要的 subplot 是讲美国总统选举的。书里说,谁的钱多,谁就能赢。读后,我对大选的激情更加淡薄。归根结底还是钱的问题。

CIA director wants to increase military budget, so he picks an unknown Arizona congressman to be a presidential candidate after NH primary, promises to provide unlimited campaign funding. He "creates" terrorist crisis to scare the people, and soon everyone turns to the new candidate. The money comes from defense companies, including "private" companies that nobody knows. The money is used for advertisement, for buying off politicians (to pay off their campaign debts), and such. Throughout the book, the CIA director keeps saying that the one who has more campaign money always wins. The writer John Grisham has worked in a presidential campaign before, so I assume he knows some inside stories.

Labels:

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

TTC: 20th Century American Fiction

20th-Century American Fiction
(32 lectures, 30 minutes/lecture)
by Arnold Weinstein

Hemingway. Fitzgerald. Faulkner. No first names are needed.
These giants of literature are immediately recognizable to anyone who loves to read fiction and even to many who don’t.

Now, thanks to this course from Brown University’s Professor Arnold Weinstein, you can develop fresh insight into these and eight other great American authors of the 20th century. Professor Weinstein sheds light not only on the sheer magnificence of these writers’ literary achievements but explores their uniquely American character as well. Despite their remarkable variety, each represents an outlook and a body of work that could only have emerged in the United States.

Freedom and Speech

The aim of this course is to analyze and appreciate some of the major works of fiction produced in this country over the past century, using as a focal point the idea of "freedom of speech." The focus on freedom of speech is appropriate for many reasons, particularly:
These texts often invoke the fundamental political freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and many of them take the liberty of articulating the painful ideological conflicts that have punctuated our modern history: war, racism, poverty, drugs, sexism, and the like.
"Freedom of speech" also spells out the key thesis to be presented in these readings: Language itself turns out to be not only "free" but a precious means of becoming free, of experiencing life beyond the constraints of the ordinary workaday world.
The overriding theme in American literature, as in American life, is that of freedom itself, whether expressed in a laissez-faire economy, in upward mobility, or simply in our belief that we can make ourselves and our lives into something beyond the origins and influences of our births, a theme sometimes called the American dream. No other society has ever professed such beliefs, and it is not surprising that our literature has much to tell us about the viability of these notions.
Our Ongoing War for Independence

Why would literature be a privileged record for this special American story about freedom? The answer: American fiction is something of a battleground in the "war of independence" that human beings—white or black or red or yellow, male or female—wage every day of their lives.

Our war consists of achieving a self, making or maintaining an identity, making our particular mark in the world we inhabit. This is a battle because the 20th century American scene is not particularly hospitable to self-making: great forces coerce our lives, forces that are at once economic, biological, political, racial, and ideological.

We are dogged by not only death and taxes but by the influence of family, of business, of society, of all those potent vectors that constitute the real map and landscape of our lives. This vexed and conflicted terrain does not resemble the smooth résumés that are our shorthand for what we have done, but it does correspond to our experiential awareness of what we go through, how we have changed from childhood to adulthood, what our work and friendships and marriages have been and what they have meant to us. Literature enables us to recover this territory—our territory. The texts presented in this course constitute an enlarged repertory of human resources, of the battle for freedom.

The Heroic Self in a Humbling Land

We begin by looking at the great texts and movements of the 19th century, especially our belief in heroic selfhood, and we begin to see and chart the kinds of forces that make up the moving stage we occupy.

Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio is among the most poignant descriptions of life at the beginning of the century, but the charm of this small-town narrative acquires a deeper hue when we see the amount of repression and inner violence that Anderson chronicles.

Hemingway’s In Our Time and Fitzgerald’s Tender is the Night are both, in their own ways, about American loss of innocence; about how the Great War and the brutality of modern life permanently altered our belief systems. This theme is presented as physical trauma in Hemingway and as madness and decay in Fitzgerald.

Faulkner’s Light in August depicts the ravages of racism in the American South, but it seeks, magnificently, to pair its overt story of carnage and neurosis with another, more elusive fable of love, kinship, and redemption.

We turn to Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God for the first—and perhaps the best—account of growing up black and female in America, a story that is expressed in a kind of language and diction that moves breathlessly from the vernacular to the legendary.

Flannery O’Connor’s stories bring a different agenda to our course: the challenge of perceiving the contours of God, spirit, and grace in a seemingly materialist Southern landscape peopled with the lowest profile folks in American literature.

Burroughs’ Naked Lunch, once censored and then seen as merely a raunchy drug epic, will be studied as a dazzling and disturbing account of the body in culture, a body that is horribly open and defenseless against the takeovers that beset it.

War returns to our course in Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, at once poignant and wacky, speaking to us of mass destruction and of extraterrestrials in the same voice, a voice that is hard to forget.

The course will close with a series of lectures on three of the most significant contemporary writers—writers whose works may not yet be familiar to you.

In his sprawling and audacious Public Burning, Robert Coover uses that most popular American code, entertainment, to present a manic account of the Rosenberg execution and the antics of one Richard Nixon.

Toni Morrison’s fascinating Sula is an experimental novel in which Morrison fashions a group of characters whose lives and values make rubble out of the conventions of humanistic culture, whether black or white.

Finally, Don DeLillo’s appealing, absurdist comedy of modern life, White Noise, depicts our encounter with the technological madhouse in which we live but which we have not quite gotten around to seeing.

Lifelines

These American fictions, seen together, tell a composite story about coping, about fashioning both a story and a life. The range of experiences and subcultures to be found here will dwarf the experience of any single reader, and that is how it should be. Much is dark in these stories, but the honesty and integrity of these writers adds pith and richness to our own lives and makes us realize that reading is as much a lifeline as it is entertainment or education.

Course Lecture Titles

1. American Fiction and the Individualist Creed
2. The American Self—Ghost in Disguise
3. What Produces "Nobody"?
4. Sherwood Anderson's Winesburg, Ohio—Writing as the Talking Cure
5. Winesburg—A New American Prose-Poetry
6. Hemingway—Journalist, Writer, Legend
7. Hemingway as Trauma Artist
8. Hemingway's Cunning Art
9. F. Scott Fitzgerald—Tender Is the Night—Fitzgerald's Second Act
10. Fitzgerald's Psychiatric Tale
11. Dick's Dying Fall—An American Story
12. Light in August—Midpoint of the Faulkner Career
13. Light in August—Determinism vs. Freedom
14. Light in August—Novel as Poem, or, Beyond Holocaust
15. Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God—Canon Explosion
16. Their Eyes Were Watching God—From Romance to Myth
17. Flannery O'Connor—Realist of Distances
18. O'Connor—Taking the Measure of the Region
19. Williams Burroughs—Bad Boy of American Literature
20. Naked Lunch—The Body in Culture
21. Naked Lunch—Power and Exchange in the Viral World
22. Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five—Apocalypse Now
23. Vonnegut's World—Tralfamadore or Trauma?
24. Robert Coover—Postmodern Fabulator
25. The Public Burning—Execution at Times Square
26. Robert Coover—Fiction as Fission
27. Toni Morrison's Sula—From Trauma to Freedom
28. Sula—New Black Woman
29. Don DeLillo—Decoder of American Frequencies
30. White Noise—Representing the Environment
31. DeLillo and American Dread
32. Conclusion—Nobody's Home

Labels: , ,

Monday, September 29, 2008

Book: Sister Carrie

I'm so happy to be reading Sister Carrie instead of the Bone People. I read it with great intent, enjoying each word in each sentence. It sounds like music to me.

I read the first two chapters last year when I was nursing. I found it very difficult, and I could not get into the book. I was not in the mood to enjoy it. I felt sad, and I didn't know if I would ever enjoy a great book again. I am glad this book has given me another chance.

There are several books in the past that I could not get into. I will have to give them a second chance. Yes, One Hundred Years of Solitude needs 3 or 4 chances.

Friday, September 26, 2008

book: The Bone People by Keri Hulme

I can't say I enjoyed the Bone People by Keri Hulme. While I was reading it the last two weeks, I was impatient with the book, and speed-read many pages. For one thing, I am not used to the language style. It is said to "follow the rhythms and accents of the Maori idiom". It is very difficult for me to follow. Also Hulme changes her narrative back and forth from third person to first person, and it is confusing, especially if I am speed reading. Most of the passages about Kerewin Holmes, which is over half of the book, read like a private diary. Since Kerewin Holmes sounds like Keri Hulme, and they have similar backgrounds (part Maori, part European, painter, drinker, asexual, etc.), I feel I am reading a badly written autobiography. I do not care about the protagonist, because she is self-absorbing and irritating. I care about Joe, but the book tells too little about him. I care about Simon, and in the book there is a promise of a mystery, but it is never resolved. There is no story in the book, only character studies, of only one character, which is the author, who is often drunk, depressed, or dreaming. I have learned something about the Maori people, but it is only through the eyes of Keri Hulme, whom I have a most difficult time to relate. I do not trust her at all.

The only part I can read normally is the part about Joe's wandering, and about Simon's recovering. Hulme uses normal English in those chapters, and I could understand. Then she switches back to Kerewin, and I am lost again. Unlike the other two characters, I don't understand how and why she is healed. In the end, I don't know what has happened. I am confused from beginning to end.

I got this book because it has won several book award, including the 1985 Booker Prize, an award for contemporary fiction writers from the British Commonwealth and Ireland. Past award winners include these two that I have read:

1989 - Kazuo Ishiguro - United Kingdom/Japan - The Remains of the Day - (I love it)
2002 - Yann Martel - Canada - Life of Pi - (I don't like)

Also Alice Walker recommends this book. Well, I don't.

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Book: All the King's Men by Robert Penn Warren

I really enjoyed this 661-pages long political novel. It started very slowly, with long descriptions of landscapes, people in the background, characters in the foreground, and so on. The story was thin and deeply embedded in the descriptions. After a couple of chapters, I gradually see the history of each character, and the relationships among them. I was drawn into the complicated web of people with past, present, and future. Characters are well-developed. The plots are neat and tight. There is a satisfactory closure at the end.

There are two movies made for this book. I have seen the earlier one but I didn't understand it at the time of viewing. I've read that the character Willie Stark (Boss) is based on a real governor (Huey Long of Louisiana). I've always wondered where the character Jack Burden come from. There were many rich memories from the past. I kept thinking that the author must have had most of the experiences he gave to Jack Burden. This novel also reminds me of The Angle of Repose by Wallace Stegner.

It is a successful novel, a literary classic.

A few quotes from the book:

Yeah, I heard the speech. But they don't give a damn about that. Hell, make 'em cry, make 'em laugh, make 'em think you're their weak erring pal, or make 'em think you're Gold-Almighty. Or make 'me mad. Even mad at you. Just stir 'em up, it doesn't matter how or why, and they'll love yo and come back for more. Pinch 'em in the soft place. They aren't alive, most of 'em, and haven't been alive in twenty years. Hell, their wives have lost their teeth and their shape, and likker won't set on their stomachs, and they don't believe in God, so it's up to you to give 'em something to stir 'em up and make 'em feel alive again. Just for half an hour. That's what they come for. Tell 'em anything. But for Sweet Jesus' sake don't try to improve their minds. (p.108)

One feels incredulity at the first breaking of a habit, but horror at the violation of a principle. Therefore what virtue and honor I had known in the past had been an accident of habit and not the fruit of will. Or can virtue be the fruit of human will? The thought is pride. p.254

We wrote every day, but the letters began to seem like checks drawn on the summer's capital. There had been a lot in the bank, but it is never good business practice to live on your capital, and I had the feeling, somehow, of living on the capital and watching something dwindle. p.449 (long-distance relationship)

Labels:

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Book: Seabiscuit

I got Laura Hillenbrand's Seabiscuit from the library for $0.50, and since it had top rating at amazon.com, I began reading it. When the movie came out a few years ago, I didn't see it in the theater. Everyone told me that it was a "guy's movie". I only saw part of it on a train (from San Francisco to Los Angeles), and thought it was all fictional.

But it is all real in history. Charles Howard. Tom Smith. Red Pollard. George Woolf. Seabiscuit.

This book is not about a racehorse. It is about a lost era, about those "dear, dead days".

After reading the book, I become fascinated with horse race, and I want to go to racecourses and see real horse racing. I have been to Churchill Downs, Santa Anita, and the Detroit Race Course, but I didn't know anything about horse race before, and I missed the real excitement. I have checked to see the racecourses near us. The Hollywood Park is in our area, and it was where Seabiscuit won the inaugural Hollywood Gold Cup in 1938. Santa Anita is like a home to Seabiscuit, and there is a statue of the horse and the jockey Iceman Woolf. So many stories of Seabiscuit happened there. I really want to go and see it again. When I told people that I wanted to see horse racing, they

Here's a list of all California horse racing venues from Wikipedia (there are more from other sites):

Santa Anita Park racecourse
Bay Meadows, San Mateo, California
Golden Gate Fields, Albany, California
Del Mar Racetrack, Del Mar, California
Fairplex, Pomona, California
Hollywood Park Racetrack, Inglewood, California
Los Alamitos, Los Alamitos, California
Santa Anita Park, Arcadia, California

Hillenbrand did a great job digging up lost history, organizing the materials, and telling the life of Seabiscuit and those of everyone around him. Her language is colorful and vivid, and sometimes very sensational. For example:

His (Johnny Pollard) emotions were liquid; his anger was a wild rage, his pleasure jubilation, his humor biting, his sorrow and empathy a bottomless abyss. (p.51)

Below is an interesting "observation" of the depression era:

In the winter of 1937, America was in the seventh year of the most catastrophic decade in its history. The economy had come crashing down, and millions upon millions of people had been torn loose from their jobs, their savings, their homes. A nation that drew its audacity from the quintessentially American belief that success is open to anyone willing to work for it was disillusioned by seemingly intractable poverty. The most brash of peoples was seized by despair, fatalism, and fear. The sweeping devastation was giving rise to powerful new social forces. The first was a burgeoning industry of escapism. America was desperate to lose itself in anything that offered affirmation. The nation's corner theaters hosted 85 million people a week for 25-cent viewings of an endless array of cheery musicals and screwball comedies. On the radio, the idealized world of One Man's Family and the just and reassuring tales of The Lone Ranger were runaway hits. Downtrodden Americans gravitated strongly toward the Horatio Alger protagonist, the lowly bred Everyman who rises from anonymity and hopelessness. They looked for him in spectator sports, which were enjoying explosive growth. With the relegalization of wagering, no sport was growing faster than Thoroughbred racing.

Note the part about "cheery musicals and screwball comedies". See my movie review for the 1930s.

I've just signed up for a membership at The Daily Racing Form. I don't know what I am going to do with it....

Labels: , ,

关于 Bach/Brahms Chaconne 3

我第一次正式听巴赫的恰空,是两年前,在一个教会举行的午间音乐会上。演奏者是 Timothy Fain,一个很帅的年轻小提琴家。为了写音乐会报告,我在网上查了不少关于恰空的资料,整理了一番,作为我对巴赫恰空最初的理性认识。这是我写的报告中关于恰空的(英文):

The main piece is Bach Partita No.2 in D minor for solo violin (BWV 1004). It was written in the period 1717-1723, dedicated to the memory of his first wife. The partita is composed of five parts, combining different folk traditions—Allemande (German), Courrant (French), Saraband (Spanish or Oriental), Gigue (French), and Chaconne (Spanish or Moorish). A common theme is shared among the first four parts. The 15-minute long Chaconne runs over the time of all other four parts together, overshadowing the remainder of the partita. It is considered a pinnacle in the solo violin repertoire, covering almost every aspect of violin playing known during Bach’s time, and it is among the most difficult pieces to play on any instrument. Different transcriptions of the piece were made by Busoni (piano), Brahms (piano left hand), Segovia (guitar), and Stokowski (orchestra), among others. It also represents the zenith of polyphonic writing for a non-keyboard instrument. Having listened to Bach’s unaccompanied cello suites many times, I had no doubt that Bach’s solo violin would be magnificent.

Fain was well prepared to tackle all the technical difficulties. At first his whole body moved a lot with the emotion of the piece, which was distracting to me because he was very tall. Half way through the piece, he became more absorbed in the music and his movement was reduced. In Chaconne, there were a lot of technical passages. He played with concentration and passion. It was especially exciting to watch him play the passage of 32nd-note arpeggio over all four strings. However, musically I got lost after a while. A few times I thought the music had reached the climax and was coming to an end, but Bach kept going and Fain kept going. After several false climaxes, I lost my concentration to listen. I did not realize the section was in the form of theme and variations. I think as a performer, one should pay good attention to the structure of the music, and be a guide to the audience and so they could understand where the music is going, help the audience hear how the composer wants the music to flow. Nonetheless, overall I greatly enjoyed this performance of Bach’s Violin Partita, for both Bach and Fain were full of surprises and excitement.

After the concert, I looked up the score of Chaconne (or Ciaccona) and read some analyses. It was actually composed of 64 “stunning” variation upon the “stark, open-ended” four measure theme in the beginning. The theme and its chord progression is on D, C#, Bb and A. The piece starts and ends in a D minor with a D major central section starting and ending in arpeggio. I listened to three recordings of this piece (by Arthur Grumiaux, Hilary Hahn, and Nathan Milstein) with the score. Full of triple, quadruple stops and arpeggio over four strings, it was truly a stunning piece, both technically and musically.

当时我听演奏的时候,听到一半我就跑神了。平时我听音乐都是这样的,除非手里有谱子,我是不会专心的把一个曲子从头听到尾的,即使是我自己弹奏的曲子,弹到一半我脑子就不知跑到那里去了,连我从未弹奏过的新曲子也如此。但是巴赫的恰空,时不时的带来新鲜的音乐,或是委婉,或是激昂,或是遥远,或是悲壮,总是召唤我回到音乐旁边。我发现我并不了解这首恰空的结构,不懂其写作格式和技巧,每个大段都有高潮,三次下来,我丢了方向。我还抱怨演奏者不能给我适当的指示。现在想来也是很好笑的。

演奏中,我印象最深的是前面 D minor 结束前的的那一大段32分音符的扒音,在小提琴的四根弦上,快速的来回穿梭。手指飞奔。我看着都紧张,手里捏着一把汗。这一段持续的时间很久,有8个变奏,大概两分钟。非常精彩。

我看钢琴谱的这一段,第二个变奏标的是 tranquillo,平静,第三个是 p e molto leggiero,轻及更加轻盈,好像是在孕育着后来的风暴。到后来才慢慢渐强起来。这些跨越度大、快速的32分音符,我练了很久,才能勉强把音都弹出、弹对,但轻盈这种力度却难以做到。紧接下来的是自由的、尽兴的感叹,感叹终于雨过天晴,D大调就要来到了。这一段成为我最喜欢练习的,因为不仅可以反复练手指、练技巧,体会和声微妙的变化,而且那种一气呵成的感觉真是太好了。