TIME和"Aragorn"的善恶观
（看杂志的感想，发在这里可以吧？）<br><br>在所有有关LOTR的电影评论中，我最不喜欢的就是把这片子和当今局势联系在一起的那种，有些人好像是天生的听不进别人的话，即使Tolkien老先生否认Middle-Earth与现实世界的关系，即使他认为读者应该在文学上享受这部作品而不是扭曲它的含义，即使PJackson一再说影片的剧本和拍摄都是在911之前完成的，却还是有那么多的影评硬把LOTR往国际形势上拉，而且还认为这是一种赞美。最典型的是TIME这篇，（虽说一致认为TIME有点“御用”，可是一致认为他们不至于这么没水平）前面介绍剧情的就不引用了，光引用评论那一段：<br><br>Tolkien, who wrote much of the trilogy during World War II, denied that his tale was analogous to that great battle. Believe who will. But it is hard to miss connections with a new struggle. The Fellowship can be seen as Western democracies now besieged by the lunatic faction of Islamic fundamentalism. (Saruman, as played by the tall, lean, bearded Lee, looks eerily like Osama bin Laden.) The enemy's power seems overwhelming, untouchable; its ruthlessness makes strong nations shiver. "So much death," King Theoden says. "What can men do against such reckless hate?" Aragorn replies, "Ride out to meet them." <br><br>（设计对白）李大爷：我招谁惹谁了？说我象拉登？拉登的胡子又我白吗？有我直吗？我记得以前倒有个长着弯弯曲曲灰胡子的巫师……<br>麦大爷：……干我屁事……<br><br>本来想认真说说这种事的，后来发现有人已经说过了 —— E!Online上Viggo Mortensen 的访谈（E是提问者V是Viggo）：<br><br>Aragorn Explains the Whole Good-Evil Thing<br><br>We suspect that nothing could please the quiet, sensitive Viggo Mortensen (he paints and writes poetry on the side) less than becoming the big movie star that The Two Towers will make him. He tells us that he has got bigger things on his mind, like, oh, Iraq and Afghanistan. But after his bravura turn as an untiring freedom-fighter, he's going to have to work to keep the fame machine at bay.<br><br>E:In this movie, even more than in the first, Aragorn represents the good in humans. He helps us separate right and wrong.<br><br>V:What I like about Tolkien is that it's not black and white. Evil does not have one place. Evil doesn't, as an idea, have a geographical location--it is wherever its victims are. And its victims are, at any given time, all of us, all the people in the story.<br><br>Whenever you are weak of will or you put yourself before the common good, when you are selfish, then you are opening the door. And the ring symbolizes that--that's all it does. It symbolizes being selfish.<br><br>Because Aragorn's human, we can see ourselves in him, and lots of people have extracted the themes of the story to our current world situation.<br><br>As far as it reflecting our times, an easy way out is to look at the so-called good guys in this story, who do have doubts sometimes about what they're doing and hesitate, which makes it interesting and reflects what Tolkien wrote. It's easy to look at them as the good guys and to want to be that and to see ourselves as that as Americans.<br><br><br>E:Is that wrong?<br><br>V:I think that it might be worth asking the thousands and thousands of people who have been killed in Afghanistan--innocent people--without us catching Osama bin Laden or anybody. And [we should] ask the people who have been killed and maimed and whose lives have been ruined, whose families have been destroyed [during] 11 years of continual bombing in Iraq because of a southern no-fly zone that nobody recognizes, really, except England and the United States. It's an illegal action.<br><br>[I wonder] if one shouldn't consider whether those civilians on the ground in those countries, do they look at us as good guys? Or do they look at us like Sauron, who wants to destroy their way of life and destroy their wills? I don't think it should be assumed that [Americans] are the good guys.<br><br>E:Based on what we know about your art and poetry, I'd say you're more of a lover than a fighter. So, where does Aragorn find his rage on the battlefield?<br><br>V:I don't think Aragorn is naturally prone to fighting in the same sense that maybe Boromir was in the first story or Éomer is in this. He isn't, by nature, warlike.<br><br>The Elvish name his mother gives him at birth is Estelle, which means hope. I think he basically has a sunny disposition, but it has been dampened over the years by what he has seen in the world. He is a skilled fighter who has taken on the fighting styles of the different places he has lived and fought in, but it's by virtue of necessity that he does it.<br><br>虽然好像Viggo Mortensen一开始不是LOTR迷，可他还是多多少少理解这作品的，我不想谈政治，只是觉得把这样一部书，这样一套有诚意的电影，狭隘地套到反恐上，对Tolkien，对PJ和参与者们，对Tolkien的书迷都太不尊重了。又想起以前看见过的人种问题、地域问题之类的话题，LOTR不是一部儿童读物，但也不是一部复杂的政治书，我想还是单纯一点，去欣赏一部梦境一样的书，去看一场再现梦境的电影，那真是很享受的事情啊。 算啦算啦，由人去联想好了<br><br>老托自己不是说过吗：”很多人把联想和隐喻混为一谈，但前者是读者与生俱来的自由，后者则是作者另有企图的操纵。“<br><br>只要那些评论什么不把反核反恐当成是小说或电影有意的影射就可以了，由大家施展自己的”自由“吧。大家看了电影都有一堆关于人生关于社会的联想嘛。喜欢把自己代入”正义“一方，顺便把敌人带入坏蛋一方也是读者观众的人之常情。只是有时联想得过于得意了，就自以为读懂了作者，变成了作者的知音呢。 引用rangueen:虽然好像Viggo Mortensen一开始不是LOTR迷，可他还是多多少少理解这作品的，我不想谈政治，只是觉得把这样一部书，这样一套有诚意的电影，狭隘地套到反恐上，对Tolkien，对PJ和参与者们，对Tolkien的书迷都太不尊重了。又想起以前看见过的人种问题、地域问题之类的话题，LOTR不是一部儿童读物，但也不是一部复杂的政治书，我想还是单纯一点，去欣赏一部梦境一样的书，去看一场再现梦境的电影，那真是很享受的事情啊。<br>______________________________________________<br>就是,就是, 什么都套上去干什么,目的性太明显就龌龊了.就象那个普鲁塔克,为了现实的想法,把希波战争都加工成了什么故事了.还有冷战时代好莱坞的一些所谓的历史题材的影片.<br><br>一部作品若不能引发读者的想象,不能引发所有不同层次,不同心态的人的共鸣,不能"一石激起千层浪",那它就没什么了不起了.Tolkien给了我们一个丰富多彩的世界,也给了我们丰富多彩的想象力,亮丽的,阴暗的,都是精彩的,至于作者本人的想法,那只有他自己才最清楚了,读者可以去感受,去猜测,去感叹,但不是武断地断言是如何如何,该如何如何......要是再功利地加上实用色彩,那"梦境一样的书，梦境的电影"( rangueen语)将打多少折扣.老托本来让人们共娱的作品,成了人们用来互相攻击的武器,那该是莫大的讽刺啊.真对不起老托和PJ. 呵呵，不管什么东西都往政治上套，偶还以为是中国的专利呢，没想到老外也学会这手了，真是有~够~无~聊~！<!--emo&:)--><img src='http://localhost/ipb/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->页:
[1]