村上春树《Always on the side of the egg(永远站在蛋的一边)》

永远站在蛋的一边

村上春树

翻译：王俊超

晚上好。今天我是以小说家的身份——也可以说以职业谎话编造者的身份来到耶路撒

冷。

当然，小说家并非唯一说谎的人。众所周知，政治家们也说谎。外交官和有时也说

他们那种谎话，二手汽车推销员、屠夫和建筑商都这样做。尽管如此，小说家的谎话与其他

人的不同之处在于，没有人批评小说家说谎是不道德的。事实上，谎话说的越多、越好，谎

话构思越巧妙，小说家可能越受到公众和批评家的赞扬。这是为什么呢？

我的答案会是：通过说巧妙的谎话——也就是构造看起来真实的小说——小说家能够把

真实带出来到另一个位置，并以新的光芒照亮它。在多数情况下，事实上不可能按其本来样

子把握真实并准确加以描述。这就是为什么我们试图通过把真实从其藏身之处出来，转

移到一个虚构的位置，用虚构的样子替换它，以把握其踪迹的原因。尽管如此，为了达到这

一目的，我们须首先阐明在我们心里真实存在于哪里。这是构造好的谎话的一个重要条件。

尽管如此，今天，我没有说谎的打算。我将尽量诚实。在今年有几天的时间我没有致力

于说谎，今天恰好是其中之一。

所以请让我告诉你们真相。许多许多的人建议我不要来这里接受耶路撒冷文学奖。有些

人甚至警告我，如果我来，他们将对我的书发起抵制。

当然，这都是因为加沙正白热化的激烈战争。联合国报告已有1000多人在被封锁的加沙

城中失去了生命，包括许多手无寸铁的平民——孩子和老人。

自收到这一奖项的通知后，我无数次问我自己，在这样的时刻是否该去以色列，接受这

一文学奖是否正确，是否会造成这样的的印象——我支持冲突中的某一方，或者，我公开赞

同某国选择发动压倒性军力的政策。当然，这是一个我不希望给出的印象。我不赞同任何战

争，我也不支持任何国家。当然，我更不希望看到我的书被抵制。

尽管如此，经过仔细考虑后，最终我决定来到这里。如此决定的一个原因是太多太多的

人建议我不要这样做。可能，像其他许多小说家一样，我倾向于去做与别人告诉我的恰好相

反的事。如果人们告诉我——尤其如果他们警告我——“不要去那里”，“不要做那些事”，

那么我往往想“去那里”和“去做那些事”。你们可能会说，这是我作为小说家的天性使然。

小说家是特殊的族群。他们发自内心地不信任他们没有亲眼见到过或没亲手接触过的事情。

这就是我为什么在这里的原因。我选择来到这里而不是避开。我选择亲眼目睹而不是无

视。我选择对你们讲话而不是保持沉默。

这并不是说我来这里是传达一个政治信号。当然，对是非作出判断是小说家最重要的责

任之一。

尽管如此，决定以什么样的形式把这样的判断传达给别人，取决于每一位作家自身。我

自己更喜欢把他们转换成故事——趋向于超现实的故事。这就是为什么今天我不打算站在你

们面前传达一个直接政治信号的原因。

尽管如此，请一定允许我传达一个非常私人的信号，是我写小说时一直紧记的。我从来

不会将其写在一张纸上贴在墙上，而是刻在我心灵的墙上，它是这样的：

“在一堵高而坚固的墙和一只撞它的蛋之间，我会一直站在蛋一边。”

是的，不管这堵墙可能是多么正确，这只蛋是多么错误，我将与蛋站在一起。别人会必

须决定什么正确什么错误；可能时间或历史会决定。如果有一位小说家，不管因为什么原因，

写的作品站在墙一边，那么这样的作品有什么样的价值？

这个隐喻是什么意思呢？在某些情况下，它是那么简单和清楚。炸弹、坦克、火箭和白

磷弹就是那堵高而坚固的墙。蛋就是被它们碾碎、焚烧和击毙的手无寸铁的平民。这就是这

条隐喻的含义之一。

然而，这并非全部。它有一层更深的含义。这样想。我们每一个人，或多或少，都是一

只蛋。我们每一个人都是一个独一无二的、无可替代的、带着一个脆弱外壳的灵魂。我是这

样，你们每个人也是这样。我们每一个人，在或多或少的程度上，面对着一堵高而坚固的墙。

这堵墙有个名字：就是“体制”。“体制”本来是保护我们的，但有的时侯它表现出自己的生

命，然后开始杀戮我们，使我们去杀别人——冷酷，高效，有系统地杀戮。

我写小说的原因只有一个，就是把个体灵魂的尊严拿到表面上并以光芒照亮它。故事的

目的是拉响警报，保持一束瞄准“体制”的光芒，来阻止它缠结我们的灵魂于它的网络和践

踏我们的灵魂。我充分相信通过写故事来尽力阐明每个个体灵魂的独一无二性是小说家的工

作——写生与死的故事，爱的故事，使人们带着恐惧哭泣和发抖的故事和使人们带着大笑打

颤的故事。这就是为什么我们不停地，日复一日带着绝对的严肃杜撰小说的原因。

我的父亲去年去世，享年90岁。他是一名退休教师和一名兼职佛教徒。他在研究生院读

书时被征召入军队，并被派到中国打仗。作为一个战后出生的孩子，我常常看到他每天早上

早饭前在我家佛坛前长时间非常虔诚地祈祷。有一次我问他为什么这样做，他告诉我他在为

战争中死去的人祈祷。

他说他为所有死去的人祈祷，同胞和敌人。当他跪在祭坛前时看着他的脊背，我好像感

到他周围盘旋着的死亡的阴影。

我的父亲去世了，带走了他的记忆，我永远不会知道的记忆。但潜藏在他身上的死亡的

影子却留在我的记忆中。这是我从他身上获得的东西之一，也是最重要的东西之一。

今天我只有一样我希望能传达给你们东西。我们都是人，是超越国籍、种族和地域的个

体，是面对坚固“体制”之墙的脆弱的蛋。众所周知，我们几乎没有赢的希望。这堵墙太高

太坚固——且太冷酷。假如我们有一点胜利希望的话，它必将来自我们对于自己和别人灵魂

的绝对独一无二性和无可替代性的信仰，来自我们从联合我们的灵魂中获取的温暖。

花一点时间来想想这些。我们每一个人拥有一个可触摸到的、活生生的灵魂。“体制”

没有这些。我们必须禁止“体制”攫取我们。我们必须禁止“体制”表现出它自己的生命。

“体制”没有制造我们：我们制造了“体制”。

这就是我必须要对你们说的。

我对于被授予耶路撒冷文学奖表示感激。我很感激我的书被世界许多地方的人们阅读。

我很高兴今天有这样的机会对你们讲这些。

谢谢。

Published 10:22 17.02.09 Latest update 22:56 17.02.09

Always on the side of the egg

By Haruki Murakami

From:/culture/arts-leisure/always-on-the-side-of-the-egg-1.270371

I have come to Jerusalem today as a novelist, which is to say as a professional spinner of lies.

Of cour, novelists are not the only ones who tell lies. Politicians do it, too, as we all know.

Diplomats and military men tell their own kinds of lies on occasion, as do ud car salesmen,

butchers and builders. The lies of novelists differ from others, however, in that no one criticizes

the novelist as immoral for telling them. Indeed, the bigger and better his lies and the more

ingeniously he creates them, the more he is likely to be praid by the public and the critics. Why

should that be?

My answer would be this: Namely, that by telling skillful lies - which is to say, by making up

fictions that appear to be true - the novelist can bring a truth out to a new location and shine a

new light on it. In most cas, it is virtually impossible to grasp a truth in its original form and

depict it accurately. This is why we try to grab its tail by luring the truth from its hiding place,

transferring it to a fictional location, and replacing it with a fictional form. In order to accomplish

this, however, we first have to clarify where the truth lies within us. This is an important

qualification for making up good lies.

Today, however, I have no intention of lying. I will try to be as honest as I can. There are a few

days in the year when I do not engage in telling lies, and today happens to be one of them.

So let me tell you the truth. A fair number of people advid me not to come here to accept the

Jerusalem Prize. Some even warned me they would instigate a boycott of my books if I came.

The reason for this, of cour, was the fierce battle that was raging in Gaza. The UN reported that

more than a thousand people had lost their lives in the blockaded Gaza City, many of them

unarmed citizens - children and old people.

Any number of times after receiving notice of the award, I asked mylf whether traveling to

Israel at a time like this and accepting a literary prize was the proper thing to do, whether this

would create the impression that I supported one side in the conflict, that I endord the policies

of a nation that cho to unleash its overwhelming military power. This is an impression, of

cour, that I would not wish to give. I do not approve of any war, and I do not support any nation.

Neither, of cour, do I wish to e my books subjected to a boycott.

Finally, however, after careful consideration, I made up my mind to come here. One reason for my

decision was that all too many people advid me not to do it. Perhaps, like many other novelists,

I tend to do the exact opposite of what I am told. If people are telling me - and especially if they

are warning me - "don't go there," "don't do that," I tend to want to "go there" and "do that." It's

in my nature, you might say, as a novelist. Novelists are a special breed. They cannot genuinely

trust anything they have not en with their own eyes or touched with their own hands.

And that is why I am here. I cho to come here rather than stay away. I cho to e for mylf

rather than not to e. I cho to speak to you rather than to say nothing.

This is not to say that I am here to deliver a political message. To make judgments about right and

wrong is one of the novelist's most important duties, of cour.

It is left to each writer, however, to decide upon the form in which he or she will convey tho

judgments to others. I mylf prefer to transform them into stories - stories that tend toward the

surreal. Which is why I do not intend to stand before you today delivering a direct political

message.

Plea do, however, allow me to deliver one very personal message. It is something that I always

keep in mind while I am writing fiction. I have never gone so far as to write it on a piece of paper

and paste it to the wall: Rather, it is carved into the wall of my mind, and it goes something like

this:

"Between a high, solid wall and an egg that breaks against it, I will always stand on the side of the

egg."

Yes, no matter how right the wall may be and how wrong the egg, I will stand with the egg.

Someone el will have to decide what is right and what is wrong; perhaps time or history will

decide. If there were a novelist who, for whatever reason, wrote works standing with the wall, of

what value would such works be?

What is the meaning of this metaphor? In some cas, it is all too simple and clear. Bombers and

tanks and rockets and white phosphorus shells are that high, solid wall. The eggs are the

unarmed civilians who are crushed and burned and shot by them. This is one meaning of the

metaphor.

This is not all, though. It carries a deeper meaning. Think of it this way. Each of us is, more or less,

an egg. Each of us is a unique, irreplaceable soul enclod in a fragile shell. This is true of me, and

it is true of each of you. And each of us, to a greater or lesr degree, is confronting a high, solid

wall. The wall has a name: It is The System. The System is suppod to protect us, but sometimes

it takes on a life of its own, and then it begins to kill us and cau us to kill others - coldly,

efficiently, systematically.

I have only one reason to write novels, and that is to bring the dignity of the individual soul to the

surface and shine a light upon it. The purpo of a story is to sound an alarm, to keep a light

trained on The System in order to prevent it from tangling our souls in its web and demeaning

them. I fully believe it is the novelist's job to keep trying to clarify the uniqueness of each

individual soul by writing stories - stories of life and death, stories of love, stories that make

people cry and quake with fear and shake with laughter. This is why we go on, day after day,

concocting fictions with utter riousness.

My father died last year at the age of 90. He was a retired teacher and a part-time Buddhist priest.

When he was in graduate school, he was drafted into the army and nt to fight in China. As a

child born after the war, I ud to e him every morning before breakfast offering up long,

deeply-felt prayers at the Buddhist altar in our hou. One time I asked him why he did this, and

he told me he was praying for the people who had died in the war.

He was praying for all the people who died, he said, both ally and enemy alike. Staring at his back

as he knelt at the altar, I emed to feel the shadow of death hovering around him.

My father died, and with him he took his memories, memories that I can never know. But the

prence of death that lurked about him remains in my own memory. It is one of the few things I

carry on from him, and one of the most important.

I have only one thing I hope to convey to you today. We are all human beings, individuals

transcending nationality and race and religion, fragile eggs faced with a solid wall called The

System. To all appearances, we have no hope of winning. The wall is too high, too strong - and

too cold. If we have any hope of victory at all, it will have to come from our believing in the utter

uniqueness and irreplaceability of our own and others' souls and from the warmth we gain by

joining souls together.

Take a moment to think about this. Each of us posss a tangible, living soul. The System has no

such thing. We must not allow The System to exploit us. We must not allow The System to take

on a life of its own. The System did not make us: We made The System.

That is all I have to say to you.

I am grateful to have been awarded the Jerusalem Prize. I am grateful that my books are being

read by people in many parts of the world. And I am glad to have had the opportunity to speak to

you here today.

新闻背景

图一 村上春树在以色列总统西蒙·佩雷斯的陪伴下出席2009年耶路撒冷文学奖颁奖典礼

图二 村上春树捧奖杯和$10000奖金

2月15日，日本作家村上春树赴以色列领取授予他的耶路撒冷文学奖。此前“巴勒斯坦

论坛”和“巴勒斯坦学术与文化抵制以色列运动”等组织公开呼吁，村上不应在此时前往以

色列。“巴勒斯坦论坛·日本”在一封致村上春树的公开信中写道：“我们请您慎重考虑，像

您这样一位世界知名作家出席该书展可能造成的社会和政治意义。该书展乃由以色列外交部

和耶路撒冷市政当局全力支持，并将从耶路撒冷市长手中领奖，而此时以色列刚刚在加沙夺

走了1300余人的宝贵生命，致伤5300余人，包括500名重伤者，摧毁了无数人的生活，因此

犯下了一系列的战争罪行。”信中称，耶路撒冷奖所宣扬的“社会中的个人自由”与以色列

的屠杀、集体惩罚、封锁政策、定居点建设，以及建造隔离墙等“有效摧毁巴勒斯坦人自由”

的行为完全矛盾。“如果您接受此奖，”该信写道，“将通过媒体的渲染和传播，传达一个错

误的信息，即以色列尊重‘社会中的人的自由’。”但村上执意前往。

获奖声明赞扬了村上的艺术成就和“对人民的爱”，并称：“他的人道主义清晰地呈现于

其作品中。”“村上容易阅读，但不易读懂。”声明说，“他的极简主义与明晰的文风结合，使

他成 为高度可读的作家，但其文学世界的复杂性，即便对初读者来说，亦十分显著。他小

说的主人公通常为反英雄，叙述在一个并行的疏离世界里其生活故事的荒谬，这 令村上入

列以同一精髓写作的作家群：从卡夫卡、加谬，到1971年的耶路撒冷奖得主博尔赫斯。”

耶路撒冷文学奖创办于1963年，每两年颁发一次，意在表彰其作品涉及人类自由、人与

社会和政治间关系的作家。往届得主包括阿瑟·米勒、苏珊·桑塔格、伯特兰·罗素、VS.

奈保尔、JM.库切、博尔赫斯、米兰·昆德拉、西蒙娜·波伏瓦、奥克塔维奥·帕斯和巴尔

加斯·略萨等人。

参考链接：

/book/txt/2009-02/20/content_

/art/2009-02/06/content_

/book/2009-02/05/content_