Very very sad, but Very very true.

《英語一生中》
「一個逃走、一個留守、一個壯志未酬」

《Sky News》日前關於BNO港人心聲的新聞故事，原來在視象版本中，還有另一名受訪者現身說法。大家不用興奮，那個不是我，是另一名沒打算離港的年輕人。（唔駛諗住有機會笑我！）既然，大家都看過帖文，那就讓我們賞析一下記者的報道和寫作手法，又可藉機學好英語。

報道以紀錄片手法拍攝，先由李小姐在街頭穿梭（點解唔舒舒服服係屋企做訪問？），交待出她的家庭背景和移民英國的決定。然後，就用以下文字入題：

This isn’t how Mrs. Lee imagine her middle age in HK. Anonymous interview, using a pseudonym, her voice altered, all for safety as she prepares to leave her home. Beijing imposed a tough new National Security Law. Britain offered the way out. Still it is not an easy choice for an unlikely refugee.

這並不是李太想像中，在香港中年的場景。因為安全理由，要以匿名訪問、冠以假名、聲音處理，全因她正準備離開家園。北京實施強硬的國安法，英國提供了出路。然而，對於一個「非一般的難民」來說，這絕非容易的決定。（因為諗住走，做個訪問都要咁。）

首個訪問完結，接著解釋政策，由明年一月起，容許BNO人士入境定居，居留後可以入籍成為公民。（全港人都知，唔譯喇！仲有記者講咗7年入籍，應該係5+1）

雖然逃生門打開，但又不是人人想法一致：

But not everyone wants to take up that offer. Pong is a filmmaker who documented last year’s protest. His BNO passport expired more than a decade ago and he doesn’t plan on getting another one.

不過，並非人人都會接受英國提供的幫忙。邦是一個電影製作人，紀錄了去年的社會運動。他的BNO過期逾10年，而他無意續領。

再由邦講出會留守的心情，和可能待致言論自由收窄到創作受影響時，或考慮會走，但又會不會太遲？之後，再帶入第三名受訪者：

The mood in HK is different now. Exuberance and violence of last year’s protest replaced by anxiety and resignation. Arnold, another pseudonym, protested the last long year.

香港的氣氛已經出現變化。去年運動期間的熱情和暴力不再，換來的是憂慮和無奈接受。另一個假名受訪的阿樂，在漫長的去年中抗爭。

阿樂的心聲⋯⋯（無語😓）

Arnold’s never imagined leaving HK. Now he said his home has become unfamiliar to him. It is only the name that remains.

阿樂從未想像過要離開過香港，但認為香港已經面目全非，留下的只有一個名號。

佳句摘錄與賞析：

三個個案無論走與不走，都充滿無奈。大家看到中年入晚的，會義無反顧的帶著子女離開，但作為「非一般難民」也不是個容易的決定。港人的身份（身世）複雜，此刻是難民？移民？英國海外國民？還是殖民地遺民？以「Unlikely refugee」來表達，就完全交待了這種身份角色上的矛盾和衝突。

雖然，大家看到較年輕的會選擇留守，但也滲出淡淡的無力感。去年運動期間的熱情和暴力不再，換來的是憂慮和無奈接受。 （ Exuberance and violence of last year’s protest replaced by anxiety and resignation.) 這句詩化的文字，道出香港過去一年的變化。由激情陷入無力；由動態走入靜止；再由有聲進入無聲。情景交融下，再畫龍點睛地形容阿樂抗爭了漫長的一年（last long year) 。說一年、太漫長。觀眾亦無不唏噓嘆息。

最後結語則簡潔而有力，「（香港）留下的只有一個名號。」(It is only the name that remains.) 再一次把觀眾由歎息，帶入無語狀態，再一次有聲入無聲⋯⋯

影片傳送門： https://youtu.be/eNIA8zSPyHQ

文字版重溫： https://news.sky.com/…/this-is-for-my-children-hong-kongers…

#英語一生中
#中文都要學
#琵琶行
#別有幽愁暗恨生
#此時無聲勝有聲

圖片來源：Sky News

<<冒用亞裔姓名而獲詩作入選所引發的軒然大波
A White Poet Borrows a Chinese Name and Sets Off Fireworks>>

New York Times, Sept. 8th (by Jeniifer Schuessler) -- This year’s edition of the anthology “Best American Poetry” has come under criticism for including a poem by a white poet writing under a Chinese pseudonym, touching off intense online debate about diversity, inclusion and racial entitlement in the poetry world.
在收錄了一名用中文筆名寫作的白人詩人的作品後，今年的《美國最佳詩作》選集受到不少責難。此事在網路上引發了詩壇中關於多樣性、包容性和種族特權的熱烈討論。

“The Bees, the Flowers, Jesus, Ancient Tigers, Poseidon, Adam and Eve” was submitted to the anthology, published on Tuesday by Scribner, by a little-known poet named Michael Derrick Hudson, under the pseudonym Yi-Fen Chou. After the poem’s selection, Mr. Hudson revealed his identity to the volume’s editor, Sherman Alexie, who decided to include it anyway, along with a note explaining the use of the pseudonym.
默默無聞的詩人Michael Derrick Hudson用周一峰(Yi-Fen Chou)作為筆名，向《美國最佳詩作》投稿了自己的作品《蜜蜂、鮮花、耶穌、古代的老虎、波塞頓、亞當和夏娃》。詩選由出版社Scribner於週二刊出。作品入選後，Hudson對《美國最佳詩作》主編Sherman Alexie表明了自己的真實身份，並附上對使用這一筆名的相關解釋。結果Alexie依然決定收錄這首詩。

In an essay on the Best American Anthology blog on Monday, Mr. Alexie, a Native American, defended his decision, saying he had paid closer attention to the poem because of the author’s name — a kind of “racial nepotism,” he said — but ultimately chose it because he liked it.
週一，身為土生土長美洲人的Alexie在《美國最佳詩作》部落格上發文為自己的決定辯護，他聲稱因為作者的名字，他給與了這首詩更多關注─他表示，這是一種「種族裙帶行為」─但選擇那首詩的最終原因是自己喜歡。

When Mr. Hudson revealed his use of a pseudonym, Mr. Alexie wrote, he debated how to deal with this instance of “colonial theft,” but decided that dropping the poem “would have cast doubt on every poem I have chosen” and “implied that I chose poems based only on identity.”
Alexie寫道，當Hudson表明自己用的是筆名時，他考慮過該如何處理這起「殖民盜用」事件，但後來下定決心，認為放棄這首詩「會讓我對選出來的每首詩產生懷疑」，並「意味著我只是根據作者的身份來選詩。」

“I hadn’t been fooled by its ‘Chinese-ness’ because it contained nothing that I recognized as being inherently Chinese or Asian,” Mr. Alexie wrote.
「我並沒有被它的『華人元素』給欺騙，因為它並沒有包含在我看來是華人或亞裔固有特色的成分，」 Alexie如此表示。

Mr. Hudson, who works as an indexer at the Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne, Ind., did not answer messages requesting comment. But in the biographical note in “Best American Poetry,” he explained that he often sent poems out under the name Yi-Fen Chou.
Hudson在印第安那州韋恩堡的艾倫縣公共圖書館當索引編輯員，而他並沒有對於被提出的要求做任何回覆及評論。但在《美國最佳詩作》的簡介中，他解釋自己經常用周一峰的筆名投稿其詩歌創作。

“As a strategy for ‘placing’ poems this has been quite successful for me,” he said, noting that “The Bees” had been rejected 40 times under his own name but only nine times under the pseudonym before it was printed by the journal Prairie Schooner.
他認為「作為一種讓詩作『入眼』的策略，這個辦法對我來說相當成功，」，並指出自己用真實姓名寄出《蜜蜂》後被拒絕了40次，用筆名只被拒絕了九次，然後就在期刊《草原篷車》上被刊登了。

“If indeed this is one of the best American poems of 2015, it took quite a bit of effort to get it into print,” Mr. Hudson wrote. (Poems under his own name have appeared in numerous journals, including Poetry, this year.)
Hudson還這麼寫著「如果說這真的是美國2015年最好的詩作之一，那為了要刊登它還真是費了些功夫，」。（今年，以他真名署名的詩作出現在了包括《詩歌》[Poetry]在內的眾多期刊上。）

Mr. Hudson’s blunt explanation drew outrage and ridicule online. “Never thought I’d see poets using yellowface to get published in 2015 but here we are,” Saeed Jones, a poet and the literary editor of Buzzfeed, said on Twitter. Jezebel ran a post under the headline “If You’re a White Man Who Can’t Get Published Under Your Own Name, Take the Hint.”
Hudson這般露骨的解釋在網路上引發了憤怒和嘲諷兼有的一陣論戰。「從來沒想過，到了2015年居然會看到詩人為了能發表作品而假裝自己是黃種人，但現在還真就看到了，」本身也是詩人的Buzzfeed文學主編Saeed Jones在Twitter上如此表示。Twitter上的另一個帳號Jezebel也發表了一篇文章，標題是《如果你是用真名發表不了作品的白人，看這裡》。

Ken Chen, a poet and executive director of the Asian American Writers Workshop, said Mr. Hudson was guilty of “cynical mischief” in the service of a “reactionary fantasy.”
同樣身為詩人的亞裔美國作家工作坊行政總監陳聖為(Ken Chen)表示，Hudson利用「反動幻想」的做法是犯了「虛偽惡作劇」的錯誤。

“He believes that he’s being cheated, and things will only improve if writers of color are virtualized away,” Mr. Chen said in an interview. “If only they didn’t really exist, and were just white guys with pseudonyms.”
「他以為別人在作弊，只有當有色人種作家被虛化掉，情況才會有所改善，」陳聖為在接受採訪時說。「他們其實並不存在，都是用了筆名的白人就好了。」

Rigoberto González, a poet who teaches at Rutgers University, Newark, said that Mr. Hudson had inadvertently “given a language to the anxiety that’s out there” among nonwhite writers: that they are included as tokens.
在紐華克羅格斯大學任教的詩人Rigoberto González認為，Hudson無意之間讓非白人作家「本已存在的焦慮具現化了」：他們是作為一種象徵被接納的。

“He’s buying into this notion of ‘I’ll be noticed because I have this ethnic name,’ ” Mr. González said. “But that’s what many writers of color are trying to avoid. We just happen to have ethnic names. But we are getting published because we are also good poets.”
「他相信『我會因為用了這個有種族特色的名字而被注意到』的觀念，」岡薩雷斯說。「但這正是很多有色人種作家在努力避免的。我們只是碰巧擁有了有種族特色的名字。我們的作品能發表是因為我們也是優秀的詩人。」

On Twitter on Monday, Mr. Alexie found a silver lining, writing, “I’m exhausted by the Best American Poetry mess, but wow, how cool that so many people are crazy-passionate about poems.”
週一的時候，Alexie還從這件事上發現了亮點。他在Twitter上寫道，「被《美國最佳詩作》的爛攤子搞得精疲力盡，不過話說回來，哇，有這麼多人對詩歌有著瘋狂的熱情真是太酷了。」

Mr. González, however, said that including Mr. Hudson had distracted from the anthology.
然而，González表示，收錄Hudson作品這件事轉移了人們對《美國最佳詩作》本身的注意力。

“There are good poems and other new names in the anthology, but all we’ve been hearing about is this guy,” Mr. González said. “It’s really a shame.”
González說「選集中有不少優秀的詩歌和其他一些新秀，但我們聽到的所有討論都是關於這一個人的，」他認為這樣「真的很遺憾。」

#高雄人 #學習英文 請找 多益達人 林立英文