💕「愛台灣，我的選擇」系列第16發：熱愛台灣詩的美國學者白瑞梅(Amie Parry)

「我在加州內陸地區一個叫做聖伯納迪諾的小城市長大，隨後在聖地牙哥念大學和研究所，並獲得文學博士學位。求學期間我們必須至少選修一門外語，所以我就選了中文。1987年我大學畢業之後，跟朋友來了台灣一趟，在台灣教英文和學中文六個月，接著就自己一個人當起背包客在亞洲四處旅遊。

我本來想要研究中國古典詩詞，後來因為獲得傅爾布萊特獎學金，便又再度回到台灣。當時我在討論詩詞的聚會上認識了幾位現代派詩人，所以我就將研究主題轉而聚焦在台灣60、70和80年代的現代詩。我的博士論文探討的就是，以現代主義來理解現有政治語言中難以理解的現代性。我認為歷史形塑而來的經驗，往往比語言本身還要複雜。

我研究的那些詩作沒有明確的政治性，反而是有很強的實驗性質，並帶著詭譎的神秘感。當時我認識的現代派詩人大多是跟著國民黨飄洋過海來台的外省人，他們經歷過戰爭和顛沛流離，也經歷過劇烈且痛苦的歷史創傷。每個人的經驗都不同，在那個年代，也很難說出口。後來，我寫了一本關於詩的書，並聚焦在一兩位我覺得特別有趣的詩人。我在書中問了一些類似的問題：這些詩作如何幫你思考艱難的議題？

當時的現代詩已經頗有制度，許多詩人都有投稿《現代詩》這份重要的詩刊，有些詩人則是將詩作與戲劇結合。整體而言，台灣的現代詩、表演藝術和文學都發展地如火如荼，也深深吸引了我，但我還未全盤了解。當我完成博士論文時，我便獲得交通大學的教職，讓我對台灣的學術圈感到非常驚艷。而當我出版第一本著作時，我也很訝異能在美國獲獎；我根本不知道自己獲得提名，當時我問授獎單位：「為什麼選擇我的書？」他們表示：「因為書中其中一個章節是以跨國的架構來進行整體論述，妳不是單用西方的理論和東方的詩詞，而是從東西方共同錘煉出嶄新的知識。」

我目前任教於中央大學英美語文學系，除了擔任系主任之外，我也有教授寫作課、文學課和文學文化理論課程。從我1987年第一次來台灣到現在，我覺得台灣人愈來愈能自在地與來自不同地方的人交談，就個人經驗來說，我認為台灣社會愈來愈開放。我第一次來台灣時，經歷了許多台灣社會有趣的發展，也結交了許多朋友，並認識了許多學術圈的同好。我想，這些珍貴的回憶就是呼喚我再度回台的動力；就像是，如果你覺得這個社會充滿生氣和活力，而你也能夠參與其中、做出貢獻，我想這就是像家一樣的感覺吧！」

✨白瑞梅 Amie Parry 現為中央大學英美語文學系 專任教授

💕Why I chose Taiwan #16 – Amie Parry

“I grew up in a small city in inland California called San Bernardino. I went to college and graduate school in San Diego. I got my PhD in literature. We were all expected to learn at least one language, so I did Chinese. I traveled to Taiwan with a friend right after I graduated from college in 1987. We came here to teach English and study Chinese for six months, then I traveled around Asia by myself with a backpack.

I originally wanted to study classical Chinese poetry. I got a Fulbright grant and I came back here. I started going to the poetry nights that were happening at that time. I met some of the modernist poets, and I switched my focus to the modernist poetry of the 60s, 70s, and 80s in Taiwan. I wrote my dissertation on modernism as a way of understanding the parts of modernity that are hard to know in the existing political language that we inherit. I think that experience in historical formation is always more complicated than the language.

These poems are not explicitly political; they're very experimental and strange. At the time, the modernist poets I met were mostly 外省, men who had been drafted and come over with the KMT, so they had experienced war and displacement, and a very intense and traumatic historical moment. People experienced it differently, and at that time, it was a hard thing to talk about. Later, I wrote a book about poetry, but I just focused on one or two poets I find really, really fascinating. And I was asking some of the same kinds of questions: how can these poems help you think about certain topics that are hard to think about?

At that time, Modernist poetry was a kind of an institution already. There was a journal called 現代詩, “Modern Poetry,” a really important journal that most of these poets were published in. Some of them combined poetry and theater. There's just so much going on in Taiwan in terms of poetry and performance and literature. It's just amazing. And I'm very interested in it at all, but I haven't kept up. After I finished my dissertation, I got a job offer at 交大. I thought, wow, there's something really amazing happening intellectually here. When my first book came out, it actually got an award in the U.S., and I was so surprised. I didn't even know it had been nominated. I asked them, ‘Why did you choose my book?’ And they said, because one of the chapters has a transnational of framework for the whole argument, so it wasn't like you used Western theories and Eastern texts, it's like the whole knowledge part is coming out of both places.

I currently teach in the English department at National Central University. I'm the chair and I teach writing classes, literature classes, and literary and cultural theory classes. Since my first visit to Taiwan in 1987, I think people are a little more comfortable talking to people from different places. In my personal interactions, I feel a difference, like a greater openness. Back then, there were so many interesting things happening here, all at one time, and that's the time that I happened to be here. And I made good friends in my personal life and in my intellectual life. And I think those are the things that made me come back: like if you feel that there's something interesting happening and there's some way that you can support it. I guess that's a way of feeling at home.” — Amie Parry

✨Amie Parry is professor of the Department of English at the National Central University

《家長/照顧者協助家庭因應新冠病毒/武漢肺炎疫情（COVID-19)指南》

由美國國家兒童創傷壓力網（NCTSN; National Child Traumatic Stress Network, USA）的領導者與成員共同編製：Drs. M. Brymer, R. Pynoos, 及A. Steinberg

中文版由台大心理系陳淑惠教授翻譯。

文章裡有按照孩童年齡區分出各種我們可以協助孩子的調適方式。

出處：https://www.nctsn.org/resources/parent-caregiver-guide-to-helping-families-cope-with-the-coronavirus-disease-2019-ch?fbclid=IwAR2jWYo05dD3zLPIoQtAmJDVN89IRoHmsqfYckLagAXUL6Hjz6lSbV9YwOk

醫者有社會責任去保障公眾健康，我們認為梁卓偉教授和陳家亮教授作為香港兩所醫學院院長責無旁貸。因此，我們呼籲所有醫護人員參與連署，懇請兩位院長履行社會使命發表聲明保障社會大眾的健康和人身安全。

連署連結: https://forms.gle/teMGNCiZPMYatVbh8
———————————————————————-
《致香港大學李嘉誠醫學院院長、中文大學醫學院院長的公開信》

梁教授、陳教授道鑒：

　　有鑑於在六月十二日、七月二日及二十一日，香港警察濫用武力以控制群眾。如此行徑實對公眾健康遺害無窮，我們一眾醫療人員對此極為關切。作為香港大學李嘉誠醫學院院長、中文大學醫學院院長，吾等懇請兩位院長細察香港警察控制群眾之手段，以保障公眾健康。

　　據多家本地及國際媒體報導，香港警察於六月十二日，發射多輪催淚彈、橡膠子彈及布袋彈，以驅散聚集在金鐘的示威者。報導提及，警方向示威者發射至少一百五十枚催淚彈，二十輪布袋彈以及數枚橡膠子彈，造成至少七十二人受傷。從多家媒體直播可見，橡膠子彈更直射一名教師眼球，創傷嚴重，對其視力之損害非同等閒。另外，警方亦曾以數枚催淚彈包抄示威者，堵塞其退路；而當示威者被逼退守至中信大廈，警方竟朝人群中央投以催淚彈，造成數以百計的市民受傷及呼吸困難，生死攸關，不容小覷。此外，警方向一名手無寸鐵的市民，近距離發射橡膠子彈，以致其下腹嚴重受傷，情況慘不忍睹。

　　據多份醫學期刊綜述──如《刺針》（Lancet）[1] 及英國醫學期刊（BMJ (Open)）[2]，橡膠子彈乃可致命武器。同時，橡膠子彈不易操控，準確性低，有引致重傷，乃至死亡之風險。多份期刊不約而同指出，橡膠子彈不適宜用於密集人群之管制。

　　然而，香港警察漠視上述已知風險，仍於七月二日及七月二十一日繼續使用此類武器。在七月二十一日，警察更於鄰近民居之地，向群眾發射多輪催淚彈及橡膠子彈，當中更殃及記者。此等武器之禍害影響深重，不單有損呼吸系統，更會導致燒傷、嚴重鈍物創傷及爆炸性創傷。據媒體報導，武器造成至少十四人受傷；更有市民懼於警方之搜捕行動，而未敢求醫，致使受傷數字難以估算。

　　人權醫療組織（Physicians for Human Rights）醫生哈爾（Dr Rohini Haar）在接受紐約時報訪問時指出，警方對市民使用不成比例的武力，實有濫用武力之嫌。早在二零一四年，潘冬平教授[3]亦對香港警察使用催淚氣體情況深表關注，擔心催淚氣體損害市民呼吸系統。可見，催淚彈、橡膠子彈及豆袋彈等武器危害不輕，對香港市民公眾健康的損害不容置疑。

　　兩大醫學學院一直致力培育杏林菁英，不遺餘力。一眾醫療人員亦謹承《希波克拉底誓詞》之教誨，不論病患身份職要，一直為全人類之福祉著想，嚴守不懈。學院循循善誘，吾等縷心刻骨。誓詞薪火相傳，代代不息；缺少對生命健康之尊重，醫療人員何以自立？故此，我們一眾醫療人員懇請院長，發表聲明，呼籲香港警察：

一、避免濫用催淚彈及任何類型子彈，以免導致人命傷亡及其他不可見之損傷。
二、在使用武力時，必須顧及市民安全，並保持專業克制。

　　醫療人員一直存仁心，行仁術；保護市民之健康，乃至生命，吾等責無旁貸。院長為學為醫，高風峻節，茍以吾等同心同德，捍衛市民之生命健康，必見杏林春暖。

　　謹祝
道安

一眾醫療人員謹上
———————————————————————


Dear Professor Leung and Professor Chan,

We are a group of healthcare professionals, some of us being also graduates from the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong. We are writing to express our gravest concerns over the persistent and serious threats to the health of members of the public posed by weapons deployed in crowd control by the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) on 12 June, 2 July and 21 July. We hereby urge the Deans of the sole Faculties of Medicine in Hong Kong to take actions in censuring the HKPF and the Hong Kong Government against the serious health risks in their crowd-control tactics.

On 12 June, as reported by multiple local and international news agencies, the HKPF fired multiple rounds of tear gas, rubber bullets and bean-bag rounds to disperse protesters in Admiralty. Over 150 canisters of tear gas, 20 bean-bag rounds and several rubber bullets have admittedly been directed at protestors which resulted in at least 72 injuries. As evident in the live reports from various media sources, a teacher suffered traumatic ocular injury causing significant vision loss when his eye was hit by a rubber bullet; hundreds of citizens suffered various degrees of injuries and respiratory distress consequential upon the numerous tear gas canisters shot at Citic Tower in Admiralty where protesters were trapped in a life-threatening space filled with tear gas; an unarmed man sustained injury in his lower abdomen when a rubber bullet was directed at him in a short distance.

According to multiple studies and reviews from high impact factor medical journals, in particular the Lancet[1] and BMJ (Open)[2], rubber bullets can be lethal. Their notorious inaccuracy and risk of severe injury and death render them inappropriate and unsafe means of force in crowd control.

However, despite the known risks of these weapons, the HKPF tenaciously deployed them on citizens on 2 July and 21 July. On 21 July, 55 canisters of tear gas, 5 rubber bullet rounds and 24 sponge bullets were admittedly shot, some without immediate warning, at protestors and even at journalists notwithstanding the numerous residential buildings and citizens in the vicinity. The use of these weapons has left members of the public with at the very least, various types of injuries and further, burns, blunt force trauma and explosive injuries. 14 injuries have by far been reported where others did not present themselves to the hospital in fear of the risk of prosecution.

Dr Rohini Haar of Physicians for Human Rights had in a recent interview told the New York Times that the force used by the HKPF was disproportionate and excessive. In Hong Kong, Professor Ronnie Poon had as early as in 2014 expressed openly his earnest concern over both the short term and long term health risks in the use of tear gas in particular to one’s respiratory system when the HKPF first fired tear gas at Hong Kong citizens [3]. It is indisputable that these named weapons put the health of Hong Kong citizens at serious risks.

Doctors have striven to stand by the Hippocratic oath that they remain members of society, the identity of which comes before their profession, with special obligations to all fellow human beings. The two medical schools in Hong Kong have been established accordingly for the nurture of healthcare professionals to serve the public with benevolent hearts and minds. This is the time to honour our oath that human life should deserve the utmost respect and to maintain by all means such noble traditions of the medical profession.

We, as healthcare professionals, therefore implore the Deans of the only Faculties of Medicine in Hong Kong, in the service of humanity with conscience and dignity, to take the lead in safeguarding the public’s health and to issue a statement to urge the Hong Kong Police Force to:

(1) refrain from using tear gas and bullets in any form on protestors to prevent further bloodshed and severe non-reversible injuries; and

(2) exercise due restraint over the use of force when handling protests and at all times, put the safety of Hong Kong citizens at the highest priority.

Regards,
A group of healthcare professionals
———————————————————
Healthcare professionals have a social responsibility to safeguard the health of members of the public. We believe that, as Deans of the faculties of medicine in Hong Kong, Professor Leung and Professor Chan bear a paramount obligation in this regard. We appeal to all healthcare professionals to join us in this petition to urge the deans to issue a statement to honour their obligation to defend the public from health risks.
—————————————————————
Petition Link: https://forms.gle/teMGNCiZPMYatVbh8
——————————
參考資料/References
[1] Mahajna, A., Aboud, N., Harbaji, I., Agbaria, A., Lankovsky, Z., Michaelson, M., . . . Krausz, M. M. (2002). Blunt and penetrating injuries caused by rubber bullets during the Israeli-Arab conflict in October, 2000: A retrospective study. The Lancet, 359(9320), 1795-1800. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08708-1

[2] Haar, R. J., Iacopino, V., Ranadive, N., Dandu, M., & Weiser, S. D. (2017, December 01). Death, injury and disability from kinetic impact projectiles in crowd-control settings: A systematic review

[3] Professor Ronnie Poon Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/138599119760/posts/10152753050039761?s=1014598371&sfns=mo

—————————————————————