|
I beg leave to thank you for the extremely kind and appreciative manner in which you have received the toast of Science. It is the more gratefu1 to me to hear that toast proposed in an assembly of this kind, because I have noticed of late pears a great and growing tendency among those who were once jestingly said to have bee11 born in a pre-scientific age to look upon science as an invading and aggressive force, which if it had its own way would oust from the universe all other pursuit. I think there are many persons who look upon this new birth of our times as a sort of monster rising out of the sea of modern thought with the purpose of devouring the Andromeda of art. And now and then a Perseus, equipped with the shoes of swiftness of the ready writer, with the cap of invisibility of the editorial article, and it may be with the Medusahead of vituperation, shows himself ready to try conclusions with the scientific dragon. Sir, I hope that Perseus will think better of it; first, for his own sake, because the creature is hard of head, strong of jaw, and for some time past has shown a great capacity for going over and through whatever comes in his way: and secondly, for the sake of justice, for I assure you, of my own personal knowledge that if left alone, the creature is a very debonair and gentle monster. As for the Andromeda of art, he has the tenderest respect for that lady, and desires nothing more than to see her happily settled and annually producing a flock of such charming children as those we see about us.
But putting parab1es aside, I am unable to understand how any one with a knowledge of mankind can imagine that the growth of science can threaten the development of art in any of its forms. If I understand the matter at all, science and art are the obverse and reverse of Nature's medal; the one expressing the eternal order of things, in terms of feeling, the other in terms of thought. When men no longer love nor hate; when suffering causes no pity, and the tale of great deeds ceases to thrill, when the lily of the field shall seem no longer more beautifully arrayed than Solomon in all his glory, and the awe has vanished from the snow-capped peak and deep ravine, then indeed science may have the world to itself, but it will not be because the monster has devoured art, but because one side of human nature is dead, and because men have lost the half of their ancient and present attributes. |
|
请允许我感谢诸位极其友好、极有眼光地听取了为科学而作的祝酒辞。在今天这样的会上听到这个祝酒辞，更使我感激不已。因为近年来我注意到，在那些被戏称为生于前科学时代的人当中，出现了一种日益强大的、把科学视为一股侵略势力的倾向。他们以为，如果科学要想随心所欲的话，就会把其他行业逐出宇宙。我想，现在有许多人都认为当代的这个新生事物是一头从现代思潮的海洋中冒出来的怪兽，它想要吞噬艺术的安德洛墨达。于是，一位帕修斯就会不时出现。他脚登写作快手的“追风靴”，头戴重要评论的“隐形盔”，也许还长着装满谩骂之词的“美杜萨脑袋”，摆出了欲与科学之龙决胜负的架势。诸位，我希望这位帕修斯三思。首先要为自己着想。因为怪兽的头很坚硬，颚也很强壮，而且一段时间以来，它在冲破任何羁绊方面已大显身手。其次要为公正着想。因为我向诸位担保，依本人之愚见，这头怪兽如果不去惹它的话，本来是非常温文尔雅的。至于艺术的安德洛墨达，它对那位女士非常敬慕，而且别无他求，只盼她幸福地安家落户，年年生育一大群招人喜爱的儿女，就像我们在自己周围所看到的孩子们那样。
但是，撇开上述比喻不谈，我实在弄不懂，一个具有人类知识的人，怎么能以为科学的进步竟会威胁到任何艺术形式的发展。如果我对此还不是门外汉的话，我以为，科学和艺术乃是自然这枚圣牌的正反面。一个是用感情来表达事物的永恒秩序，另一个则是用思想。当人们不再有爱恨之心；当苦难不再引起同情，伟大的英雄业绩的故事不再动人地传唱；当田野里的百合花不能再与身披盛装荣耀已极的所罗门媲美，雪峰和深渊不再使人惊叹，到那时，科学确实有可能占据世界，但这不是因为怪物吞噬了艺术，而是因为人类天性的一个方面已经死亡，因为人类丢掉了古往今来所拥有的那一半天性。
（秦文勇 译) |
