熊培云："杨帆门"是道什么门？
2008-01-16 08:47:20 来源: 东方早报(上海)
作者：熊培云 资深时事评论员，《南风窗》主笔
有个笑话，讲的是一个人去看电影，由于迟到了几分钟，电影院的门已锁上。于是，他央求看门人："只要给我开点空隙，我悄悄溜进去，不会影响别人的。"然而，看门人还是拒绝了他："我不能这样做，因为我只要一开门，里面的观众就会全部跑光的。"
如你所知，这只是一个笑话。然而，你也得承认，当笑话以一种诙谐的形式进入我们的生活时，它们又是真实的。只要你细心，就不难发现，这种"电影院故事"在日常生活中随处可见。比如，最近发生在中国政法大学的"杨帆门"。
1月4日晚，中国政法大学教授杨帆在上"生态经济与中国人口环境"选修课的最后一节课时，由于逃课学生太多而关起教室门辱骂学生，进而与一名进该教室取书包出门的非选修课女学生发生肢体冲突。
关于"杨帆门"，网上有两种截然不同的观点：
一方认为杨帆教授是捍卫"师道尊严"；另一方则以政法大学青年教师萧瀚为代表，认为"逃课是自由的象征"，真正该道歉的不是学生而是杨帆。支持者亦认为，学生逃课首先要检讨的是杨帆的讲课水平。不过，事情最后的发展的确出人意料。因为这件事，支持学生有"用脚投票"权利的萧瀚，日前"用脚投票"辞去了政法大学的教职。
"杨帆门"的发生不得不说令人遗憾。不过，这件事学生虽有责任，但最该反思的是教师治学与育人的态度。
在我看来，教书育人者应该将课堂当作一个与学生相遇的场所，一个在互动中倾听意见、共同成长的场所，而不是发布真理、摆弄权威的场所。一个教师，不能向学生传授有用的知识和不能从学生身上学到有益于自己创造的东西，都是十分失败的。
师道不是霸道。尽管我认同大学应该有自己的管理，但在大学精神上却更能理解萧瀚所说的"上课点名只是为了认识学生"，而不是一种潜在的强制，其背后是"一日三省吾身"的责任心。一个教师课讲得不好又要强迫学生来听自己的课，对学生显然是不公平的。一方面，学生在这个学校浪费了钱，另一方面又因为必须应付对他没有意义的课而浪费时间。所以，有责任心的老师在看到学生大面积逃课时，首先会觉得难为情，并且会想方设法提高自己课堂上的含金量，而不是辱骂甚至将学生"关禁闭"。
其实，读过大学的人或多或少都有逃课的经历。厌学只是一种，还有一种逃课是对自己的人生负责。比如说我当年上大学时也经常逃课，这包括经验告诉我不会有收获的课。这样的时候，我可能会选择去某位教授家里聊天，或泡一天图书馆。这种逃课并不丢人，更谈不上对师长与知识有什么不敬不畏。大学是一个学生开始自主生活的起点，如果对自己的人生负责，又有勇气不在某些死气沉沉的课堂里浪费自己的时间，逃课不过是一种日常自救。既救自己，也救教育。
"杨帆门"的发展，同样搀杂了一些荒诞的因素。
其一，在接受采访时杨帆承认自己在课堂上卖书和光碟："我这样做的目的有两个，一是选我课的人太多了，这样可以拦住一批人，让真正喜欢我的人来上课。"另外，事实上有少数人会中途违反承诺，不来上课，这样做实际上起到一个让他们造成损失，受到"惩罚"的效果。另外他特意强调"贫困生只要有院里的证明可以不买"。
相信很多人都是第一次听到教授强卖自己的图书是为了过滤学生听课。更有意思的是这番辩解背后的内涵，即杨帆自己也认为卖给学生的书与碟不值那价，否则怎么会给逃课学生"造成损失"与"惩罚"呢？就这样转眼之间，那些书与碟便由挡截学生的护城河变成惩罚学生的刑具了？
其二，杨帆声称"这个事件现在已经很混乱了，而且已经上升到学校声誉，甚至是国家安全的地步"。"学校的声誉"或许勉强能凑上，只是不知道"国家安全"从何谈起？
透过这起冲突，如果真有"不安全"因素，恐怕也是教师剥夺学生"用脚投票"的权利，通过锁门进行绑架式教育，不知道尊重并宽容学生们内心的感受与抉择。
自"水门事件"以来，丑闻多以"门"命名，但它们通常都与门没有多大关系。然而，"杨帆门"事件却真真切切与门有关。通过开篇那个电影院笑话，或许你已知道"杨帆门"是道什么门了吧。
(本文来源： 东方早报 作者：熊培云)
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
【何兵】我们的好教员为什么被谩骂?
政法大学教授何兵：我们的好教员为什么被谩骂?
文／何 兵（中国政法大学法学院副院长，教授 ）
本校杨帆教授在课堂上与学生冲突一事，近来广为媒体渲染。我的意见是，教授和学生都有错，社会可以就此议论，但教授、学生、社会都不应夸大事实以图轰动效应。人民内部矛盾应当和平解决。激化社会纷争，于国于已无益——台湾就是先例。因为与杨帆教授专业有别，素无交往，对其不予评论，评论仅及本院萧潮副教授，敬请读者谅解。
冲突发生以后，萧瀚就此事发表评论，陈述与杨帆教授不同的教育理念。他主张学生可以逃课，课堂上可以进出；上课可以吃东西，但不能破坏环境；可以睡觉，但不能影响别人……此言一出，一些人以为这是一个极不负责的教授，以为中国政法大学的教学秩序荡然无存，更有甚者以为萧瀚是一个败类，应当从中国政法大学清理出去。作为萧瀚的同事和法学院领导之一，我有义务向社会澄清一些事实，并阐述这些言论背后的教育理念。鉴于事件涉及本校声誉，并涉及大学应当如何对待学生，社会应当如何对待教授，民族应当如何对待教育这些重大议题，我已无法置身事外。责任所在，义不容辞。
一切辩论的前提是还原事实。有人妄加想像，以为萧瀚极不负责，他的课堂一定混乱不堪。这是事实错误。据我所知，萧瀚的课程颇受欢迎，课堂秩序井然。萧瀚是一个纯正的知识分子，是一个有个性并且人格自尊感极强的知识分子，是一个对学生和教学出奇负责的知识分子。他的个性不仅表现在教学上，而且表现在学校管理上。作为他的直接行政领导，我对他的评价是，开会经常不到，表格基本不填，经常批评领导，主张教授专权。他不是一个好员工，但是一个好教员。他的一些言行，个人并不赞成，否则本院就要散伙。但我和我的领导对他都有一定程度的"姑息养奸"。我们为什么这么做？简而言之，为国家保存读书的种子，为民族养育未来的精英。以萧瀚目前的学养和勤勉的教学态度，我有充分的理由相信，他会成为政法大学最好的老师之一，——个性创造未来。 大学灵魂在于包容，包容未必一定能够出成果，但没有包容，一定不能出成果 。
萧瀚放任学生，学生为何不放纵自己？因为我知道，他在苦自己。一个多小时的课程，他至少在家里闭门一天至二天。他开设的《先秦公法研究》，国内尚无二人。他在进行艰苦的开创性工作。这种开创未必有成果，但这种开创精神，正是本院和本校的希望所在。他的阅读广度和深度，他的学术交往层次，是许多同龄学者所未能达到的。他以自己的言行在感染和引领着他所深爱的学生，——政法大学有一群这样的知识分子。作为一个纯粹的知识分子，他耻于自我表白；作为领导，我有义务为他澄清。
学生们为何不放纵自己？因为年青人有其天然的生命力和上进心，有其自在的识别力和使命感，对此我有充分的经验和信心。出于阐述事理而不是炫耀自己的目的，请容许我陈述个人的经验。本人曾在 山东烟台大学任教四年，但任一届班主任。我们取得了什么成绩呢？这个四十余人的班级中，李富成同学以专业第一的成绩考取北大法学院研究生。祁建建同学以全华东政法政法大学第一名的成绩——401分，考取研究生。本班先后有四人取得北京大学法学院博士学位。作为地方院校，取得这样的成绩，我相信法学同行们会有公正的评价。作为班主任，我不注重他们的到课率，也不注重他们的成绩单。我所做的就是，每隔一段时间和他们谈真正的理想，说真实的人生，并解答他们的困惑。我相信，只要将年青人心灵的火炬点燃，他们会自我燃烧并照亮人生的旅程。毕业以后，一个学生告诉我， 何老师，看到你在冰天雪地里一边跑步，一边听英语，我们那能不上进啊 ？
我曾经是一名 乡村初级中学教师，现在忝列著名大学教授，我的上进心和取得的成绩，是父母和教师管出来的吗？( tiǎn忝,辱也)。不是，这是生活的压力逼出来的，是心灵深处那股永不服输的精神摧出来的。就中国政法大学的学生而言，他们都是以一流的成绩考入本校。我相信，他们内心深处的精英意识，现实社会的竞争压力，已使他们有足够的人生动力。作为教师的我们和社会上的家长，更应当呵护的是他们的身心健康。我希望家长们认同一个道理，这就是， 比事业成功更重要的是身心健康，比枯燥成绩更重要的是健全人格。我们这一代人其实活得很不健康，许多人已经迷失了人生的方向，为了成功而成功。我深深地以为，他们应当有着不同于我们的别样的人生——解放他们 。我呼吁整个社会，给他们以人格和自由，给他们以鼓舞和信心，给他们以关爱和勉励，他们决不是垮了的一代！
在我的课堂上，我也不禁止学生吃点东西。我认为这和他们的饥饿有关，和我的尊严无关。对于迟到的学生，我也从不斥责，因为年轻人正在长身体，睡过了头属于正常。我的课堂乱吗？我的学生放纵自己了吗？我的学生上课进进出出，满嘴都是零食吗？希望记者朋友亲身去调查。我知道我的一些同事，对于课堂教学秩序有别样的认识，我也坚决地支持他们，这是教授的自由。我院著名教授郑永流向以严谨著称，他也很受学生欢迎。我相信，正是这些不同风格的教授，组成丰富多彩的大学，使大学真实可爱并让人留念不已。
对于学生逃课，我想首先要澄清一点，事实远非想像那么夸张。记者朋友可以在清晨五点半到政法大学图书馆门前调查，是不是学生已经成群结队在寒风中占座？上课时，是不是许多课堂人满为患，要站着听课？一个大学当然有学生逃课，清华、北大、哈佛、牛津，全世界如此。 他们逃了该逃的，听了该听的。我想，大学的发展史总是伴随着学生的逃课史。我不鼓励学生逃课，但逃课远远没有想像那么可怕。本人在北大读书就曾多次逃课，我垮了吗？我确实没有最大程度地发挥自己，从而取得世俗社会所赞赏的更大的成绩，我认为那样会毁了自己。我的人生我掌握，我的幸福我选择。政法大学不可能让所有的学生都成功，作为家长们也不要让自己的成功观毁了孩子。我的孩子也在上大学，我对她的希望是，身心健康。我对她的教导是，幸福比成功更重要。
我的上述信念有人不理解，有人不赞同，但既然身为教授，我有责任和权利贯彻我的信念，我认为这是知识分子对社会最大的贡献。信念就是信念，请原谅我无法证明它的正确，正如宗教一样。正是这样的信念促使我不惮 (dan4) 于误解和谩骂, 执笔为文， 为学生争人格，为教授争自由，为民族争未来！
文／何 兵（中国政法大学法学院副院长，教授 ）
本校杨帆教授在课堂上与学生冲突一事，近来广为媒体渲染。我的意见是，教授和学生都有错，社会可以就此议论，但教授、学生、社会都不应夸大事实以图轰动效应。人民内部矛盾应当和平解决。激化社会纷争，于国于已无益——台湾就是先例。因为与杨帆教授专业有别，素无交往，对其不予评论，评论仅及本院萧潮副教授，敬请读者谅解。
冲突发生以后，萧瀚就此事发表评论，陈述与杨帆教授不同的教育理念。他主张学生可以逃课，课堂上可以进出；上课可以吃东西，但不能破坏环境；可以睡觉，但不能影响别人……此言一出，一些人以为这是一个极不负责的教授，以为中国政法大学的教学秩序荡然无存，更有甚者以为萧瀚是一个败类，应当从中国政法大学清理出去。作为萧瀚的同事和法学院领导之一，我有义务向社会澄清一些事实，并阐述这些言论背后的教育理念。鉴于事件涉及本校声誉，并涉及大学应当如何对待学生，社会应当如何对待教授，民族应当如何对待教育这些重大议题，我已无法置身事外。责任所在，义不容辞。
一切辩论的前提是还原事实。有人妄加想像，以为萧瀚极不负责，他的课堂一定混乱不堪。这是事实错误。据我所知，萧瀚的课程颇受欢迎，课堂秩序井然。萧瀚是一个纯正的知识分子，是一个有个性并且人格自尊感极强的知识分子，是一个对学生和教学出奇负责的知识分子。他的个性不仅表现在教学上，而且表现在学校管理上。作为他的直接行政领导，我对他的评价是，开会经常不到，表格基本不填，经常批评领导，主张教授专权。他不是一个好员工，但是一个好教员。他的一些言行，个人并不赞成，否则本院就要散伙。但我和我的领导对他都有一定程度的"姑息养奸"。我们为什么这么做？简而言之，为国家保存读书的种子，为民族养育未来的精英。以萧瀚目前的学养和勤勉的教学态度，我有充分的理由相信，他会成为政法大学最好的老师之一，——个性创造未来。 大学灵魂在于包容，包容未必一定能够出成果，但没有包容，一定不能出成果 。
萧瀚放任学生，学生为何不放纵自己？因为我知道，他在苦自己。一个多小时的课程，他至少在家里闭门一天至二天。他开设的《先秦公法研究》，国内尚无二人。他在进行艰苦的开创性工作。这种开创未必有成果，但这种开创精神，正是本院和本校的希望所在。他的阅读广度和深度，他的学术交往层次，是许多同龄学者所未能达到的。他以自己的言行在感染和引领着他所深爱的学生，——政法大学有一群这样的知识分子。作为一个纯粹的知识分子，他耻于自我表白；作为领导，我有义务为他澄清。
学生们为何不放纵自己？因为年青人有其天然的生命力和上进心，有其自在的识别力和使命感，对此我有充分的经验和信心。出于阐述事理而不是炫耀自己的目的，请容许我陈述个人的经验。本人曾在 山东烟台大学任教四年，但任一届班主任。我们取得了什么成绩呢？这个四十余人的班级中，李富成同学以专业第一的成绩考取北大法学院研究生。祁建建同学以全华东政法政法大学第一名的成绩——401分，考取研究生。本班先后有四人取得北京大学法学院博士学位。作为地方院校，取得这样的成绩，我相信法学同行们会有公正的评价。作为班主任，我不注重他们的到课率，也不注重他们的成绩单。我所做的就是，每隔一段时间和他们谈真正的理想，说真实的人生，并解答他们的困惑。我相信，只要将年青人心灵的火炬点燃，他们会自我燃烧并照亮人生的旅程。毕业以后，一个学生告诉我， 何老师，看到你在冰天雪地里一边跑步，一边听英语，我们那能不上进啊 ？
我曾经是一名 乡村初级中学教师，现在忝列著名大学教授，我的上进心和取得的成绩，是父母和教师管出来的吗？( tiǎn忝,辱也)。不是，这是生活的压力逼出来的，是心灵深处那股永不服输的精神摧出来的。就中国政法大学的学生而言，他们都是以一流的成绩考入本校。我相信，他们内心深处的精英意识，现实社会的竞争压力，已使他们有足够的人生动力。作为教师的我们和社会上的家长，更应当呵护的是他们的身心健康。我希望家长们认同一个道理，这就是， 比事业成功更重要的是身心健康，比枯燥成绩更重要的是健全人格。我们这一代人其实活得很不健康，许多人已经迷失了人生的方向，为了成功而成功。我深深地以为，他们应当有着不同于我们的别样的人生——解放他们 。我呼吁整个社会，给他们以人格和自由，给他们以鼓舞和信心，给他们以关爱和勉励，他们决不是垮了的一代！
在我的课堂上，我也不禁止学生吃点东西。我认为这和他们的饥饿有关，和我的尊严无关。对于迟到的学生，我也从不斥责，因为年轻人正在长身体，睡过了头属于正常。我的课堂乱吗？我的学生放纵自己了吗？我的学生上课进进出出，满嘴都是零食吗？希望记者朋友亲身去调查。我知道我的一些同事，对于课堂教学秩序有别样的认识，我也坚决地支持他们，这是教授的自由。我院著名教授郑永流向以严谨著称，他也很受学生欢迎。我相信，正是这些不同风格的教授，组成丰富多彩的大学，使大学真实可爱并让人留念不已。
对于学生逃课，我想首先要澄清一点，事实远非想像那么夸张。记者朋友可以在清晨五点半到政法大学图书馆门前调查，是不是学生已经成群结队在寒风中占座？上课时，是不是许多课堂人满为患，要站着听课？一个大学当然有学生逃课，清华、北大、哈佛、牛津，全世界如此。 他们逃了该逃的，听了该听的。我想，大学的发展史总是伴随着学生的逃课史。我不鼓励学生逃课，但逃课远远没有想像那么可怕。本人在北大读书就曾多次逃课，我垮了吗？我确实没有最大程度地发挥自己，从而取得世俗社会所赞赏的更大的成绩，我认为那样会毁了自己。我的人生我掌握，我的幸福我选择。政法大学不可能让所有的学生都成功，作为家长们也不要让自己的成功观毁了孩子。我的孩子也在上大学，我对她的希望是，身心健康。我对她的教导是，幸福比成功更重要。
我的上述信念有人不理解，有人不赞同，但既然身为教授，我有责任和权利贯彻我的信念，我认为这是知识分子对社会最大的贡献。信念就是信念，请原谅我无法证明它的正确，正如宗教一样。正是这样的信念促使我不惮 (dan4) 于误解和谩骂, 执笔为文， 为学生争人格，为教授争自由，为民族争未来！
【萧瀚】最后一课："如何度过我们的一生?"
萧瀚的最后一课："如何度过我们的一生?"
作者系中国政法大学法学院前教授
在座诸君：你们好！
我到法大已经整整四年，开了四年的课。今天是你们这学期的最后一课，我和大家已经一起度过了美好的17周，如果包括今天，总共是27个小时。在这27个小时里，我有幸和大家一起回到遥远的中国古代，去遐思我们的祖先是怎样的生活，那一切都让我感动。
说到最后一课，我们很自然地想到都德的那篇著名小说《最后一课》。我们没有他们当年法国人那么惨，但这最后一课，于我却是伤感的。我不打算再讲任何与这门课程相关的内容，因为那是讲不完的。今天我只希望自己能够真正地来尽一个教师的职责，那就是跟在座诸君聊聊我们每个人都正在经历的人生。
早在一周前，我就在想，我应该怎样讲这最后一课，以前各个学期的最后一课，我总是将自己对中国历史的宏观看法告诉大家，但这些话，我在以前的课上都已经讲过，再讲并没有太大意义。以前各个学期，我犯下一个严重的过错，就是更多地只是进行知识性宣讲，然而，这两年，尤其是今年，我越来越觉得这样做一个教师是有限的，也是远远不够的。在我与在座诸君有限的交往中，我更深切感受到的是朋友们对人生问题的关切，而无论求诸他人，还是我自己的经验，这一思考和探索远比知识性的学习更为重要。
是的，你们正处在花样年华，与你们相比，我已经太老了，几乎是你们年龄的两倍。你们降生的那一年，如果是1987年的话，那年的年初，中国大学生第一次自发地走上街头，用他们的激情和热血、真诚和青春向政府呼吁政治改革，但是没有结果——甚至比没有结果更糟糕；两年后的1989年，那时候你们才3岁，那年的初夏，更多的大学生，用更多的鲜血和青春去唤醒这个沉睡的国家， 但是他们中的许多人，鲜血留在了广场，这个现在只躺着一具尸体的广场，当年的鲜血是不可能洗净的，它比一切有形的墓碑更为久长，就像我的同事海子把自己留在山海关，成了他有生之年的最后一首诗。这些人的名字被人从户口本上永久删除，我们甚至不知道他们是谁，而你们中甚至可能有人不知道发生过这件事，然而，对于我们，对于经历了那个年代的我，却是一生中最重大的社会事件，它已深刻地影响我的一生。
再过一年，这件事情就已经过去二十年了，时光为什么过得如此之快，我们来不及流泪，泪却已经干了； 我们来不及回忆，回忆却已经变成了失忆。但我知道，和我一样经历过这件事的人，会永远将这件事留在心底，不知道什么时候就会翻出来祭奠一番，那代表着我们的青春，代表着关心天下兴亡的青年人第一次的梦想破灭，代表着与这个社会初恋的失败，它不可能不是铭心刻骨的。
我从来没有写过演讲稿，这是第一次，大家知道我没法用教案讲课，那样我会张口结舌。但今天，我似乎觉得有写下这篇文字的必要，至于是不是会完全按照这稿子讲，我自己也不知道。
人的一生里会遇到许多事，有小事，有大事，有些事发生仿如没有，有些事发生了就再无法遗忘，每个人都有自己独特的不能遗忘的人和事，当人生走到尽头的时候，这些就构成了一生。
你们这一生将怎样度过？这是你们一定在考虑的问题，你们也一定带着无限的憧憬在考虑这个问题。但是，无论如何，有一点是共同的，问之万人，答案相同，就是希望过得幸福。
什么是幸福？怎样才能幸福？
《现代汉语辞典》说："1、是使人心情舒畅的境遇和生活；2、（生活、境遇）称心如意。"
古罗马诗人贺拉斯则说："人的幸福要等到最后，在他生前和葬礼前，无人有权说他幸福。"
拉罗什福科，法国17世纪的思想家说：" 幸福在于趣味，而不在于事物。我们幸福在于我们拥有自己的所爱，而不在于拥有其他人觉得可爱的东西。"
方登纳，一位17、18世纪之交的法国作家说："幸福就是人们希望永久不变的一种境界。"
关于幸福，各种各样的说法都有，人言人殊，我就不再举例子。法国作家莫洛亚有一篇演讲，谈幸福，他说构成 幸福的核心是把自己心中自有的美传达给外界的一种精神状态，人所祈求不变的也是这种精神状态，而不是具体的物象。我很认同莫洛亚的这一说法。
但是，这只是一种理想状态，因为人除了灵魂、精神，还有躯体，还受着七情六欲等等诸多物质性存在的困扰。《论语》里的颜回能够一箪食、一瓢饮不改其乐；帕乌斯托夫斯基在《金玫瑰》里说一天两片面包，依然能够快乐地天天朗诵普希金，至少他们都没到彻底断炊的境遇。如果人的基本欲望无法得到满足，人就会一天到晚渴望这基本的满足，没办法，这是人性。
我相信，只要不发生战争，不发生大饥荒，一般而言，你们将来不会发生因物质极度困乏而造成的痛苦，所以这个问题并不那么迫切。但是，物质性的躯体会生病。25年前的1983年，著名报告文学作家孟晓云女士曾经写过一个感动了全中国的真实故事，一位在那个国家精神病时代 深受迫害与蹂躏的学者钱仁宗，无论在什么样的恶劣境遇中，他都热爱学习一切他能接触到的知识，最后他终于苦尽甘来，调到人民日报海外版，就在他即将展开鸿图之际，突然病倒，一个月后去世，他得的是肝癌晚期。我所知道的看过这篇报告文学的人，没有人不是流着眼泪读完的。人在这样的境遇面前，是无话可说的，谁也无法与死亡抗衡。但是，一般性的疾病也是很折磨人的意志的，不过，一个本性乐观，时常充满幸福感的人，在面对疾病甚至绝症的时候也许会更有力量。中山大学的程文超教授便是如此，他明知自己得了绝症，与癌症整整斗争了12年，就在最后的弥留时刻，他的哭还是为他妻子的憔悴而哭，认为自己拖累了家人，他自己则依然保持了昂扬工作的精神状态，这是极其了不起的。
除了疾病，生活的不安定，也会严重影响人的幸福感，一个居无定所的人，除非酷爱流浪，一般而言，很难幸福。你们毕业以后，如果出去工作，最初肯定要经历一段居无定所的阶段，除非住在父母家里。但是，这些问题随着你们的努力工作，一点点都能够解决。
我今天着重要和诸君讲的问题不是这些纯粹物质性的问题，因为这些问题在你们将来一般都不难解决，除非过于物欲的追求，那是另一回事。
我今天最想讲的是，假定我们在物质层面的基本问题都能解决，如何获得幸福，如何像前面说的那样将自己心中的美传递给外在的世界，使得自己永远保持着这样一种美丽和谐的精神状态，保持了这样的状态便是幸福。
这当然涉及世界观问题，涉及信仰问题。但这些都是各人自己要去解决的问题，我不能在这里布道传教，信仰在一定意义上是隐私，所以我不打算谈这个问题。
但是信仰之下，应该有一些非常具体的获得幸福的方法。依我之见，这个法门只有三个字：
"爱"和"创造"。
一个心中充满爱的人，无论是对什么的爱，都将会是幸福的。因为爱是忘我，是付出，是为了别人快乐，为了别人幸福。英国的詹姆斯.里德写过一本《基督的人生观》，对于完满人生有个三条件说，即一个最终的目标，这涉及信仰，人有这样的最终目标，就能将日常生活的所有行动都统一到这一目标之下，而不会发生虚无感的问题；是否为自己一个人活着，如果仅仅是为自己一个人活着，这人不可能幸福，因为太自私，太有我；是否能够处理遇到的一切事情，这是前两个条件的延伸，没有前面两条，人就无法处理遇到的所有事情。因此，爱就变得极端重要。爱是付出的概念，而不是获得的概念。
你们正处在青春年华，你们遇到的第一个爱的问题就是爱情。我不知道在座诸君是否都经历过爱情，这是你们必经的人生一课，是这个年龄段里最重要的一课，不管男女，在你们大学毕业之前至少应该恋爱一次，无论成败，成功了，结为百年之好，这是最理想的，不成功，那也是重要的人生经历，没有经历这样的阶段，人往往难以最真切地理解爱是什么。由于你们这个年龄段的人，思想比较单纯，对感情也更能付出，一旦将来工作了，要保持一种比较单纯的情感就有难度了，即使你单纯，而别人未必单纯，所以学生时代的爱情就变得很重要，因为只有在心灵比较纯净的状态里，才能体验到真正爱情的分量，才能真正清晰完整地体验爱一个人，愿意为一个人付出的感情状态是什么。
中国人向来缺乏情感教育，包括我自己在内，至今并不真懂得如何与异性相处，你们也不妨自问，有没有与异性相处的能力。你们现在比我们那时候好多了，比我们正常得多，我们那时候的人与爱情为敌，视爱情为洪水猛兽，大学生谈恋爱都会被找去谈话，校纪校规里直接禁止学生谈恋爱。如果中学谈恋爱那就绝对是道德败坏！可以想见这个国家对待情感的主流观念是多么愚昧！但你们比我们要幸运，你们接触到的这个世界至少比我们那时候稍稍多一点温情，多一点爱。
不过，我要提醒你们的是，不要轻易地把爱情和性混为一谈，性固然是基本的人欲，但并不总是与爱情同在，在你们这样的纯情阶段，我以为应该更重情，而不是性。如果感情未到，急于性结合，可能恰恰是最伤害情的，它可能导致的恶果是你不管经历多少性，也无法体会爱到底是什么。看看日本导演岩井俊二的电影《情书》，还有川端康成的小说《伊豆舞女》，也许你们会从艺术家的作品中获得一点感悟：情与性不同，有时差得很远，有时甚至是对立的——在它们不能统一的时候。
有过了爱情，无论成败，你们就不再是少年，你们长大成为成人。于是，你忽然发现，你会爱你们的父母，爱你们的朋友，甚至去爱陌生人，而以前这个字只是用来说的，从此，你可能不再会说个字，却会去做，甚至是完全默默地做，以至于怕被爱的人知道你做了爱他们的事情，这个时候，爱早已升华，有点类似英文里的圣爱，或者更通俗的说法是博爱。无论哪种爱，只要是真情真性的爱，往往离宗教信仰很近，而爱情最容易达到这一点。俄国大文豪蒲宁的小说有爱情的百科全书之称，建议你们去读一读他的《爱情学》，也译为《爱情法则》，他的其他爱情小说也是美轮美奂，你们有兴趣都可以找来看看。
爱是通往幸福的有效途径之一，还有一条道路，也通往幸福，就是创造。
创造当然有很多不同的类型，有思想的创造，有艺术的创造，有技术的创造，生活的创造，各种各样的创造都会使人达到幸福。
创造需要一个前提条件，就是好奇心，好奇心在本质上是什么，是自由！这个学期以来，我一直在竭力地督促你们能够自由地思想，抛开以前那些垃圾教材，要触动你们自己的强烈求知欲，当你们打开了自己这扇思维的自由之门以后，你们就会发现，人类的知识世界是多么美妙。这个年龄段，就是你们博览群书的年龄，离开了大学，你们将会发现，读书的时间会大大减少。所以我热切地希望你们考试成绩不要太好，更多的时间应该用在读教材以外的书，你们要在大学时期，打下人文、科学知识的基础，这个基础包括神、文、史、哲、科、艺。
神，是神学，就是与信仰相关的一切书，佛教、基督教、伊斯兰教、巴哈依教、印度教……，与这些宗教相关的书统统都可属于神学范畴，找几本经典的介绍性的好书，接触一下，就会在你们的人生观中留下一个伏笔，也许哪天开花结果，你发现自己有信仰了，那我祝贺你们；
文，是文学，诗歌、戏剧、小说、散文、评论，人类数千年来的文字艺术精华都在这里了。尤其要多读诗歌和小说，例如诗经楚辞汉赋乐府唐诗宋词元曲清诗，以及现代诗中的精华，例如顾城、海子等等，还有一些译得不错的外国诗。小说中，《红楼梦》、《战争与和平》都应该读，前者是中国小说的顶峰，后者是外国小说的顶峰，当然还有很多一流的外国小说，作家太多就不举例了。
史，就是历史，这方面的书也是数不胜数，中国的，《史记》总该读吧，本来前四史都应该读，但你们可能会说时间不够，那降到最低标准，《史记》是必读的中国史籍，如果有时间也应该读《资治通鉴》，至于其他的史书，就看你们自己的兴趣了，不过，比较像样的通史性的作品必须读上几部，例如钱穆先生的《国史大纲》，张荫麟先生的《中国史纲》，费正清主编的剑桥中国史系列，至于其他的通史著作没见过特别好的，不读关系也不大。但是，如果对其文字以及思想本身要求不很高，仅仅是知识性需求的话，吕思勉先生的一些通史性作品还是值得读的，例如他的《白话本国史》。外国史方面，可选择的范围很广，例如美国拉尔夫主编的《世界文明史》，黑格尔的《历史哲学》，威尔杜兰的《世界文明史》、汤因比的《历史研究》、《新编剑桥世界近代史》系列等等，就不再举例子了。
哲，就是哲学，古往今来的哲学著作很多，应该从哲学史入手，我的经验是德国文德尔班的《哲学史教程》最好，其次是美国梯利的《西方哲学史》，至于那部名气很大的罗素的《西方哲学史》，我并不喜欢。看了这些哲学史著作之后，你自然会知道自己应该看什么具体的哲学著作。
科，当然是科学，这方面的书，我们主要是读科普性的读物，例如阿西莫夫的书，卡尔.萨根的书，还有植物学、动物学、地理学、天文学等等一切自然科学领域的科普作品，这些书有助于我们摆脱科盲这尴尬的身份，扩大我们的视野；
艺，就是艺术，范围很广，绘画、雕塑、音乐、舞蹈、戏剧、建筑、影视……，这些不但要从形成文字的文本去了解，更重要的是要亲炙，就是亲身接触，有些甚至去学习具体的艺术创作方法，艺术创作是最直接感受世界的方式，因此对人的影响巨大，这是一个纯粹以美为表达对象的世界，对于人格的培养以及道德素养的培育都至关重要，请大家不要误以为艺术只是一件奢侈的事，"美学是伦理学之母"，这是1987年的诺贝尔文学奖获得者布罗茨基，在受奖演说中说过的名言，在绝大多数情况下， 美往往是与善连在一起的。
我希望诸君对上述这些所有人类智慧的积累都能够有兴趣，都有强烈的好奇心，有强烈的求知欲。如果有了那么广阔的视野和强烈的好奇心、求知欲，你们最终必将很清楚地知道最喜欢做什么事，有了你毕生喜欢的事情，你热爱它们，你就会自由地去思想，去创造，而创造将使你的生活永远充满新生的力量，永远充满活力，使你的精神灵魂生命永葆青春。因此创造是生活中最美好的事情之一，它会在给你带来幸福的同时，也会给他人带来审美的愉悦。创造也是人世间所有事情中最美好的事之一。
如果，你们在大学期间打下很好的各方面基础，包括人文、社科、自科，那么你们的这颗心灵就不会是乏味、枯萎、老化的，而将是活泼、新鲜、年轻，充满创造力的，这样你无论从事什么方面的工作，你都将在工作本身中找到创造的乐趣，即使工作本身不允许你们发挥太多的创造力，你们也会在工作之外，过上十分充实的生活，而充实的生活，就是幸福的基本条件之一。它也能够帮助你们抵御生活中的许多艰难，让人在艰难中有寄托，有乐趣，有希望。
课马上就要结束了，我该讲的话，能讲的话，也基本上都讲了。离开这个教室，也许我和诸君还会在许多地方相逢，我希望大家能够记得我这位忘年朋友，如果需要我的帮助，只要我能做到，不与我的原则冲突，我都会尽力帮助，我可能因为粗心而犯下一些过失，如果因此而伤害过你们，请你们原谅我的过犯。
在座诸君，下课的铃声也许马上就会响起。无论将来你们会在哪里，无论你们将来从事什么，我祝愿你们永保一颗单纯的心，一颗充满爱和美的心灵；我祝愿你们获得一颗富有生命力、独立而自由的灵魂；我尤其要祝愿你们每个人，无论在多么肮脏卑污的环境中，都持守着自己永不被玷辱的卓越人格。
在座诸君，谢谢你们与我一起度过这快乐的18周27个小时。我为你们骄傲，祝你们幸福！
2008年1月3日於追遠堂
作者系中国政法大学法学院前教授
在座诸君：你们好！
我到法大已经整整四年，开了四年的课。今天是你们这学期的最后一课，我和大家已经一起度过了美好的17周，如果包括今天，总共是27个小时。在这27个小时里，我有幸和大家一起回到遥远的中国古代，去遐思我们的祖先是怎样的生活，那一切都让我感动。
说到最后一课，我们很自然地想到都德的那篇著名小说《最后一课》。我们没有他们当年法国人那么惨，但这最后一课，于我却是伤感的。我不打算再讲任何与这门课程相关的内容，因为那是讲不完的。今天我只希望自己能够真正地来尽一个教师的职责，那就是跟在座诸君聊聊我们每个人都正在经历的人生。
早在一周前，我就在想，我应该怎样讲这最后一课，以前各个学期的最后一课，我总是将自己对中国历史的宏观看法告诉大家，但这些话，我在以前的课上都已经讲过，再讲并没有太大意义。以前各个学期，我犯下一个严重的过错，就是更多地只是进行知识性宣讲，然而，这两年，尤其是今年，我越来越觉得这样做一个教师是有限的，也是远远不够的。在我与在座诸君有限的交往中，我更深切感受到的是朋友们对人生问题的关切，而无论求诸他人，还是我自己的经验，这一思考和探索远比知识性的学习更为重要。
是的，你们正处在花样年华，与你们相比，我已经太老了，几乎是你们年龄的两倍。你们降生的那一年，如果是1987年的话，那年的年初，中国大学生第一次自发地走上街头，用他们的激情和热血、真诚和青春向政府呼吁政治改革，但是没有结果——甚至比没有结果更糟糕；两年后的1989年，那时候你们才3岁，那年的初夏，更多的大学生，用更多的鲜血和青春去唤醒这个沉睡的国家， 但是他们中的许多人，鲜血留在了广场，这个现在只躺着一具尸体的广场，当年的鲜血是不可能洗净的，它比一切有形的墓碑更为久长，就像我的同事海子把自己留在山海关，成了他有生之年的最后一首诗。这些人的名字被人从户口本上永久删除，我们甚至不知道他们是谁，而你们中甚至可能有人不知道发生过这件事，然而，对于我们，对于经历了那个年代的我，却是一生中最重大的社会事件，它已深刻地影响我的一生。
再过一年，这件事情就已经过去二十年了，时光为什么过得如此之快，我们来不及流泪，泪却已经干了； 我们来不及回忆，回忆却已经变成了失忆。但我知道，和我一样经历过这件事的人，会永远将这件事留在心底，不知道什么时候就会翻出来祭奠一番，那代表着我们的青春，代表着关心天下兴亡的青年人第一次的梦想破灭，代表着与这个社会初恋的失败，它不可能不是铭心刻骨的。
我从来没有写过演讲稿，这是第一次，大家知道我没法用教案讲课，那样我会张口结舌。但今天，我似乎觉得有写下这篇文字的必要，至于是不是会完全按照这稿子讲，我自己也不知道。
人的一生里会遇到许多事，有小事，有大事，有些事发生仿如没有，有些事发生了就再无法遗忘，每个人都有自己独特的不能遗忘的人和事，当人生走到尽头的时候，这些就构成了一生。
你们这一生将怎样度过？这是你们一定在考虑的问题，你们也一定带着无限的憧憬在考虑这个问题。但是，无论如何，有一点是共同的，问之万人，答案相同，就是希望过得幸福。
什么是幸福？怎样才能幸福？
《现代汉语辞典》说："1、是使人心情舒畅的境遇和生活；2、（生活、境遇）称心如意。"
古罗马诗人贺拉斯则说："人的幸福要等到最后，在他生前和葬礼前，无人有权说他幸福。"
拉罗什福科，法国17世纪的思想家说：" 幸福在于趣味，而不在于事物。我们幸福在于我们拥有自己的所爱，而不在于拥有其他人觉得可爱的东西。"
方登纳，一位17、18世纪之交的法国作家说："幸福就是人们希望永久不变的一种境界。"
关于幸福，各种各样的说法都有，人言人殊，我就不再举例子。法国作家莫洛亚有一篇演讲，谈幸福，他说构成 幸福的核心是把自己心中自有的美传达给外界的一种精神状态，人所祈求不变的也是这种精神状态，而不是具体的物象。我很认同莫洛亚的这一说法。
但是，这只是一种理想状态，因为人除了灵魂、精神，还有躯体，还受着七情六欲等等诸多物质性存在的困扰。《论语》里的颜回能够一箪食、一瓢饮不改其乐；帕乌斯托夫斯基在《金玫瑰》里说一天两片面包，依然能够快乐地天天朗诵普希金，至少他们都没到彻底断炊的境遇。如果人的基本欲望无法得到满足，人就会一天到晚渴望这基本的满足，没办法，这是人性。
我相信，只要不发生战争，不发生大饥荒，一般而言，你们将来不会发生因物质极度困乏而造成的痛苦，所以这个问题并不那么迫切。但是，物质性的躯体会生病。25年前的1983年，著名报告文学作家孟晓云女士曾经写过一个感动了全中国的真实故事，一位在那个国家精神病时代 深受迫害与蹂躏的学者钱仁宗，无论在什么样的恶劣境遇中，他都热爱学习一切他能接触到的知识，最后他终于苦尽甘来，调到人民日报海外版，就在他即将展开鸿图之际，突然病倒，一个月后去世，他得的是肝癌晚期。我所知道的看过这篇报告文学的人，没有人不是流着眼泪读完的。人在这样的境遇面前，是无话可说的，谁也无法与死亡抗衡。但是，一般性的疾病也是很折磨人的意志的，不过，一个本性乐观，时常充满幸福感的人，在面对疾病甚至绝症的时候也许会更有力量。中山大学的程文超教授便是如此，他明知自己得了绝症，与癌症整整斗争了12年，就在最后的弥留时刻，他的哭还是为他妻子的憔悴而哭，认为自己拖累了家人，他自己则依然保持了昂扬工作的精神状态，这是极其了不起的。
除了疾病，生活的不安定，也会严重影响人的幸福感，一个居无定所的人，除非酷爱流浪，一般而言，很难幸福。你们毕业以后，如果出去工作，最初肯定要经历一段居无定所的阶段，除非住在父母家里。但是，这些问题随着你们的努力工作，一点点都能够解决。
我今天着重要和诸君讲的问题不是这些纯粹物质性的问题，因为这些问题在你们将来一般都不难解决，除非过于物欲的追求，那是另一回事。
我今天最想讲的是，假定我们在物质层面的基本问题都能解决，如何获得幸福，如何像前面说的那样将自己心中的美传递给外在的世界，使得自己永远保持着这样一种美丽和谐的精神状态，保持了这样的状态便是幸福。
这当然涉及世界观问题，涉及信仰问题。但这些都是各人自己要去解决的问题，我不能在这里布道传教，信仰在一定意义上是隐私，所以我不打算谈这个问题。
但是信仰之下，应该有一些非常具体的获得幸福的方法。依我之见，这个法门只有三个字：
"爱"和"创造"。
一个心中充满爱的人，无论是对什么的爱，都将会是幸福的。因为爱是忘我，是付出，是为了别人快乐，为了别人幸福。英国的詹姆斯.里德写过一本《基督的人生观》，对于完满人生有个三条件说，即一个最终的目标，这涉及信仰，人有这样的最终目标，就能将日常生活的所有行动都统一到这一目标之下，而不会发生虚无感的问题；是否为自己一个人活着，如果仅仅是为自己一个人活着，这人不可能幸福，因为太自私，太有我；是否能够处理遇到的一切事情，这是前两个条件的延伸，没有前面两条，人就无法处理遇到的所有事情。因此，爱就变得极端重要。爱是付出的概念，而不是获得的概念。
你们正处在青春年华，你们遇到的第一个爱的问题就是爱情。我不知道在座诸君是否都经历过爱情，这是你们必经的人生一课，是这个年龄段里最重要的一课，不管男女，在你们大学毕业之前至少应该恋爱一次，无论成败，成功了，结为百年之好，这是最理想的，不成功，那也是重要的人生经历，没有经历这样的阶段，人往往难以最真切地理解爱是什么。由于你们这个年龄段的人，思想比较单纯，对感情也更能付出，一旦将来工作了，要保持一种比较单纯的情感就有难度了，即使你单纯，而别人未必单纯，所以学生时代的爱情就变得很重要，因为只有在心灵比较纯净的状态里，才能体验到真正爱情的分量，才能真正清晰完整地体验爱一个人，愿意为一个人付出的感情状态是什么。
中国人向来缺乏情感教育，包括我自己在内，至今并不真懂得如何与异性相处，你们也不妨自问，有没有与异性相处的能力。你们现在比我们那时候好多了，比我们正常得多，我们那时候的人与爱情为敌，视爱情为洪水猛兽，大学生谈恋爱都会被找去谈话，校纪校规里直接禁止学生谈恋爱。如果中学谈恋爱那就绝对是道德败坏！可以想见这个国家对待情感的主流观念是多么愚昧！但你们比我们要幸运，你们接触到的这个世界至少比我们那时候稍稍多一点温情，多一点爱。
不过，我要提醒你们的是，不要轻易地把爱情和性混为一谈，性固然是基本的人欲，但并不总是与爱情同在，在你们这样的纯情阶段，我以为应该更重情，而不是性。如果感情未到，急于性结合，可能恰恰是最伤害情的，它可能导致的恶果是你不管经历多少性，也无法体会爱到底是什么。看看日本导演岩井俊二的电影《情书》，还有川端康成的小说《伊豆舞女》，也许你们会从艺术家的作品中获得一点感悟：情与性不同，有时差得很远，有时甚至是对立的——在它们不能统一的时候。
有过了爱情，无论成败，你们就不再是少年，你们长大成为成人。于是，你忽然发现，你会爱你们的父母，爱你们的朋友，甚至去爱陌生人，而以前这个字只是用来说的，从此，你可能不再会说个字，却会去做，甚至是完全默默地做，以至于怕被爱的人知道你做了爱他们的事情，这个时候，爱早已升华，有点类似英文里的圣爱，或者更通俗的说法是博爱。无论哪种爱，只要是真情真性的爱，往往离宗教信仰很近，而爱情最容易达到这一点。俄国大文豪蒲宁的小说有爱情的百科全书之称，建议你们去读一读他的《爱情学》，也译为《爱情法则》，他的其他爱情小说也是美轮美奂，你们有兴趣都可以找来看看。
爱是通往幸福的有效途径之一，还有一条道路，也通往幸福，就是创造。
创造当然有很多不同的类型，有思想的创造，有艺术的创造，有技术的创造，生活的创造，各种各样的创造都会使人达到幸福。
创造需要一个前提条件，就是好奇心，好奇心在本质上是什么，是自由！这个学期以来，我一直在竭力地督促你们能够自由地思想，抛开以前那些垃圾教材，要触动你们自己的强烈求知欲，当你们打开了自己这扇思维的自由之门以后，你们就会发现，人类的知识世界是多么美妙。这个年龄段，就是你们博览群书的年龄，离开了大学，你们将会发现，读书的时间会大大减少。所以我热切地希望你们考试成绩不要太好，更多的时间应该用在读教材以外的书，你们要在大学时期，打下人文、科学知识的基础，这个基础包括神、文、史、哲、科、艺。
神，是神学，就是与信仰相关的一切书，佛教、基督教、伊斯兰教、巴哈依教、印度教……，与这些宗教相关的书统统都可属于神学范畴，找几本经典的介绍性的好书，接触一下，就会在你们的人生观中留下一个伏笔，也许哪天开花结果，你发现自己有信仰了，那我祝贺你们；
文，是文学，诗歌、戏剧、小说、散文、评论，人类数千年来的文字艺术精华都在这里了。尤其要多读诗歌和小说，例如诗经楚辞汉赋乐府唐诗宋词元曲清诗，以及现代诗中的精华，例如顾城、海子等等，还有一些译得不错的外国诗。小说中，《红楼梦》、《战争与和平》都应该读，前者是中国小说的顶峰，后者是外国小说的顶峰，当然还有很多一流的外国小说，作家太多就不举例了。
史，就是历史，这方面的书也是数不胜数，中国的，《史记》总该读吧，本来前四史都应该读，但你们可能会说时间不够，那降到最低标准，《史记》是必读的中国史籍，如果有时间也应该读《资治通鉴》，至于其他的史书，就看你们自己的兴趣了，不过，比较像样的通史性的作品必须读上几部，例如钱穆先生的《国史大纲》，张荫麟先生的《中国史纲》，费正清主编的剑桥中国史系列，至于其他的通史著作没见过特别好的，不读关系也不大。但是，如果对其文字以及思想本身要求不很高，仅仅是知识性需求的话，吕思勉先生的一些通史性作品还是值得读的，例如他的《白话本国史》。外国史方面，可选择的范围很广，例如美国拉尔夫主编的《世界文明史》，黑格尔的《历史哲学》，威尔杜兰的《世界文明史》、汤因比的《历史研究》、《新编剑桥世界近代史》系列等等，就不再举例子了。
哲，就是哲学，古往今来的哲学著作很多，应该从哲学史入手，我的经验是德国文德尔班的《哲学史教程》最好，其次是美国梯利的《西方哲学史》，至于那部名气很大的罗素的《西方哲学史》，我并不喜欢。看了这些哲学史著作之后，你自然会知道自己应该看什么具体的哲学著作。
科，当然是科学，这方面的书，我们主要是读科普性的读物，例如阿西莫夫的书，卡尔.萨根的书，还有植物学、动物学、地理学、天文学等等一切自然科学领域的科普作品，这些书有助于我们摆脱科盲这尴尬的身份，扩大我们的视野；
艺，就是艺术，范围很广，绘画、雕塑、音乐、舞蹈、戏剧、建筑、影视……，这些不但要从形成文字的文本去了解，更重要的是要亲炙，就是亲身接触，有些甚至去学习具体的艺术创作方法，艺术创作是最直接感受世界的方式，因此对人的影响巨大，这是一个纯粹以美为表达对象的世界，对于人格的培养以及道德素养的培育都至关重要，请大家不要误以为艺术只是一件奢侈的事，"美学是伦理学之母"，这是1987年的诺贝尔文学奖获得者布罗茨基，在受奖演说中说过的名言，在绝大多数情况下， 美往往是与善连在一起的。
我希望诸君对上述这些所有人类智慧的积累都能够有兴趣，都有强烈的好奇心，有强烈的求知欲。如果有了那么广阔的视野和强烈的好奇心、求知欲，你们最终必将很清楚地知道最喜欢做什么事，有了你毕生喜欢的事情，你热爱它们，你就会自由地去思想，去创造，而创造将使你的生活永远充满新生的力量，永远充满活力，使你的精神灵魂生命永葆青春。因此创造是生活中最美好的事情之一，它会在给你带来幸福的同时，也会给他人带来审美的愉悦。创造也是人世间所有事情中最美好的事之一。
如果，你们在大学期间打下很好的各方面基础，包括人文、社科、自科，那么你们的这颗心灵就不会是乏味、枯萎、老化的，而将是活泼、新鲜、年轻，充满创造力的，这样你无论从事什么方面的工作，你都将在工作本身中找到创造的乐趣，即使工作本身不允许你们发挥太多的创造力，你们也会在工作之外，过上十分充实的生活，而充实的生活，就是幸福的基本条件之一。它也能够帮助你们抵御生活中的许多艰难，让人在艰难中有寄托，有乐趣，有希望。
课马上就要结束了，我该讲的话，能讲的话，也基本上都讲了。离开这个教室，也许我和诸君还会在许多地方相逢，我希望大家能够记得我这位忘年朋友，如果需要我的帮助，只要我能做到，不与我的原则冲突，我都会尽力帮助，我可能因为粗心而犯下一些过失，如果因此而伤害过你们，请你们原谅我的过犯。
在座诸君，下课的铃声也许马上就会响起。无论将来你们会在哪里，无论你们将来从事什么，我祝愿你们永保一颗单纯的心，一颗充满爱和美的心灵；我祝愿你们获得一颗富有生命力、独立而自由的灵魂；我尤其要祝愿你们每个人，无论在多么肮脏卑污的环境中，都持守着自己永不被玷辱的卓越人格。
在座诸君，谢谢你们与我一起度过这快乐的18周27个小时。我为你们骄傲，祝你们幸福！
2008年1月3日於追遠堂
余英時：別再為虛幻口號殊死對抗
2008.01.30
余英時：別再為虛幻口號殊死對抗
黃清龍／華府─普林斯頓大學電話專訪
第七屆立委選舉令專家跌破眼鏡，這樣的選舉結果對台灣未來的發展究竟有何意義？長年關注兩岸民主發展的余英時教授指出，台灣立委選舉的最大意義，在於彰顯真實民意與民主化的成熟；民主與中國文化乃是台灣存在的最大動力，也是台灣最寶貴的兩樣資產。
余教授近年專心讀書著作，甚少對時政發表看法。記者徵得他的同意，將日前與他在電話上的訪談內容整理後在本報發表。以下是訪談內容：
立委選舉彰顯真實民意
問：這次台灣立委選舉結果，出乎許多人的意料；從台灣民主發展的軌跡來看，你認為這次選舉代表何種意義？
答：我不是研究選舉的專家，無法評論選舉的具體實務，譬如新的選舉制度是否對民進黨比較不利，這些技術面的問題我並不清楚。但從選舉過程以及結果來看，我認為它突出了三方面的意義：首先，投票日當天平和有序，社會運作如常，顯示台灣人民已經十分習慣民主選舉，把它當成生活的一部份，這在華人社會是很寶貴的資產；其次，選民用選票對民進黨過去幾年執政的表現做出裁判，並願意給已經下台七年的國民黨再一次機會，這是台灣民主走向成熟的重要一步。第三、從新的民意來看，台灣人民表達出對兩岸和平與生活改善的強烈願望，這對台灣未來的發展是很重要的訊息，值得朝野重視。
挫敗民進黨非終結本土化
問：有人認為民進黨的挫敗，代表本土化路線已經走到盡頭，你認為呢？
答：這恐怕是太過表面的看法。民主化與本土化之間本來就有著一定的關連，台灣經過近廿年的民主發展，整個社會逐漸走向本土化是必然的趨勢。但是本土化並不等於台獨，也不是哪個政黨的專利。不能說你民進黨最早喊出本土化，所以就只有你一個黨是代表本土的，其他政黨都不是。只要是透過民主的程序、經由人民選票產生的政權，都是本土化，都代表本土。
我認為這次選舉最可貴的，是真實民意得到彰顯，台灣老百姓真正在乎的是和平、安全與生活的改善。過去為了一些虛幻的口號，台灣內部形成兩個集團做殊死對抗，這樣國家發展不可能好。所以國民黨透過選票再贏回來，對台灣內部的和解是很重要的。但這並不表示民進黨已經沒有前途。當初如果不是黨外的努力，台灣的民主發展不起來，這是民進黨對台灣民主的貢獻。但民進黨執政之後，腐化速度加快，選民決定不要它繼續執政。這是台灣選民的自主決定，是人民一票一票投出來的結果。將來民進黨重新整頓，還有機會重來過，這就是民主的精神。
清楚國際現實摒棄激進台獨
問：這次選舉結果，對兩岸關係有何影響？有人說這代表著「終統」路線將成為未來的主流，你的看法呢？
答：不能太過簡單地做這樣的推論。台灣人民追求獨立自主是可以理解的，但台海關係影響區域穩定至關重大，各國基於國家利益都不希望看到衝突發生。以美國來說，台灣對它有很重要的戰略利益，美國也支持台灣發展民主；但美國不可能為了台灣而與中國發生衝突。這不是今天所謂的「中國崛起」之後，美國人才這麼想；當年文革發生時，美國政府就反對蔣介石反攻大陸的想法，因為中國太大，是個看不到邊際的戰場，美國連北越都打不贏，怎麼會為了台灣去和中國打仗？台灣既然自許為國際民主社會的一員，就不能不考慮到這一點。
國際的現實擺在那裡，台灣老百姓也很清楚，大家並不願意被中共統治，所以香港那一套東西在台灣沒有市場。但台灣人民也不希望為了獨立的空名而發生戰爭，因為那對台灣的傷害將是致命性的。因此激進的台獨路線受到摒棄，大家寧可維持實質的獨立，ＲＯＣ和ＲＯＴ名異實同，你維持中華民國的存在，就可以和中國平起平坐。我相信這才是當前台灣民意的主流，而且是不分族群、省籍的最大共識。
所以即使馬英九當選總統、國民黨重新執政，不必擔心台灣就會被中國吞掉，因為民意不會允許。相反地，正因為馬英九是外省人，我認為他在處理兩岸問題上會更加審慎。馬英九過去對大陸的民主曾表達關切，他對法輪功、六四事件的態度，都是有案可稽的。如果他當選總統，我希望他能繼續堅持下去，不要受國民黨內一些人的利益所牽絆。
民主與中國文化是兩大資產
問：這幾年民進黨政府一些做法被批評是在推動「去中國化」，似乎不如此，台灣的主體性就無法建立；從歷史與文化的角度，你怎麼看所謂的「去中國化」問題？
答：我不清楚這個口號是怎麼開始的？如果「去中國化」是指過去威權時代的國民黨政權或今天在海峽對岸的中共政權，這是可以理解的，但仍不能用「去中國化」這個錯誤的名詞。從歷史文化上說，台灣人也是中國人，因此如果真的公開推動「去中國化」那是很荒唐的事。你的根源明明就是中國文化，不論血緣、文字、語言乃至宗教信仰都是，怎麼可能去掉？一旦去掉了之後，台灣還有什麼？台灣人能夠完全西化，然後變成洋人嗎？台灣的下一代要從小學習希臘、羅馬歷史，乃至歐洲、美國的近現代史嗎？即使是這樣，你也不可能就得到所謂的主體性啊！一個國家的發展，不能脫離它的文化背景。台灣近代以來接受各種文化的影響，追本溯源，還是中國這個大文明體系底下的一部份。這是台灣很大的資產，為什麼要把它去掉呢？
問：近來北京當局對台灣的民主成就多所否定，你認為台灣的民主發展對中國有何意義？
答：台灣的民主發展對中國大陸當然意義重大。民主和中國文化是台灣存在的最大動力，也是台灣最寶貴的兩樣東西。民主不是空洞的理論，而是以文化為根源的實實在在的生活價值；文化也不能固步自封，必須是開放的，吸收世界上一切好的價值和事物。今天台灣能夠把兩者結合，顯示民主政治與中國文化是可以相容的，而不是一些人所說的中國因為國情特殊，所以不適合發展民主體制。這就是台灣民主的價值所在。
我一向對台灣的民主不悲觀，因為台灣人民走過威權統治，會更珍惜今天享有的一切。過去一段時間，台灣的民主發展出現一些亂象，在我看來那是從威權過渡到民主的必經過程。這次選舉證明，台灣的民主已經更加成熟，選舉變動如此之大，社會卻不擾不驚，這是很了不起的成就。台灣雖然很小，影響力卻是巨大的。
（記者現為美國布魯金斯學會東北亞中心訪問學者）
http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-Focus/2007Cti-Focus-Content/0,4518,9701300211+97013021+0+075820+0,00.html
余英時：別再為虛幻口號殊死對抗
黃清龍／華府─普林斯頓大學電話專訪
第七屆立委選舉令專家跌破眼鏡，這樣的選舉結果對台灣未來的發展究竟有何意義？長年關注兩岸民主發展的余英時教授指出，台灣立委選舉的最大意義，在於彰顯真實民意與民主化的成熟；民主與中國文化乃是台灣存在的最大動力，也是台灣最寶貴的兩樣資產。
余教授近年專心讀書著作，甚少對時政發表看法。記者徵得他的同意，將日前與他在電話上的訪談內容整理後在本報發表。以下是訪談內容：
立委選舉彰顯真實民意
問：這次台灣立委選舉結果，出乎許多人的意料；從台灣民主發展的軌跡來看，你認為這次選舉代表何種意義？
答：我不是研究選舉的專家，無法評論選舉的具體實務，譬如新的選舉制度是否對民進黨比較不利，這些技術面的問題我並不清楚。但從選舉過程以及結果來看，我認為它突出了三方面的意義：首先，投票日當天平和有序，社會運作如常，顯示台灣人民已經十分習慣民主選舉，把它當成生活的一部份，這在華人社會是很寶貴的資產；其次，選民用選票對民進黨過去幾年執政的表現做出裁判，並願意給已經下台七年的國民黨再一次機會，這是台灣民主走向成熟的重要一步。第三、從新的民意來看，台灣人民表達出對兩岸和平與生活改善的強烈願望，這對台灣未來的發展是很重要的訊息，值得朝野重視。
挫敗民進黨非終結本土化
問：有人認為民進黨的挫敗，代表本土化路線已經走到盡頭，你認為呢？
答：這恐怕是太過表面的看法。民主化與本土化之間本來就有著一定的關連，台灣經過近廿年的民主發展，整個社會逐漸走向本土化是必然的趨勢。但是本土化並不等於台獨，也不是哪個政黨的專利。不能說你民進黨最早喊出本土化，所以就只有你一個黨是代表本土的，其他政黨都不是。只要是透過民主的程序、經由人民選票產生的政權，都是本土化，都代表本土。
我認為這次選舉最可貴的，是真實民意得到彰顯，台灣老百姓真正在乎的是和平、安全與生活的改善。過去為了一些虛幻的口號，台灣內部形成兩個集團做殊死對抗，這樣國家發展不可能好。所以國民黨透過選票再贏回來，對台灣內部的和解是很重要的。但這並不表示民進黨已經沒有前途。當初如果不是黨外的努力，台灣的民主發展不起來，這是民進黨對台灣民主的貢獻。但民進黨執政之後，腐化速度加快，選民決定不要它繼續執政。這是台灣選民的自主決定，是人民一票一票投出來的結果。將來民進黨重新整頓，還有機會重來過，這就是民主的精神。
清楚國際現實摒棄激進台獨
問：這次選舉結果，對兩岸關係有何影響？有人說這代表著「終統」路線將成為未來的主流，你的看法呢？
答：不能太過簡單地做這樣的推論。台灣人民追求獨立自主是可以理解的，但台海關係影響區域穩定至關重大，各國基於國家利益都不希望看到衝突發生。以美國來說，台灣對它有很重要的戰略利益，美國也支持台灣發展民主；但美國不可能為了台灣而與中國發生衝突。這不是今天所謂的「中國崛起」之後，美國人才這麼想；當年文革發生時，美國政府就反對蔣介石反攻大陸的想法，因為中國太大，是個看不到邊際的戰場，美國連北越都打不贏，怎麼會為了台灣去和中國打仗？台灣既然自許為國際民主社會的一員，就不能不考慮到這一點。
國際的現實擺在那裡，台灣老百姓也很清楚，大家並不願意被中共統治，所以香港那一套東西在台灣沒有市場。但台灣人民也不希望為了獨立的空名而發生戰爭，因為那對台灣的傷害將是致命性的。因此激進的台獨路線受到摒棄，大家寧可維持實質的獨立，ＲＯＣ和ＲＯＴ名異實同，你維持中華民國的存在，就可以和中國平起平坐。我相信這才是當前台灣民意的主流，而且是不分族群、省籍的最大共識。
所以即使馬英九當選總統、國民黨重新執政，不必擔心台灣就會被中國吞掉，因為民意不會允許。相反地，正因為馬英九是外省人，我認為他在處理兩岸問題上會更加審慎。馬英九過去對大陸的民主曾表達關切，他對法輪功、六四事件的態度，都是有案可稽的。如果他當選總統，我希望他能繼續堅持下去，不要受國民黨內一些人的利益所牽絆。
民主與中國文化是兩大資產
問：這幾年民進黨政府一些做法被批評是在推動「去中國化」，似乎不如此，台灣的主體性就無法建立；從歷史與文化的角度，你怎麼看所謂的「去中國化」問題？
答：我不清楚這個口號是怎麼開始的？如果「去中國化」是指過去威權時代的國民黨政權或今天在海峽對岸的中共政權，這是可以理解的，但仍不能用「去中國化」這個錯誤的名詞。從歷史文化上說，台灣人也是中國人，因此如果真的公開推動「去中國化」那是很荒唐的事。你的根源明明就是中國文化，不論血緣、文字、語言乃至宗教信仰都是，怎麼可能去掉？一旦去掉了之後，台灣還有什麼？台灣人能夠完全西化，然後變成洋人嗎？台灣的下一代要從小學習希臘、羅馬歷史，乃至歐洲、美國的近現代史嗎？即使是這樣，你也不可能就得到所謂的主體性啊！一個國家的發展，不能脫離它的文化背景。台灣近代以來接受各種文化的影響，追本溯源，還是中國這個大文明體系底下的一部份。這是台灣很大的資產，為什麼要把它去掉呢？
問：近來北京當局對台灣的民主成就多所否定，你認為台灣的民主發展對中國有何意義？
答：台灣的民主發展對中國大陸當然意義重大。民主和中國文化是台灣存在的最大動力，也是台灣最寶貴的兩樣東西。民主不是空洞的理論，而是以文化為根源的實實在在的生活價值；文化也不能固步自封，必須是開放的，吸收世界上一切好的價值和事物。今天台灣能夠把兩者結合，顯示民主政治與中國文化是可以相容的，而不是一些人所說的中國因為國情特殊，所以不適合發展民主體制。這就是台灣民主的價值所在。
我一向對台灣的民主不悲觀，因為台灣人民走過威權統治，會更珍惜今天享有的一切。過去一段時間，台灣的民主發展出現一些亂象，在我看來那是從威權過渡到民主的必經過程。這次選舉證明，台灣的民主已經更加成熟，選舉變動如此之大，社會卻不擾不驚，這是很了不起的成就。台灣雖然很小，影響力卻是巨大的。
（記者現為美國布魯金斯學會東北亞中心訪問學者）
http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-Focus/2007Cti-Focus-Content/0,4518,9701300211+97013021+0+075820+0,00.html
Sunday, June 10, 2007
郑小琼：记录流水线上的屈辱与呻吟
郑小琼：记录流水线上的屈辱与呻吟
2007-06-11 09:05:22 来源: 南方报业(广州)
四川打工妹郑小琼一边在广东东莞工厂打工，一边写出了“打工诗歌”，作品《铁·塑料厂》获得人民文学奖散文奖。有人说，她的作品充满灰暗与苦涩，但是她说，记录了打工者的真实境况。“来自底层的真切体验给了她沉实的底气。”
打工妹郑小琼作品选：
我不断地试图用文字把打工生活的感受写出来／它的尖锐总是那样的明亮／像烧灼着的铁一样／不断地烧烤着肉体与灵魂———《铁》
在背后我让人骂了一句狗日的北妹／这个玩具化的城市没有穿上内裤／欲望的风把它的裙底飘了起来／它露出的光腚／让我这个北妹想入非非啊！———《人行天桥》
在深夜轰鸣的机器中／夜晚疲惫得如同一个筋疲力尽的鱼／在窗外／在机台上游动着———《塑料厂》
那个疲倦的外乡人／小心而胆怯／你从来没有见过这么胆小的人／像躲在浓荫下的灯光一样———《黄麻岭》
相关报道 郑小琼：在诗人与打工妹之间（南方周末）
郑小琼与诗友结伴爬山被警察拦住，朋友从手提袋里拿出一本书，挥舞着告诉警察，那是他刚出的诗集。警察不耐烦，将诗集打翻在地，把手一伸，“暂住证！”
“我不知道什么叫光明或阴暗，我只看见事实。我的诗歌灰，因为我的世界是灰的。”
“珠江三角洲有4万根以上断指，我常想，如果把它们都摆成一条直线会有多长，而我笔下瘦弱的文字却不能将任何一根断指接起来……”
《南方人物周刊》实习记者 郑廷鑫 李劼婧 发自东莞
是诗人在打工，还是打工妹在写诗？成希／图（南方周末供网易深度图片）
女工们的真实生活怎样？（南方周末供网易深度图片）
见到郑小琼，颇费几番周折。
记者到达东莞南城客运站，郑小琼告知：“我今天要去送货，在长安镇。”
车到长安已是中午。再去电，得知她接下来要去涌头工业区。
到了涌头工业区，太阳曝晒，仍然不见人影。后来终于见到了，这个人民文学奖本年度“新浪潮”散文奖的得主一脸歉意：“上午忙着到处送货，还要赶到朋友那边拿信。我没有固定的住址，信件都是寄到朋友那，我一个月再去拿一次。”
以前在厂里，她的信经常被扣留。每个月要扣她几十块钱才能把信拿走。“一封信要我交一块多，每个月扣四五十块，我一个月就赚几百块，都是血汗钱，心痛死了。”所以，只好让朋友代为收信。
几十封沉甸甸的信，大都是各地的文学刊物寄来的，还有一些读者的信，当然还有汇款。
于是一起到邮局。却被告知无法取款：汇款单上写的是朋友转交给郑小琼，必须有朋友的身份证和签名。她打电话给朋友，朋友却已经出差去了。
没人知道她叫郑小琼
在没来东莞打工之前，郑小琼是四川南充乡下诊所的一个小医士。
1996年，当她考上南充卫校的时候，还是家里的骄傲。“在那个年代，考上卫校，毕业后分配到某个医院，就意味着端起了铁饭碗，吃上了公家饭。”她带着村里人羡慕的眼光，和家里人砸锅卖铁也要供她上学的决心，来到了卫校。
四年毕业后，学校不再包分配了，郑小琼来到了一家乡村诊所。
诊所的经历，她一直都拒绝回忆，因为那是个梦魇。乡村诊所说到底就是个性病医院，“那些地方太黑了，根本就是骗人的，一点效果都没有，害人啊。我真的看不下去，良心不安啊。”
“上学时，我一个月要用两三百，一年学费要两三千，上学欠的那么多钱怎么还？更别提回报父母了！”于是，她不顾家里人反对，南下打工。
“那时候找工作挺难的，要找到一个好的工作就更难。招两三个人，就有两百多人排队。先让你跑步，还要做仰卧起坐啊，看看你体力怎么样。人都没有尊严了，反正他叫你做什么你就得做什么。进去的话，又要收押金，先交一两百块，制服费。”打工多年，见过无数不平事的郑小琼讲起这些，还有些忿忿不平。
在残酷的现实面前，“好像所有的理想一下子全都没有了”。先在一个模具厂工作，没做多久又去了玩具厂、磁带厂，再到家具厂做仓管。
不断转厂换工作的后果，就是生活更加地艰难。“当你连饭都吃不上的时候，那种感觉真叫可怕。”但恐慌之后，生活还得继续，继续挨饿，饿过一顿是一顿。
挨饿之外，暂住证成了郑小琼的另一个梦魇。“有时候老乡把你反锁在出租屋里，查房的就猛敲铁皮房门，看你在不在，外面又下着雨……有些家里带着小孩，‘哇’地一声就吓得哭起来……特别是他那个手电筒‘刷’地一下照着你，那种感觉……”
工厂没有任何休息日，一天工作十二小时。饶是如此，她在家具厂上了一个月班后，月底结算的时候又一次让她彻底地心寒了：工资卡上的数字是284元。
几番辗转，郑小琼来到一个叫黄麻岭的小镇，进了一家五金厂。这里，所有的东西都是冰冷而残酷的，但对她来说，这是一座火山，让她喷发出无尽的灵感。
工厂实行全封闭式管理，一个员工一周只允许出厂门三次，用于购置基本的生活用品或办理私事。有一次老乡来看望她，在门口等了半天，等到她下班，因为那周她已经出去了三次，两个人只能站在铁门的两侧，说上几句话。
在这个封闭得类似于监狱的环境里，她每天早上七点三十分上班，十二点下班，下午一点四十五分上班，五点四十五分下班，六点半加班，一直到九点半下班。每月五号左右，领一千块左右的工资。加班费倒是有，一个小时一块钱。很多工人会争着要加班，为了三个小时三块钱的加班费而争执起来。
在郑小琼看来，“这是挺好的工作了”。她一呆就是四年，在流水线干了两年后，又到办公室做文员。
五金厂的流水线上，所有人都没有名字，只有工号。每天的工作就是在铁片上用超声波轧孔，从机台上取下两斤多重的铁块，摆好、按开关、打轧，然后取下再摆，不断地重复。每天要将一两斤重的铁片起起落落一万多次，第一个月手就磨烂了。等到你的手磨掉了一层皮，长出老茧之后，便开始能适应这种生活。
流水线上，没有我，只有们，人只是流水线上的一种工具。这是郑小琼在东莞最为辛苦的一段日子。在那里，没人知道她叫郑小琼，人们只会说：“哎，245号。”
后来，她在自己一篇名为《流水线》的文章中写下了这段经历。虽然已经时过境迁，语言中的愤懑与辛酸却是无法掩盖的：
作为个体的我们在流水线样的现实中是多么柔软而脆弱，这种敏感是我们痛觉的原点，它们一点一点地扩散，充满了我的内心，在内心深处叫喊着，反抗着，我内心因流水线的奴役感到耻辱，但是我却对这一切无能为力，剩下的是一种个人尊严的损伤，在长期的损伤中麻木下去，在麻木中我们渐渐习惯了，在习惯中我渐渐放弃曾经有过的叫喊与反抗，我渐渐成为了流水线的一部分。
写诗能赚多少钱？
还是在流水线上。有个工友在打轧的时候，手上动作慢了一点，手指立刻被打下来。自己还不知道，还在继续做事。然后就奇怪，这怎么有血呀？一看只有一个指甲盖在流水线上，其它部分都压成了肉酱，看不到了。
工友看着自己的手，等了会，血一下子喷出来了。她按住手，走到郑小琼面前，缓缓地说：手砸了。
郑小琼急了，赶紧去找老板。老板说：哦？严不严重？那就去找厂里的采购吧，坐他的摩托车去医院。
采购在外面，半个小时后才能回来。老板的车就在旁边，但他看到工人流血的手，肯定会弄脏自己的车，又面无表情地摇摇头，让她们继续等采购回来。
十分钟、二十分钟、三十分钟，血已经在地上摊成一大片。采购终于回来了，受伤的人却不愿意住院，因为这样能向工厂要求多赔点钱。好的时候，能有一两千块的赔偿，不走运的时候，老板都没有赔，就从保险里面给，还要扣掉医药费。
伤口简单包扎一下之后，血止住了，彻骨的疼痛却止不住。半夜睡觉时，她一再地痛醒，喊痛的呻吟又吵醒了其他工友。
后来，断指的故事被郑小琼一再提起。她自己也有相似经历，幸好手抽得快，只打掉了一个拇指盖，但也足够痛彻心扉。
在获得人民文学奖“新浪潮”散文奖后，站在领奖台上，她又一次讲起了断指，断指和她的写作：
我在五金厂打工五年时光，每个月我都会碰到机器轧掉半截手指或者指甲盖的事情，我的内心充满了疼痛，当我从报纸上看到在珠三角每年有超过4万根的断指之痛时，我一直在计算着，这些断指如果摆成一条直线，它们将会有多长，而这条线还在不断地、快续地加长之中。此刻，我想得更多的是这些瘦弱的文字有什么用？它们不能接起任何一根断指。
但是，我仍不断告诉自己，我必须写下来，把自己的感受写下来，这些感受不仅仅是我的，也是我的工友们的。我们既然对现实不能改变什么，但是我们已经见证了什么，我想，我必须把它们记录下来。
在家具厂做仓管的时候，郑小琼每天守在很大很凌乱的仓库里，等待有人来领胶布之类的东西。很多时候，都是一个人枯坐在办公桌前。于是她会偷偷地翻看厂里的书和报刊。
在一些打工者的刊物上，看到别人写的诗歌，她觉得有些奇怪：写这些东西有什么困难嘛，我也能写。就是在这里，她偷偷地写下了生平的第一首诗，然后寄给了一家镇报，居然发表了。在那之前，她对诗歌一点也不了解。在那之后，便一发不可收拾地写起来了。
写作都在一个前提下进行：偷偷地。如果被人发现她在上班的时间写作，后果就是罚钱。但写诗的激情总归战胜罚款的忧虑。她在小纸片上，这里写几句那里写几句，回到宿舍再整理起来。因此，曾被人称为“地下党”。
有一天郑小琼突然心血来潮，想跟同住的老乡说说自己写的东西，“正当我很有激情要跟她说这些的时候，她突然就埋下头，不是擦擦鞋，就是整理一下被子，弄一下衣服……虽然也没有离开，但是……你就觉得这样真的很没意思，就不想说了。”
她一直偷偷把诗写在工厂的合格纸上，堆起来有一尺多高。因为居无定所，转厂的时候，这些全部都带不走，扔掉了。
故乡只能是笔下的故乡了
几年的时间，郑小琼把自己的打工生活都写成诗歌。写诗给她带来了意想不到的名声。随着她的诗歌在各种文学媒体上频频发表，引起了文坛的关注，也获得了“打工诗人”的称呼。
但到现在，郑小琼仍然认为，自己“还不明白什么是诗歌的体例”，自己只是在记录一些来自内心的感受，没有经过过多的雕琢，连错别字都没改。
理所当然，有人认为她的诗歌“过于粗糙，堆砌太多”，“写诗还处于无意识状态，宣泄的成分多一些”。
但更多的人，却被她诗歌的大气和对苦难生活的描写所震撼。评论家惊叹，“来自底层的真切体验给了她沉实的底气，苍茫而又富有细节能力的描述，再加上天然的对底层劳动者身份的认同，使她的作品倍添大气、超拔、质朴和纯真的意味。”
所有这些评价都很难与记者面前这个郑小琼联系在一起。她看上去柔弱，腼腆而害羞，说话不多，脸上总是漾着笑意。
“也许你无法想象，打工这么多年，我不敢回家。”因为工资低，郑小琼“到了结婚的年龄，仍身无分文”，也没寄过多少钱回家：“我现在都不敢去流浪，要是流浪一年的话，所有的亲戚都不相信你了，因为你没钱了要去他们那边借……”
今年上半年，转做业务的郑小琼一单没成，还倒贴了三千块。得到的一万块人民文学奖金，只是让她可以缓一口气。
2007年，郑小琼终于回到阔别七年的家乡，却发现“完全没有家乡的感觉，故乡只能是笔下的故乡了”。
“家里都是一些老人孩子，盼着打工的人拿回去更多的钱。萧条的街上没什么人，小时候的玩伴一个都没有了，出来那么久已经完全改变了。
“等我写完这个南方系列，也可能我就不再写，或者不在这个城市了，人生总是有很多可能的。”
仍然奔波于东莞大街小巷的郑小琼，一边祈愿写作的人要“正常一点，良善一点，平静一点，谦和一点”，一边希望“打工的人，大家都越来越好”。（感谢洪湖浪对此文的帮助）
本文来源：南方人物周刊 作者：郑廷鑫 李劼婧
http://news.163.com/07/0611/09/3GMPCVJK00011SM9.html
2007-06-11 09:05:22 来源: 南方报业(广州)
四川打工妹郑小琼一边在广东东莞工厂打工，一边写出了“打工诗歌”，作品《铁·塑料厂》获得人民文学奖散文奖。有人说，她的作品充满灰暗与苦涩，但是她说，记录了打工者的真实境况。“来自底层的真切体验给了她沉实的底气。”
打工妹郑小琼作品选：
我不断地试图用文字把打工生活的感受写出来／它的尖锐总是那样的明亮／像烧灼着的铁一样／不断地烧烤着肉体与灵魂———《铁》
在背后我让人骂了一句狗日的北妹／这个玩具化的城市没有穿上内裤／欲望的风把它的裙底飘了起来／它露出的光腚／让我这个北妹想入非非啊！———《人行天桥》
在深夜轰鸣的机器中／夜晚疲惫得如同一个筋疲力尽的鱼／在窗外／在机台上游动着———《塑料厂》
那个疲倦的外乡人／小心而胆怯／你从来没有见过这么胆小的人／像躲在浓荫下的灯光一样———《黄麻岭》
相关报道 郑小琼：在诗人与打工妹之间（南方周末）
郑小琼与诗友结伴爬山被警察拦住，朋友从手提袋里拿出一本书，挥舞着告诉警察，那是他刚出的诗集。警察不耐烦，将诗集打翻在地，把手一伸，“暂住证！”
“我不知道什么叫光明或阴暗，我只看见事实。我的诗歌灰，因为我的世界是灰的。”
“珠江三角洲有4万根以上断指，我常想，如果把它们都摆成一条直线会有多长，而我笔下瘦弱的文字却不能将任何一根断指接起来……”
《南方人物周刊》实习记者 郑廷鑫 李劼婧 发自东莞
是诗人在打工，还是打工妹在写诗？成希／图（南方周末供网易深度图片）
女工们的真实生活怎样？（南方周末供网易深度图片）
见到郑小琼，颇费几番周折。
记者到达东莞南城客运站，郑小琼告知：“我今天要去送货，在长安镇。”
车到长安已是中午。再去电，得知她接下来要去涌头工业区。
到了涌头工业区，太阳曝晒，仍然不见人影。后来终于见到了，这个人民文学奖本年度“新浪潮”散文奖的得主一脸歉意：“上午忙着到处送货，还要赶到朋友那边拿信。我没有固定的住址，信件都是寄到朋友那，我一个月再去拿一次。”
以前在厂里，她的信经常被扣留。每个月要扣她几十块钱才能把信拿走。“一封信要我交一块多，每个月扣四五十块，我一个月就赚几百块，都是血汗钱，心痛死了。”所以，只好让朋友代为收信。
几十封沉甸甸的信，大都是各地的文学刊物寄来的，还有一些读者的信，当然还有汇款。
于是一起到邮局。却被告知无法取款：汇款单上写的是朋友转交给郑小琼，必须有朋友的身份证和签名。她打电话给朋友，朋友却已经出差去了。
没人知道她叫郑小琼
在没来东莞打工之前，郑小琼是四川南充乡下诊所的一个小医士。
1996年，当她考上南充卫校的时候，还是家里的骄傲。“在那个年代，考上卫校，毕业后分配到某个医院，就意味着端起了铁饭碗，吃上了公家饭。”她带着村里人羡慕的眼光，和家里人砸锅卖铁也要供她上学的决心，来到了卫校。
四年毕业后，学校不再包分配了，郑小琼来到了一家乡村诊所。
诊所的经历，她一直都拒绝回忆，因为那是个梦魇。乡村诊所说到底就是个性病医院，“那些地方太黑了，根本就是骗人的，一点效果都没有，害人啊。我真的看不下去，良心不安啊。”
“上学时，我一个月要用两三百，一年学费要两三千，上学欠的那么多钱怎么还？更别提回报父母了！”于是，她不顾家里人反对，南下打工。
“那时候找工作挺难的，要找到一个好的工作就更难。招两三个人，就有两百多人排队。先让你跑步，还要做仰卧起坐啊，看看你体力怎么样。人都没有尊严了，反正他叫你做什么你就得做什么。进去的话，又要收押金，先交一两百块，制服费。”打工多年，见过无数不平事的郑小琼讲起这些，还有些忿忿不平。
在残酷的现实面前，“好像所有的理想一下子全都没有了”。先在一个模具厂工作，没做多久又去了玩具厂、磁带厂，再到家具厂做仓管。
不断转厂换工作的后果，就是生活更加地艰难。“当你连饭都吃不上的时候，那种感觉真叫可怕。”但恐慌之后，生活还得继续，继续挨饿，饿过一顿是一顿。
挨饿之外，暂住证成了郑小琼的另一个梦魇。“有时候老乡把你反锁在出租屋里，查房的就猛敲铁皮房门，看你在不在，外面又下着雨……有些家里带着小孩，‘哇’地一声就吓得哭起来……特别是他那个手电筒‘刷’地一下照着你，那种感觉……”
工厂没有任何休息日，一天工作十二小时。饶是如此，她在家具厂上了一个月班后，月底结算的时候又一次让她彻底地心寒了：工资卡上的数字是284元。
几番辗转，郑小琼来到一个叫黄麻岭的小镇，进了一家五金厂。这里，所有的东西都是冰冷而残酷的，但对她来说，这是一座火山，让她喷发出无尽的灵感。
工厂实行全封闭式管理，一个员工一周只允许出厂门三次，用于购置基本的生活用品或办理私事。有一次老乡来看望她，在门口等了半天，等到她下班，因为那周她已经出去了三次，两个人只能站在铁门的两侧，说上几句话。
在这个封闭得类似于监狱的环境里，她每天早上七点三十分上班，十二点下班，下午一点四十五分上班，五点四十五分下班，六点半加班，一直到九点半下班。每月五号左右，领一千块左右的工资。加班费倒是有，一个小时一块钱。很多工人会争着要加班，为了三个小时三块钱的加班费而争执起来。
在郑小琼看来，“这是挺好的工作了”。她一呆就是四年，在流水线干了两年后，又到办公室做文员。
五金厂的流水线上，所有人都没有名字，只有工号。每天的工作就是在铁片上用超声波轧孔，从机台上取下两斤多重的铁块，摆好、按开关、打轧，然后取下再摆，不断地重复。每天要将一两斤重的铁片起起落落一万多次，第一个月手就磨烂了。等到你的手磨掉了一层皮，长出老茧之后，便开始能适应这种生活。
流水线上，没有我，只有们，人只是流水线上的一种工具。这是郑小琼在东莞最为辛苦的一段日子。在那里，没人知道她叫郑小琼，人们只会说：“哎，245号。”
后来，她在自己一篇名为《流水线》的文章中写下了这段经历。虽然已经时过境迁，语言中的愤懑与辛酸却是无法掩盖的：
作为个体的我们在流水线样的现实中是多么柔软而脆弱，这种敏感是我们痛觉的原点，它们一点一点地扩散，充满了我的内心，在内心深处叫喊着，反抗着，我内心因流水线的奴役感到耻辱，但是我却对这一切无能为力，剩下的是一种个人尊严的损伤，在长期的损伤中麻木下去，在麻木中我们渐渐习惯了，在习惯中我渐渐放弃曾经有过的叫喊与反抗，我渐渐成为了流水线的一部分。
写诗能赚多少钱？
还是在流水线上。有个工友在打轧的时候，手上动作慢了一点，手指立刻被打下来。自己还不知道，还在继续做事。然后就奇怪，这怎么有血呀？一看只有一个指甲盖在流水线上，其它部分都压成了肉酱，看不到了。
工友看着自己的手，等了会，血一下子喷出来了。她按住手，走到郑小琼面前，缓缓地说：手砸了。
郑小琼急了，赶紧去找老板。老板说：哦？严不严重？那就去找厂里的采购吧，坐他的摩托车去医院。
采购在外面，半个小时后才能回来。老板的车就在旁边，但他看到工人流血的手，肯定会弄脏自己的车，又面无表情地摇摇头，让她们继续等采购回来。
十分钟、二十分钟、三十分钟，血已经在地上摊成一大片。采购终于回来了，受伤的人却不愿意住院，因为这样能向工厂要求多赔点钱。好的时候，能有一两千块的赔偿，不走运的时候，老板都没有赔，就从保险里面给，还要扣掉医药费。
伤口简单包扎一下之后，血止住了，彻骨的疼痛却止不住。半夜睡觉时，她一再地痛醒，喊痛的呻吟又吵醒了其他工友。
后来，断指的故事被郑小琼一再提起。她自己也有相似经历，幸好手抽得快，只打掉了一个拇指盖，但也足够痛彻心扉。
在获得人民文学奖“新浪潮”散文奖后，站在领奖台上，她又一次讲起了断指，断指和她的写作：
我在五金厂打工五年时光，每个月我都会碰到机器轧掉半截手指或者指甲盖的事情，我的内心充满了疼痛，当我从报纸上看到在珠三角每年有超过4万根的断指之痛时，我一直在计算着，这些断指如果摆成一条直线，它们将会有多长，而这条线还在不断地、快续地加长之中。此刻，我想得更多的是这些瘦弱的文字有什么用？它们不能接起任何一根断指。
但是，我仍不断告诉自己，我必须写下来，把自己的感受写下来，这些感受不仅仅是我的，也是我的工友们的。我们既然对现实不能改变什么，但是我们已经见证了什么，我想，我必须把它们记录下来。
在家具厂做仓管的时候，郑小琼每天守在很大很凌乱的仓库里，等待有人来领胶布之类的东西。很多时候，都是一个人枯坐在办公桌前。于是她会偷偷地翻看厂里的书和报刊。
在一些打工者的刊物上，看到别人写的诗歌，她觉得有些奇怪：写这些东西有什么困难嘛，我也能写。就是在这里，她偷偷地写下了生平的第一首诗，然后寄给了一家镇报，居然发表了。在那之前，她对诗歌一点也不了解。在那之后，便一发不可收拾地写起来了。
写作都在一个前提下进行：偷偷地。如果被人发现她在上班的时间写作，后果就是罚钱。但写诗的激情总归战胜罚款的忧虑。她在小纸片上，这里写几句那里写几句，回到宿舍再整理起来。因此，曾被人称为“地下党”。
有一天郑小琼突然心血来潮，想跟同住的老乡说说自己写的东西，“正当我很有激情要跟她说这些的时候，她突然就埋下头，不是擦擦鞋，就是整理一下被子，弄一下衣服……虽然也没有离开，但是……你就觉得这样真的很没意思，就不想说了。”
她一直偷偷把诗写在工厂的合格纸上，堆起来有一尺多高。因为居无定所，转厂的时候，这些全部都带不走，扔掉了。
故乡只能是笔下的故乡了
几年的时间，郑小琼把自己的打工生活都写成诗歌。写诗给她带来了意想不到的名声。随着她的诗歌在各种文学媒体上频频发表，引起了文坛的关注，也获得了“打工诗人”的称呼。
但到现在，郑小琼仍然认为，自己“还不明白什么是诗歌的体例”，自己只是在记录一些来自内心的感受，没有经过过多的雕琢，连错别字都没改。
理所当然，有人认为她的诗歌“过于粗糙，堆砌太多”，“写诗还处于无意识状态，宣泄的成分多一些”。
但更多的人，却被她诗歌的大气和对苦难生活的描写所震撼。评论家惊叹，“来自底层的真切体验给了她沉实的底气，苍茫而又富有细节能力的描述，再加上天然的对底层劳动者身份的认同，使她的作品倍添大气、超拔、质朴和纯真的意味。”
所有这些评价都很难与记者面前这个郑小琼联系在一起。她看上去柔弱，腼腆而害羞，说话不多，脸上总是漾着笑意。
“也许你无法想象，打工这么多年，我不敢回家。”因为工资低，郑小琼“到了结婚的年龄，仍身无分文”，也没寄过多少钱回家：“我现在都不敢去流浪，要是流浪一年的话，所有的亲戚都不相信你了，因为你没钱了要去他们那边借……”
今年上半年，转做业务的郑小琼一单没成，还倒贴了三千块。得到的一万块人民文学奖金，只是让她可以缓一口气。
2007年，郑小琼终于回到阔别七年的家乡，却发现“完全没有家乡的感觉，故乡只能是笔下的故乡了”。
“家里都是一些老人孩子，盼着打工的人拿回去更多的钱。萧条的街上没什么人，小时候的玩伴一个都没有了，出来那么久已经完全改变了。
“等我写完这个南方系列，也可能我就不再写，或者不在这个城市了，人生总是有很多可能的。”
仍然奔波于东莞大街小巷的郑小琼，一边祈愿写作的人要“正常一点，良善一点，平静一点，谦和一点”，一边希望“打工的人，大家都越来越好”。（感谢洪湖浪对此文的帮助）
本文来源：南方人物周刊 作者：郑廷鑫 李劼婧
http://news.163.com/07/0611/09/3GMPCVJK00011SM9.html
Corporate Korea Corks the Bottle as Women Rise
June 10, 2007
Corporate Korea Corks the Bottle as Women Rise
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
SEOUL, South Korea — In a time-honored practice in South Korea’s corporate culture, the 38-year-old manager at an online game company took his 10-person team on twice-weekly after-work drinking bouts. He exhorted his subordinates to drink, including a 29-year-old graphic designer who protested that her limit was two glasses of beer.
“Either you drink or you get it from me tomorrow,” the boss told her one evening.
She drank, fearing that refusing to do so would hurt her career. But eventually, unable to take the drinking any longer, she quit and sued.
In May, in the first ruling of its kind, the Seoul High Court said that forcing a subordinate to drink alcohol was illegal, and it pronounced the manager guilty of a “violation of human dignity.” The court awarded the woman $32,000 in damages for the incidents, which occurred in 2004.
The ruling was as much a testament to women’s growing presence in corporate life here as a confirmation of changes already under way. As an increasing number of women have joined companies as professionals in the past half decade, corporate South Korea has struggled to change the country’s thoroughly male-centered corporate culture, starting with alcohol.
An evening out with colleagues here follows a predictable, alcohol-centered pattern: dinner, usually some grilled pork, washed down with soju, Korea’s national vodkalike drink; then a second round at a beer hall; then whiskey and singing at a “norae bang,” a Korean karaoke club. Exhorted by their bosses to drink, the corporate warriors bond, literally, so that the sight of dark-suited men holding hands, leaning on one another, staggering toward taxis, is part of this city’s nighttime streetscape. The next morning, back at the office, they are ready to fight, with reaffirmed unity, for more markets at home and abroad.
Many professional women manage to avoid much of the drinking by adopting well-known strategies. They slip away while their male colleagues indulge in a second or third round of drinking. They pour the drinks into potted plants. They rely on male colleagues, called “knights in shining armor,” to take their turns in drinking games.
Companies, too, have begun to respond. Since 2005, Posco, the steel manufacturer, has limited company outings to two hours at its mill in South Korea’s southwest. Employees can raise a red card if they do not want to drink or a yellow card if they want to go home early. At Woori Bank, one of South Korea’s largest, an alarm rings at 10 p.m. to encourage workers to stop drinking and go home using public transportation, which stops running before midnight.
“My boss used to be all about, ‘Let’s drink till we die!’ ” said Wi Su-jung, a 31-year-old woman employed at a small shipping company.
Ms. Wi, who was out enjoying the sun in downtown Seoul, said the atmosphere began changing as more women joined her company in the past couple of years. “The women got together and complained about the drinking and the pressure to drink,” she said. “So things changed last year. Now we sometimes go to musicals or movies instead.”
Kim Chil-jong, who was taking a walk on his lunch hour, said he owned a nine-person publishing company. In the last couple of years, he hired two women for the first time.
“We drink less because of their presence,” Mr. Kim, 47, said. “Before, I’d encourage my workers to drink whenever we went out, but I don’t do that anymore.”
Still, at least 90 percent of company outings — called “hoishik,” or coming together to eat — still center on alcohol, according to the Korean Alcohol Research Foundation. The percentage of women who drink has increased over all as they have joined companies.
Over all, South Koreans consume less alcohol than, say, most Europeans, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a research organization financed by industrialized nations.
But Cho Sung-gie, the alcohol foundation’s research director, estimates that South Koreans rank first in binge drinking: the goal is to drink as much as possible, as quickly as possible, so that co-workers loosen up.
Companies have awakened to the potential dangers of bingeing: health threats, decreased productivity and, with more women working, the risk of sexual harassment.
The foundation, though financed largely by the alcohol industry, is considered the authority on the country’s drinking culture. It runs programs on responsible drinking and abstinence, and assists companies to organize outings not centered on alcohol. Chang Kih-wung, a manager in the education team, has even joined company outings to the movies.
“Usually, a company decides to do something about drinking after a guest, often a foreigner, visits and makes a comment like, ‘Man, people drink like crazy here!’ ” Mr. Chang said. “So they’ll invite me for a lecture or organize a single activity — then they forget about it and go back to drinking.”
Traditionally, this corporate culture often began at the job interview itself. Asked whether they liked to drink, applicants knew that there was only one correct answer.
“If they said they didn’t drink, we’d think that we couldn’t work closely together,” said Lee Jai-ho, 40, an engineer at a paper mill that was bought by Norske Skog of Sweden in the late 1990s.
Mr. Lee said he was asked whether he was a good drinker during his job interview in 1992, and he asked the same question of job candidates later. The company’s hard-drinking culture changed, however, after it changed to foreign ownership.
It is this fear of not being accepted as full members of the team that has led many women to drink to excess. A 31-year-old lawyer for a telecommunications company, who asked that her name not be used, blacked out during a company outing shortly after she became the first Korean woman to serve as a lawyer in the legal division three years ago. “During my studies, I always competed against men,” she said. “So I didn’t want to lose to men at hoishik.”
She drank so much during dinner at a Chinese restaurant that she remembered nothing past 9 p.m., though the outing lasted until 1 a.m.
However, as more women have joined her division, she said, the emphasis on alcohol has decreased.
“Before it was always grilled pork with soju followed by mixed drinks,” she said. “Now, I can suggest that we go to a Thai or Italian restaurant.”
Not all men were so flexible, though. In the case of the 29-year-old graphic designer, when she was interviewed at the 240-employee online game company in 2004, she was also forced to submit to an “alcohol interview,” according to the court ruling. She could drink only two glasses of beer and no soju at all, she said.
Her boss, though, liked to go out with his 10-person marketing team — six men and four women — at least twice a week until the predawn hours and brooked no excuses.
One time, he told her that if she called upon a “knight in shining armor,” she would have to kiss him. So she drank two glasses of soju. Another time, after she slipped away early, he called her at home and ordered her to come back. She refused.
At the trial, the boss said he was so intent on having his subordinates bond that he sometimes used his own money to take them out drinking. He called the woman a weirdo and said of the lawsuit, “I’m the victim.”
Corporate Korea Corks the Bottle as Women Rise
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
SEOUL, South Korea — In a time-honored practice in South Korea’s corporate culture, the 38-year-old manager at an online game company took his 10-person team on twice-weekly after-work drinking bouts. He exhorted his subordinates to drink, including a 29-year-old graphic designer who protested that her limit was two glasses of beer.
“Either you drink or you get it from me tomorrow,” the boss told her one evening.
She drank, fearing that refusing to do so would hurt her career. But eventually, unable to take the drinking any longer, she quit and sued.
In May, in the first ruling of its kind, the Seoul High Court said that forcing a subordinate to drink alcohol was illegal, and it pronounced the manager guilty of a “violation of human dignity.” The court awarded the woman $32,000 in damages for the incidents, which occurred in 2004.
The ruling was as much a testament to women’s growing presence in corporate life here as a confirmation of changes already under way. As an increasing number of women have joined companies as professionals in the past half decade, corporate South Korea has struggled to change the country’s thoroughly male-centered corporate culture, starting with alcohol.
An evening out with colleagues here follows a predictable, alcohol-centered pattern: dinner, usually some grilled pork, washed down with soju, Korea’s national vodkalike drink; then a second round at a beer hall; then whiskey and singing at a “norae bang,” a Korean karaoke club. Exhorted by their bosses to drink, the corporate warriors bond, literally, so that the sight of dark-suited men holding hands, leaning on one another, staggering toward taxis, is part of this city’s nighttime streetscape. The next morning, back at the office, they are ready to fight, with reaffirmed unity, for more markets at home and abroad.
Many professional women manage to avoid much of the drinking by adopting well-known strategies. They slip away while their male colleagues indulge in a second or third round of drinking. They pour the drinks into potted plants. They rely on male colleagues, called “knights in shining armor,” to take their turns in drinking games.
Companies, too, have begun to respond. Since 2005, Posco, the steel manufacturer, has limited company outings to two hours at its mill in South Korea’s southwest. Employees can raise a red card if they do not want to drink or a yellow card if they want to go home early. At Woori Bank, one of South Korea’s largest, an alarm rings at 10 p.m. to encourage workers to stop drinking and go home using public transportation, which stops running before midnight.
“My boss used to be all about, ‘Let’s drink till we die!’ ” said Wi Su-jung, a 31-year-old woman employed at a small shipping company.
Ms. Wi, who was out enjoying the sun in downtown Seoul, said the atmosphere began changing as more women joined her company in the past couple of years. “The women got together and complained about the drinking and the pressure to drink,” she said. “So things changed last year. Now we sometimes go to musicals or movies instead.”
Kim Chil-jong, who was taking a walk on his lunch hour, said he owned a nine-person publishing company. In the last couple of years, he hired two women for the first time.
“We drink less because of their presence,” Mr. Kim, 47, said. “Before, I’d encourage my workers to drink whenever we went out, but I don’t do that anymore.”
Still, at least 90 percent of company outings — called “hoishik,” or coming together to eat — still center on alcohol, according to the Korean Alcohol Research Foundation. The percentage of women who drink has increased over all as they have joined companies.
Over all, South Koreans consume less alcohol than, say, most Europeans, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a research organization financed by industrialized nations.
But Cho Sung-gie, the alcohol foundation’s research director, estimates that South Koreans rank first in binge drinking: the goal is to drink as much as possible, as quickly as possible, so that co-workers loosen up.
Companies have awakened to the potential dangers of bingeing: health threats, decreased productivity and, with more women working, the risk of sexual harassment.
The foundation, though financed largely by the alcohol industry, is considered the authority on the country’s drinking culture. It runs programs on responsible drinking and abstinence, and assists companies to organize outings not centered on alcohol. Chang Kih-wung, a manager in the education team, has even joined company outings to the movies.
“Usually, a company decides to do something about drinking after a guest, often a foreigner, visits and makes a comment like, ‘Man, people drink like crazy here!’ ” Mr. Chang said. “So they’ll invite me for a lecture or organize a single activity — then they forget about it and go back to drinking.”
Traditionally, this corporate culture often began at the job interview itself. Asked whether they liked to drink, applicants knew that there was only one correct answer.
“If they said they didn’t drink, we’d think that we couldn’t work closely together,” said Lee Jai-ho, 40, an engineer at a paper mill that was bought by Norske Skog of Sweden in the late 1990s.
Mr. Lee said he was asked whether he was a good drinker during his job interview in 1992, and he asked the same question of job candidates later. The company’s hard-drinking culture changed, however, after it changed to foreign ownership.
It is this fear of not being accepted as full members of the team that has led many women to drink to excess. A 31-year-old lawyer for a telecommunications company, who asked that her name not be used, blacked out during a company outing shortly after she became the first Korean woman to serve as a lawyer in the legal division three years ago. “During my studies, I always competed against men,” she said. “So I didn’t want to lose to men at hoishik.”
She drank so much during dinner at a Chinese restaurant that she remembered nothing past 9 p.m., though the outing lasted until 1 a.m.
However, as more women have joined her division, she said, the emphasis on alcohol has decreased.
“Before it was always grilled pork with soju followed by mixed drinks,” she said. “Now, I can suggest that we go to a Thai or Italian restaurant.”
Not all men were so flexible, though. In the case of the 29-year-old graphic designer, when she was interviewed at the 240-employee online game company in 2004, she was also forced to submit to an “alcohol interview,” according to the court ruling. She could drink only two glasses of beer and no soju at all, she said.
Her boss, though, liked to go out with his 10-person marketing team — six men and four women — at least twice a week until the predawn hours and brooked no excuses.
One time, he told her that if she called upon a “knight in shining armor,” she would have to kiss him. So she drank two glasses of soju. Another time, after she slipped away early, he called her at home and ordered her to come back. She refused.
At the trial, the boss said he was so intent on having his subordinates bond that he sometimes used his own money to take them out drinking. He called the woman a weirdo and said of the lawsuit, “I’m the victim.”
For One Visit, Bush Will Feel Pro-U.S. Glow
For One Visit, Bush Will Feel Pro-U.S. Glow
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/09/world/europe/09albania.html?em&ex=1181620800&en=6c0473e76408e8cd&ei=5087%0A
By CRAIG S. SMITH
Published: June 9, 2007
TIRANA, Albania, June 8 — The highlight of President Bush’s European tour may well be his visit on Sunday to this tiny country, one of the few places left where he can bask in unabashed pro-American sentiment without a protester in sight.
Enlarge This Image
Visar Kryeziu/Associated Press
Women passing the day at a park in Tirana, Albania, where the American and Albanian flags are on display in anticipation of President Bush’s visit Sunday. He will be the first sitting American president to stop by.
The New York Times
The mayor of Tirana calls Albania “the most pro-American country.”
Americans here are greeted with a refreshing adoration that feels as though it comes from another time.
“Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world,” said Edi Rama, Tirana’s mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists. “Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the president of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn’t be as welcome.”
Thousands of young Albanians have been named Bill or Hillary thanks to the Clinton administration’s role in rescuing ethnic Albanians from the Kosovo war. After the visit on Sunday, some people expect to see a rash of babies named George.
So eager is the country to accommodate Mr. Bush that Parliament unanimously approved a bill last month allowing “American forces to engage in any kind of operation, including the use of force, in order to provide security for the president.” One newspaper, reporting on the effusive mood, published a headline that read, “Please Occupy Us!”
There are, to be sure, signs that the rest of Europe is tilting a bit more in America’s direction, narrowing the gap between “old” and “new” Europe that opened with disagreements over the Iraq war.
France’s new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, wants to forget the acrimony that marked his predecessor’s relations with the United States, even appointing a pro-American foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, who supported the United States’ invasion of Iraq.
Shortly after taking office, Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Germany did “not have as many values in common with Russia as it does with America.” She has since proposed a new trans-Atlantic economic partnership that would get rid of many non-tariff barriers to trade.
And Gordon Brown, who will succeed Tony Blair as Britain’s prime minister this month, has vacationed several times on Cape Cod and befriended a succession of Treasury officials. He is expected to maintain what Britons call the country’s “special relationship” with the United States, ahead of other American allies.
So “old Europe” has warmed toward the United States, although there has been no fundamental shift toward more American-friendly policies. But even in “new Europe,” as the post-Communist states of Central and Eastern Europe have been called, Albania is special.
Much of Eastern Europe has grown more critical of Mr. Bush, worried that the antimissile defense shield he is pushing will antagonize Russia and lead to another cold war. Many Eastern Europeans, Czechs and Poles among them, are also angry that the United States has maintained cumbersome visa requirements even though their countries are now members of the European Union.
But here in Albania, which has not wavered in its unblinking support for American policies since the end of the cold war, Mr. Bush can do no wrong. While much of the world berates Mr. Bush for warmongering, unilateralism, trampling civil liberties and even turning a blind eye to torture, Albania still loves him without restraint.
Mr. Bush will be the first sitting American president to visit the country, and his arrival could not come on a more auspicious day: the eighth anniversary of the start of Serbian troop withdrawals from Kosovo and ratification by the United Nations Security Council of the American-brokered peace accord that ended the fighting. Mr. Bush is pushing the Security Council to approve a plan that would lead to qualified Kosovo independence.
Albanians are pouring into the capital from across the region. Hotel rooms are as scarce as anti-American feelings.
Albanians’ support for the war in Iraq is nearly unanimous, and any perceived failings of American foreign policy are studiously ignored. A two-day effort to find anyone of prominence who might offer some criticism of the United States turned up just one name, and that person was out of the country.
Every school child in Albania can tell you that President Woodrow Wilson saved Albania from being split up among its neighbors after World War I, and nearly every adult repeats the story when asked why Albanians are so infatuated with the United States.
James A. Baker III was mobbed when he visited the country as secretary of state in 1991. There was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country America’s 51st state around that time.
“The excitement among Albanians over this visit is immeasurable, beyond words,” said Albania’s new foreign minister, Lulzim Basha, during an interview in his office, decorated with an elegant portrait of Faik Konica, who became the first Albanian ambassador to the United States in 1926. “We truly believe that this is a historic moment that people will look back on decades later and talk about what it meant for the country.”
Mr. Bush’s visit is a reward for Albania’s unflinching performance as an unquestioning ally. The country was among the first American allies to support Washington’s refusal to submit to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. It was one of the first countries to send troops to Afghanistan and one of the first to join the forces in Iraq. It has soldiers in both places.
“They will continue to be deployed as long as the Americans are there,” Albania’s president, Alfred Moisiu, said proudly in an interview.
Most recently, the country has quietly taken several former detainees from the base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, off the Bush administration’s hands when sending them to their home countries was out of the question. There are eight so far, and Mr. Moisiu said he is open to accepting more.
Mr. Rama, Tirana’s mayor, says he is offended when Albania’s pro-Americanism is cast as an expression of “provincial submission.”
“It’s not about being blind,” he said, wearing a black T-shirt emblazoned with the Great Seal of the United States. “The U.S. is something that is really crucial for the destiny of the world.”
The pro-American feeling has strayed into government-commercial relations. The Albanian government has hired former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge as a consultant on a range of issues, including the implementation of a national identity card.
Many people questioned the procedures under which a joint venture led by Bechtel won Albania’s largest public spending project ever, a contract to build a highway linking Albania and Kosovo. President Moisiu said state prosecutors were now looking at the deal.
In preparation for Mr. Bush’s six-hour visit, Tirana has been draped in American flags and banners that proclaim, “Proud to be Partners.” A portrait of Mr. Bush hangs on the “Pyramid,” a cultural center in the middle of town that was built as a monument to Albania’s Communist strongman, Enver Hoxha. State television is repeatedly playing a slickly produced spot in which Prime Minister Sali Berisha welcomes Mr. Bush in English.
What Mr. Bush will get in return from the visit is the sight of cheering crowds in a predominantly Muslim nation. When asked by an Albanian reporter before leaving Washington what came to mind when he thought of Albania, Mr. Bush replied, “Muslim people who can live at peace.”
Albania is about 70 percent Muslim, with large Orthodox and Catholic populations. To underscore the country’s history of tolerance, President Moisiu will present Mr. Bush with the reproduction of an 18th-century Orthodox icon depicting the Virgin Mary and baby Jesus flanked by two mosques.
“President Bush is safer in Albania than in America,” said Ermin Gjinishti, a Muslim leader in Albania.
Tim Golden contributed reporting from Tirana, and Alan Cowell from London.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/09/world/europe/09albania.html?em&ex=1181620800&en=6c0473e76408e8cd&ei=5087%0A
By CRAIG S. SMITH
Published: June 9, 2007
TIRANA, Albania, June 8 — The highlight of President Bush’s European tour may well be his visit on Sunday to this tiny country, one of the few places left where he can bask in unabashed pro-American sentiment without a protester in sight.
Enlarge This Image
Visar Kryeziu/Associated Press
Women passing the day at a park in Tirana, Albania, where the American and Albanian flags are on display in anticipation of President Bush’s visit Sunday. He will be the first sitting American president to stop by.
The New York Times
The mayor of Tirana calls Albania “the most pro-American country.”
Americans here are greeted with a refreshing adoration that feels as though it comes from another time.
“Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world,” said Edi Rama, Tirana’s mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists. “Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the president of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn’t be as welcome.”
Thousands of young Albanians have been named Bill or Hillary thanks to the Clinton administration’s role in rescuing ethnic Albanians from the Kosovo war. After the visit on Sunday, some people expect to see a rash of babies named George.
So eager is the country to accommodate Mr. Bush that Parliament unanimously approved a bill last month allowing “American forces to engage in any kind of operation, including the use of force, in order to provide security for the president.” One newspaper, reporting on the effusive mood, published a headline that read, “Please Occupy Us!”
There are, to be sure, signs that the rest of Europe is tilting a bit more in America’s direction, narrowing the gap between “old” and “new” Europe that opened with disagreements over the Iraq war.
France’s new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, wants to forget the acrimony that marked his predecessor’s relations with the United States, even appointing a pro-American foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, who supported the United States’ invasion of Iraq.
Shortly after taking office, Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Germany did “not have as many values in common with Russia as it does with America.” She has since proposed a new trans-Atlantic economic partnership that would get rid of many non-tariff barriers to trade.
And Gordon Brown, who will succeed Tony Blair as Britain’s prime minister this month, has vacationed several times on Cape Cod and befriended a succession of Treasury officials. He is expected to maintain what Britons call the country’s “special relationship” with the United States, ahead of other American allies.
So “old Europe” has warmed toward the United States, although there has been no fundamental shift toward more American-friendly policies. But even in “new Europe,” as the post-Communist states of Central and Eastern Europe have been called, Albania is special.
Much of Eastern Europe has grown more critical of Mr. Bush, worried that the antimissile defense shield he is pushing will antagonize Russia and lead to another cold war. Many Eastern Europeans, Czechs and Poles among them, are also angry that the United States has maintained cumbersome visa requirements even though their countries are now members of the European Union.
But here in Albania, which has not wavered in its unblinking support for American policies since the end of the cold war, Mr. Bush can do no wrong. While much of the world berates Mr. Bush for warmongering, unilateralism, trampling civil liberties and even turning a blind eye to torture, Albania still loves him without restraint.
Mr. Bush will be the first sitting American president to visit the country, and his arrival could not come on a more auspicious day: the eighth anniversary of the start of Serbian troop withdrawals from Kosovo and ratification by the United Nations Security Council of the American-brokered peace accord that ended the fighting. Mr. Bush is pushing the Security Council to approve a plan that would lead to qualified Kosovo independence.
Albanians are pouring into the capital from across the region. Hotel rooms are as scarce as anti-American feelings.
Albanians’ support for the war in Iraq is nearly unanimous, and any perceived failings of American foreign policy are studiously ignored. A two-day effort to find anyone of prominence who might offer some criticism of the United States turned up just one name, and that person was out of the country.
Every school child in Albania can tell you that President Woodrow Wilson saved Albania from being split up among its neighbors after World War I, and nearly every adult repeats the story when asked why Albanians are so infatuated with the United States.
James A. Baker III was mobbed when he visited the country as secretary of state in 1991. There was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country America’s 51st state around that time.
“The excitement among Albanians over this visit is immeasurable, beyond words,” said Albania’s new foreign minister, Lulzim Basha, during an interview in his office, decorated with an elegant portrait of Faik Konica, who became the first Albanian ambassador to the United States in 1926. “We truly believe that this is a historic moment that people will look back on decades later and talk about what it meant for the country.”
Mr. Bush’s visit is a reward for Albania’s unflinching performance as an unquestioning ally. The country was among the first American allies to support Washington’s refusal to submit to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. It was one of the first countries to send troops to Afghanistan and one of the first to join the forces in Iraq. It has soldiers in both places.
“They will continue to be deployed as long as the Americans are there,” Albania’s president, Alfred Moisiu, said proudly in an interview.
Most recently, the country has quietly taken several former detainees from the base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, off the Bush administration’s hands when sending them to their home countries was out of the question. There are eight so far, and Mr. Moisiu said he is open to accepting more.
Mr. Rama, Tirana’s mayor, says he is offended when Albania’s pro-Americanism is cast as an expression of “provincial submission.”
“It’s not about being blind,” he said, wearing a black T-shirt emblazoned with the Great Seal of the United States. “The U.S. is something that is really crucial for the destiny of the world.”
The pro-American feeling has strayed into government-commercial relations. The Albanian government has hired former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge as a consultant on a range of issues, including the implementation of a national identity card.
Many people questioned the procedures under which a joint venture led by Bechtel won Albania’s largest public spending project ever, a contract to build a highway linking Albania and Kosovo. President Moisiu said state prosecutors were now looking at the deal.
In preparation for Mr. Bush’s six-hour visit, Tirana has been draped in American flags and banners that proclaim, “Proud to be Partners.” A portrait of Mr. Bush hangs on the “Pyramid,” a cultural center in the middle of town that was built as a monument to Albania’s Communist strongman, Enver Hoxha. State television is repeatedly playing a slickly produced spot in which Prime Minister Sali Berisha welcomes Mr. Bush in English.
What Mr. Bush will get in return from the visit is the sight of cheering crowds in a predominantly Muslim nation. When asked by an Albanian reporter before leaving Washington what came to mind when he thought of Albania, Mr. Bush replied, “Muslim people who can live at peace.”
Albania is about 70 percent Muslim, with large Orthodox and Catholic populations. To underscore the country’s history of tolerance, President Moisiu will present Mr. Bush with the reproduction of an 18th-century Orthodox icon depicting the Virgin Mary and baby Jesus flanked by two mosques.
“President Bush is safer in Albania than in America,” said Ermin Gjinishti, a Muslim leader in Albania.
Tim Golden contributed reporting from Tirana, and Alan Cowell from London.
Monday, May 28, 2007
A Devil in the Details, but Not the Constitution
Supreme Court Memo
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: May 28, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 27 — When people think, if they ever do, about a Supreme Court justice’s daily routine, many undoubtedly envision a life spent contemplating the great issues: due process, equal protection and other resonant constitutional concepts.
What they probably do not imagine is time spent puzzling over whether the phrase “within 75 miles” in a 1993 federal statute means miles as the crow flies — in a straight line that disregards hill and dale — or miles as a car must actually navigate on the ground: around curves, doubling back to avoid geographic barriers, traveling real roads that rarely mark the shortest distance between two points.
The difference between the two possible definitions of “within 75 miles” usually does not matter much. But when it matters, it matters a lot, as it does to a former insurance executive from Oklahoma, Kelly Hackworth.
If the distance between two of her former employer’s offices is measured by “radius miles,” a straight line on the map, Ms. Hackworth was entitled to the protections of the Family and Medical Leave Act when she lost her job after taking time off to take care of her hospitalized mother. The law applies to companies that employ at least 50 people within 75 miles of the complaining employee’s workplace. If the distance between Ms. Hackworth’s office in Norman, Okla., and a satellite office in Lawton is measured by driving the route along existing roads, she is out of luck by six-tenths of a mile, which is what the federal appeals court in Denver ruled a few months ago.
Her appeal, now awaiting word on whether the justices will accept it for decision, would not appear to be the stuff of a Supreme Court case. But in fact, it is quite typical, more so than people realize. It therefore offers a window on the court’s ordinary life as the 2006-2007 term enters its final, and atypically frantic, month.
More than half the cases the court agrees to hear are not constitutional, but statutory, presenting questions much like the one posed by Hackworth v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company, No. 06-1300. To whom does a statute apply? Precisely what behavior does it prohibit? How does it fit with another law on the books that seems to suggest something quite different?
The immigration bill now being fitfully knit together in Congress is a reminder that any major piece of legislation is a result of dozens of big and small compromises. Compromises often leave gaps, and as often as not, the gap itself is part of the compromise.
Many compromises went into the Family and Medical Leave Act, the product of years of Congressional consideration and debate. By the time the final bill passed, there was such a generous exemption for small business that the law covers only about 5 percent of all companies, employing about 40 percent of the work force. Companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt altogether.
The requirement for 50 employees “within 75 miles” was intended to ensure that an employer would not be too inconvenienced by the need to reassign a worker to cover the duties of one who was out on family or medical leave.
During debates on the bill, as reflected in The Congressional Record, there were several references to a “75-mile radius,” suggesting a straight line. But the word “radius” does not appear in the final text of the statute. Ms. Hackworth’s lawyers argue that Congress should be understood as having had radius in mind nonetheless.
But the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit refused to make that leap. Congress simply “did not define a method of measuring,” the appeals court said, and “therefore left an implicit statutory gap” that the Department of Labor was authorized to fill by regulation. The department adopted a regulation in 1995 providing that the distance should be measured as “surface miles using surface transportation.” That definition was entitled to deference, the 10th Circuit concluded.
The 73 cases the court selected for argument during the current term included 41 statutory cases, 27 that raised chiefly constitutional issues and 5 other kinds that raised issues of retroactivity and jurisdiction. (These calculations are subject to interpretation; at the margins, the categories can easily overlap, as when the court is asked to interpret a statute in such a way as to avoid a potential constitutional problem.)
Statutory cases are not necessarily less challenging for the justices or less important to the country than constitutional cases; whether the Clean Air Act applies to global warming, to recall one statutory case from the current term, is a question with more impact than whether a certain type of appeal in patent cases meets the jurisdictional requirements of Article III of the Constitution, to recall another case, this time a constitutional one.
The court will probably not accept Ms. Hackworth’s case, a safe prediction when the justices accept only about 1 percent of the appeals that reach them. But on any inventory of recent statutory cases, it does not rank noticeably lower than many, including one the court decided in its last term on whether the “negligent transmission” of mail by the Postal Service includes the careless deposit of a package where someone might predictably trip over it. (It does not.)
But the mail delivery case, in which the court ruled that the Postal Service, statutorily immune from suit for “negligent transmission,” could be sued for careless delivery, had a feature that Ms. Hackworth’s case lacks. The lower courts had disagreed on whether “negligent transmission” included careless delivery, and the Supreme Court felt obliged to step in.
But no such lower-court conflict has developed over how to measure the 75 miles, although the regulation has been on the books for 12 years. Fascinating as the justices may find the issue, they are likely to take a pass.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/us/28scotus.html?th&emc=th
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: May 28, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 27 — When people think, if they ever do, about a Supreme Court justice’s daily routine, many undoubtedly envision a life spent contemplating the great issues: due process, equal protection and other resonant constitutional concepts.
What they probably do not imagine is time spent puzzling over whether the phrase “within 75 miles” in a 1993 federal statute means miles as the crow flies — in a straight line that disregards hill and dale — or miles as a car must actually navigate on the ground: around curves, doubling back to avoid geographic barriers, traveling real roads that rarely mark the shortest distance between two points.
The difference between the two possible definitions of “within 75 miles” usually does not matter much. But when it matters, it matters a lot, as it does to a former insurance executive from Oklahoma, Kelly Hackworth.
If the distance between two of her former employer’s offices is measured by “radius miles,” a straight line on the map, Ms. Hackworth was entitled to the protections of the Family and Medical Leave Act when she lost her job after taking time off to take care of her hospitalized mother. The law applies to companies that employ at least 50 people within 75 miles of the complaining employee’s workplace. If the distance between Ms. Hackworth’s office in Norman, Okla., and a satellite office in Lawton is measured by driving the route along existing roads, she is out of luck by six-tenths of a mile, which is what the federal appeals court in Denver ruled a few months ago.
Her appeal, now awaiting word on whether the justices will accept it for decision, would not appear to be the stuff of a Supreme Court case. But in fact, it is quite typical, more so than people realize. It therefore offers a window on the court’s ordinary life as the 2006-2007 term enters its final, and atypically frantic, month.
More than half the cases the court agrees to hear are not constitutional, but statutory, presenting questions much like the one posed by Hackworth v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company, No. 06-1300. To whom does a statute apply? Precisely what behavior does it prohibit? How does it fit with another law on the books that seems to suggest something quite different?
The immigration bill now being fitfully knit together in Congress is a reminder that any major piece of legislation is a result of dozens of big and small compromises. Compromises often leave gaps, and as often as not, the gap itself is part of the compromise.
Many compromises went into the Family and Medical Leave Act, the product of years of Congressional consideration and debate. By the time the final bill passed, there was such a generous exemption for small business that the law covers only about 5 percent of all companies, employing about 40 percent of the work force. Companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt altogether.
The requirement for 50 employees “within 75 miles” was intended to ensure that an employer would not be too inconvenienced by the need to reassign a worker to cover the duties of one who was out on family or medical leave.
During debates on the bill, as reflected in The Congressional Record, there were several references to a “75-mile radius,” suggesting a straight line. But the word “radius” does not appear in the final text of the statute. Ms. Hackworth’s lawyers argue that Congress should be understood as having had radius in mind nonetheless.
But the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit refused to make that leap. Congress simply “did not define a method of measuring,” the appeals court said, and “therefore left an implicit statutory gap” that the Department of Labor was authorized to fill by regulation. The department adopted a regulation in 1995 providing that the distance should be measured as “surface miles using surface transportation.” That definition was entitled to deference, the 10th Circuit concluded.
The 73 cases the court selected for argument during the current term included 41 statutory cases, 27 that raised chiefly constitutional issues and 5 other kinds that raised issues of retroactivity and jurisdiction. (These calculations are subject to interpretation; at the margins, the categories can easily overlap, as when the court is asked to interpret a statute in such a way as to avoid a potential constitutional problem.)
Statutory cases are not necessarily less challenging for the justices or less important to the country than constitutional cases; whether the Clean Air Act applies to global warming, to recall one statutory case from the current term, is a question with more impact than whether a certain type of appeal in patent cases meets the jurisdictional requirements of Article III of the Constitution, to recall another case, this time a constitutional one.
The court will probably not accept Ms. Hackworth’s case, a safe prediction when the justices accept only about 1 percent of the appeals that reach them. But on any inventory of recent statutory cases, it does not rank noticeably lower than many, including one the court decided in its last term on whether the “negligent transmission” of mail by the Postal Service includes the careless deposit of a package where someone might predictably trip over it. (It does not.)
But the mail delivery case, in which the court ruled that the Postal Service, statutorily immune from suit for “negligent transmission,” could be sued for careless delivery, had a feature that Ms. Hackworth’s case lacks. The lower courts had disagreed on whether “negligent transmission” included careless delivery, and the Supreme Court felt obliged to step in.
But no such lower-court conflict has developed over how to measure the 75 miles, although the regulation has been on the books for 12 years. Fascinating as the justices may find the issue, they are likely to take a pass.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/us/28scotus.html?th&emc=th
The Educated Giant
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/opinion/28kristof.html?th&emc=th
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: May 28, 2007
Taishan, China
With China’s trade surplus with the United States soaring, the tendency in the U.S. will be to react with tariffs and other barriers. But instead we should take a page from the Chinese book and respond by boosting education.
One reason China is likely to overtake the U.S. as the world’s most important country in this century is that China puts more effort into building human capital than we do.
This area in southern Guangdong Province is my wife’s ancestral hometown. Sheryl’s grandparents left villages here because they thought they could find better opportunities for their children in “Meiguo” — “Beautiful Country,” as the U.S. is called in Chinese. And they did. At Sheryl’s family reunions, you feel inadequate without a doctorate.
But that educational gap between China and America is shrinking rapidly. I visited several elementary and middle schools accompanied by two of my children. And in general, the level of math taught even in peasant schools is similar to that in my kids’ own excellent schools in the New York area.
My kids’ school system doesn’t offer foreign languages until the seventh grade. These Chinese peasants begin English studies in either first grade or third grade, depending on the school.
Frankly, my daughter got tired of being dragged around schools and having teachers look patronizingly at her schoolbooks and say, “Oh, we do that two grades younger.”
There are, I think, four reasons why Chinese students do so well.
First, Chinese students are hungry for education and advancement and work harder. In contrast, U.S. children average 900 hours a year in class and 1,023 hours in front of a television.
Here in Sheryl’s ancestral village, the students show up at school at about 6:30 a.m. to get extra tutoring before classes start at 7:30. They go home for a lunch break at 11:20 and then are back at school from 2 p.m. until 5. They do homework every night and weekend, and an hour or two of homework each day during their eight-week summer vacation.
The second reason is that China has an enormous cultural respect for education, part of its Confucian legacy, so governments and families alike pour resources into education. Teachers are respected and compensated far better, financially and emotionally, in China than in America.
In my last column, I wrote about the boomtown of Dongguan, which had no colleges when I first visited it 20 years ago. The town devotes 21 percent of its budget to education, and it now has four universities. An astonishing 58 percent of the residents age 18 to 22 are enrolled in a university.
A third reason is that Chinese believe that those who get the best grades are the hardest workers. In contrast, Americans say in polls that the best students are the ones who are innately the smartest. The upshot is that Chinese kids never have an excuse for mediocrity.
Chinese education has its own problems, including bribes and fees to get into good schools, huge classes of 50 or 60 students, second-rate equipment and lousy universities. But the progress in the last quarter-century is breathtaking.
It’s also encouraging that so many Chinese will shake their heads over this column and say it really isn’t so. They will complain that Chinese schools teach rote memorization but not creativity or love of learning. That kind of debate is good for the schools and has already led to improvements in English instruction, so that urban Chinese students can communicate better in English than Japanese or South Koreans.
After I visited Sheryl’s ancestral village, I posted a video of it on the Times Web site. Soon I was astonished to see an excited posting on my blog from a woman who used to live in that village.
Litao Mai, probably one of my distant in-laws, grew up in a house she could see on my video. Her parents had only a third grade education, but she became the first person in the village to go to college. She now works for Merrill Lynch in New York and describes herself as “a little peasant girl” transformed into “a capitalist on Wall Street.”
That is the magic of education, and there are 1.3 billion more behind Ms. Mai.
So let’s not respond to China’s surpluses by putting up trade barriers. Rather, let’s do as we did after the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik in 1957: raise our own education standards to meet the competition.
You are invited to comment on this column at Mr. Kristof’s blog, www.nytimes.com/ontheground.
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: May 28, 2007
Taishan, China
With China’s trade surplus with the United States soaring, the tendency in the U.S. will be to react with tariffs and other barriers. But instead we should take a page from the Chinese book and respond by boosting education.
One reason China is likely to overtake the U.S. as the world’s most important country in this century is that China puts more effort into building human capital than we do.
This area in southern Guangdong Province is my wife’s ancestral hometown. Sheryl’s grandparents left villages here because they thought they could find better opportunities for their children in “Meiguo” — “Beautiful Country,” as the U.S. is called in Chinese. And they did. At Sheryl’s family reunions, you feel inadequate without a doctorate.
But that educational gap between China and America is shrinking rapidly. I visited several elementary and middle schools accompanied by two of my children. And in general, the level of math taught even in peasant schools is similar to that in my kids’ own excellent schools in the New York area.
My kids’ school system doesn’t offer foreign languages until the seventh grade. These Chinese peasants begin English studies in either first grade or third grade, depending on the school.
Frankly, my daughter got tired of being dragged around schools and having teachers look patronizingly at her schoolbooks and say, “Oh, we do that two grades younger.”
There are, I think, four reasons why Chinese students do so well.
First, Chinese students are hungry for education and advancement and work harder. In contrast, U.S. children average 900 hours a year in class and 1,023 hours in front of a television.
Here in Sheryl’s ancestral village, the students show up at school at about 6:30 a.m. to get extra tutoring before classes start at 7:30. They go home for a lunch break at 11:20 and then are back at school from 2 p.m. until 5. They do homework every night and weekend, and an hour or two of homework each day during their eight-week summer vacation.
The second reason is that China has an enormous cultural respect for education, part of its Confucian legacy, so governments and families alike pour resources into education. Teachers are respected and compensated far better, financially and emotionally, in China than in America.
In my last column, I wrote about the boomtown of Dongguan, which had no colleges when I first visited it 20 years ago. The town devotes 21 percent of its budget to education, and it now has four universities. An astonishing 58 percent of the residents age 18 to 22 are enrolled in a university.
A third reason is that Chinese believe that those who get the best grades are the hardest workers. In contrast, Americans say in polls that the best students are the ones who are innately the smartest. The upshot is that Chinese kids never have an excuse for mediocrity.
Chinese education has its own problems, including bribes and fees to get into good schools, huge classes of 50 or 60 students, second-rate equipment and lousy universities. But the progress in the last quarter-century is breathtaking.
It’s also encouraging that so many Chinese will shake their heads over this column and say it really isn’t so. They will complain that Chinese schools teach rote memorization but not creativity or love of learning. That kind of debate is good for the schools and has already led to improvements in English instruction, so that urban Chinese students can communicate better in English than Japanese or South Koreans.
After I visited Sheryl’s ancestral village, I posted a video of it on the Times Web site. Soon I was astonished to see an excited posting on my blog from a woman who used to live in that village.
Litao Mai, probably one of my distant in-laws, grew up in a house she could see on my video. Her parents had only a third grade education, but she became the first person in the village to go to college. She now works for Merrill Lynch in New York and describes herself as “a little peasant girl” transformed into “a capitalist on Wall Street.”
That is the magic of education, and there are 1.3 billion more behind Ms. Mai.
So let’s not respond to China’s surpluses by putting up trade barriers. Rather, let’s do as we did after the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik in 1957: raise our own education standards to meet the competition.
You are invited to comment on this column at Mr. Kristof’s blog, www.nytimes.com/ontheground.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Line Up and Pick a Dragon: Bhutan Learns to Vote [NY Times]
J. Adam Huggins for The New York Times
The people of the tiny Buddhist nation of Bhutan undertook a sort of fire drill for democracy over the weekend and set down an important marker on their carefully ordered journey toward modernity. In Thimphu, the nation's capital, they lined up to cast their votes in the country's first round of mock elections
At a polling station in Thimphu, Bhutanese voted Sunday in the first round of a mock election for Parliament. The real election is next year.
Election officials tested a voting machine at a polling station in Thimphu before the polls opened to the public for voting.
King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who recently announced his plan to abdicate, has ordered parliamentary elections next year. In preparation for the real thing, more than 125,000 citizens lined up at voting booths across the country to take part in mock elections.
The king’s call for elections, along with a constitution that will introduce multiparty democracy, forestalls any ferment for freedom, from inside or outside the country.
Line Up and Pick a Dragon: Bhutan Learns to Vote
By SOMINI SENGUPTA
THIMPHU, Bhutan, April 22 — Can “Desperate Housewives,” free trade and multiparty elections deliver happiness?
The people of Bhutan, the tiny Buddhist nation once known as the hermit kingdom of the Himalayas, pondered these questions this weekend as they undertook a sort of fire drill for democracy and set down an important marker on their carefully ordered journey toward modernity.
King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who recently announced his plan to abdicate, has ordered parliamentary elections next year.
In preparation for the real thing, more than 125,000 citizens, many with more than a little ambivalence, lined up at voting booths across the country on Saturday to take part in mock elections.
They chose among four “dummy” political parties: Druk Blue, Druk Green, Druk Red and Druk Yellow. The Druk, or thunder dragon, is the national symbol.
Having once sealed itself off from the world, the lair of the Druk has cautiously and deliberately begun opening up. Television, including foreign cable stations, was introduced only in 1999 (and more recently featured an episode of “Desperate Housewives” on election day). The Internet came soon after.
There are no McDonald’s golden arches poking out from the blue pine forests yet, though the influence of global consumer culture can be glimpsed in the Pepe jeans on young men and a convenience store here that calls itself 8-Eleven.
The government is considering joining the World Trade Organization. Foreign tourists are allowed to come in somewhat larger numbers than before, though still chaperoned from one high-priced resort to another. “A cautious approach,” Prime Minister Khandu Wangchuck called it. In an interview here on Friday, he added: “We were conscious of the fact that interaction with the world would only benefit us. We have had no reason to put the brakes on.”
Elections, he said, have been embraced, albeit reluctantly, by the citizenry because the king wanted them.
“The objectives are to ensure national security, national sovereignty, well-being and prosperity, which will lead to gross national happiness also,” the prime minister said. “His Majesty believes this is the best form of government, and the people of Bhutan are ready to launch this.”
How the strange lures of modernity will affect the gross national happiness, the unusual yardstick the king invented to measure his nation’s progress, is a matter of uncertainty and wonder in this country.
Gross national happiness includes criteria like equity, good government and harmony with nature. It apparently does not include harmony with the 100,000 ethnic Nepalis who fled Bhutan after a royal crackdown on their agitation for democratic rights and have languished since 1990 in refugee camps in Nepal.
In any case, the king’s call for elections, along with a constitution that will introduce multiparty democracy, forestalls any ferment for freedom, from inside or outside the country.
But all that is in its infancy. For the moment at least, Bhutan does not resemble a democracy, particularly compared with other countries in the region. Barely two political parties have been formed. It is far from having an outspoken free press or an active civil society. Criticism of government policy is rare, except from abroad.
Not surprisingly, ethnic Nepali dissidents have denounced the elections as a ploy to deflect international attention from the refugee crisis. The government prefers to call them illegal immigrants who had to be forced out because they threatened to swamp a small, fragile country of about 700,000 people.
The Bhutanese monarchy turns 100 this year, and the king apparently decided that this was an auspicious time to further reduce its power. The national elections next year are part of a process that began nearly a decade ago, when the king introduced nonparty elections for Parliament.
Next, day-to-day administration was handed over to the cabinet. The proposed constitution would remove the king as head of the government, set a mandatory retirement age of 65 for the ruler and empower an elected Parliament to oust him from the throne by a two-thirds vote.
Last December, after more than 30 years in power, the current king announced that he was abdicating in favor of his 26-year-old son, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck.
The prospect of self-government seemed to send shivers down many spines here. “Why have politicians?” people wanted to know, expressing doubts about the results of democracy in neighboring countries. Isn’t the king always supposed to know what is best for his people and guide them accordingly?
“I’m a little bit skeptical,” Sonam Wangmo, 38, said as she waited in line Saturday to cast her vote in a neighborhood school with calla lilies blooming in the garden. “I’m not sure whether it will work, or whether it will be better for our country.”
Two long lines formed on the school grounds, one for men, one for women, quiet and well-disciplined, and with only a few grumbles despite waits of up to an hour or more just to reach the voting booth.
Unusually for this part of the world, Bhutan is a very orderly place, where traffic rules are closely obeyed and the color of a shawl denotes social rank. Native dress is mandatory at work and at school. For men that means a knee-length robe, for women a short jacket and long wraparound skirt.
With sustained government spending on health and education in the last several decades, there have been remarkable gains in basic social indicators, from reducing child mortality to increasing school enrollment.
Bhutan remains a poor country, heavily reliant on foreign aid and with little industry. But it is set to reap the latest bounty from the one natural resource that it has in plenty: the water that comes rushing down from the Himalayas, which it has harnessed, with Indian help, to create hydroelectric power. Most of that power will be exported to India.
What clocks are to Switzerland, water can be for Bhutan. According to the World Bank, the country could see up to 14 percent annual economic growth in the coming years, though it will not necessarily create many jobs.
“The going is good,” said Tshering Tobgay, 42, a former civil servant who is working with a former cabinet minister to start the People’s Democratic Party. “We want more of the same.”
This is one reason, he said, that even would-be politicians like himself find it hard to sell their message to the citizenry. “We are not starting a party because we have an ideology,” he said. “We’re not starting a party because we have a vision for a better Bhutan. We are starting a party because the king has ordered us.”
He sat on the patio of a bar, cupping his beer can in a napkin, because it was Friday and alcohol sales were prohibited on the day before the election. “It’s a big compliment to the king that no one’s very enthusiastic.”
Another patron in the bar, Kesang Dorji, 36, said he was puzzled by the royal order to vote, but intended to obey. “We have to stand fast to the wisdom of our monarch,” he said. “He knows what’s best for us. Any normal person would think, ‘Why this, when everything is O.K.?’ ”
Holding on to the way things are seems to have been Bhutan’s choice in the mock elections. Each of the Druk parties presented a platform. Druk Blue promised to fight corruption and extend free health care and education. Druk Green stood for environment-friendly development. Druk Red promised industrialization. And Druk Yellow asked: “Do you believe in the preservation and promotion of our rich cultural heritage and tradition? Vote for Druk Yellow Party.”
On Sunday, Druk Yellow emerged as the hands-down winner, with 44 percent of the vote, according to the Election Commission. Next month it takes on Druk Red, which won about 20 percent, in a mock runoff.
Tilak Pokharel contributed reporting from Katmandu, Nepal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/world/asia/24bhutan.html?ex=1178078400&en=b58c592a16693300&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Prime Minister Khandu Wangchuk with a portrait of the king. Elections, the prime minister said, have been embraced, albeit reluctantly, by the citizenry because the king wanted them.
Long lines formed, one for men, one for women, quiet and well-disciplined, and with only a few grumbles despite waits of up to an hour or more just to reach the voting booth.
J. Adam Huggins for The New York Times
Tshering Tobgay, who is starting the People's Democratic Party, said: "We are not starting a party because we have an ideology. We’re not starting a party because we have a vision for a better Bhutan. We are starting a party because the king has ordered us."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)