再次遇上“紅”：“夢”又重現(xiàn)了

司馬勤（Ken Smith）

早在2016 年，當歌劇《紅樓夢》在舊金山歌劇院世界首演的時候，我以為自己已經(jīng)做好了看這部劇所需的一切準備：我閱讀了兩個不同的英譯全本，還有一個厚厚的刪節(jié)版（966 頁）;也看過了兩部不同的邵氏電影，還有1980 年代末中央電視臺制作的電視劇全集，以及2010 年新版《紅樓夢》電視?。ㄎ乙呀?jīng)盡我所能地堅持下去，但最終還是可惜“棄坑”了）。

但是，當年我沒做到的一件事，也是界定普通讀者與“紅迷”的標準：我沒有時間把任何一個版本的《紅樓夢》重讀或重溫一遍。最近我開始步入“紅迷”的世界了。

適逢盛宗亮與黃哲倫一起創(chuàng)作的歌劇紅樓夢即將重返舊金山——這也是舊金山歌劇院首次在戰(zhàn)爭紀念歌劇院舞臺上重演自家委約作品——我再次翻開霍克思（David Hawkes）與閔福德（JohnMinford）合譯的《紅樓夢》。這個譯本是歌劇劇本的模范，也是這部巨著最權威的英文參考資料。你只需翻翻前十頁就能領略到這個英譯本獨占鰲頭的原因。從霍克思- 閔福德譯本轉(zhuǎn)移視線至戴乃迭（Gladys Yang）- 楊憲益的譯本，反差就像從歌劇舞臺跳進邵氏電影一樣。我發(fā)現(xiàn)，翻譯的過程加入了改編的思維——譯者時不時會擔任編輯的工作，包括取舍不同材料，或是決定哪些地方需要添加背景資料。因為這部小說原著從早期的手稿至印刷的歷史極為繁復，許多中文原文的解讀已經(jīng)備受爭議，更何況要把《紅樓夢》放在另一個語境與文化背景中。

我最近察覺，反過來看，這種錯位同樣令人傷腦筋。不久之前，我請朋友在家吃休閑午餐，剛從英國大學畢業(yè)的香港朋友栩彤翻開我正在閱讀的《紅樓夢》霍克思- 閔福德譯本（五卷之二），寫意的午餐時間頓時變成公開的閱讀大師班。栩彤只看過《紅樓夢》的中文原版，面對某些英文翻譯的辭藻就摸不著頭腦，尤其是原著中曹雪芹筆下描述清代人物的措辭，譯本里顯然添上了不少現(xiàn)代英國式的文采。最后，她決定用標準的英式口音朗誦文本。賈寶玉的那些話頓時變得很不一樣：聽起來好像是奧斯卡· 王爾德（Oscar Wilde）在講演。

可是，有一件事她覺得很正常，那就是拾起經(jīng)典再重讀幾遍。

通常情況下，我并不推崇“重讀”。我從前在《金融時報》（Financial Times ）的同事拉胡爾· 雅各布（Rahul Jacob）是一位患有強迫癥的重讀者。在他發(fā)表的一篇關于自己與朋友午餐聚會的文章里，充分分析了一對夫婦的這種進退兩難的困境：世界上有這么多值得閱讀的書籍，但大家的時間和精力有限，所以妻子堅持說：“你有什么理由，來證明再去花時間重讀書籍的必要性呢？”她的丈夫則采取了相反的立場：“我們可以重聽無數(shù)遍唱片，為何不能重讀書籍呢？”

在這件事情上，解答問題的首席權威——無論是栩彤或是拉胡爾都會聽從這位名人的忠告——應該是弗拉基米爾· 納博科夫（Vladimir Nabokov）。他曾這樣寫道：“奇怪的是，一個人不能‘看書，書本只可以重讀?！彼傅牟粏问牵ㄈ缋鸂査潛P的那樣）一種重新評估文學的方法，而是致力挖掘藏在文字里深層次內(nèi)涵的唯一方法。

在來自不同背景的中國朋友中，有數(shù)十位曾告訴過我，他們有重讀《紅樓夢》的習慣（有些人至少每年讀一遍，其他人則是在時間允許的條件下重讀）。樂評家李澄與作曲家盛宗亮兩人首次閱讀這部小說時是十來歲，只不過年輕的他們并沒有耐心鉆研小說里的詩詞歌賦。李澄喜歡整部小說的敘事架構，而盛宗亮閱讀《紅樓夢》時的年齡與賈寶玉相若，則更向往寶玉身邊的眾多美女。

我接觸《紅樓夢》時的年齡，要比李、盛二人大得多，但因為面對多重截稿期限的壓力，也沒有足夠時間咀嚼那些詩歌。然而又因為中國文化不是我的母語文化，我也許比其他人更有耐性細讀那些關于豐盛宴會的描述，細品賈家那些行酒令的游戲規(guī)則。小說中花了很多篇幅描述各種人與物，卻沒有推進情節(jié)。但其實這就是關鍵：當我重讀小說時，我發(fā)現(xiàn)字里行間很多看似與劇情無關的描述，原來都是作者埋下的伏筆。

我首次閱讀《紅樓夢》時，最令我感到好奇的，是那些涉及詩詞中豐富的美學以及對格律行文的詳盡論述。耐心看罷這堆文字后，才能再次投入故事劇情。直到后來，我才意識到，盡管章節(jié)中談論的主題是文學詩詞，但其實呈現(xiàn)的是小說中人物的自身狀態(tài)。一開始，看到豪門大戶有足夠的財力供養(yǎng)自家的戲班，我深感仰慕;后來看到家道衰落以至戲班也解散的這段，我同樣也被逗樂了。今天大家都有句口頭禪：“這是有錢人才會有的問題。”回想起來，因為財務上的輕率行為讓賈家無法超脫的那句諺語“另外半杯水”，才最終導致了整個家族的惡性循環(huán)，最終一敗涂地。

每當一個故事有機會“重生”，無論是用新的語種或是新的媒介，關鍵的問題是，新版本可以令作品升值嗎？雖然具有一些奇怪之處和獨有特質(zhì)，霍克思-閔福德的《紅樓夢》譯本，本著原著史詩般的敘事方針，讓廣大的非華裔讀者有機會認識中國文化。但是對于歌劇來說，作品與觀眾的關系就沒有那么公平。

歌劇藝術最本質(zhì)的原則是將東西簡化，因而主要運用的手法應該是“減法”——在處理《紅樓夢》這個特別個案時，歌劇的編劇最起碼刪掉了原著中的380 個角色，還有大部分的敘事線索，以及任何沒有直接推動故事主線的段落。因此，歌劇劇本是花了很少篇幅去敘述家族糾葛、行酒令或詩歌會。考慮到歌劇是用英語演唱，漢語中的咬文嚼字也用不上。從任何客觀角度來看，歌劇藝術好像沒什么可以為《紅樓夢》原著添磚加瓦的。

反過來看，《紅樓夢》小說為歌劇帶來了什么呢？這是一個完全不同的命題。故事里的角色感情極具張力，更有不少人仙逝，原本顯赫的家族最后破產(chǎn)，眾人顛沛流離，如此適合歌劇表達的坎坷的悲劇情節(jié)在世界文學中都很少見。除此之外，劇中那些主要角色跟國際標準歌劇中常設的戲劇與聲部特征也十分吻合。

沖動的寶玉當然是個男高音（聯(lián)想一下卡拉夫）;具有天賦但身體孱弱的黛玉是女高音，她體弱多病卻敢作敢為，可以比肩咪咪與薇奧萊塔;務實而可靠的寶釵——沒有人會感到驚訝——是一位女中音。賈家的其他角色同樣符合西方歌劇的模式。從架構上來說，歌劇劇本充分證明，當你把故事的細枝末節(jié)去掉（并重新編排或濃縮其他細節(jié)），《紅樓夢》的感情主軸與很多保留歌劇劇目都很相似。中國與世界分享了很多故事，但極少有像《紅樓夢》那般，齊全地符合歌劇藝術所需的全部選項。

《紅樓夢》可以進入歌劇界保留劇目名單嗎？現(xiàn)在言之過早，還需看看其他導演與歌劇院搬演這部作品時的處理手法。但是，在舊金山重演賴聲川執(zhí)導的世界首演制作已經(jīng)是往那方向邁進了一大步。6 月19 日的演出還安排了全球網(wǎng)上直播，觀眾們還可以在歌劇院官網(wǎng)點播視頻（48 小時期限）。不少新面孔將參與此次重演，包括出生于四川女高音張玫瑰飾演黛玉，現(xiàn)居廣州的女中音吳虹霓（飾演寶釵），韓國男高音金健雨（Konu Kim，飾演寶玉），以及新加坡指揮家洪毅全（Darrell Ang），他們都將首次亮相舊金山歌劇院。

我終于從我的“夢”里醒過來了。讓我雀躍地告訴你，細讀霍克思- 閔福德譯本第二遍，讓我更深入地了解了這部小說，對于人物與他們的環(huán)境也產(chǎn)生了新的見解（在已經(jīng)了解故事發(fā)展走向的背景下，對于行文中一早埋下的蛛絲馬跡就更加敏銳）?，F(xiàn)在，是時候讓我們給予盛宗亮- 黃哲倫以同樣的禮遇了。

Back in 2016， when Dream of the Red Chamber hadits world premiere at San Francisco Opera， I thoughtId done everything possible to prepare. Id read twodifferent translations of the full novel and a 960-page“abridgement” as well as screening two different ShawBrothers films， the entire CCTV television series from the1980s and as much of the 2010 series as I could stand.

What I hadnt done， though， was the one thing thatmarks the end of being a casual reader and the firstsign of becoming a Red Chamber obsessive： I hadntread the same version twice.

With Bright Sheng and David Henry Hwangsopera about to return to San Francisco—the first ofthe companys commissions ever to be revived athome—I began rereading the full translation by DavidHawkes and John Minford， which was the version thatmost shaped the operas libretto and pretty muchevery major reference in the English language. It tookonly about 10 pages to realize how different this wasfrom merely sampling different versions of the story.Pivoting from Hawkes-Minford to the translationby Gladys Yang and her husband Yang Xianyi isas different as turning from the opera to a ShawBrothers film. Each individual translation， Id becomeaware， is itself an adaptation， a continuous editorialprocess of what to include， what to leave out， whatto contextualize. With the novels convoluted historythrough early manuscripts and controversial printededitions， getting to the actual story is hard enough inChinese， let alone another language or culture.

The dislocation， I recently observed， can be equallyvexing from the opposite direction. Not long ago Iwas hosting a casual lunch when my friend Hilary，a highly literate Hong Kong girl recently graduatedfrom university in the UK， picked up the secondvolume of the Hawkes-Minford edition and cooptedthe occasion into a public reading. Having onlyencountered the story in Chinese， she was oftenpuzzled by specific choices in interpretation， andparticularly amused by a vivid syntax that oftenhas Cao Xueqins Qing dynasty denizens soundingvaguely like modern English subjects. She soonbegan reading with a British accent. Rarely has JiaBaoyu sounded so much like Oscar Wilde.

But the one thing she found perfectly normal wasthe urge to read the book again.

Normally Im not much of a re-reader. Rahul Jacobmy former colleague at the Financial Times and anobsessive re-reader， once wrote about a luncheonof his own where a married couple illustrated thedilemma completely. With so much to read and solittle time， the wife maintained， how can you justifyreading a book again？ Her husband took the oppositestand： we have no problem listening over and over tothe same recordings， so why not return to books？

The main authority in this matter—and probablythe one figure to whom Hilary and Rahul wouldboth defer—is Vladimir Nabokov， who once wrote，“Curiously enough， one cannot read a book： one canonly reread it.” In this case， its not simply， as Rahulextolled， a way of reassessing; rather， its the onlyway to figure out whats in the material to begin with.Dozens of Chinese readers， from a wide rangeof backgrounds， have told me that they return toDream of the Red Chamber ， if not annually， at leastas regularly as their schedules will allow. Both themusic critic Li Cheng and the composer Bright Shengdiscovered the novel as young teenagers， when neitherhad much inclination to linger over the poetry. Li gotcaught up in the narrative sweep; Sheng， who was thesame age as Baoyu， particularly marveled at a youngboy being surrounded by so many beautiful women.

I was a bit older by the time I arrived at the book，but being on deadline I didnt have much timefor the poetry either. Coming from outside theculture， I probably had a bit more patience readingdescriptions of elaborate banquets， or trying tofollow the rules to Jia familys drinking games.Long stretches of the novel have nothing to do withadvancing the plot. But heres the thing： readingthese discourses again， sometimes they do.

The first time around， I tolerated the elaboratediscourses concerning the abundant virtues andstringent esthetics of Chinese poetry while waiting toget back to the story. Only later did I realize that often，while ostensibly discussing poetry， the charactersare really talking about themselves. Initially， I wasfascinated that any family could support its ownopera troupe， and equally amused that， when thefamily funds start to dwindle， the troupe needs to bedissolved. “Rich-people problems，” wed say today.But in retrospect， fiscal imprudence put the Jia familyunder the proverbial viewing glass and the situationspirals downward from there.

Every time a story takes on new life， whether inlanguage or medium， the overriding question shouldbe， what does the new version add？ For all its quirksand idiosyncrasies， the Hawkes-Minford translationapproaches the epic timelessness of the originalwhile opening the story to a broad range of non-Chinese readers. Regarding opera， the relationship israther less equitable.

Since opera by nature is reductive， the equationis mostly one of subtraction—in the extreme caseof Red Chamber， lopping off at least 380 characters，most of the narrative threads， and any action inthe remaining episodes not directly advancing thestory. Little time remains for family intrigue， drinkinggames or poetry circles—and considering that thelibretto is in English， no time at all for the language.By any objective measure， its hard to see what operahas to offer Dream of the Red Chamber.

But what does Red Chamber offer opera？ That isa different proposition entirely. Given the generallyhigh emotional tone， multiple deaths， and thefinancial ruin of a prominent family， one would behard-pressed to find a more suitably operatic storyin world literature. But even more crucially， the keycharacters conveniently fall into internationallystandard dramatic and vocal types.

The impulsive Baoyu is， of course， a tenor （thinkCalaf）; the gifted and sickly Daiyu reveals herselfas a consumptive soprano heroine worthy of Mimiand Violetta; the pragmatic and reliable Baochaibecomes—is anyone surprised here？—a mezzosoprano.Other family members， too， fall reliably inline. Structurally， the libretto shows that， once all thedigressions are removed （and some remaining detailsrearranged and compressed） the story smoothly fitsthe familiar emotional arc of most repertory operas.China has many stories to give the world， but few tickall the boxes for the operatic stage so neatly.

Though its still rather early to gauge Red Chamber splace in the repertory—well need to see what differentdirectors and other opera companies do with it—StanLais premiere production returning to San Franciscoalready bodes well. A matinee performance on June 19，live-streamed and available on demand worldwide for48 hours on the SFO website， will introduce new faceslike the Sichuan-born soprano Meigui Zhang （Daiyu），Guangzhou-based mezzo Hongni Wu （Baochai），Korean tenor Konu Kim （Baoyu） and Singapore-bornconductor Darrell Ang—all of whom making their SanFrancisco Opera debuts.

After finally reemerging from my Dream ， I canhappily say that reading the full Hawkes-Minfordtranslation a second time does indeed deepen anunderstanding of the novel and provides a wealthof fresh insights into the characters and their world（particularly since I knew the story well enough tospot the clues in advance）. Now its time to give theSheng-Hwang opera the same courtesy.