2015年9月30日 星期三

1003 「羅斌:回顧展」 Robin Ruizendaal「Some Paintings: 1986-2015」

Opening Saturday night, live jazz and more 20:30-2230 點展覽開幕:現場爵士音樂與其他
「羅斌:回顧展」
Robin Ruizendaal「Some Paintings: 1986-2015」
主辦:《見真人文空間》 At: Origin Art & Culture, Taipei
台北市師大路136號(台電大樓站4號出口)

1026/1104/1118 2015年雷震民主人權講座 Cass R. Sunstein將於12月10日、12日舉辦


2015年雷震講座暨中研院特別講座Cass R. Sunstein訪台系列演講

到2015年10月為止,Cass Sunstein一共寫了30本書,由他主編的專書至少也有10冊以上,期刊論文更是數以百計,其中內容橫跨經濟學、法律學、政治哲學、傳播理論、風險管制、資訊社會、心理學、公共政策、生物科技、民主轉型等。

這麼廣袤的知識領域,實在很難在12月訪台的四場演講中完整呈現。

為了讓大家更瞭解Sunstein教授在知識領域和公共服務的特殊貢獻和精闢見解,我們預計從10月開始,一連舉辦四場精彩的前導活動 - 「對談Sunstein」。邀請國內頂尖的學者專家,共同討論他的主張和相關議題。


無論是否參加12月的正式講座,這一連四場的前導活動都十分難得,和台灣社會當前重大公共議題密切相關,不容錯過!

◎10/26(一) 19:00-21:00 @慕哲咖啡
「謠言、言論自由和公共領域:從Cass Sunstein的民主理論與公民共和主義談起」
許家馨副研究員(中央研究院法律學研究所)、蘇慧婕助研究員(中央研究院歐美研究所)
(與「哲學非星期五」合辦)

*推薦閱讀:《網路會顛覆民主嗎?》新新聞出版

◎11/4(三)19:00-21:00 @台大法律學院霖澤館三樓1301多媒體教室
「司法自制與政治衝突:從Cass Sunstein的司法最小主義談起」
黃舒芃研究員 (中央研究院法律學研究所)、蘇彥圖助研究員(中央研究院法律學研究所)

*推薦閱讀:《司法極簡主義》商周出版

◎11/18(三) 19:00-21:00 @台大社科院二樓202 教室
「自由市場和政府管制的第三條路:從Cass Sunstein的「推力」談起」
陳敦源教授(政治大學公共行政學系)、王道一教授(台灣大學經濟學系)

*推薦閱讀:《推力》時報出版

◎12/3(四) 19:00-21:00 @里山咖啡
「審議民主在台灣:政策、憲改與公民參與」
林國明教授(台灣大學社會學系)、陳俊宏副教授(東吳大學政治學系、呂家華(台北市政府公民參與委員會委員)

*推薦閱讀:《剪裁歧見:訂作民主社會的共識》(暫訂)衛城出版(預計十二月初出版)




2015年雷震民主人權講座將於12月10日、12日舉辦。


今年將由哈佛大學的大學講座教授(Robert Walmsley University Professor)凱斯·桑斯汀(Cass R. Sunstein)針對法治的內涵以及審議民主的理念與實踐,進行兩場重要的公開演講。

凱斯·桑斯汀教授是美國法學界最重要、也是最受矚目的學者。過去25年已經出版28本書,上百篇學術論文,兩本重量級的憲法和行政法教科書的主要編者,更是全美論文引用率最高的法律學者。他也經常在New York Review of Books、The New Republic、New Yorker等雜誌撰寫評論,是美國社會舉足輕重的公共知識份子。他的研究課題包括憲法理論、審議民主、公民共和主義、言論自由、民主理論、網路空間、環境與衛生醫療、行政管制、成本效益分析、行為主義經濟學、動物權等等。桑斯汀教授曾於2009至2012年間擔任歐巴馬總統的重要白宮官員,主管各項管制業務。


相關時間、地點,請密切注意「2015年雷震民主人權講座」的正式網頁,將於九月中旬公布。
[Image source: nyu.edu]

1004 高美講堂:「走進《藝術家》的世界--看台灣藝術現當代發展故事」;遠流40周年






【《文訊》第360期2015年10月號*遠流40周年特刊*新上市】

 「找到勇敢的編輯,和作家一起努力為社會溝通,為每一本逆風而行的書找到特殊位置。」

 在一次採訪中,王榮文如此評論遠流經營的關鍵。1975年創辦以來,遠流以員工三五人的小出版社,到今日已成為一個以內容為核心,跨足紙本與數位出版,平面及空間展演的事業體。


 一路走來,遠流為作家的創作開發多元的可能,包括「大眾心理學叢書」、「小說館」、「台灣館」、「日本館」、「親子館」、「實戰智慧」、「綠蠹魚」等,陪伴讀者看見台灣與世界。在遠流創辦滿40年之際,《文訊》邀約過去與現在的遠流作者,以及遠流的編輯群,一同回顧與遠流攜手同行的日子,並邀約數篇綜述專文,略論遠流在出版上的前瞻性與開創性,為台灣出版社留下歷史見證,也祝福遠流邁向下一個40年。

————————————————————

【《文訊》第360期2015年10月號*目錄】

★編輯室報告
封德屏◎不廢江河萬古流

★封面故事
應鳳凰◎羅蘭第一本散文:《羅蘭小語》

★人文關懷
〈老梗終結者5〉
朱宥勳◎複製貼上的正確方法:抄襲,或致敬?

〈溪雲初起〉
邱坤良◎關渡屋簷下──文資學院的二三事(上)

〈當代台灣人文精神10〉
陳芳明◎誰先解嚴:文學或政治?

〈百草言〉
黃英哲◎翻譯台灣(一):黃春明與日本

★談文論藝
石永貴◎回到心靈的故鄉──彭歌《自強之歌》讀後感

★人物春秋
〈資深作家〉
顏訥◎邊緣人的人生棋術──專訪王溢嘉

〈作家行止〉
張俐璇◎蕭颯

〈懷念作家〉
趙琴◎半世紀的忘年交──悼念羅蘭姊
陳銘磻◎不再飄雪的春天
王蘭芬◎我與羅蘭阿姨奇妙的緣分
周伯乃◎知交半零落──追憶詩人方艮

★我們的文學夢 特輯
苦苓◎找一個島嶼情人

★本期專題:跨.閱知識的圍牆──遠流40周年

〈綜述〉
丁希如◎遠流書系經營與編輯職能
汪其楣◎期望百年出版老店
邱炯友◎遠流事業體發展與台灣出版未來的可能
果子離◎歷史長河總得繼續下去
唐薇◎無遠弗屆的文創探險家
 
〈遠流與我〉
吳祥輝◎取名字的最厲害──和遠流的40年交情
吳靜吉◎教育創新牽的線──我與遠流
李乾朗◎「台灣館」書寫樂
林真美◎那源遠流長的感覺,不曾斷過
洪蘭◎打開閱讀之門──歡祝遠流40年
徐仁修◎我與遠流的「荒野」情
翁智琦◎「賽德克.巴萊」在遠流──訪魏德聖導演
郭正偉◎他們展現專業,使我絕對信任──訪林夕談與遠流的合作
曾志朗◎遠流四十:一部台灣大百科全書
樂茝軍◎與遠流的緣──我的第一本書和「最後」一本書
鄭石岩◎日新又新的遠流

〈遠流時光〉
郝廣才◎回顧是為了向前走得更遠
陳雨航◎在遠流
傅月庵◎理想與勇氣的實驗之地
黃盛璘◎我在「台灣館」
 
〈遠流人〉
王榮文◎見證台灣豐富多元的出版史
蘇惠昭◎回顧傳統.創新未來──訪遠流李傳理總經理
王明雪◎是了,我們互相感謝!
黃靜宜◎編舟上的風景──記我在遠流台灣館的日子
陳英哲◎不做重複的自己——訪遠流出版三部總監汪若蘭
陳英哲◎在新世界裡,維持出版的優雅——訪遠流出版四部總編輯兼總監曾文娟
鄭祥琳◎金庸情緣
吳家恆◎收集碎片以成章
張孟媛◎科學人實踐之路
陳采瑛◎我在遠流的小日子
劉曉玲◎挑戰與成長──遠流40周年感言
黃驗◎百科編輯二三事
李傳理◎遠流40,從10說起
遠流編輯部◎遠流40.作家40

★2015文藝雅集作家關懷列車 特別報導
樸月◎「老哥」張拓蕪
廖志峰◎早秋──探訪尉天驄老師
林少雯◎天生我才必有用──風趣幽默的黃天才
樸月◎福如東海 壽比南山──探訪余宗玲校長
林少雯◎點燃紅燭93──靜定滿足的芯心大姊
龔華◎感念的季節──探訪周伯乃先生
林少雯◎以文學書寫人生──梅遜在黑暗中點燃生命之火
林少雯◎畢璞大姊,我們又來了──兼賀《畢璞全集》出版

★亞洲華文創作新星 特輯
鄭羽倫◎大學畢業那天

★特載
龔如玥◎看不見的那一維
張日郡◎水底的神明──遙敬石門水庫底的土地公
王嘉菱◎仲夏
黃彥禎◎故園

★書評書介
房慧真◎未曾抵達的應許之地──讀《世界的盡頭》
鴻鴻◎連接世界的水電工──評瞇的第一本詩集《沒用的東西》
沈眠◎疾病發光體──閱讀德尉、李南亮《病態》

★藝文史記
編輯部◎各地藝文採風
編輯部◎全球華文文學通訊
朱雙一◎大陸有關華文文學研究動態
劉靈均◎日本的台灣文學研究動態
張瓊文◎文學記事──2015年8月~9月
詹宇霈◎文學新書──2015年8月~9月

★銀光副刊
〈詩〉
蘇紹連◎山路
謝輝煌◎破繭
落蒂◎夜宿峨眉聞晚鐘
趙天儀◎在野風中奔跑
綠蒂◎尼羅河小夜曲
辛牧◎建寧詩誌

〈散文〉
張拓蕪◎我怎樣認識趙老大的
李喬◎草木恩情:公館紅棗
邵僩◎在國立編譯館
寧可◎山之最
賈士蘅◎憶半世紀前的邵族原住民──在日月潭和大平林的二次詩情畫意人類學田野工作
吳東權◎我寫「三人」與「四話」
趙淑敏◎重讀端木蕻良的《曹雪芹》

〈圖文創作〉
李賢文◎《光之道》第十道光:波光.白浪吟

————————————————————

【經典文章——盡在《文訊》第360期2015年10月號】

◎文訊雜誌社
http://www.wenhsun.com.tw/







------





【10/04 (日) ⊙ 高美講堂】

本周講堂特別邀請 何政廣(藝術家雜誌社、藝術家出版社、藝術收藏+設計雜誌發行人)演講「走進《藝術家》的世界--看台灣藝術現當代發展故事」。

《藝術家》雜誌創辦於1975年,在過去四十年的時間裡與台灣的現當代藝術發展密不可分。回顧過去,《藝術家》雜誌為了傳遞國際與台灣藝術資訊、報導優秀的藝術家與展覽而存在,隨著雜誌每一期的出刊,四十年來已累積了可觀的史料與豐富的文化資產。
本場講座從《藝術家》雜誌的創始故事到現在的四十年間,台灣的藝術發展與環境在每十年有什麼樣的變化。從鄉土藝術的盛行、現代主義的興起、到全球化時代與國際藝壇接軌,每一個現場,《藝術家》雜誌都未曾缺席,何政廣先生將與民眾分享台灣美術數十年來發展的故事。


☞ 歡迎大家前往觀展與聽講座喔!☜

●時間:10/04,週日下午2:00~4:00
●地點:高雄市立美術館地下一樓演講廳
●官網相關連結:http://www.kmfa.gov.tw/home02.aspx…^$1001_PN-1

====== 相關展覽 ======
【與時代共舞—《藝術家》40年×台灣當代美術】
●日期:104.09.26- 104.11.29
●地點:104-105展覽室
●官網相關連結:http://www.kmfa.gov.tw/home02.aspx…

2015年9月28日 星期一

1006 李筱峰 「聽台灣歌.說台灣史」

李筱峰週二9/29下午的演講「聽台灣歌.說台灣史」,順延一週至10/6(二)13:30~15:30。地點仍在國立台北教育大學圖書館四樓。要報名的人,還來得及。

2015年9月24日 星期四

1002 《畫世紀:透納先生》Mr. Turner



        Image result for turner film
    Mr. Turner
    2014 film
    6.9/10·IMDb
    Eccentric British painter J.M.W. Turner (Timothy Spall) lives his last 25 years with gusto and secretly becomes involved with a seaside landlady, while his faithful housekeeper (Dorothy Atkinson) bears an unrequited love for him.
    Initial releaseOctober 31, 2014 (United Kingdom)
    Running time2h 30m
    Initial DVD releaseMay 5, 2015 (USA)




第七屆「關渡電影節」10月2日 熱鬧登場
「關渡電影節」由國立臺北藝術大學電影創作學系主辦、英國文化協會協辦,為國內少數結合電影策展實務課程由師生共同策劃辦理、並邀請國際優秀電影學校來台交流之影展平台。自2009年舉辦第一屆至今已邁入第七屆,每屆皆以不同國家為主題舉辦觀摩影展節目,過去相繼放映過以色列、英國舞蹈電影、泰國電影、印度電影、法國電影、波蘭電影。今年的主題國家為英國,特別邀請到英國倫敦電影學校(London Film School)來台交流,共同舉辦工作坊與影片放映。
今年其中一部開幕片則為英國導演麥可李的作品《畫世紀:透納先生》。該片曾獲多項國際大獎與入圍2014坎城影展劇情長片,描述備受爭議的十九世紀英國浪漫派風景畫作大師威廉透納的故事。透納不止以油畫聞名,也是公認最偉大的英國水彩畫大師之一。他擅於以巧筆描繪出光線的微妙變化,並藉由水彩畫呈現出仿如油畫般的效果,因而被譽為「光之畫家」,其中「被拖去解體的戰艦無畏號」之作品更是被選為「英國最偉大的畫作」。他不僅影響了無數後世印象派畫家,更啟發了二十世紀抽象畫風氣的萌芽茁壯。
《畫世紀:透納先生》於10月2日(五)晚上20:00於臺北藝術大學藝文生態館三樓電影院(台北市北投區學員路一號)播放,影片播放前30分鐘將為本次電影開幕茶會,入場免費,歡迎校友們蒞臨觀賞。

2015年9月22日 星期二

10月各周末 民報文化講座

好消息~~
民報、蔣渭水文化基金會、上海商銀文化基金會將從十月起,每星期六下午在台北市延平北路二段27號2樓,舉辦民報文化講座。(免費入場,現場提供義美輕食,當天報到前五十位朋友送福袋一只)
十月份定為台灣月,將邀請小野老師談台灣電影,吳念真導演談台灣文學,音樂人楊緬因談台灣音樂,吳祥輝先生談台灣識別,柯一正導演談台灣社會運動。
這種強大卡司,不容錯過。因場地座位有限,每場可容納人數為七十人,明天開始報名,請密切注意臉書及民報官網的發布訊息。

2015年9月16日 星期三

0918 Prof. Carlo Ginzburg 主講: Doing History, Writing History: a Personal Experience : 2015 Tanner Lecturer、傅斯年講座 ; 0914/0916/0918 Exploring the Boundaries of Microhistory

故事:寫給所有人的歷史
歷史可以帶來正義嗎?義大利的歷史學者金茲伯格(Carlo Ginzburg)這麼說:
「記憶(remembrance)是與遺忘相互交織的。這就是為什麼猶太歷史學家耶魯沙利米(Yosef Yerushalmi)指出,『遺忘的對立面不是記憶而是正義。』」
「但審判的概念不可與報復的概念相混淆,這是非常重要的一點。」
面對臺灣的歷史,你覺得我們會需要一場審判嗎?
--
【臺大歷史系學術座談會:與大師談史學】Prof. Carlo Ginzburg 主講: Doing History, Writing History: a Personal Experience
主講者:Professor Carlo Ginzburg(Professor Emeritus, Dept. of History, UCLA)
主持人:楊肅献 教授(臺大歷史系教授兼主任)
時 間:2015年9月18日(週五)15:00
地 點:臺大文學院會議室(文學院二樓)
上集:「我們對死者有義務」──義大利最重要的歷史學者卡洛.金茲伯格...
GUSHI.TW



故事:寫給所有人的歷史
堪稱二十世紀義大利最重要的歷史學者卡洛.金茲伯格(Carlo Ginzburg)正在臺灣訪問。
他的成名作《乳酪與蟲子》,寫義大利山村一位小工匠的故事。這位名為曼諾齊歐的工匠相信,世界由混沌而生,「就像乳酪是從牛奶中做出來的,蛆蟲也是從中而生的,那些蛆蟲便是天使。」
多年之後談到這本書,他說:「我最難忘的是我投注了那麼多時間和精力,只為了證明我這個作法是對的:寫一本書,一本關於某個沒沒無名的人的書。」
「我們對死者有義務。說出關於他們的事實真相是我們的責任。」





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Ginzburg

刊登時間: 2015-07-31
【2015傅斯年講座】
主題:Exploring the Boundaries of Microhistory
講者:Professor Carlo Ginzburg (Professor Emeritus, Dept. of History, UCLA)
第一講:
Topic: Travelling in Spirit, from Friuli to Siberia
Time: September 14th, Monday, 10:00 am
第二講:
Topic: Unintentional Revelations: Reading History Against the Grain
Time: September 16th, Wednesday, 10:00 am
第三講:
Topic: Macro and Micro: A False Alternative?
Time: September 18th, Friday, 10:00 am
地點: B1 Conference Room, Museum of the Institute of History and Philology Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica



  • 杉山光信訳『チーズとうじ虫――16世紀の一粉挽屋の世界像』(みすず書房, 1984年/新装版, 1995年)
  • I benandanti-Stregoneria e culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento, Einaudi, 1972.
  • 竹山博英訳『ベナンダンティ 16-17世紀における悪魔崇拝と農耕儀礼』(せりか書房, 1986年)
  • 森尾総夫訳『ピエロ・デッラ・フランチェスカの謎』(みすず書房, 1998年/新装版, 2006年)
  • 竹山博英訳『神話・寓意・徴候』(せりか書房, 1988年)
  • 竹山博英訳『闇の歴史――サバトの解読』(せりか書房, 1992年)
  • 竹山博英訳『ピノッキオの眼――距離についての九つの省察』(せりか書房, 2001年)
  • 上村忠男・堤康徳訳『裁判官と歴史家』(平凡社, 1992年)
  • 上村忠男訳『歴史・レトリック・立証』(みすず書房, 2001年)
  • Das Schwert und die Glühbirne. Eine neue Lektüre von Picassos Guernica, Frankfurt am Main 1999, ISBN 3518121030.
  • No Island is an Island. Four Glances at English Literature in a World Perspective, New York 2000, ISBN 0231116284.
  • Un dialogo, Milano, 2003.
  • Articles in Past and Present, Annales, Quaderni storici, Rivista storica italiana, Critical Inquiry, Elementa etc.


Interview with 2015 Tanner Lecturer Carlo Ginzburg by Matthew Collins

Friday, March 6, 2015
Learn more about the 2015 Tanner Lectures by Carlo Ginzburg here.

Introduction

One finds in the life and work of this year’s Tanner Lecturer, Carlo Ginzburg, intertwined layers of living history and historical study. The scholar principally regarded as an historian was born into a family of no small significance, especially (but not only) because it consisted of many noteworthy figures in the Italian antifascist resistance. Both of Carlo’s parents were of Jewish descent. His mother Natalia (Levi) Ginzburg would recall her experiences as a member of this antifascist family in Lessico famigliare (Family Sayings), a widely read book which has been translated into more than ten languages. Carlo’s father, Leone Ginzburg, was born in the city of Odessa (in present-day Ukraine) and moved with his family to Italy after they had remained for a time in Germany. He briefly taught Slavic Languages and Russian Literature at the University of Turin, but his academic career ended abruptly in 1934, because he refused to swear an oath of allegiance to the Fascist regime which had been imposed upon University professors. In the same year he was arrested and condemned for antifascist conspiracy; he spent two years in prison. He was also the co-founder of Einaudi, a highly prominent Italian publishing house. Having lost his Italian citizenship due to the 1938 antisemitic laws, he was subjected to internal exile in a small village in the Abruzzi as soon as Fascist Italy entered the war as an ally of Nazi Germany. In 1943 Leone was arrested in Rome, where he was directing an antifascist newspaper at the time. His true identity was recognized and he was sent to the German-controlled section of the Roman prison and tortured; he died in jail shortly thereafter, in February 1944. Meanwhile, Natalia and her three children, the five-year-old Carlo among them, fled to the hills of Tuscany where they evaded the Nazi’s last attempt to slaughter as many Jews as possible while retreating from the Allied forces.
At the age of twenty, while he was a student at the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa, Carlo Ginzburg decided that he would study history. His focus would be particularly on witchcraft trials under the inquisition, and even more particularly on the attitudes and beliefs held by the persecuted. His work on this topic has now spanned decades and has resulted in many essays and numerous books which have continued to stand the test of time. If one measures success by reception, The Cheese and the Worms, his fourth book, stands out significantly. It still makes frequent appearances nearly four decades after its initial publication in the Italian language on syllabi in universities around the world—from Italy to the US to Japan and beyond. It has been translated into twenty-four languages. Ginzburg’s historical approach is abundantly multifaceted, but it may be fair, even if simplified, to present it in this way: in his work one discovers a balance between philological rigor and imaginative thinking. He seems drawn to deploying carefully conducted, well-founded study in apparently impossible spheres of knowledge production, thus requiring ever-innovative methods and conceptual tools. For example: how amidst the recorded documents of inquisitional trials can one uncover the true attitudes of the fundamentally subaltern figure of a peasant subjected to psychological and physical torture? Not only do the circumstances themselves lead toward false information: the entirety of the dialogue is under the strict control of the inquisitors, from the questioning itself to the written record of the exchange. Yet Ginzburg was able to find moments of unintended transparency— “leaks,” as he has called them—especially in trials in which the inquisitor misunderstood the defendant’s narratives. Such creative manners of thinking as this transcend mere rigor without discarding it, and thus one finds a rare combination indeed that produces fascinating insights. Ginzburg has also embraced the link between chance in the development of history itself and a similarly inevitable element of chance in the reconstruction of that history. He has come to refer to his frequent starting point in historical inquiry as that of “the euphoria of ignorance,” which is to say, the joy of encountering a puzzling fragment of information or an unknown topic, which is then followed by an endeavor to make sense of it.
Ginzburg has even found the possibilities implicit in such initial states of ignorance so enjoyable that, as he has said, he deliberately chose—and with increasing frequency—to delve into areas with which he was personally less familiar. As an unsurprising result, topics covered in his work have expanded well beyond that of early modern witchcraft trials; they reach the fields of art history, literary history, theology, psychoanalysis, and more. One can find among his writings references to Ovid, Titian, Stendhal, Dostoevsky, Morelli, Arthur Conan Doyle, Freud, and the list goes on, some receiving more attention than others, but all evincing studied familiarity. In 2000 he published No Island is an Island, a book which deals with the influences upon English Literature from beyond the British Isles; truly a long distance intellectually travelled from his earliest work in terms of theme, geography and discipline. Yet in everything he addresses one finds the same rigor and insight which result in a solid and lasting contribution to whatever the given subject is at hand—and indeed, he has continued his longstanding prolific production of weighty articles and books to the present day.
In addition to cultural historical topics, Ginzburg has likewise spent significant time meditating upon the methodologies underlying the study of cultural history. The Cheese and the Worms is regarded as a forerunner in the study of microhistory, which can be defined as an approach based on a sharply focused analysis of a specific moment, place, individual or human group, sometimes of lesser significance according to the grander histories that deal principally with the social elite. This sharply focused approach, which aims to unfold the implications of a specific case resulting in the construction of new generalizations, emerged in the late ‘70s from the intellectual exchanges among a group of Italian historians, Ginzburg included, who were connected to the journal Quaderni storici. The worldwide influence of microhistory (from France to the US, from Korea to Iceland, from Hungary to Brazil) has lasted to the present day. Besides The Cheese and the Worms, Ginzburg has repeatedly reflected on the implications of microhistory in essays including “Microhistory, Two or Three Things that I Know about it” and “Latitude, Slaves, and the Bible: An Experiment in Microhistory.” In recent decades Ginzburg has devoted most of his activity to an analysis, based on a series of cases studies, of the relationship between fictional narratives and historical narratives, arguing against the fashionable neo-skeptic attitudes towards history, notably in History, Rhetoric, and Proof and in Threads and Traces: True, False, Fictive.
Throughout these years of historical inquiry, Carlo Ginzburg has not ceased to remain a part of living history, and his work has continued to be informed by it. One can find in his reflections on his own work—especially when he has looked back on his writings completed in the relatively distant past—realizations regarding how current political climates and the particular circumstances of his upbringing influenced his topical choices, from the victims of inquisitorial persecution and beyond. For example, he said of his classic essay “Clues: Roots of an Evidential Paradigm” that the tumultuous political climate of the 70s in Italy (during which he too made his voice heard) subconsciously informed his piece, even though it had no overt connection to the events of the moment. Likewise, his initial choice of studying those persecuted during witchcraft trials was influenced by a variety of personal factors, including—as he came to fully realize years afterward—the fact that he and his family were severely persecuted themselves. While it is all too easy to continue detailing this fascinating life and career, it is far better to turn now to hear Carlo Ginzburg’s own reflections as a way of further introduction, now in his own words.

Interview

Matthew Collins: Given the occasion of your coming to Harvard as the Tanner Lecturer, I would like to begin with a question related to the general scope of the lecture series: do you consider that there are one (or several) overriding ethical or moral charge(s) in your study of history?
Carlo Ginzburg: A distinction should be made between ethical issues as a topic of historical research and the ethical implications of the historian’s work. Concerning the former, the general topic of my Tanner Lectures – casuistry and the controversies generated by it – has been at the center of debates about ethics for centuries, in different cultures. Even if my lectures will not address the relevance of casuistry in our world today, that relevance (especially related to bioethics) will certainly provide the context in which my historical questions emerged. The ethical implications of the historian’s work are a different matter. I am fully aware of them, but I usually refrain from focusing explicitly on them, for a very simple reason: I dislike sermons, I detest preaching. The ethical side of the historian’s work must emerge from the work itself, since it is (in my view) synonymous with the search for truth which historians must pursue. I say truth without quotation marks: the truth we are looking for is a human endeavor– fallible, revocable. That’s the reason why I insist on proofs – and disprovals. In the title of the Menachem Stern Lectures I gave in Jerusalem in 1993 – History, Rhetoric, and Proof – the polemical word was the last one, Proof. But then I argued that despite the widespread perception of rhetoric and proof as mutually incompatible, proofs have been regarded as a central element of rhetoric from Aristotle, to Quintilian, to Valla – a tradition which had been ignored or tacitly dismissed by late twentieth century neo-skeptics. The ethical implications of my argument were obvious. If a contemporary neo-skeptic feels unable to refute the arguments (or pseudo-arguments) of so-called negationists, who claim that the extermination of the European Jews never took place – then there must be something rotten in the historical profession. This neo-skepticism is largely out of fashion, but the need to place the search for truth (an extremely demanding task) at the center of the historian’s work is still there, and it will remain there.
MC: In your early intellectual development, what are some your most vivid memories and/or important moments of formation?
CG: My intellectual trajectory has many roots, like anyone else’s. But working on Inquisition archival evidence has been fundamental – something I have sometimes compared to the field experience of an anthropologist. It shaped my later research in many ways, although after a few decades I started to work in different directions. I vividly remember the long days spent completely alone in the Udine Ecclesiastical Archive in the early ‘60s (half a century ago, I can’t believe it) transcribing Inquisition trials nobody had seen before me – except for the inquisitors themselves. I was thrilled by what I read, thrilled by my solitude, thrilled by the encounter with a phenomenon (the benandanti) which no scholar had been aware of. Names of completely unknown peasants, men and women, emerged from those sixteenth century trials – along with their dreams, their emotional reactions, and so forth. I have never since experienced something comparable in my life as a researcher.
MC: Were you aware of the ethical dimension of your work from the start?
CG: I certainly was – after all, Antonio Gramsci’s prison notebooks had been one of the books which had pushed me towards the study of witchcraft, as a case study in the cultural history of subaltern classes. But ethical and political awareness was mingled with different feelings: first of all, the intellectual joy which I always experienced in doing research, whether I was discovering something new or realizing that I had been wrong.
MC: Do you consider that chapter of your life, so to speak—referring to your early archival experiences—one that is still open?
CG: Yes and no. That particular archival experience came to an end in 1989, with the publication of Storia notturna (translated into English as Ecstasies: Deciphering the Witches’ Sabbath): a book which sought to unfold, on a completely different spatial and chronological scale, ¬the implications of my first one, I benandanti (translated into English as The Night Battles). But some of the issues I dealt with in Ecstasies—for instance the relationship between morphology and history—fueled much of my later work.
MC: How might you regard the subsequent chapter (of sorts) in your life as a researcher? One notices an increasing presence of apparently disparate nodes in cultural history in your work, such as Dante, Thomas More, and Blaise Pascal, to name some among many. Is there some intentionality here? Does this relate to what you have referred to as a sort of euphoria of ignorance?
CG: What I have done since 1989 is difficult to describe: my research path may seem erratic, although I can detect a certain logic in it. Indeed, I have tried to repeat over and over the thrill of ignorance, addressing subjects I was completely unfamiliar with. First of all, I would say, it is pleasure: I love teaching but I love learning much more. But there is probably another, more hidden, reason. I encountered my research topic, along with the books which deeply shaped my mind as a scholar, when I was in my twenties. Being precocious is not necessarily a bliss. Later I tried, more or less unconsciously, to disentangle myself from what I had become, testing what I had learned so far on new, unfamiliar topics. Casuistry was one of them. I first came across it in an essay on Machiavelli entitled Machiavelli, the Exception and the Rule: Notes from a Research in Progress. Then Pascal came, and his opponents: the Jesuits. I will talk about both of them in my Tanner Lectures. But casuistry also required a reflection upon case studies and their implications. Once again, writing history and reflecting on the historian’s craft were inextricably connected, as they have always been since my early experiences in the Friulian archives.
MC: You wrote in the 80s, while reflecting upon your own work, that you were often your own greatest antagonist and that you held objections which typically differed from those of your critics. Is this still the case today? If so, what are your greatest objections to your own work as of now?
CG: For a long time I have been fascinated by the devil’s advocate: a figure that has played a crucial role in Catholic canonization trials since the early seventeenth century. The topic of the Martin Buber lecture I gave in Jerusalem a few years ago was “Inner Dialogues. The Jew as Devil’s Advocate.” I feel involved in an endless, contentious conversation with the devil’s advocate. What does he say to me in these days? He says: “You are trying to tame me. You are not listening to me as you did in the past.” Maybe he is right. But self-satisfaction would be the end – a ludicrous end. I will try to do my best to avoid it.

TEDxTaipei:10月17-18日舉行年會

【TEDxTaipei年會開跑】
 
《報導者》的好朋友TEDxTaipei即將在今年10月17-18日舉行年會了!今年30多位頂尖講者中,還包括知名戰地記者張翠容,歡迎大家屆時聆聽張翠容的心路歷程。
 
為響應美國TED大會「Ideas Worth Spreading」(值得傳播的好點子)的理念而在2009年創立的TEDxTaipei,歷年來致力於營造讓台灣好故事發聲的創新對話平台,這次年會主題為「Big Bang」,分為源、擊、群、浪、本五個子題。來自海內外跨領域共30多名的頂尖講者,將從這五個面向探討這個時代。
 
《報導者》認同TED的「公共」、「開放」、「分享」精神,此次年會講員中,張翠容分享的戰地記者觀察與心路歷程,對關心全球新聞媒體發展者來說尤其珍貴,期待屆時張翠容的演講能激起更多火花 。(攝影/何榮幸)
 
TEDxTaipei 2015 年會 Big Bang官網:http://2015.tedxtaipei.com

2015年9月13日 星期日

黎烈文教授手迹資料展 (2014年11月28日)國立臺灣大學圖書館


西洋文學研究與翻譯名家黎烈文教授,於民國36年8月應聘本校,任外國文學系教授,迄民國61年10月逝世止,共在校前後26年,其間著述不斷,尤以對法國文學的探討,最為深入,而且擅以優美譯筆,譯介法國小說名著,風行一時,影響深遠。今年適逢黎教授110壽辰,特舉辦此次手迹資料展,以為紀念。
時間|
2014年11月28日(週五),15:30-17:30
講題|
王文興教授-黎烈文先生的文筆
白先勇教授-黎烈文先生與法國文學中譯
鄭恆雄教授-跟黎老師學習閱讀莫泊桑
地點|國立臺灣大學總圖書館地下一樓國際會議廳



 黎烈文教授手迹資料展 (2014年11月28日)國立臺灣大學圖書館

從初二起,1966,就開始讀黎烈文翻譯的法國文學。
如今他已110歲了。我似乎記得,他到法國從中學學起。(這情況,跟現在德國漢學家莫芝宜家(Monika Motsch)到台北的仁愛國中上課類似。)
後來,我從許達然、楊牧等前輩的作品知道:他們也讀黎先生的中譯小說。
2015.9.13 我稍微跟許達然談他的學士畢業論文,他是用英文寫的,主題可能是"西方近期拿破崙文獻的研究",也牽涉到法文。我早知道黎烈文教授當年到東海大學兼課,教法文,而在山上,他與學生如許達然等的交往密切,告訴學生許多他與魯迅的交往---我相信黎烈文教授很少跟臺大的師生說這些。
hanching 先生/小姐, 您好
感謝您的報名,活動場次資訊:
活動名稱: 「黎烈文教授手跡資料展」專題演講
專題演講
時間:2014/11/28 15:30-2014/11/28 17:30
地點:總圖書館地下1樓國際會議廳
感謝您的參與,請記得準時出席。有任何問題可以上活動網站查詢或洽主辦單位。http://hclectures.blogspot.tw/2014/11/blog-post_27.html

2015年9月11日 星期五

0902 許達然「臺灣詩裡的抗議和疏離」;2015臺南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節暨世界詩人運動組織臺灣年會



今天許達然老師給我一本掌中詩集 (共16頁;編號16),笠50年紀念。以及一篇哲、思、詩、文兼美的論文:

「臺灣詩裡的疏離和抗議,1924~1945」,是台南文化局主辦的"2015臺南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節"受邀"專題演講論文" (A4,42頁,英文摘要3頁,中文引用書目1頁--p.43,英文引用書目15頁)。


笠詩刊

2015臺南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節繆思論壇
9月2日(三)下午4點至5點10分
許達然老師在國立台灣文學館演講「臺灣詩裡的抗議和疏離」
(照片由鄭烱明醫師提供)

廖志峰分享了笠詩刊相片
對年輕時的我來說,許達然這三個字充滿了神秘,今天依然
他的文字和敘述自成一個境界和世界
自然,這個名字也是在老曹的課堂上聽到的
在[陳情表]和[祭妹文]之外
我發覺文章也可以這樣寫------寫得這樣感人這樣不帶哭腔


2015臺南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節繆思論壇

9月2日(三)下午4點至5點10分

許達然老師在國立台灣文學館演講「臺灣詩裡的抗議和疏離」

(照片由鄭烱明醫師提供)



-----

2015台南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節暨世界詩人運動組織台灣年會(成大場次)

時間:2015年9月4日(五)早起9:00-11:00AM 地點:成大榕園校區修齊大樓3F 26302演講室


2015臺南福爾摩莎國際詩歌節暨世界詩人運動組織臺灣年會(成大場次)

主辦:台南市文化局、世界詩人運動組織
協辦:台文筆會、台灣羅馬字協會
時間:2015年9月4日(五)早起9:00-11:00AM
地點:成大榕園校區修齊大樓3F 26302演講室
內容:
Kok-lāi-gōa si-jîn liām-si kau-liû! Bián-hùi ji̍p-tiûⁿ!
國外二十外位詩人chham國內詩人念詩交流。免費入場!

[台文筆會+台羅會 聯合活動通知 歡迎會員參加]

台文筆會&台羅會會員請事先kā秘書處報名統計人數。
咱會ē請會員用tiong-tàu-tǹg

另外,主辦單位tī 9月2號到6號tī國立台灣文學館B1國際會議廳mā有辦5場「謬思論壇」講座。歡迎自由報名參加。