弗雷德里克·特納教授訪談錄

摘 要：弗雷德里克·特納是德州大學達拉斯校區人文藝術學院的創立教授，也是提倡生態恢復運動的重要思想家，目前已撰寫了2部長篇科幻史詩以及 34部著作，內容涉及文學、美學、文化研究等領域，多次榮獲各種文學獎項。本次訪談中，特納教授談到了美、生態、人道以及中西文化的異同。他認為美是價值觀中的價值觀，同時美也是一種客觀現實；主張恢復美國的大草原，呼吁創建世外桃源阿卡迪亞；中西方文化都已經達到了和諧，只是中國文化傾向于整體和諧，而西方文化轉向沖突式的和諧；他提出搶奪他人的物質或意識形態領地不能解決爭端，而應符合人道和生態，懷著愛與結合的態度，將自己的領地經營得與眾不同而美好，開拓未知的或多學科的新領域。

關鍵詞：弗雷德里克·特納；美；生態；和諧；人道

中圖分類號：I106.2 文獻標識碼：A 文章編號：1003-6822（2015）01-0043-09

Wan： Professor Turner， thank you so much for offering me the chance to interview you just before I return to China after finishing my research here. Frankly speaking， it is one of your books—Beauty： The Value of Values （1991）—that attracted my attention upon my arrival in Dallas because it deals with the main concern of aesthetical studies in an original way. It also strikes me that you are dealing with beauty in the context of values hereby ascribing to beauty the value of truth， reminding me of Keats， who in his poem “Ode on a Grecian Urn” equated beauty with truth： “Beauty is truth， truth beauty.” I benefited a lot from your book as I worked on my PhD dissertation with the title Beauty in Love and Death—An Aesthetic Reading of Kate Chopin’s Works （2012）， and I recognized that beauty in spite of increasing crises still has maintained its role as an important category in modern aesthetics. Is it in your opinion possible in a few words to describe the range of beauty in contemporary writing？

Turner： Thank you for interest in my work. What is beauty？ I can suggest one essay， “On Beauty” （1991）， which explains my basic ideas about aesthetics. This essay is an attempt at an advocacy of beauty； it will show how beauty is at the very core of science， clarify the creative and innovative aspects of beauty， and demonstrate its cultural universality， biological foundations， and human necessity. Finally it will show that beauty is the source of our deepest knowledge of the world， and the foundation of effective and ethical action.

Wan： Oh， how interesting！ These are the perspectives from which I expect to learn the quintessence of beauty. I notice you have included this essay in your book， Rebirth of Value： Meditations on Beauty， Ecology， Religion， and Education （1991）. In this essay， to put forward your view on beauty， firstly you argue， “The very concept [beauty] is rejected by many contemporary artists and estheticians” （Turner， 1991b： 3）. Secondly， you explain this and prove it with the following quotation：

At present we’re snowed under with an irrational expansion of blind data-gathering in the sciences， because there’s no rational format for any understanding of scientific creativity. At present we’re also snowed under with a lot of stylishness in the arts—thin art—because there’s very little assimilation or extension into underlying form. We have artists with no scientific knowledge and scientists with no artistic knowledge and both with no spiritual sense of gravity at all. And the result is not just bad， it’s ghastly. （Pirsig， 1993： 287）

Then you say that “spiritual sense of gravity” is close to what you mean by beauty. I strongly agree with you and Pirsig on that both artists and scientists must have spiritual sense of gravity. Or could we say aesthetic perception？ But I feel a little confused when you say that “beauty is an objective reality，” while we have only taken this for granted for a long time that “beauty is an illusion in the eye of the beholder， an eye preconditioned by social convention and economic interest” （Turner， 1991b： 3-4）. Do you agree with this saying or not？ Why and how can you equate an illusion with an objective reality？

Turner： Well， you must be in agreement on that all human societies possess the concept of beauty， often with a very precise vocabulary and a tradition of argument about it as I have mentioned in my essay， “On beauty”. People see （hear， touch， taste， smell） the beautiful， and recognize it by a natural intuition and a natural pleasure. Even animals and plants do： antiphonal birdsong， the gorgeous ritual mating garments of tropical fishes and birds of paradise， and the brilliant shapes and colors of flowers probably concerning the esthetic preferences of bees. All attest to a more-than-utilitarian attraction in certain forms of organization. This “natural intuition” is for us human beings activated， sensitized， and deepened by culture， that is， a natural capacity of the nervous system now incorporates a cultural feedback loop， and also uses the physical world， through art and science， as part of its own hardware. The theory of such a training or sensitization， the incorporation of this cultural feedback loop， the plugging of it into the prepared places in our brains， is what I call “natural classicism.” The paradoxes of this term are not unintended. The foundation of the natural classical perspective is that the universe， and we， evolved. This fact entails two truths about beauty： a special evolutionary truth and a general evolutionary truth. On the one hand， the special evolutionary truth is that our capacity to perceive and create beauty is a characteristic of an animal that evolved. Beauty is thus in some way a biological adaptation. Beauty is a physiological reality： the experience of beauty can be connected to the activity of actual neurotransmitters in the brain， endorphins and enkephalins. For instance， when we become addicted to a drug such as heroin or cocaine， we do so because their molecular structure resembles that of the chemistries of joy that the brain feeds to itself. On the other hand， the whole species must benefit from possessing a sense of beauty. This could only be the case if beauty is a real characteristic of the universe， one that it would be useful—adaptive—to know. Without this general evolutionary truth， it would be meaningful only in a practical sense， it would leave out that tremble of philosophical insight that we associate with beauty， and would ignore the beauty that we find in nature and in the laws of science （Turner， 1991b： 4-11）. In brief， there’s a whole raft of fundamental human artistic genres and preferences. I call them “fundamental” based upon my research in psychophysics， neurobiology， cognitive studies， and， to some extent， information science. Studies of the human brain show that it actually does prefer certain things—certain ratios like the golden-section ratio and golden-section spirals， and so on （O’Sullivan， 1993： 14）.

Wan： Thank you for your reasonable analysis. Fortunately， I first majored in scientific fields and not in English language and literature. Otherwise I probably would become more confused by your explanation given those multi-disciplinary terms such as endorphins and enkephalins. It must be very challenging to reconsider the accepted conceptions and put forward your own ideas.

Turner： As you see， I tend to question things that everybody else did not question， and to some extent， I got myself into trouble， not big trouble， not be sent to reeducation camp. But at certain points even to talk about beauty was to run the risk of being considered to be old fashioned， sentimental， even imperialistic—and the logic behind that is very weird—but you know all that says I was pushing a kind of class， a gender； the idea of beauty implies the idea of something being more beautiful than something else and therefore is not egalitarian， that makes inequality and all of those things. People have changed their mind now， realizing， I think， that beauty is something which is naturally independent， beauty is a process. That is something that involves a complex relation among things and among people and it is not simply a set of rules that set one bunch of people off from another， and a lot of my work is showing that popular art is often more beautiful than avant-garde， or of high class academic art. So there again， I’ve made trouble for myself.

Wan： But I prefer to think both truth and beauty are on your side since you present a new theory of aesthetics based on the argument that beauty is an objective reality in the universe and you also identify the experience of beauty with a pancultural， neurobiological phenomenon in your Beauty： the Value of Values. Of course， I consider， like you， these ideas as more objective and convincing than those of people denying the existence of beauty and its power.

Turner： Well， thank you. But you know I’ve certainly been faithful to it. Whether it’s been faithful to me is a matter for God， I suppose.

Wan： You have not only set up your own thought on beauty， but you have been considered “one of the leading thinkers and spokespersons for the emerging restoration ecology movement” （O’Sullivan， 1993： 8）. So could I ask you： what are your basic ideas regarding ecology？

Turner： Here I can suggest another essay， “Restoring the American Prairie” besides the one “On Beauty” I’ve mentioned above， which explain my basic ideas about ecology and aesthetics. I hope this helps： a shorter explanation would certainly distort and oversimplify a philosophical position that is naturally complex. However， concerning ecology， briefly speaking， I call for an American garden， a new tradition that would bridge the deep and damaging gap in the American imagination between nature and humanity， the protected wilderness area and the exploited landscape. Here we have the philosophical elements of a new kind of environmental ethic， one that accepts human participation as essential to the wholeness of the world， and that actively seeks out ways in which that participation can be deepened and extended. It could be argued that the lovely complex tissue of the biosphere， threatened as it is， needs our best talents if it is to survive. We may find our greatest hopes for the future， as did the Renaissance itself， in a re-creation of the past； the prairie may be the best long-term rotation crop for farm areas suffering from soil erosion and impoverishment. This vision is Arcadian in the best sense. If the restored prairie is one prototype of the American garden， that garden is the culmination of the Arcadian tradition （Turner， 1991b： 67）.

Wan： What you said reminds me of the interview with you by The Humanist in late July， 1993. In this interview you said that you preferred to call the restoration ecology movement “inventionist ecology，” echoing your own interest in the theme of Arcadia restored， so it had the main title “Inventing Arcadia.” Here the name Arcadia lets me recall the fable of “The Peach Blossom Spring” in Tao Yuanming’s works. Tao Yuanming （c.a. 365-427）， well nourished by Confucianism and Taoism， is often regarded as the greatest recluse poet in Chinese history whose ethereal utopia-ideal society is in the story of “The Peach Blossom Spring” where Nature is beautiful； growth is abundant； people communicate harmoniously with each other and with nature. Is there any relationship between your ideas on ecology and Taoism， “the most influential indigenous school of religion in China” （Ye， 2008： 11）？

Turner： Yes， I definitely find the Taoist vision very compatible with my own， especially its concept of Chi （which I would identify with the current concept of self-organization）， its recognition of the fact that humans are part of nature， and its awareness of the natural reality of continuous change and dynamic feedback between the elements of the world.

Wan： I am glad to hear this because similar notions have been found in the early works of Allen Ginsberg， whose Chinese images “were filled with various cultural imaginations and the admiration of the ancient Chinese culture， leading to the rethinking of the American culture and the destination of human being” （蘇暉， 2007：91）. For me as a Chinese， it is remarkable to know that foreigners can realize the spirit and core values of Chinese culture. As a result， I would like to know your views on the differences and similarities between Chinese and Western cultures since you are familiar with Chinese culture.

Turner： I think in Chinese culture itself， in Chinese cultural philosophy itself， there are insights that match some of the most important work that is going on in sciences all over the world， especially the whole idea of self-organization of feedback among lots of different elements within the system， that is dynamic and creates new forms， and I think much of this is implicit in Daoism and the idea of Qi is in some ways like the Western discovery of the idea of energy as a systematic distortion of space-time. So in a sense， the different cultures came to the similar idea of a kind of harmony of differences. The West is turning to a kind of more conflictual harmony， and China is moving towards a more balanced kind of harmony， but similar kinds of ideas and in a sense， these ideas deal with the whole and deal with the edge of everything and deal with the frontiers of knowledge， the frontiers of our capacity to think. The problem， in a sense， with the novel and even with conventional literary poems， is that they take place where inside the whole. It is a little piece of an area that we already know. The novel is about people within the society and it’s maybe a critique of that society， but at the same time， that society is embedded in the whole world， which is a value we are unknown， and as the characters go through things， they have the realization that they have the sense to think back into the generalized society and in a sense you could say something about a lot of lyric poetry. It is observation within a world which is already to something learned to accept. It might be elegant. It might be a nice way of looking at it， but it’s inside something that is much bigger. One of the reasons I like science fiction is because science fiction likes to deal with the frontiers of everything， with the edge of everything. I like epic because the epic hero goes to the edge of the world and breaks through and goes somewhere else and it seems to me， and you know， not just for China， but I think for the world in general， we have to some extent been frozen inside certain kind of conventions， the conventions of the novel， the conventions of the art movie， the conventions of the short previous lyric poems. We’ve been stuck inside the conventions and in a sense we need to go back to the epic， to the big story that challenges the edge of world like Monkey and Trip-talker going over the Himalayas to fetch back the scriptures of Buddha， like the gigantic tragic catastrophe of the three kingdoms， where China lost two-thirds of its population in this magnificent， insane war. When you go to the edge of things， the big story， we need to recount the big story together. Now I see some of that happening already particularly in Chinese film. I’d love to see what really good Chinese science fiction would be like. They would not just be about brave Chinese astronauts； China is doing really good science now. So why not have some good science fiction？

Wan： Oh， that’s the part I didn’t realize before. Maybe you are right and we ought to pay more attention to science fiction. Among readers in China there is a growing interest for SF， but in the times of internet I am afraid the number of readers is decreasing. Some scholars assert that there are more poets than their readers in China. Isn’t that a paradox？

Turner： More poets than their readers. That’s the case in the United States as well， I am afraid. There are hundreds of creative writing schools and departments across the country， but the reading audience for poetry is not much more than a few thousand， out of all 306 million people in the United States. I think， well again， one of the things that I get in trouble for saying is that in concentrating on the short free verse subject of a lyric poem with no music or meter to it， without the beauty of rhyme that works through a number of things， sacrificing the power of argument， and logic， and clear thought the poetry can do， can perform by essentially making all poetry move towards a certain philosophical conclusion， which is a kind of existentialist acceptance of limit. Poetry became less and less something people would use as part of the celebration of the great things in their lives. Poetry became like the very sweet little things one put in letters to one’s friends but it became less and less something that at a crucial moment of one’s life came to one’s voice immediately as a way of making sense of everything. I am not saying that poetry can be fixed to do those things but it’s not the fault of the audience. A lot of people in America， England， or Europe， and I’m sure also in China， know the old poetry very well. I know what Chinese thinkers and artists can do because I translated some of the Tang poetry and that is some of the best poetry in the world. You know I can quote it.

Wan：Yes， there’s power in them. Many people prefer to find consolation in their healing power. Turner： Exactly， exactly， and it is the same with Shakespeare in England， or Goethe in Germany，or Dante in Italy and so on.

Wan： That’s true. Just now you mentioned Dante， and this reminds me of another article I appreciate， which says， “Dante’s works contained many aesthetic and poetic thoughts，” and argues that he “promoted that ‘art should mimic nature，’ and should embody personal feelings and emotions” （蘇暉， 2004： 132）. I think you have the similar ideas concerning the relationship between art and nature. To emphasize the role of “to be natural，” you once referred in that interview to， “Shakespeare said the same thing in The Winter’s Tale： ‘Over that art which you say adds to nature， is an art that nature makes’” （O’Sullivan， 1993： 15）. In fact， I also want to state that your works have the same influence. Many of your brilliant formulations in your classes or books are full of enlightening strength such as “Death is one of the most beautiful things we know” （Turner， 1991a： 13）； “Death is the mother of beauty” （Wallace Stevens）； or “Doubts are poison which can make lovers part.” Anyway， your reflections on truth， compassion and beauty are suited to soothe one’s soul， not to hurt， panic or disturb by arguing， conflicting or denying.

Turner： Yeah， all of them are quarreling over stuff， when you could make stuff instead. I think all the political language doesn’t mean very much either way. I mean one side of it is the way of excusing power； the other side is the way of excusing just the accumulation of stuff， the accumulation of possessions. Generally what I say is when you are confronted with the choice between A and B， always choose C. Freedom isn’t having the choice between A and B. Freedom is being able to choose something else all together which， you see， which is something different. If one finds one doesn’t have a certain kind of possession that other people have， then don’t try to take that possession away from them， make your own possession， create something of your own. Don’t try to take somebody else’s land， create cyberspace or go to the moon， or make the little space one has into a really huge space by articulating the inside of it， by making it special and beautiful. People always try to take things away from other people and that is a barren thing to do because it might impoverish somebody else， but it impoverishes oneself， too， because it means that one doesn’t trust one’s own capacity to make the thing that one wants. It is sad [on] both sides， sad both ways. That world is barren. It has no fertility. Maybe more important still is love， [which] is not trying to conquer the other， and it is trying to marry the other. That’s not to say marriage is just full of tension and thorns. It is life， having to deal with something that is different from oneself， and it is continually challenging， continually gives you a kind of a mirror for yourself also. Sometimes a not very flattering mirror but， you know， it means one of life.

Wan： I appreciate your views very much since I think love is the most important thing in this world under nearly all circumstances. Especially when we are facing conflicts， it is more significant to remember this in dealing with them， just thinking of Jesus’ remaining unchanged love for the people after his resurrection， thinking of Shakyamuni still promising to rescue King Kalinga from life of pains and misery once he could become a Buddha though he was being dismembered by this evil king， or just thinking of Tagore’s poem lines： “The world has kissed my soul with its pain， asking for its return in songs.” I recall that Shakespeare in Love’s Labour’s Lost exposed the male characters’ hypocritical efforts to gain young ladies’ favor to the mocking of the audience and highlighted the triumph of genuine love and natural instinct over the affected and impudent courtship. By the way， I noticed that you on your blog pay reverence to Shakespeare with the words， “Shakespeare is my enduring literary obsession.” Could I ask how much influence Shakespeare has on you？

Turner： Oh， Shakespeare is simply my master. He’s always the guide， incredible mixture of humanity， a wonderful sense of humor， this capacity to see the very dark， which is to look at the darkest side of the things， and then just beauty， sheer beauty of the poetry， the mastery of the characters， and the kind of wonderful deep understanding of political politics of society. It is a curiosity about every kind of physical thing of the world， I mean it is huge. There are other poets， perhaps on the same scale， Dante perhaps and Goethe and so on， maybe Li Bai， maybe Du Fu.

Wan： I agree with you. I am aware of the fundamental importance of Shakespeare， but I was surprised to learn that he also belongs to the category of science fiction writers in your Shakespeare’s class.

Turner： Shakespeare was doing a lot of science fiction of his time too. Well， I mean The Tempest in many ways is a sort of science fiction story in terms of the time. He based quite a little bit on the accounts of those coming back from the new world of these islands on the Caribbean where they were encountering； what they saw were Italian alien groups of beings. You have to think of what the Renaissance time， the medieval time was like. It was like a time， let’s say 200 hundred years in the future when we go out to other planets or maybe even to other stars， we begin to encounter other forms of life. I mean， that was the imaginative explosion that was happening in the Renaissance， and we haven’t had anything like those things. Maybe we’ve got an age like that coming in the future， maybe to some extent that has already happened with our encounter with our own creation—that is computers， thinking machines and so on， maybe through our better understanding of biology， recognition that other animals have words， but it is that I want to rediscover the sense of adventuring outward rather than quarreling among ourselves for what we got here.

Wan： All your explanations gave me a lot of pleasant surprise because they on the one hand focus on beauty， love， ecology， but also include morality， ethics and human responsibility and so on—these core values are inseparably interconnected， on the other hand， in my opinion， your ideas echo what some other leading scholars are advocating， who are not only from the United States and Europe， but also from China. Among them， Professor Nie Zhenzhao from Central China Normal University just gives me this impression for two of his articles—one is“On Ethical Literary Criticism and Moral Criticism” （2006） and the other is “Ethical Approach to Literary Studies： A New Perspective”（2004）， in which he puts forward“an ethical approach in literary criticism as new methodology” （聶珍釗， 2004： 169）， on an equal level with supplementing articles such as，“Importance of the Humanities with an Emphasis on Literature in English” （2008） by Professor James Engell from Harvard University and “The Role of Ethics in Literature and Art”（2014） by Professor Knut Brynhildsvoll from Oslo University. Concerning the broad scale of your research fields it could prove difficult to rank your critical writing within “the intellectual framework of some existing school of thought” （Turner， 1991b： xv-xvi）. Nonetheless I tend to agree that your Rebirth of Value marks a turning point in the theoretical debate because it questions the validity of the“deconstructive or eliminative postmodernism” （Prakash， 1993： 95） that aims at “deconstructing or eliminating God， self， purpose， meaning， a real world， and truth as well as the other elements needed for a worldview” （Prakash， 1993： 95）. You argue on the contrary in favor of a “constructive or revisionary postmodernism”—“by fundamentally revising modern premises and traditional concepts； by reunifying once again our scientific， ethical， aesthetic， and religious intuitions； by rejecting scientism， and not science； by transcending the modern world’s individualism， consumerism， nationalism， and militarism through supporting the ecology， peace， feminist， and other contemporary emancipatory movements” （Prakash， 1993： 95）. In fact， I do not think the second wave of postmodern writing is completely new and strange to us except the term because traditional Chinese culture such as Confucianism， Taoism and Buddhism always pay attention to “a more balanced kind of harmony，” according to what you mentioned between different human beings and nature， and the same single human being with his or her inner self. So， for instance， when an English Professor from China， with a thorough knowledge of Chinese culture reads Elizabeth Alexander’s poetry， he thinks that when she deals with familial history in her poetry， she deals with it not individually or separately， but “combines the familial history with the past of the whole nation， and sometimes even all of humanity” （羅良功， 2011： 3）. As to “humanity，” I recall that in China， to call on a much wider attention to the importance of ethics， ecology and the humanities， some leading scholars not only show their deep concern for how to solve contemporary social problems in their own literary criticism， but also organize some forums such as the international symposiums on “Ethical Literary Criticism” and on “Humanities in the world” with a subtitle， “The Value of Humanities Research： Cross-cultural and Inter-disciplinary Dialogues.” It seems to me that the awareness of cultural interconnections has paved the way for artistic concepts which aim at uniting the fragmentary elements of our common heritage， bringing them into a global perspective.

Turner： The title of the conference is a statement that I passionately believe in. Stéphane Mallarmé （quoted by T.S. Eliot in Four Quartets） said that the function of poetry was to purify the dialect of the tribe， and for me the tribe is the human race itself. James Joyce said something similar—writing was “to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race”—again， for me the race is the human race. Here is one of my poems， written about my experience in the Galapagos Islands， swimming in the Pacific with young sea lions （Charles Darwin conceived his theory of evolution in those islands）：

Mammals （Blood Kin）

Swimming with sea lions by the reef I see

That once upon a time our furry mother

Nursed a warm brood： one pup gave rise to me，

And one， who liked the water， to my brother.

We are all descended from common ancestors. One of the functions of the Humanities， I believe， is to reunite the scattered fragments of our family through truly faithful translation—a work that will finally link up with science’s great project of showing the family tree of all living beings. If the language is purified by the Humanities， we may finally come to recognize one another as kin.

References

O’Sullivan， G.， Carl， P. Inventing Arcadia： An Interview with Frederick Turner [J]. The Humanist， 1993， （6）： 9-18.

Pirsig， R. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance [M]. New York： Bantam， 1974.

Prakash， M. S. Dilafruz， R. W. Rebirth of Value： Meditations on Beauty， Ecology， Religion， and Education [J]. Educational Studies， 1993， （1）： 95-99.

Turner， F. Beauty： the Value of Values [M]. Charlottesville and London： UP of Virginia， 1991a.

Turner， F. Rebirth of Value： Meditations on Beauty， Ecology， Religion， and Education[M]. New York： State University of New York Press， 1991b.

Ye， L.， Zhu， L. Insight into Chinese Culture[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press， 2008.

羅良功. 伊麗莎白·亞歷山大教授訪談錄[J]. 外國文學研究， 2011， （5）： 1-7.

聶珍釗. 文學倫理學批評：文學批評方法新探索[J]. 外國文學研究， 2004， （5）： 16-24， 169.

蘇暉、陳蘭薰. 文化幻想與文化實體之間—金斯伯格詩中的中國觀[J]. 外國文學研究， 2007， （6）： 90-96.

蘇暉、邱紫華. 但丁的美學和詩學思想[J]. 西南師范大學學報（人文社會科學版）， 2004， （2）： 128-132.

Abstract： Frederick Turner， Founders Professor of Arts and Humanities at the University of Texas at Dallas， is one of the leading thinkers for the emerging restoration ecology movement. He has published 2 science fiction epics and 34 books which deal with literature， aesthetics， cultural studies， etc. and won him numerous prizes. In this interview， Professor Turner briefly addresses several issues including beauty， ecology， humanity， and similarities and differences between Chinese and Western cultures. He believes that beauty is the value of values and also an objective reality. He suggests restoring the American Prairie and calling for an American Arcadia. As for harmony， he considers that China is moving towards a balanced harmony while the west is turning to a conflictual harmony. Instead of taking away the others’ material and ideological possessions， he advocates a humanitarian and ecological approach to solving disputes—loving and marrying the others， and creating a unique and beautiful possession of his own in the undiscovered or multidisciplinary fields.

Key words： Frederick Turner； beauty； ecology； harmony； humanity

作者簡介：萬雪梅，女，江蘇大學外國語學院副教授，文學博士，2011-2012年美國德州大學達拉斯校區訪問學者，主要從事英美文學、比較文學和美國文化研究。

通訊地址：江蘇大學外國語學院，郵編 212013

E-mail： wanxuemei@ujs.edu.cn

（責任編輯：劉芳）