<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Homepage on Heterogeneity &amp; Zen</title>
    <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Homepage on Heterogeneity &amp; Zen</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Books on self help</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_selfhelp/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_selfhelp/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「Nonviolent Communication」byMarshall B. Rosenberg</strong>

<ul>
<li>A must-read.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「How to Decide」by Annie Duke</strong>

<ul>
<li>还算有用，不过有点太啰嗦。关键信息看这两个<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUB8l1Fz0mA" target="_blank">总结</a>就好。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/TheGiftsofImperfection/" target="_blank"><strong>「The Gifts of Imperfection」by Brené Brown</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>“Staying vulnerable is a risk we have to take if we want to experience connection.” 展示脆弱需要勇气，但只有那样我们才能真正做自己和爱他人。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Atomic Habits」by James Clear</strong>

<ul>
<li>Quite practical and actionable</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Gift from the Sea」by Anne Morrow Lindbergh</strong>

<ul>
<li>Reading this book is like meditation.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Outliers: The Story of Success」by Malcolm Gladwell</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>人物传记书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_biography/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_biography/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「Madame Restell」by Jennifer Wright</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Woman, Captain, Rebel」by Margaret Willson</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Art Thief: A True Story of Love, Crime, and a Dangerous Obsession」by Michael Finkel</strong></li>
<li><strong>「How to Stand up to a Dictator」by Maria Ressa</strong>

<ul>
<li>2020 年诺贝尔和平奖获得者玛丽亚·雷萨 (Maria Ressa)写下的她和菲律宾独裁政府抗争的经历。 向所有为自由和真相而战的勇敢的人们致敬。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Autobiography of a Face」by Lucy Grealy</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Wisdom of Joseph Campbell」by Joseph Campbell &amp; Micheal Toms</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Pleasure of Finding Things Out」by Richard Phillips Feynman &amp; Jeffrey Robbins</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Leonardo da Vinci」by Walter Isaacson</strong>

<ul>
<li>强烈的好奇心，敏锐的观察力，出色的动手能力，极致的完美主义(以及导致的无可救药的拖延症)。非常好的一本传记。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「梵高手稿｜Van Gogh’s Letters: The Mind of the Artist in Paintings, Drawings, and Words,1875-1890」by Van Gogh</strong>

<ul>
<li>善良的、纯真的、热爱生活的、爱用黄和蓝的梵高，如果钴蓝能便宜点儿，他的画里蓝色应该会更多吧。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Alexander Hamilton」by Ron Chernow</strong>

<ul>
<li>看完音乐剧找来读的。好看！决斗真是可恶的陋习，多少可贵可爱的灵魂丧命于斯。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Notorious RBG: The Life and Times of Ruth Bader Ginsburg」byIrin Carmon and Shana Knizhnik</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>历史书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_history/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_history/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: The Iliad of Homer」by Elizabeth Vandiver</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: The History of Ancient Egypt」by Bob Brier</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>哲学书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_philosophy/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_philosophy/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「The Wisdom of Insecurity」by Alan Watts</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: The Great Ideas of Philosophy」by Daniel N. Robinson</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance」by Robert M Pirsig</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>女性主义书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_feminism/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_feminism/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「第二性」by 波伏娃</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Madame Restell」by Jennifer Wright</strong>

<ul>
<li>堕胎届祖师奶</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Woman, Captain, Rebel」by Margaret Willson</strong>

<ul>
<li>18世纪冰岛首个女船长</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「I Know Who You Are」by Barbara Rae-Venter</strong>

<ul>
<li>遗传谱系学家，帮助抓捕了Golden State Killer.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Famina」by Janina Ramirez</strong></li>
<li><strong>「How to Stand up to a Dictator」by Maria Ressa</strong>

<ul>
<li>2020 年诺贝尔和平奖获得者玛丽亚·雷萨 (Maria Ressa)写下的她和菲律宾独裁政府抗争的经历。 向所有为自由和真相而战的勇敢的人们致敬。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Great Circle」by Maggie Shipstead</strong>

<ul>
<li>A strong, determined, fierce, and independent woman, who did not conform to the social norm. Girls and women need more role models like her, real or fictional.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 The Sleeper and the Spindle」by Neil Gaiman</strong>

<ul>
<li>好喜欢这个没有王子的故事。</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>小说/故事书单(non-scifi)</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_novel/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_novel/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>Terry Pratchett的所有作品</strong></li>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/bieguni/" target="_blank"><strong>「Bieguni | Flights ｜云游」by Olga Tokarczuk</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>“他们想缔造一种固化的秩序，篡改时间的路径。他们希望日复一日按部就班，没有变化；他们希望建起一台巨大的机器，每个生物都被迫占据一个位置，各就各位，展开虚假行动。各种机构和办公室，各种标记和通讯，等级制度，各种头衔和学历证明，申请和被拒，护照，编号，卡券，选举结果，折扣价和积分点，囤货，物物交换。/// 他们想在条形码的协助下让这个世界举步维艰，给所有东西贴上标签，让所有人知道一切都是商品，你要为此花多少钱。不让人类读懂这门新新外语，只允许机器和机器人读取。就这样，到了夜里，他们就能在地下的超大商店里举办诗歌朗诵会，读的尽是他们自己的条形码。/// 行动起来。走动起来。离开的人是有福的。”</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「太古和其他的时间」by Olga Tokarczuk</strong>

<ul>
<li>“小咖啡磨是在某个手工作坊里造出来的，而后才落到某个人的家里，人们每天上午在那儿磨咖啡。一些温暖而有生气的手拿过它。有些手曾将它紧紧贴到胸口，在印花布或法兰绒的下面跳动着一颗人的心。 - 小咖啡磨像每件物品一样接受了世界的全部混乱：频仍遭受射击的火车的惨象，缓慢流淌的血的溪流，每年都有不同的风在被抛弃的房屋窗口嬉戏。小咖啡磨吸收了渐渐冷却的人们尸体的热气，承受了人们抛弃一切熟悉东西时的绝望心情。无数双手触摸过它，那些抚摸过它的手都对它寄予过无限的深情和剪不断、理还乱的思绪。小咖啡磨接受了这一切，因为大凡是物质统统都有这种能力——留住那种轻飘飘的、转瞬即逝的思想的能力。”</li>
</ul></li>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/sth_menro/" target="_blank"><strong>「我一直想要告诉你的事」by Alice Munro</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>关于母亲：&rdquo;须知她才是我费尽周折想要抵达的地方；这么一段漫长文字的旅程，只是要去接近她、触摸她，将她从人群中分离出来，描述她，照亮她，歌颂她，并最终，摆脱她。但我没能实现，她始终在离我太近之处若隐若现，她一贯就是如此。她一贯是这么重，比世界上任何的存在都要重，却又是不明晰的，她的边缘消融了，流逝了。这意味着她已经牢固地依附于我，像以往任何时候一样紧密贴近，拒绝抛弃，而我将负重前行，前行，使用我所能的技巧，践行我所能的手段，始终不变。&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/amancalledove/" target="_blank"><strong>「A Man Called Ove」by Fredrik Backman</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>&ldquo;爱上一个人就像搬进一座房子，一开始你会爱上新的一切，陶醉于拥有它的每一个清晨，就好像害怕会有人突然冲进房门指出这是个错误，你根本不该住得这么好。但经年累月房子的外墙开始陈旧，木板七翘八裂，你会因为它本该完美的不完美而渐渐不再那么爱它。然后你渐渐谙熟所有的破绽和瑕疵。天冷的时候，如何避免钥匙卡在锁孔里；哪块地板踩上去的时候容易弯曲；怎么打开一扇橱门又恰好可以不让它嘎吱作响。这些都是会赋予你归属感的小秘密。&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Anxious People」by Fredrik Backman</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Remarkably Bright Creatures」by Shelby Van Pelt</strong>

<ul>
<li>好治愈的故事！ 故事里有一只聪明的章鱼。才知道章鱼有3颗心脏和9个大脑，能够记住人类的长相。难怪有人说章鱼是寒武纪时来自太空的外星生物呢。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「All Creatures Great and Small」by James Herriot</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Midnight Library」by Matt Haig</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Girl, Woman, Other」by Bernardine Evaristo</strong></li>
<li><strong>「A Gentleman in Moscow by」Amor Towles</strong></li>
<li><strong>「 Beautiful World, Where Are You」by Sally Rooney</strong>

<ul>
<li>It&rsquo;s about the relationships between two &ldquo;broken&rdquo; women and two &ldquo;broken&rdquo; men. (who isn&rsquo;t broken, after all) Every conversation, every love scene, is intertwined with awkwardness and sincerity, duplicity and candidness. (当然，我对感情倒不会这么拧巴。)</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 Normal People」by Sally Rooney</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Lessons in Chemistry」 by Bonnie Garmus</strong></li>
<li><strong>「A Quiet Life 」by Ethan Joella</strong>

<ul>
<li>一个有关悲伤、哀悼、放下、人和人的连接、救赎和爱的故事。 作者的细节描写功夫了得，有几次让我在散步的路上都忍不住想哭。通常倍速听有声书的我，这次没舍得倍速听，而是用原速慢慢听完。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Art Thief: A True Story of Love, Crime, and a Dangerous Obsession」by Michael Finkel</strong></li>
<li><strong>「1984」by George Orwell</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Serious Face」by Jon Mooallem</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Dutch House」by Ann Patchett</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Tattooist of Auschwitz」by Heather Morris</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo」by Taylor Jenkins Reid</strong>

<ul>
<li>故事很吸引人，情节切换流畅，对人物的刻画也很好。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Diamond Eye」by Kate Quinn</strong>

<ul>
<li>Kate Quinn的女性主角二战历史小说。她的小说几乎每一本都很好读，这一本也不例外。 这次的主角是一个苏联女性狙击手，基于真实历史人物Lyudmila Pavlichenko，据称她击杀了309个纳粹，又被称为Lady Death.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Huntress」by Kate Quinn</strong>

<ul>
<li>忙里偷闲听完了Kate Quinn的又一本书。每次都是女性+一战/二战+杀手/间谍的组合，读多了可能觉得俗套，但情节和人物刻画还挺吸引人的。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Rose Code」by Kate Quinn</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Alice Network」by Kate Quinn</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Island of Missing Trees」by Elif Shafak</strong>

<ul>
<li>尽管这样，我还是花了七年时间才能再次结出果实。这就是漂泊和迁徙对我们的影响：当你离开你的家乡去到未知的远方时，你没法简单地像以前一样继续下去；你内心的一部分得死去，这样另一部分才可以重新开始。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「A Swim in a Pond in the Rain」by George Saunders</strong>

<ul>
<li>非常棒的俄罗斯小说解读和写作技巧传授。现在我都跃跃欲试想写小说。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Siddhartha」by Hermann Hesse</strong>

<ul>
<li>&ldquo;One must find the source within one&rsquo;s own Self, one must possess it. Everything else was seeking &ndash; a detour, an error.&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Great Circle」by Maggie Shipstead</strong>

<ul>
<li>A strong, determined, fierce, and independent woman, who did not conform to the social norm. Girls and women need more role models like her, real or fictional.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 All the Light We Cannot See」by Anthony Doerr</strong>

<ul>
<li>悲伤又优美的故事。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 Hamnet」by Maggie O&rsquo;Farrell</strong>

<ul>
<li>文笔是很优美，但是好悲伤。 &ldquo;给予的东西随时可能被拿走。残忍和毁灭在角落、库房、门后等着你：它们随时可能像小偷或强盗一样跳出来。诀窍是：永远不要放松警惕。永远不要以为自己是安全的。千万不要把孩子的心跳、喝奶、呼吸、走路、说话、微笑、争吵、玩耍视为理所当然。永远不要忘记他们可能会离你而去，从你身边被夺走，就在一眨眼间，像蓟花一样从你身边飘走。&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 The Sleeper and the Spindle」by Neil Gaiman</strong>

<ul>
<li>好喜欢这个没有王子的故事。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「 Where the Crawdads Sing」by Delia Owens</strong></li>
<li><strong>「 American Gods」by Neil Gaiman</strong></li>
<li><strong>「 American Dirt」by Jeanine Cummins</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Silent Patient」by Alex Michaelides</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>心理学书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_psychology/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_psychology/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「Thinking, Fast and Slow」by Daniel Kahneman</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Influence」by Robert B. Cialdini</strong></li>
<li><strong>「 Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness」by Richard H. Thaler &amp; Cass R. Sunstein</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: The Great Ideas of Psychology」by Daniel N. Robinson</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism」by Robert Jay Lifton</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Laws of Human Nature」by Robert Greene</strong>

<ul>
<li>有的章节对例子过分解读，硬套理论，不过整体还算有趣。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Upside of Irrationality」by Dan Ariely</strong>

<ul>
<li>每次读Dan Ariely的书或者听他的课都有太多感触，一个被严重烧伤在医院住了三年至今仍忍受着痛楚的人，依然热爱着生活，把他的研究和故事向我们娓娓道来。这种力量让人动容。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Nonviolent Communication」byMarshall B. Rosenberg</strong>

<ul>
<li>A must-read.</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>散文集</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_essays/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_essays/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「These Previous Days」by Ann Patchett</strong>

<ul>
<li>暖心的一本散文集，特别是对于人生中不可避免的告别。 最喜欢三个父亲的故事，以及这段： ”I was starting to get rid of my possessions, at least the useless ones, because possessions stood between me and death. They didn’t protect me from death, but they created a barrier in my understanding, like many layers of bubble wrap.“</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Truth &amp; Beauty」by Ann Patchett</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Happy-Go-Lucky」by David Sedaris</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Calypso」by David Sedaris</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Let&rsquo;s Explore Diabetes with Owls」by David Sedaris</strong>

<ul>
<li>还挺喜欢David Sedaris的风格的，虽然刻薄和愤世嫉俗，但让人发笑，很多时候还挺让人认同。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Islands of Decolonial Love: Stories &amp; Songs」by Leanne Betasamosake Simpson</strong>

<ul>
<li>最推荐其中两篇：Buffalo On 和 It takes an ocean not to break. 以下摘自第二篇： &ldquo;Vulnerability, forgiveness and acceptance were privileges. She made the assumption of a white person: they were readily available to all like the fresh produce at the grocery store.&rdquo; &ldquo;脆弱、宽恕和接受是一种特权。她站在白人的角度看，觉得它们对所有人都是现成的，就像超市里的新鲜农产品一样。&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「调香师日记」by 让-克罗德·艾列纳</strong>

<ul>
<li>通感的艺术</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>治愈书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_soothing/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_soothing/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/amancalledove/" target="_blank"><strong>「A Man Called Ove」by Fredrik Backman</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>&ldquo;爱上一个人就像搬进一座房子，一开始你会爱上新的一切，陶醉于拥有它的每一个清晨，就好像害怕会有人突然冲进房门指出这是个错误，你根本不该住得这么好。但经年累月房子的外墙开始陈旧，木板七翘八裂，你会因为它本该完美的不完美而渐渐不再那么爱它。然后你渐渐谙熟所有的破绽和瑕疵。天冷的时候，如何避免钥匙卡在锁孔里；哪块地板踩上去的时候容易弯曲；怎么打开一扇橱门又恰好可以不让它嘎吱作响。这些都是会赋予你归属感的小秘密。&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Anxious People」by Fredrik Backman</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Remarkably Bright Creatures」by Shelby Van Pelt</strong>

<ul>
<li>好治愈的故事！ 故事里有一只聪明的章鱼。才知道章鱼有3颗心脏和9个大脑，能够记住人类的长相。难怪有人说章鱼是寒武纪时来自太空的外星生物呢。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「All Creatures Great and Small」by James Herriot</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Midnight Library」by Matt Haig</strong>

<ul>
<li>A beautiful and powerful story.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Girl, Woman, Other」by Bernardine Evaristo</strong></li>
<li><strong>「A Gentleman in Moscow by」Amor Towles</strong></li>
<li><strong>「 Beautiful World, Where Are You」by Sally Rooney</strong>

<ul>
<li>It&rsquo;s about the relationships between two &ldquo;broken&rdquo; women and two &ldquo;broken&rdquo; men. (who isn&rsquo;t broken, after all) Every conversation, every love scene, is intertwined with awkwardness and sincerity, duplicity and candidness. (当然，我对感情倒不会这么拧巴。)</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Lessons in Chemistry」 by Bonnie Garmus</strong></li>
<li><strong>「A Quiet Life 」by Ethan Joella</strong>

<ul>
<li>一个有关悲伤、哀悼、放下、人和人的连接、救赎和爱的故事。 作者的细节描写功夫了得，有几次让我在散步的路上都忍不住想哭。通常倍速听有声书的我，这次没舍得倍速听，而是用原速慢慢听完。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Gift from the Sea」by Anne Morrow Lindbergh</strong>

<ul>
<li>Reading this book is like meditation.</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>社会学书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_sociology/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_sociology/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism」by Robert Jay Lifton</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Dawn of Everything」by David Graeber and David Wengrow</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Bullshit Jobs」by David Graeber</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Tyranny of Merit」by Michael J. Sandal</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Justice: What&rsquo;s the Right Thing to Do?」by Michael J. Sandal</strong>

<ul>
<li>这本书应纳入学校基础教育课程。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「What Money Can&rsquo;t Buy」by Michael J. Sandal</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Guns, Germs, and Steel」by JJared Diamond</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Culture Map」by Erin Meyer</strong>

<ul>
<li>好有趣的书，有很多点大家可能都吐槽过，能够relate，比如中国人和日本人的过分礼貌和言不由衷，比如美国人的浮夸的夸赞(everything is great and excellent!!)，这本书系统地归纳总结了不同文化背景导致的不同的沟通方式。如果你有来自不同国家的同事/老板/朋友，非常推荐阅读！</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City」by Matthew Desmond</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Cultish: The Language of Fanaticism」by Amanda Montell</strong>

<ul>
<li>&ldquo;Modern cultish groups also feel comforting in part because they help alleviate the anxious mayhem of living in a world that presents almost too many possibilities for who to be (or at least the illusion of such). Flexibility without structure isn’t flexibility at all; it’s just chaos.&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Power over People: Classical and Modern Political Theory」by Dennis Dalton</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Social Guidebook to Norway」by Julien S. Bourrelle</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>科学/科普书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_science/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_science/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「The Molecule of More」by Daniel Z. Lieberman and Michael E. Long</strong></li>
<li><a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/tasteforpoison/" target="_blank">「<strong>A Taste for Poison」by Neil Bradbury</strong></a>

<ul>
<li>非常喜欢这本关于毒药的书！ 介绍了人们（大部分是男人）是如何利用胰岛素、阿托品、番木鳖碱、乌头碱、蓖麻毒素、地高辛、氰化物、钾、钋、砷和氯来下毒和杀人的。 有的并非是严格意义上的“毒药”，所谓sola dosis facit venenum(&ldquo;抛开剂量谈毒性都是耍流氓&rdquo;)，有时候“毒药”能杀人，亦能救人，就看怎么用了，比如阿托品可以治疗神经毒气中毒，还能治疗心动过缓以及近视；就连蓖麻毒素也有研究者试图将其改造来抗癌。 几个喜欢的点： 1打破了“女人偏好下毒”的刻板影响。书里的大部分例子，下毒的都是男性，杀妻杀情人杀妓女。 2.案例描述得很精彩，堪比侦探小说。 3.有很多有趣的历史故事和小知识。 4.详细介绍了每种物质的作用机制，具体如何影响人体的器官和细胞，有没有解药，医学用途等。很棒的科普读物。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「Eating to Extinction」by Dan Saladino</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Wild Sex」by Carin Bondar</strong>

<ul>
<li>动物们的奇葩/奇妙性生活，讲得很有趣！ 和动物们比起来，人类的性生活可谓是波澜不惊相当无趣了。</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: Einstein&rsquo;s Relativity and the Quantum Revolution」by Richard Wolfson</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Why We Sleep」by Matthew Walker</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind」by Yuval Noah Harari</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Gene」by Siddhartha Mukherjee</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>科幻书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_scifi/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_scifi/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「Exhalation」by Ted Chiang</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Stories of Your Life and Others」by Ted Chiang</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Project Hail Mary」by Andy Weir</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Martian」by Andy Weir</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Foundation」series by Isaac Asimov</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?」by Philip K. Dick</strong></li>
<li><strong>「Sea of Tranquility」by Emily St. John Mandel</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Peripheral」by William Gibson</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>经典</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_classics/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/books_classics/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: William Shakespeare: Comedies, Histories and Tragedies」by Peter Saccio</strong>

<ul>
<li>讲莎翁戏剧的最好的课程！</li>
</ul></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: The Iliad of Homer」by Elizabeth Vandiver</strong></li>
<li><strong>「The Great Courses: Classical Mythology」by Elizabeth Vandiver</strong></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Books on how to negotiate | 谈判书单</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/booksonhowtonegotiate/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/booklists/booksonhowtonegotiate/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header">
关于谈判，推荐三本书。</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="#Neversplitthedifference"><strong>「Never split the difference」by Chris Voss</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="#splitthepie">「<strong>Split the Pie: A Radical New Way to Negotiate」by Barry Nalebuff</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="#thinkingfastandslow"><strong>「Thinking, fast and slow」by Daniel Kahneman</strong></a></li>
</ul>

<p><div id="Neversplitthedifference"></p>

<h3 id="never-split-the-difference-by-chris-voss">「Never split the difference」by Chris Voss</h3>

<p>Chris Voss曾是一名联邦调查局人质谈判专家，在处理了150多起国际人质案件后，他于2007年从联邦调查局退休，并成立了The Black Swan Group，为企业和个人提供谈判技巧的咨询和培训。</p>

<p>「Never split the difference」里，Voss总结了不少谈判中重要的心理方面的技巧：如何建立人和人之间的链接，让对方感觉到被倾听和被理解，感觉到足够的安全感，从而愿意进行下一步的对话；如何用多种方式巧妙地温和地有战略性地说“不”；如何让对方觉得是他们在掌控大局和决定事态走向，让对方做出你想要的决定。</p>

<p>让对方感觉到被倾听和被理解，书里提到了两个技巧：mirroring和labelling.</p>

<ul>
<li><strong>Mirroring</strong>, 类似鹦鹉学舌，重复对方刚刚说的最后三个词，或者关键的一至三个词。这种重复和模仿让对方感觉到相似性，感觉到你在倾听，鼓励对方与你产生共鸣和联系。这一方面能鼓励对方继续讲下去，透露更多的信息，另一方面你也能争取时间来组织语言和准备策略。</li>
<li><strong>Labelling</strong>，用&rdquo;It seems like&hellip;&rdquo; &ldquo;It sounds like&hellip;&ldquo;这种句式开头，总结出对方的需要和期望。用“看起来”“听起来”是因为万一你总结错了，你还可以说：“我并没有说肯定是那样。”如果对方害怕某事发生，当可能的坏结果被说出来的时候，对方的恐惧情绪很可能会被中和一些，从而冷静下来；如果对方的期望是积极的，当听到你“富有洞见”的总结和对他们的肯定时，他们会感觉“你好懂我！”，接下来的谈判会顺水推舟。</li>
</ul>

<p>个人觉得，这两条说起来简单，用起来可能没那么容易。用mirroring的时候，要注意语气，不要让对方觉得你在质疑他的话；用labelling的时候，注意不要给对方贴负面的标签，而是要理解对方的处境和发现对方的需要。</p>

<p>书里讲的技巧我觉得最重要的是<strong>calibrated questions</strong>，能巧妙地说“不”，并且让对方以为他们是做决定的人。</p>

<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Non-calibrated</th>
<th>Calibrated</th>
</tr>
</thead>

<tbody>
<tr>
<td>No.</td>
<td><strong>How</strong> am I supposed to do that?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>You can’t leave.</td>
<td><strong>What</strong> do you hope to achieve by going?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Does this look like something you would like?</td>
<td><strong>How</strong> does this look to you?/<strong>What</strong> about this works for you?/<strong>What</strong> about this doesn’t work for you?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Why did you do it?</td>
<td><strong>What</strong> caused you to do it?</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<p>Calibrated questions多以what和how开头，不是简单的yes/no就能回答的问题。这种开放式问题让对方感觉你在征求他们的意见，寻求他们的帮助，让他们感觉能够自主做决定和推动事态，然后主动提出有利于你的解决方案。</p>

<p>类似的calibrated questions还有很多，比如：</p>

<ul>
<li>What is the biggest challenge you face?</li>
<li>What about this is important to you?</li>
<li>How can I help to make this better for us?</li>
<li>How would you like me to proceed?</li>
<li>What is it that brought us into this situation?</li>
<li>How can we solve this problem?</li>
<li>What’s the objective? / What are we trying to accomplish here?”</li>
</ul>

<p>更多的读书笔记戳<a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/neversplitthedifference/" target="_blank">这里</a>。</p>

<p><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/La4O7lmYpvXTTIn8TPZqY9LLh3dnJl4hW4AAhEru10urnr9fCiN8Si1qchYDIxQMDtQ=w1131-h847-p" /></p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a>
<div id="splitthepie"></p>

<h3 id="split-the-pie-a-radical-new-way-to-negotiate-by-barry-nalebuff">「Split the Pie: A Radical New Way to Negotiate」by Barry Nalebuff</h3>

<p>Chris Voss的「Never split the difference」着重于谈判的心理层面，而Barry Nalebuff的「Split the Pie: A Radical New Way to Negotiate」则是技术流：用大量数字和计算来展示如何是合理的split the pie的方式。</p>

<p>用一个例子总结如何split the pie： Alice和Bob两个人，如果他们能就如何分配达成一致，他们能拿到一个12块的pizza；如果他们不能达成一致，他们还是可以拿到一些pizza，Alice可以拿到四块，Bob可以拿到两块。</p>

<p>问题来了：如何分配这12块pizza比较合理？</p>

<p><a href="https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/better-way-to-divide-the-pie" target="_blank"> <img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/8ycLVbtnCXO3pj-CTJcavPcrldfBfppnWf7VSZY6H_PbvEMX5Exi_QGt65uBfd7fh2k=w526-h591-p" /></a></p>

<ul>
<li><p>从<strong>实力</strong>的角度考虑，如果没有达成协议，Alice有4块，是Bob的两倍，所以最终她应该得到两倍的pizza：Alice 8块，Bob 4块。</p></li>

<li><p>从<strong>公平</strong>的角度考虑，pizza应该平分：Alice 6块，Bob 6块。</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Split the pie</strong>方案：如果Alice和Bob没有达成协议，他们总共会有4+2=6块。如果他们达成协议，他们将有总共12块。达成协议的价值在于从6块到12块。增加的6块就是pie。这增加的6块，Alice和Bob的贡献是一样的，缺了谁都不行，因此这额外的6块应该被平分。所以，4+3=7块给Alice，2+3=5块给Bob.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>书里用了大量的例子从各个角度论证了split the pie方案的合理性。有的例子乍听之下有点反常识，但仔细想象还是很有道理的。反正最后我是被说服了。</p>

<p>「Never split the difference」和 「Split the Pie」，这两本书名看起来似乎有点矛盾，Voss说不要split，而Nalebuff则提倡split the pie.其实他们强调的是谈判的不同方面。Voss强调不要split，主要还是因为他的人质谈判的经历。在人质谈判里，你没法对绑架者说：release half of the hostages and let&rsquo;s call it a day.在这样的危机谈判中，或者在没法明确定义“pie”的时候，Voss的温柔又强势的谈判风格可以借鉴。</p>

<p>而当pie能够被明确定义时，比如两方合作能带来多少的额外收入，能降低多少的成本，这种情况下，用split the pie的方案比较合理公平。</p>

<p>Nalebuff的书里对谈判的心理学略有涉及，但是不多，在说服对方接受split the pie方案时，可以多借鉴Voss提到的心理学技巧。</p>

<p>更多的读书笔记戳<a href="https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/splitthepie/" target="_blank">这里</a>。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a>
<div id="thinkingfastandslow"></p>

<h3 id="thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman">「Thinking, fast and slow」by Daniel Kahneman</h3>

<p>说到谈判的心理学，最后隆重推荐Daniel Kahneman的「Thinking, fast and slow」。前面的提到的两本书都或多或少参考了这本书里提到的各种理论和实验。了解人类的各种偏见、执拗、冲动、非理性，一方面可以在谈判时稍加利用，影响对方的决定，另一方面也提醒自己，避免陷入类似的陷阱。</p>

<p>（这本的笔记太长了，以后整理完了再添加链接）</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Chris Voss: Never split the difference】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/neversplitthedifference/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/neversplitthedifference/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="never-split-the-difference">Never split the difference</h3>

<p>by Chris Voss</p>

<p><a href="#sheet">Prepare a negotiation one sheet | 准备谈判单</a><br />
<a href="#twosystems">Influence system 1 to guide system 2 rationality</a><br />
<a href="#mirror">Skill 1. Be a mirror: how to quickly establish rapport</a><br />
<a href="#labelling">Skill 2. Tactical empathy: don&rsquo;t feel their pain, label it</a><br />
<a href="#yesno">Skill 3. Yes/No: How to generate momentum and make it safe to reveal the real stakes</a><br />
<a href="#thatsright">Skill 4. Trigger the two words that immediately transform any negotiation: that&rsquo;s right</a><br />
<a href="#bendreality">Skill 5. Bend their reality: How to shape what Is fair</a><br />
<a href="#calibratequestions">Skill 6. Calibrate questions: create the illusion of control</a><br />
<a href="#execution">Skill 7. Guarantee execution</a><br />
<a href="#bargainhard">Skill 8. Bargain hard</a><br />
<a href="#blackswan">Skill 9. Finding the black swan</a></p>

<p><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/La4O7lmYpvXTTIn8TPZqY9LLh3dnJl4hW4AAhEru10urnr9fCiN8Si1qchYDIxQMDtQ=w1131-h847-p" /></p>

<blockquote>
<p>The first step to achieving a mastery of daily negotiation is to get over your aversion to negotiating. You don’t need to like it; you just need to understand that’s how the world works. Negotiating does not mean browbeating or grinding someone down. It simply means playing the emotional game that human society is set up for. In this world, you get what you ask for; you just have to ask correctly. So claim your prerogative to ask for what you think is right.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>掌握谈判的第一步是克服你对谈判的厌恶。你不需要喜欢它；你只需要理解这就是世界的运作方式。谈判并不意味着对别人横加指责或磨难。它只是意味着去玩人类社会所设定的情感游戏。在这个世界上，只有你要求，你才可能得到，而你需要正确地要求。因此，正大光明地去要求你认为正确的事情。</p>

<p><div id="sheet"></p>

<h3 id="prepare-a-negotiation-one-sheet-准备谈判单">Prepare a negotiation one sheet | 准备谈判单</h3>

<ul>
<li><strong>SECTION I: THE GOAL</strong></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Think through best/worst-case scenarios but only write down a specific goal that represents the best case.</strong></p>

<p>Typically, negotiation experts will tell you to prepare by making a list: your bottom line; what you really want; how you’re going to try to get there; and counters to your counterpart’s arguments. But this typical preparation fails in many ways. It’s unimaginative and leads to the predictable bargaining dynamic of offer/counteroffer/meet in the middle. In other words, it gets results, but they’re often mediocre.The centerpiece of the traditional preparation dynamic—and its greatest Achilles’ heel—is something called the BATNA.</p>

<p>Roger Fisher and William Ury coined the term in their 1981 bestseller, Getting to Yes, and it stands for Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. Basically, it’s the best possible option you have if negotiations fail. Your last resort. Say you’re on a car lot trying to sell your old BMW 3-series. If you already have another dealer who’s given you a written offer for $10,000, that’s your BATNA.</p>

<p>The problem is that <strong>BATNA tricks negotiators into aiming low</strong>. Researchers have found that humans have a limited capacity for keeping focus in complex, stressful situations like negotiations. And so, once a negotiation is under way, we tend to gravitate toward the focus point that has the most psychological significance for us.</p>

<p>In that context, obsessing over a BATNA turns it into your target, and thereby sets the upper limit of what you will ask for. After you’ve spent hours on a BATNA, you mentally concede everything beyond it. God knows aiming low is seductive. Self-esteem is a huge factor in negotiation, and many people set modest goals to protect it. It’s easier to claim victory when you aim low. That’s why some negotiation experts say that <strong>many people who think they have “win-win” goals really have a “wimp-win” mentality</strong>. The “wimp-win” negotiator focuses on his or her bottom line, and that’s where they end up.</p>

<p>So if BATNA isn’t your centerpiece, what should be?</p>

<p><strong>Think about the outcome extremes: best and worst.</strong> If you’ve got both ends covered, you’ll be ready for anything. So know what you cannot accept and have an idea about the best-case outcome, but keep in mind that since there’s information yet to be acquired from the other side, it’s quite possible that best case might be even better than you know.</p>

<p>Remember, never be so sure of what you want that you wouldn’t take something better. Once you’ve got flexibility in the forefront of your mind you come into a negotiation with a winning mindset.</p>

<p>Let’s say you’re selling old speakers because you need $100 to put toward a new set. If you concentrate on the $100 minimum, you’ll relax when you hear that number and that’s what you’ll get. But if you know that they are for sale in used audio stores for $140, you could set a high-end goal of $150, while remaining open to better things.</p>

<p>Now, while I counsel thinking about a best/worst range to give my clients the security of some structure, when it comes to what actually goes on your one sheet, my advice is to just <strong>stick with the high-end goal, as it will motivate and focus your psychological powers, priming you to think you are facing a “loss” for any term that falls short</strong>. Decades of goal-setting research is clear that people who set specific, challenging, but realistic goals end up getting better deals than those who don’t set goals or simply strive to do their best. Bottom line: <strong>People who expect more (and articulate it) get more</strong>.</p>

<p>Here are the four steps for setting your goal:</p>

<ol>
<li>Set an optimistic but reasonable goal and define it clearly.<br /></li>
<li>Write it down.<br /></li>
<li>Discuss your goal with a colleague (this makes it harder to wimp out).<br /></li>
<li>Carry the written goal into the negotiation.<br /></li>
</ol>

<ul>
<li><strong>SECTION II: SUMMARY</strong></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Summarize and write out in just a couple of sentences the known facts that have led up to the negotiation.</strong></p>

<p>You’re going to have to have something to talk about beyond a self-serving assessment of what you want. And you had better be ready to respond with tactical empathy to your counterpart’s arguments; unless they’re incompetent, the other party will come prepared to argue an interpretation of the facts that favors them.</p>

<p>Get on the same page at the outset.</p>

<p>You have to clearly describe the lay of the land before you can think about acting in its confines. Why are you there? What do you want? What do they want? Why?</p>

<p><strong>You must be able to summarize a situation in a way that your counterpart will respond with a “That’s right.”</strong> If they don’t, you haven’t done it right.</p>

<ul>
<li><strong>SECTION III: LABELS/ACCUSATION AUDIT</strong></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Prepare three to five labels to perform an accusation audit.</strong></p>

<p>Anticipate how your counterpart feels about these facts you’ve just summarized. Make a concise list of any accusations they might make—no matter how unfair or ridiculous they might be. Then turn each accusation into a list of no more than five labels and spend a little time role-playing it.</p>

<p>There are fill-in-the-blank labels that can be used in nearly every situation to extract information from your counterpart, or defuse an accusation:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>It seems like _________ is valuable to you.<br />
  It seems like you don’t like _________.<br />
  It seems like you value __________.<br />
  It seems like _________ makes it easier.<br />
  It seems like you’re reluctant to _________.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>As an example, if you’re trying to renegotiate an apartment lease to allow subletters and you know the landlord is opposed to them, your prepared labels would be on the lines of “It seems as though you’re not a fan of subletters” or “It seems like you want stability with your tenants.&rdquo;</p>

<ul>
<li><strong>SECTION IV: CALIBRATED QUESTIONS</strong></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Prepare three to five calibrated questions to reveal value to you and your counterpart and identify and overcome potential deal killers.</strong></p>

<p>Effective negotiators look past their counterparts’ stated positions (what the party demands) and delve into their underlying motivations (what is making them want what they want). Motivations are what they are worried about and what they hope for, even lust for.</p>

<p>Figuring out what the other party is worried about sounds simple, but our basic human expectations about negotiation often get in the way. Most of us tend to assume that the needs of the other side conflict with our own. We tend to limit our field of vision to our issues and problems, and forget that the other side has its own unique issues based on its own unique worldview. Great negotiators get past these blinders by being relentlessly curious about what is really motivating the other side.</p>

<p>Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling has a great quote that sums up this concept: “You must accept the reality of other people. You think that reality is up for negotiation, that we think it’s whatever you say it is. You must accept that we are as real as you are; you must accept that you are not God.”</p>

<p>There will be a small group of “What” and “How” questions that you will find yourself using in nearly every situation. Here are a few of them:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>What are we trying to accomplish?<br />
  How is that worthwhile?<br />
  What’s the core issue here?<br />
  How does that affect things?<br />
  What’s the biggest challenge you face?<br />
  How does this fit into what the objective is?</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>QUESTIONS TO IDENTIFY BEHIND-THE-TABLE DEAL KILLERS</strong></p>

<p>When implementation happens by committee, the support of that committee is key. You’ll want to tailor your calibrated questions to identify and unearth the motivations of those behind the table, including:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>How does this affect the rest of your team?<br />
  How on board are the people not on this call?<br />
  What do your colleagues see as their main challenges in this area?”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>QUESTIONS TO IDENTIFY AND DIFFUSE DEAL-KILLING ISSUES</strong></p>

<p>Internal negotiating influence often sits with the people who are most comfortable with things as they are. Change may make them look as if they haven’t been doing their job. Your dilemma in such “a negotiation is how to make them look good in the face of that change.</p>

<p>You’ll be tempted to concentrate on money, but put that aside for now. A surprisingly high percentage of negotiations hinge on something outside dollars and cents. Often they have more to do with self-esteem, status, autonomy, and other nonfinancial needs.</p>

<p>Think about their perceived losses. Never forget that a loss stings at least twice as much as an equivalent gain.For example, the guy across the table may be hesitating to install the new accounting system he needs (and you are selling) because he doesn’t want to screw anything up before his annual review in four months’ time. Instead of lowering your price, you can offer to help impress his boss, and do it safely, by promising to finish the installation in ninety days, guaranteed.”</p>

<p><strong>QUESTIONS TO USE TO UNEARTH THE DEAL-KILLING ISSUES</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>What are we up against here?<br />
    What is the biggest challenge you face?<br />
    How does making a deal with us affect things?<br />
    What happens if you do nothing?<br />
    What does doing nothing cost you?</p>
</blockquote>

<pre><code>How does making this deal resonate with what your company prides itself on?

It’s often very effective to ask these in groups of two or three as they are similar enough that they help your counterpart think about the same thing from different angles.

Every situation is unique, of course, but choosing the right mix of these questions will lead your counterpart to reveal information about what they want and need—and simultaneously push them to see things from your point of view.

Be ready to execute follow-up labels to their answers to your calibrated questions.

Having labels prepared will allow you to quickly turn your counterpart’s responses back to them, which will keep them feeding you new and expanding information. Again, these are fill-in-the-blank labels that you can use quickly without tons of thought:

&gt; It seems like __________ is important.  
It seems you feel like my company is in a unique position to __________.  
It seems like you are worried that __________.
</code></pre>

<ul>
<li><strong>SECTION V: NONCASH OFFERS</strong></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Prepare a list of noncash items possessed by your counterpart that would be valuable.</strong></p>

<p>Ask yourself: “What could they give that would almost get us to do it for free?” Think of the anecdote I told a few chapters ago about my work for the lawyers’ association: My counterpart’s interest was to pay me as little cash as possible in order to look good in front of his board. We came upon the idea that they pay in part by publishing a cover story about me in their magazine. That was low-cost for them and it advanced my interests considerably.</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="twosystems"></p>

<h3 id="influence-system-1-to-guide-system-2-rationality">Influence system 1 to guide system 2 rationality</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>Economist Amos Tversky and psychologist Daniel Kahneman launched the field of behavioral economics—and Kahneman won a Nobel Prize—by showing that man is a very irrational beast. Through decades of research with Tversky, Kahneman proved that humans all suffer from Cognitive Bias, that is, unconscious—and irrational—brain processes that literally distort the way we see the world. Kahneman and Tversky discovered more than 150 of them. Kahneman later codified his research in the 2011 bestseller <strong>Thinking, Fast and Slow</strong>. Man, he wrote, has two systems of thought: System 1, our animal mind, is fast, instinctive, and emotional; System 2 is slow, deliberative, and logical. And System 1 is far more influential. In fact, it guides and steers our rational thoughts.</p>

<p>System 1’s inchoate beliefs, feelings, and impressions are the main sources of the explicit beliefs and deliberate choices of System 2. They’re the spring that feeds the river. We react emotionally (System 1) to a suggestion or question. Then that System 1 reaction informs and in effect creates the System 2 answer.</p>

<p>Now think about that: under this model, if you know how to affect your counterpart’s System 1 thinking, his inarticulate feelings, by how you frame and deliver your questions and statements, then you can guide his System 2 rationality and therefore modify his responses. That’s what happened to Andy at Harvard: by asking, “How am I supposed to do that?” I influenced his System 1 emotional mind into accepting that his offer wasn’t good enough; his System 2 then rationalized the situation so that it made sense to give me a better offer.</p>

<p>Psychotherapy research shows that when individuals feel listened to, they tend to listen to themselves more carefully and to openly evaluate and clarify their own thoughts and feelings. In addition, they tend to become less defensive and oppositional and more willing to listen to other points of view, which gets them to the calm and logical place where they can be good Getting to Yes problem solvers.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>心理治疗研究表明，当人感到被倾听时，他们往往会更仔细地倾听自己，并坦诚地评估和澄清自己的想法和感受。此外，他们往往变得不那么防备和反对，更愿意倾听其他观点，这让他们冷静下来，能讲逻辑，从而成为好的Getting to Yes问题解决者。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="mirror"></p>

<h3 id="skill-1-be-a-mirror-how-to-quickly-establish-rapport">Skill 1. Be a mirror: how to quickly establish rapport</h3>

<p><strong>Identify wants and needs through active listening</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>The goal is to identify what your counterparts actually <strong>need</strong> (monetarily, emotionally, or otherwise) and get them feeling safe enough to talk and talk and talk some more about what they <strong>want</strong>. The latter will help you discover the former. Wants are easy to talk about, representing the aspiration of getting our way, and sustaining any illusion of control we have as we begin to negotiate; needs imply survival, the very minimum required to make us act, and so make us vulnerable.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>目标是确定对方实际上<strong>需要</strong>什么（金钱上、情感上或其他方面），并让他们感到足够安全，以便谈论、谈论并进一步谈论他们<strong>想要</strong>什么。后者将帮助你发现前者。想要的东西很容易谈论，它代表了我们的愿望，并在我们开始谈判时维持任何控制的假象；需要意味着生存，是使我们采取行动的最低要求，因此使我们容易受到伤害。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Neither wants nor needs are where we start; it begins with listening, making it about the other people, validating their emotions, and creating enough trust and safety for a real conversation to begin.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>Basics</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>A good negotiator prepares, going in, to be ready for possible surprises; a great negotiator aims to use her skills to reveal the surprises she is certain to find.</p>

<p>Don’t commit to assumptions; instead, view them as hypotheses and use the negotiation to test them rigorously.</p>

<p>People who view negotiation as a battle of arguments become overwhelmed by the voices in their head. Negotiation is not an act of battle; it’s a process of discovery. The goal is to uncover as much information as possible.</p>

<p>To quiet the voices in your head, make your sole and all-encompassing focus the other person and what they have to say.</p>

<p><strong>Slow</strong>. It. Down. Going too fast is one of the mistakes all negotiators are prone to making. If we’re too much in a hurry, people can feel as if they’re not being heard. You risk undermining the rapport and trust you’ve built.</p>

<p>Put a <strong>smile</strong> on your face. When people are in a positive frame of mind, they think more quickly, and are more likely to collaborate and problem-solve (instead of fight and resist). Positivity creates mental agility in both you and your counterpart.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>The voice</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>You can use your voice to intentionally reach into someone’s brain and flip an emotional switch. Distrusting to trusting. Nervous to calm. In an instant, the switch will flip just like that with the right delivery.</p>
</blockquote>

<ol>
<li><p>The late-night FM DJ voice: Use selectively to make a point. Inflect your voice downward, keeping it calm and slow. When done properly, you create an aura of authority and trustworthiness without triggering defensiveness.</p></li>

<li><p>The positive/playful voice: Should be your default voice. It’s the voice of an easygoing, good-natured person. Your attitude is light and encouraging. The key here is to relax and smile while you’re talking.</p></li>

<li><p>The direct or assertive voice: Used rarely. Will cause problems and create pushback.</p></li>
</ol>

<p><strong>Mirroring</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Mirroring, also called isopraxism, is essentially imitation. It’s another neurobehavior humans (and other animals) display in which we copy each other to comfort each other. It can be done with speech patterns, body language, vocabulary, tempo, and tone of voice. It’s generally an unconscious behavior—we are rarely aware of it when it’s happening—but it’s a sign that people are bonding, in sync, and establishing the kind of rapport that leads to trust. While mirroring is most often associated with forms of nonverbal communication, especially body language, as negotiators a “mirror” focuses on the words and nothing else. Not the body language. Not the accent. Not the tone or delivery. Just the words.</p>

<p>Mirrors work magic. <strong>Repeat the last three words (or the critical one to three words) of what someone has just said.</strong> We fear what’s different and are drawn to what’s similar. Mirroring is the art of <strong>insinuating similarity</strong>, which <strong>facilitates bonding</strong>. Use mirrors to encourage the other side to empathize and bond with you, keep people talking, buy your side time to regroup, and encourage your counterparts to reveal their strategy.</p>

<p>Psychologist Richard Wiseman created a study using waiters to identify what was the more effective method of creating a connection with strangers: mirroring or positive reinforcement. Average tip of the waiters who mirrored was 70 percent more than of those who used positive reinforcement.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>How disagree without being disagreeable</strong></p>

<ol>
<li>Use the late-night FM DJ voice.<br /></li>
<li>Start with “I’m sorry &hellip;”<br /></li>
<li>Mirror.<br /></li>
<li>Silence. At least four seconds, to let the mirror work its magic on your counterpart.<br /></li>
<li>Repeat<br /></li>
</ol>

<p>Example:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>One of my students experienced the effectiveness of this simple process at her workplace, where her impulsive boss was known for his “drive-bys”: an infuriating practice by which the boss would suddenly swing by one’s office or cubicle unannounced with an “urgent,” poorly thought out assignment that created a lot of unnecessary work. Past attempts at any kind of debate created immediate pushback. “There’s a better way” was always interpreted by this boss as “the lazy way.”<br />
Such a drive-by occurred toward the end of a long consulting engagement, one that had generated literally thousands of documents. The boss, still skeptical of anything “digital,” wanted the security of paper copies.
Popping his head into her office, the boss said, “<strong>Let’s make two copies of all the paperwork.</strong>”<br />
“<strong>I’m sorry, two copies?</strong>” she mirrored in response, remembering not only the DJ voice, but to deliver the mirror in an inquisitive tone. The intention behind most mirrors should be “Please, help me understand.” Every time you mirror someone, they will reword what they’ve said. They will never say it exactly the same way they said it the first time. Ask someone, “What do you mean by  that?” and you’re likely to incite irritation or defensiveness. A mirror, however, will get you the clarity you want while signaling respect and concern for what the other person is saying.<br />
“<strong>Yes</strong>,” her boss responded, “<strong>one for us and one for the customer.</strong>”<br />
“<strong>I’m sorry, so you are saying that the client is asking for a copy and we need a copy for internal use?</strong>”<br />
“<strong>Actually, I’ll check with the client—they haven’t asked for anything. But I definitely want a copy. That’s just how I do business.</strong>”<br />
“<strong>Absolutely,</strong>” she responded. “<strong>Thanks for checking with the customer. Where would you like to store the in-house copy? There’s no more space in the file room here.</strong>”<br />
“<strong>It’s fine. You can store it anywhere,</strong>” he said, slightly perturbed now.<br />
“<strong>Anywhere?</strong>” she mirrored again, with calm concern. When another person’s tone of voice or body language is inconsistent with his words, a good mirror can be particularly useful.<br />
In this case, it caused her boss to take a nice, long pause—something he did not often do. My student sat silent. “<strong>As a matter of fact, you can put them in my office</strong>,” he said, with more composure than he’d had the whole conversation. “<strong>I’ll get the new assistant to print it for me after the project is done. For now, just create two digital backups</strong>.”<br />
A day later her boss emailed and wrote simply, “<strong>The two digital backups will be fine</strong>.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="labelling"></p>

<h3 id="skill-2-tactical-empathy-don-t-feel-their-pain-label-it">Skill 2. Tactical Empathy: don&rsquo;t feel their pain, label it</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>The relationship between an emotionally intelligent negotiator and their counterpart is essentially therapeutic. It duplicates that of a psychotherapist with a patient. The psychotherapist pokes and prods to understand his patient’s problems, and then turns the responses back onto the patient to get him to go deeper and change his behavior. That’s exactly what good negotiators do.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>Labeling</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Labeling is a way of validating someone’s emotion by acknowledging it. Give someone’s emotion a name and you show you identify with how that person feels. It gets you close to someone without asking about external factors you know nothing about (“How’s your family?”). Think of labeling as a shortcut to intimacy, a time-saving emotional hack. Labeling has a special advantage when your counterpart is tense. Exposing negative thoughts to daylight—“It looks like you don’t want to go back to jail”—makes them seem less frightening.</p>

<p>Labels almost always begin with roughly the same words:<br />
It seems like &hellip;<br />
It sounds like &hellip;<br />
It looks like &hellip;</p>

<p>Neutralize the negative, reinforce the positive. The best way to deal with negativity is to observe it, without reaction and without judgment. Then consciously label each negative feeling and replace it with positive, compassionate, and solution-based thoughts.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>Basics</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Imagine yourself in your counterpart’s situation. The beauty of empathy is that it doesn’t demand that you agree with the other person’s ideas (you may well find them crazy). But by acknowledging the other person’s situation, you immediately convey that you are listening. And once they know that you are listening, they may tell you something that you can use.</p>

<p>The reasons why a counterpart will not make an agreement with you are often more powerful than why they will make a deal, so focus first on clearing the barriers to agreement. Denying barriers or negative influences gives them credence; get them into the open.</p>

<p>Pause. After you label a barrier or mirror a statement, let it sink in. Don’t worry, the other party will fill the silence.</p>

<p>Label your counterpart’s fears to diffuse their power. We all want to talk about the happy stuff, but remember, the faster you interrupt action in your counterpart’s amygdala, the part of the brain that generates fear, the faster you can generate feelings of safety, well-being, and trust.</p>

<p>List the worst things that the other party could say about you and say them before the other person can. Performing an accusation audit in advance prepares you to head off negative dynamics before they take root. And because these accusations often sound exaggerated when said aloud, speaking them will encourage “the other person to claim that quite the opposite is true.</p>

<p>Remember you’re dealing with a person who wants to be appreciated and understood. So use labels to reinforce and encourage positive perceptions and dynamics.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Example 1:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Imagine a grandfather who’s grumbly at a family holiday dinner: the presenting behavior is that he’s cranky, but the underlying emotion is a sad sense of loneliness from his family never seeing him.<br />
 Instead of addressing his grumpy behavior, you acknowledge his sadness in a nonjudgmental way. You head him off before he can really get started.<br />
 “We don’t see each other all that often,” you could say. “It seems like you feel like we don’t pay any attention to you and you only see us once a year, so why should you make time for us?”<br />
 Notice how that acknowledges the situation and labels his sadness? Here you can pause briefly, letting him recognize and appreciate your attempts to understand what he’s feeling, and then turn the situation around by offering a positive solution.<br />
 “For us this is a real treat. We want to hear what you have to talk about. We want to value this time with you because we feel left out of your life.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Example 2:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Sensing the potential donor’s growing frustration, and wanting to end on a positive note so that they might be able to meet again, my student used another label. “It seems that you are really passionate about this gift and want to find the right project reflecting the opportunities and life-changing experiences the Girl Scouts gave you.”<br />
  And with that, this “difficult” woman signed a check without even picking a specific project. “You understand me,” she said as she got up to leave. “I trust you’ll find the right project.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Example 3:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>In front of him at the gate, a very aggressive couple was yelling at the gate agent, who was barely looking at them as she tapped on the computer in front of her; she was clearly making every effort not to scream back. After she’d said, “There’s nothing I can do,” five times, the angry couple finally gave up and left.<br />
To start, watch how Ryan turns that heated exchange to his advantage. Following on the heels of an argument is a great position for a negotiator, because your counterpart is desperate for an empathetic connection. Smile, and you’re already an improvement.
“Hi, Wendy, I’m Ryan. It seems like they were pretty upset.”<br />
This labels the negative and establishes a rapport based on empathy. This in turn encourages Wendy to elaborate on her situation, words Ryan then mirrors to invite her to go further.<br />
“Yeah. They missed their connection. We’ve had a fair amount of delays because of the weather.”<br />
“The weather?”<br />
After Wendy explains how the delays in the Northeast had rippled through the system, Ryan again labels the negative and then mirrors her answer to encourage her to delve further.<br />
“It seems like it’s been a hectic day.”<br />
“There’ve been a lot of ‘irate consumers,’ you know? I mean, I get it, even though I don’t like to be yelled at. A lot of people are trying to get to Austin for the big game.”<br />
“The big game?”<br />
“UT is playing Ole Miss football and every flight into Austin has been booked solid.”<br />
“Booked solid?”<br />
Now let’s pause. Up to this point, Ryan has been using labels and mirrors to build a relationship with Wendy. To her it must seem like idle chatter, though, because he hasn’t asked for anything. Unlike the angry couple, Ryan is acknowledging her situation. His words ping-pong between “What’s that?” and “I hear you,” both of which invite her to elaborate.<br />
Now that the empathy has been built, she lets slip a piece of information he can use.<br />
“Yeah, all through the weekend. Though who knows how many people will make the flights. The weather’s probably going to reroute a lot of people through a lot of different places.”<br />
Here’s where Ryan finally swoops in with an ask. But notice how he acts: not assertive or coldly logical, but with empathy and labeling that acknowledges her situation and tacitly puts them in the same boat.<br />
“Well, it seems like you’ve been handling the rough day pretty well,” he says. “I was also affected by the weather delays and missed my connecting flight. It seems like this flight is likely booked solid, but with what you said, maybe someone affected by the weather might miss this connection. Is there any possibility a seat will be open?”<br />
Listen to that riff: Label, tactical empathy, label. And only then a request.<br />
At this point, Wendy says nothing and begins typing on her computer. Ryan, who’s eager not to talk himself out of a possible deal, engages in some silence. After thirty seconds, Wendy prints a boarding pass and hands it to Ryan, explaining that there were a few seats that were supposed to be filled by people who would now arrive much later than the flight’s departure. To make Ryan’s success even better, she puts him in Economy Plus seating.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="yesno"></p>

<h3 id="skill-3-yes-no-how-to-generate-momentum-and-make-it-safe-to-reveal-the-real-stakes">Skill 3. Yes/No: How to generate momentum and make it safe to reveal the real stakes</h3>

<p><strong>Basics</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Break the habit of attempting to get people to say “yes.” Being pushed for “yes” makes people defensive. Our love of hearing “yes” makes us blind to the defensiveness we ourselves feel when someone is pushing us to say it.</p>

<p>“No” is not a failure. We have learned that “No” is the anti-“Yes” and therefore a word to be avoided at all costs. But it really often just means “Wait” or “I’m not comfortable with that.” Learn how to hear it calmly. It is not the end of the negotiation, but the beginning. After that ask solution-based questions or simply label their effect:<br />
“What about this doesn’t work for you?”<br />
“What would you need to make it work?”<br />
“It seems like there’s something here that bothers you.&rdquo;</p>

<p>“Yes” is the final goal of a negotiation, but don’t aim for it at the start. Asking someone for “Yes” too quickly in a conversation—“Do you like to drink water, Mr. Smith?”—gets his guard up and paints you as an untrustworthy salesman.</p>

<p>Saying “No” makes the speaker feel safe, secure, and in control, so trigger it. By saying what they don’t want, your counterpart defines their space and gains the confidence and comfort to listen to you. That’s why <strong>“Is now a bad time to talk?”</strong> is always better than “Do you have a few minutes to talk?”</p>

<p>Sometimes the only way to get your counterpart to listen and engage with you is by forcing them into a “No.” That means intentionally mislabeling one of their emotions or desires or asking a ridiculous question—like, “It seems like you want this project to fail”—that can only be answered negatively.”</p>

<p>Negotiate in their world. Persuasion is not about how bright or smooth or forceful you are. It’s about the other party convincing themselves that the solution you want is their own idea. So don’t beat them with logic or brute force. Ask them questions that open paths to your goals. It’s not about you.</p>

<p>If a potential business partner is ignoring you, contact them with a clear and concise “No”-oriented question that suggests that you are ready to walk away. <strong>“Have you given up on this project?”</strong> works wonders. The point is that this one-sentence email encapsulates the best of “No”-oriented questions and plays on your counterpart’s natural human aversion to loss. The “No” answer the email demands offers the other party the feeling of safety and the illusion of control while encouraging them to define their position and explain it to you. Just as important, it makes the implicit threat that you will walk away on your own terms.</p>

<p>“No”—or the lack thereof—also serves as a warning, the canary in the coal mine. If despite all your efforts, the other party won’t say “No,” you’re dealing with people who are indecisive or confused or who have a hidden agenda. In cases like that you have to end the negotiation and walk away.</p>

<p>There are actually three kinds of “Yes”: Counterfeit, Confirmation, and Commitment.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="thatsright"></p>

<h3 id="skill-4-trigger-the-two-words-that-immediately-transform-any-negotiation-that-s-right">Skill 4. Trigger the two words that immediately transform any negotiation: that&rsquo;s right</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>With each party having its own set of objectives, its own goals and motivations, the truth is that the conversational niceties—the socially lubricating “yeses” and “you’re rights” that get thrown out fast and furious early in any interaction—are not in any way a substitute for real understanding between you and your partner.</p>

<p>The power of getting to that understanding, and not to some simple “yes,” is revelatory in the art of negotiation. The moment you’ve convinced someone that you truly understand her dreams and feelings (the whole world that she inhabits), mental and behavioral change becomes possible, and the foundation for a breakthrough has been laid.</p>

<p>Creating unconditional positive regard opens the door to changing thoughts and behaviors. Humans have an innate urge toward socially constructive behavior. The more a person feels understood, and positively affirmed in that understanding, the more likely that urge for constructive behavior will take hold.</p>

<p>“That’s right” is better than “yes.” Strive for it. Reaching “that’s right” in a negotiation creates breakthroughs.</p>

<p>Use a summary to trigger a “that’s right.” A good summary is the combination of rearticulating the meaning of what is said plus the acknowledgment of the emotions underlying that meaning (paraphrasing + labeling = summary). Identify, rearticulate, and emotionally affirm “the world according to &hellip;”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Example:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>In her first appointments, the doctor dismissed her product. He said it was no better than the ones he was already using. He was unfriendly. He didn’t even want to hear her viewpoint. When she presented the positive attributes of her product, he interrupted her and knocked them down.<br />
Making the sales pitch, she soaked up as much as possible about the doctor. She learned that he was passionate about treating his patients. Each patient was special in his eyes. Improving their sense of calm and peace was the most important outcome for him. How could she put her understanding of his needs, desires, and passions to work for her?<br />
At her next visit, the doctor asked what medications she wanted to discuss. Rather than tout the benefits of her product, she talked about him and his practice.<br />
“Doctor,” she said, “the last time I was in we spoke about your patients with this condition. I remember thinking that you seemed very passionate about treating them, and how you worked hard to tailor the specific treatment to each and every patient.”
He looked her in the eyes as if he were seeing her for the first time.<br />
“That’s right,” he said. “I really feel like I’m treating an epidemic that other doctors are not picking up on—which means that a lot of patients are not getting treated adequately.”<br />
She told him he seemed to have a deep understanding of how to treat these patients, especially because some of them didn’t respond to the usual medications. They talked about specific challenges he had confronted in treating his patients. He gave her examples.
When he was finished, she summarized what he had said, especially the intricacies and problems in treatment.<br />
“You seem to tailor specific treatments and medications for each patient,” she said.<br />
“That’s right,” he responded.”<br />
This was the breakthrough she had hoped to reach. The doctor had been skeptical and cold. But when she recognized his passion for his patients—using a summary—the walls came down. He dropped his guard, and she was able to gain his trust. Rather than pitch her product, she let him describe his treatment and procedures. With this, she learned how her medication would fit into his practice. She then paraphrased what he said about the challenges of his practice and reflected them back to him.<br />
Once the doctor signaled his trust and rapport, she could tout the attributes of her product and describe precisely how it would help him reach the outcomes he desired for his patients. He listened intently.<br />
“It might be perfect for treating a patient who has not benefited from the medication I have been prescribing,” he told her. “Let me give yours a try.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="bendreality"></p>

<h3 id="skill-5-bend-their-reality-how-to-shape-what-is-fair">Skill 5. Bend their reality: How to shape what Is fair</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>All negotiations are defined by a network of subterranean desires and needs. Don’t let yourself be fooled by the surface. Once you know that the Haitian kidnappers just want party money, you will be miles better prepared.</p>

<p>Splitting the difference is wearing one black and one brown shoe, so don’t compromise. Meeting halfway often leads to bad deals for both sides.”</p>

<p>Approaching deadlines entice people to rush the negotiating process and do impulsive things that are against their best interests.</p>

<p>You can bend your counterpart’s reality by 1) Anchoring his starting point. Before you make an offer, emotionally anchor them by saying how bad it will be. 2) When you get to numbers, set an extreme anchor to make your “real” offer seem reasonable, 3) <strong>Use a range</strong> to seem less aggressive. 4) <strong>Pivoting to nonmonetary terms</strong>. After you’ve anchored them high, you can make your offer seem reasonable by offering things that aren’t important to you but could be important to them. Or if their offer is low you could ask for things that matter more to you than them. 5) <strong>Use odd numbers</strong>. Numbers that end in 0 inevitably feel like temporary placeholders, guesstimates that you can easily be negotiated off of. But anything you throw out that sounds less rounded—say, $37,263—feels like a figure that you came to as a result of thoughtful calculation. Such numbers feel serious and permanent to your counterpart, so use them to fortify your offers.</p>

<p>People will take more risks to avoid a loss than to realize a gain. Make sure your counterpart sees that there is something to lose by inaction.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>F-word—“Fair”</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>The F-word—“Fair”—is an emotional term people usually exploit to put the other side on the defensive and gain concessions. When your counterpart drops the F-bomb, don’t get suckered into a concession. Instead, ask them to explain how you’re mistreating them.<br />
E.g.<br />
“We just want what’s fair.”<br />
“Okay, I apologize. Let’s stop everything and go back to where I started treating you unfairly and we’ll fix it.”<br />
E.g.<br />
“We’ve given you a fair offer.”<br />
“Fair?” you’d respond, pausing to let the word’s power do to them as it was intended to do to you. Follow that with a label: “It seems like you’re ready to provide the evidence that supports that.”<br />
E.g.<br />
The last use of the F-word is my favorite because it’s positive and constructive. It sets the stage for honest and empathetic negotiation.
Here’s how I use it: Early on in a negotiation, I say, “I want you to feel like you are being treated fairly at all times. So please stop me at any time if you feel I’m being unfair, and we’ll address it.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>Negotiate a better salary</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p><strong>BE PLEASANTLY PERSISTENT ON NONSALARY TERMS</strong><br />
Pleasant persistence is a kind of emotional anchoring that creates empathy with the boss and builds the right psychological environment for constructive discussion. And the more you talk about nonsalary terms, the more likely you are to hear the full range of their options. If they can’t meet your nonsalary requests, they may even counter with more money, like they did with a French-born American former student of mine. She kept asking—with a big smile—for an extra week of vacation beyond what the company normally gave. She was “French,” she said, and that’s what French people did. The hiring company was completely handcuffed on the vacation issue, but because she was so darned delightful, and because she introduced a nonmonetary variable into the notion of her value, they countered by increasing her salary offer.</p>

<p><strong>SALARY TERMS WITHOUT SUCCESS TERMS IS RUSSIAN ROULETTE</strong><br />
Once you’ve negotiated a salary, make sure to define success for your position—as well as metrics for your next raise. That’s meaningful for you and free for your boss, much like giving me a magazine cover story was for the bar association. It gets you a planned raise and, by defining your success in relation to your boss’s supervision, it leads into the next step &hellip;</p>

<p><strong>SPARK THEIR INTEREST IN YOUR SUCCESS AND GAIN AN UNOFFICIAL MENTOR</strong>
Remember the idea of figuring what the other side is really buying? Well, when you are selling yourself to a manager, sell yourself as more than a body for a job; sell yourself, and your success, as a way they can validate their own intelligence and broadcast it to the rest of the company. Make sure they know you’ll act as a flesh-and-blood argument for their importance. Once you’ve bent their reality to include you as their ambassador, they’ll have a stake in your success.<br />
Ask: <strong>“What does it take to be successful here?”</strong><br />
Please notice that this question is similar to questions that are suggested by many MBA career counseling centers, yet not exactly the same. And it’s the exact wording of this question that’s critical.<br />
Students from my MBA courses who have asked this question in job interviews have actually had interviewers lean forward and say, “No one ever asked us that before.” The interviewer then gave a great and detailed answer.”<br />
The key issue here is if someone gives you guidance, they will watch to see if you follow their advice. They will have a personal stake in seeing you succeed. You’ve just recruited your first unofficial mentor.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Example:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>To show how this can be done to near perfection, I can think of no better example than my former MBA student Angel Prado.<br />
While Angel was finishing up his MBA, he went to his boss and began to lay the groundwork for his work post-MBA (which the company was paying). During his last semester, he set a nonspecific anchor—a kind of range—by suggesting to his boss that once he graduated and the company was done investing in his MBA (around $31,000 per year), that money should go to him as salary.<br />
His boss made no commitment, but Angel was pleasantly persistent about it, which set the idea as an anchor in his boss’s mind.<br />
Upon graduation, Angel and his boss had their big sit-down. In an assertive and calm manner, Angel broached a nonfinancial issue to move the focus away from “How much?”: he asked for a new title.<br />
Angel’s boss readily agreed that a new role was a no-brainer after Angel’s new degree.<br />
At that point, Angel and his manager defined what his roles and responsibilities would be in his new role, thereby setting success metrics. Then Angel took a breath and paused so that his boss would be the first to throw out a number. At last, he did. Curiously enough, the number showed that Angel’s earlier efforts at anchoring had worked: he proposed to add $31,000 to Angel’s base salary, almost a 50 percent raise.<br />
But Angel was no rookie negotiator, not after taking my class. So instead of countering and getting stuck in “How much?” he kept talking, labeling the boss’s emotions and empathizing with his situation (at the time the company was going through difficult negotiations with its investors).<br />
And then Angel courteously asked for a moment to step away and print up the agreed-upon job description. This pause created a dynamic of pre-deadline urgency in his boss, which Angel exploited when he returned with the printout. On the bottom, he’d added his desired compensation: “$134.5k—$143k.”<br />
In that one little move, Angel weaved together a bunch of the lessons from this chapter. The odd numbers gave them the weight of thoughtful calculation. The numbers were high too, which exploited his boss’s natural tendency to go directly to his “price limit when faced by an extreme anchor. And they were a range, which made Angel seem less aggressive and the lower end more reasonable in comparison.<br />
From his boss’s body language—raised eyebrows—it was clear that he was surprised by the compensation request. But it had the desired effect: after some comments about the description, he countered with $120,000.<br />
Angel didn’t say “No” or “Yes,” but kept talking and creating empathy. Then, in the middle of a sentence, seemingly out of the blue, his boss threw out $127,000. With his boss obviously negotiating with himself, Angel kept him going. Finally his boss said he agreed with the $134,500 and would pay that salary starting in three months, contingent on the board of directors’ approval.
As the icing on the cake, Angel worked in a positive use of the word “Fair” (“That’s fair,” he said), and then sold the raise to his boss as a marriage in which his boss would be the mentor. “I’m asking you, not the board, for the promotion, and all I need is for you to agree with it,” he said.<br />
And how did Angel’s boss reply to his new ambassador?<br />
“I’ll fight to get you this salary.”<br />
So follow Angel’s lead and make it rain!”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="calibratequestions"></p>

<h3 id="skill-6-calibrate-questions-create-the-illusion-of-control">Skill 6. Calibrate questions: create the illusion of control</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>Calibrated, or open-ended questions can remove aggression from conversations by acknowledging the other side openly, without resistance. In doing so, it lets you introduce ideas and requests without sounding pushy. It allows you to nudge. <strong>It’s really as simple as removing the hostility from the statement “You can’t leave” and turning it into a question: “What do you hope to achieve by going?</strong>.</p>

<p>As an old Washington Post editor named Robert Estabrook once said, “He who has learned to disagree without being disagreeable has discovered the most valuable secret of negotiation.”</p>

<p>Don’t try to force your opponent to admit that you are right. Aggressive confrontation is the enemy of constructive negotiation.</p>

<p>Avoid questions that can be answered with “Yes” or tiny pieces of information (when or where). These require little thought and inspire the human need for reciprocity; you will be expected to give something back.</p>

<p>Bite your tongue. When you’re attacked in a negotiation, pause and avoid angry emotional reactions. Instead, ask your counterpart a calibrated question.</p>

<p>There is always a team on the other side. If you are not influencing those behind the table, you are vulnerable.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>How to calibrate questions</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Ask calibrated questions that start with the words “How” or “What.” By implicitly asking the other party for help, these questions will give your counterpart an illusion of control and will inspire them to speak at length, revealing important information.</p>

<p>Calibrate your questions to point your counterpart toward solving your problem. This will encourage them to expend their energy on devising a solution.</p>

<p>Don’t ask questions that start with “Why” unless you want your counterpart to defend a goal that serves you. “Why” is always an accusation, in any language.</p>
</blockquote>

<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Non-calibrated</th>
<th>Calibrated</th>
</tr>
</thead>

<tbody>
<tr>
<td>No.</td>
<td><strong>How</strong> am I supposed to do that?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>You can’t leave.</td>
<td><strong>What</strong> do you hope to achieve by going?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Does this look like something you would like?</td>
<td><strong>How</strong> does this look to you?/<strong>What</strong> about this works for you?/<strong>What</strong> about this doesn’t work for you?</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Why did you do it?</td>
<td><strong>What</strong> caused you to do it?</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<p>Other examples of calibrated questions:</p>

<ul>
<li>What is the biggest challenge you face?</li>
<li>What about this is important to you?</li>
<li>How can I help to make this better for us?</li>
<li>How would you like me to proceed?</li>
<li>What is it that brought us into this situation?</li>
<li>How can we solve this problem?</li>
<li>What’s the objective? / What are we trying to accomplish here?”</li>
</ul>

<p>Example:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>A freelance marketing strategist is dealing a client who thinks the agreed bill is too high.<br />
1.A “No”-oriented email question to reinitiate contact: “Have you given up on settling this amicably?”<br />
2.A statement that leaves only the answer of “That’s right” to form a dynamic of agreement: “It seems that you feel my bill is not justified.”<br />
3.Calibrated questions about the problem to get him to reveal his thinking: “How does this bill violate our agreement?”<br />
4.More “No”-oriented questions to remove unspoken barriers: “Are you saying I misled you?” “Are you saying I didn’t do as you asked?” “Are you saying I reneged on our agreement?” or “Are you saying I failed you?”<br />
5.Labeling and mirroring the essence of his answers if they are not acceptable so he has to consider them again: “It seems like you feel my work was subpar.” Or “&hellip; my work was subpar?”<br />
6.A calibrated question in reply to any offer other than full payment, in order to get him to offer a solution: “How am I supposed to accept that?”<br />
7.If none of this gets an offer of full payment, a label that flatters his sense of control and power: “It seems like you are the type of person who prides himself on the way he does business—rightfully so—and has a knack for not only expanding the pie but making the ship run more efficiently.”<br />
8.A long pause and then one more “No”-oriented question: “Do you want to be known as someone who doesn’t fulfill agreements?”</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="execution"></p>

<h3 id="skill-7-guarantee-execution-how-to-spot-the-liars-and-ensure-follow-through-from-everyone-else">Skill 7. Guarantee execution: How to spot the liars and ensure follow-through from everyone else</h3>

<p>“Yes” is nothing without “How.”</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Ask calibrated “How” questions, and ask them again and again. Asking “How” keeps your counterparts engaged but off balance. Answering the questions will give them the illusion of control. It will also lead them to contemplate your problems when making their demands.</p>

<p>Use “How” questions to shape the negotiating environment. You do this by using “How can I do that?” as a gentle “version of “No.” This will subtly push your counterpart to search for other solutions—your solutions. And very often it will get them to bid against themselves. Other versions of &ldquo;no&rdquo;: “Your offer is very generous, I’m sorry, that just doesn’t work for me.” or “I’m sorry but I’m afraid I just can’t do that.”</p>

<p>Don’t just pay attention to the people you’re negotiating with directly; always identify the motivations of the players “behind the table.” You can do so by asking how a deal will affect everybody else and how on board they are. “How does this affect the rest of your team?” or “How on board are the people not on this call?” or simply “What do your colleagues see as their main challenges in this area?”</p>

<p>Is the “Yes” real or counterfeit? Test it with the Rule of Three: use calibrated questions, summaries, and labels to get your counterpart to reaffirm their agreement at least three times. It’s really hard to repeatedly lie or fake conviction. There are two key questions you can ask to push your counterparts to think they are defining success their way: “How will we know we’re on track?” and “How will we address things if we find we’re off track?” When they answer, you summarize their answers until you get a “That’s right.” Then you’ll know they’ve bought in. Other questions you can ask: “What’s the biggest challenge you faced? What are we up against here? What do you see as being the most difficult thing to get around?”</p>

<p>A person’s use of pronouns offers deep insights into his or her relative authority. If you’re hearing a lot of “I,” “me,” and “my,” the real power to decide probably lies elsewhere. Picking up a lot of “we,” “they,” and “them,” it’s more likely you’re dealing directly with a savvy decision maker keeping his options open.</p>

<p>Use your own name to make yourself a real person to the other side and even get your own personal discount. Humor and humanity are the best ways to break the ice and remove roadblocks</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="bargainhard"></p>

<h3 id="skill-8-bargain-hard">Skill 8. Bargain hard</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>Identify your counterpart’s negotiating style. Once you know whether they are Accommodator, Assertive, or Analyst, you’ll know the correct way to approach them. time = preparation; time = relationship; time = money</p>
</blockquote>

<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>type</th>
<th>meaning of time</th>
<th>meaning of silence</th>
</tr>
</thead>

<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Accommodator</td>
<td>relationship</td>
<td>anger</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Assertive</td>
<td>money</td>
<td>either you don’t have anything to say or you want them to talk</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Analyst</td>
<td>preparation</td>
<td>they want to think</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<blockquote>
<p>Prepare, prepare, prepare. When the pressure is on, <strong>you don’t rise to the occasion; you fall to your highest level of preparation</strong>. So design an ambitious but legitimate goal and then game out the labels, calibrated questions, and responses you’ll use to get there. That way, once you’re at the bargaining table, you won’t have to wing it.</p>

<p>Get ready to take a punch. Kick-ass negotiators usually lead with an extreme anchor to knock you off your game. If you’re not ready, you’ll flee to your maximum without a fight. So prepare your dodging tactics to avoid getting sucked into the compromise trap. First, deflect the punch in a way that opens up your counterpart. Successful negotiators often say “No” in one of the many ways we’ve talked about (“How am I supposed to accept that?”) or deflect the anchor with questions like “What are we trying to accomplish here?” Responses like these are great ways to refocus your counterpart when you feel you’re being pulled into the compromise trap. You can also respond to a punch-in-the-face anchor by simply pivoting to terms. What I mean by this is that when you feel you’re being dragged into a haggle you can detour the conversation to the nonmonetary issues that make any final price work. You can do this directly by saying, in an encouraging tone of voice, “Let’s put price off to the side for a moment and talk about what would make this a good deal.” Or you could go at it more obliquely by asking, “What else would you be able to offer to make that a good price for me?” “And if the other side pushes you to go first, wriggle from his grip. Instead of naming a price, allude to an incredibly high number that someone else might charge.</p>

<p>Set boundaries, and learn to take a punch or punch back, without anger. The guy across the table is not the problem; the situation is.</p>

<p>Prepare an Ackerman plan. Before you head into the weeds of bargaining, you’ll need a plan of extreme anchor, calibrated questions, and well-defined offers. Remember: 65, 85, 95, 100 percent. Decreasing raises and ending on nonround numbers will get your counterpart to believe that he’s squeezing you for all you’re worth when you’re really getting to the number you want. On your final number, throw in a nonmonetary item (that they probably don’t want) to show you’re at your limit.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="blackswan"></p>

<h3 id="skill-9-finding-the-black-swan-how-to-create-breakthroughs-by-revealing-the-unknown-unknowns">Skill 9. Finding the black swan: how to create breakthroughs by revealing the unknown unknowns</h3>

<p>Here are some of the best techniques for flushing out the Black Swans—and exploiting them. Remember, your counterpart might not even know how important the information is, or even that they shouldn’t reveal it. So keep pushing, probing, and gathering information.</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Let what you know—your known knowns—guide you but not blind you. Every case is new, so remain flexible and adaptable. Remember the Griffin bank crisis: no hostage-taker had killed a hostage on deadline, until he did.</p>

<p>Black Swans are leverage multipliers. Remember the three types of leverage: positive (the ability to give someone what they want); negative (the ability to hurt someone); and normative (using your counterpart’s norms to bring them around).</p>

<p>Work to understand the other side’s “religion.” Digging into worldviews inherently implies moving beyond the negotiating table and into the life, emotional and otherwise, of your counterpart. That’s where Black Swans live.</p>

<p>Review everything you hear from your counterpart. You will not hear everything the first time, so double-check. Compare notes with team members. Use backup listeners whose job is to listen between the lines. They will hear things you miss.</p>

<p>Exploit the similarity principle. People are more apt to concede to someone they share a cultural similarity with, so dig for what makes them tick and show that you share common ground.</p>

<p>When someone seems irrational or crazy, they most likely aren’t. Faced with this situation, search for constraints, hidden desires, and bad information.</p>

<p>Get face time with your counterpart. Ten minutes of face time often reveals more than days of research. Pay special attention to your counterpart’s verbal and nonverbal communication at unguarded moments—at the beginning and the end of the session or when someone says something out of line.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【 Barry Nalebuff: Split the Pie】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/splitthepie/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/splitthepie/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="split-the-pie-a-radical-new-way-to-negotiate">Split the Pie: A Radical New Way to Negotiate</h3>

<p>by Barry Nalebuff</p>

<p><a href="https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/better-way-to-divide-the-pie" target="_blank"> <img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/8ycLVbtnCXO3pj-CTJcavPcrldfBfppnWf7VSZY6H_PbvEMX5Exi_QGt65uBfd7fh2k=w526-h591-p" /></a></p>

<ul>
<li><p><strong>Start by asking</strong>. If you don’t ask, you’re unlikely to receive. You can have the greatest understanding of negotiation, but if you don’t negotiate, it doesn’t matter.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Don’t just ask; make principled arguments.</strong> There’s a famous experiment done in the 1970s by Ellen Langer, Arthur Blank, and Benzion Chanowitz in which a person asks to cut in line to make copies. Most people only know their first result, namely that asking “May I use the Xerox machine, because I have to make copies?” led to 90 percent success compared to just saying “May I use the Xerox machine?” which was only 60 percent effective. The wrong conclusion people draw is that any reason works, no matter how inane. But the inane reason (“I have to make copies”) only worked when the person wanted to make five copies. Once the person wanted to make twenty copies, both approaches had an identical 24 percent success rate. If you wanted to cut in line, you had to provide a legitimate reason, as in “I’m in a rush.” In a negotiation, I don’t advise asking for more just because “I’d like more money.” The pie framework provides logical and principled arguments that persuade others.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Know your BATNA</strong>. Your BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) is what you will do if you can’t agree on a deal. If you don’t know your BATNA, you won’t know how well you are doing in the negotiation or even if you should walk away. When your BATNA is uncertain, you should still make an estimate. And remember that your best alternative may be better than your current second-place option, as there may be the potential to improve the offer should you go down that route.
Never accept something worth less than your BATNA. Ending up with no deal is better than accepting a bad deal.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Work to understand the BATNA of the other party.</strong> You may be doing well in absolute terms, but if you don’t consider how much the other side is getting relative to its BATNA, you don’t know how well the other side is doing.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Calculate the pie</strong>. In any negotiation, employ the pie perspective. What is really at stake? With two parties, the pie is how much more the two can achieve by working together compared to what they can get if they don’t reach an agreement. To calculate the pie requires three numbers: what the two can achieve together, your BATNA, and the other party’s BATNA.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Recognize the equal power in any two-party negotiation.</strong> Since each party is essential to the deal, each has equal power. For this reason, you should split the pie evenly.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Recognize the symmetry in any two-party negotiation.</strong> Parties that otherwise look different become symmetric under the pie lens. People in symmetric positions should be treated equally. For this reason, you should split the pie evenly.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Employ symmetry</strong>. Once you are in the pie framework, everything is symmetric. Any argument the other side makes can be flipped. If they propose a <sup>90</sup>&frasl;<sub>10</sub> division in their favor, you can counter with <sup>90</sup>&frasl;<sub>10</sub> in yours. But you may want to do this as a hypothetical rather than actual flip.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>A poor BATNA does not mean low power.</strong> If there is no deal, neither party beats their BATNA. Just as you want to beat your BATNA, the other side is looking to do the same. A low BATNA means there is more at stake in the negotiation as the pie is bigger; it doesn’t mean you should accept less than half the pie.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Splitting the pie is the fair outcome</strong>. All our notions of fairness come down to a form of equal treatment. But equality of what? Proportional division treats all dollars equally. I want to treat people equally. The pie framework will help you figure out how to treat parties equally.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Beware the lure of proportional division.</strong> It is easy to fall into the trap of proportional division, especially as larger parties will present this as the default.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Just because you care more doesn’t mean you should get less.</strong> The side that cares less should find it easier to make a sacrifice. Each side should get the same share of the maximum potential gain as they perceive it. When valuations are linear, that means each side gets half their ideal pie. When valuations are nonlinear, it may be possible for each side to get more than half their ideal pie.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Present this new way of negotiating up front.</strong> People jump too quickly to numbers and offers. Start with principles and ground rules. Don’t expect the other side will be familiar with this approach. If you meet resistance, at least you know up front what type of person is on the other side.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Even if the other side doesn’t care about fairness or the pie, you can still get half the pie.</strong> Use the pie perspective to explain what the negotiation is really about. You can do so without having to use the pie terminology. (“The reason we are negotiating is to save the $1,300 ICANN fee.”) Explain why both parties are equally essential to create the pie. Symmetric power implies an equal split. Use this logic to explain why you are holding firm on requiring half the pie. The other side won’t have a principled counter. Principles and logic beat arbitrary positions.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Agree to split the pie to grow the pie.</strong> If you can resolve the issue of pie division, you will find it easier to work in a cooperative fashion to grow the pie.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Use the pie as a measuring stick.</strong> It is all too easy to fall into the trap of comparing an offer to your BATNA. The offer handily beats your BATNA and so you accept. But you have no idea how good the offer is (or how much better it could be) until you look at what share of the pie you are getting. If you are going to accept less than half the pie, you should know it at the time. And if you are asking for or already getting more than half the pie, you should know that, too.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Use the pie as a beacon.</strong> You don’t just want to get half of a small pie. Your objective is to create a massive pie (of which you get half). Think about what type of deal structures create the biggest pie.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Give the other side what they want.</strong> If they get what they want, you can get what you want. To do so, begin by learning what it is that they want (and what they don’t want). Let me share some advice here I learned from Daylian Cain: time spent trying to change minds is better spent figuring them out.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Be empathetic (or at least curious).</strong> Ask questions. Ask about their goals for the deal. Figure out what is important to them. What are their concerns? Besides giving more money, how can you help?</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Answer along with asking.</strong> If you don’t answer their questions, they’ll stop answering yours. Moreover, if you don’t share information, the other side won’t be able to figure out what you want and give it to you. People are too afraid that anything they say can and will be used against them. But if you don’t answer their questions, what you don’t say may lead to inferences that can and will be used against you.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Make smart trades.</strong> Figure out what is and is not important to you. Give up items that are valuable to the other party and less valuable to you. Get the items valuable to you and less valuable to them. This is how you expand the pie.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Remember beets versus broccoli.</strong> A good deal gives each party more of what they value. Don’t be afraid to go to extremes. If A likes beets more than broccoli and B likes broccoli more than beets, A should get all the beets and B should get all the broccoli.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Use creativity as a first resort, not a last resort</strong>. If you wait too long, both sides will be frustrated, and you may run out of time or patience. Try to expand the pie at the start of the negotiation, when people are in a more cooperative mood and there is less time pressure.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Demonstrate you understand the other side’s perspective.</strong> This is best done by making their argument for them. Check that you’ve got it right.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Create new options</strong>. Don’t limit yourself to the options on the table. People spend too much time debating different poor alternatives. One reason you may be having trouble reaching an agreement is that none of the options are fair (in that they lead to an equal split) and none lead to the largest pie. Focus on devising new options that maximize the pie and provide an even split.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Employ contingent deals (I)</strong>. One reason to propose a contingent deal is that you are unsure as to the size of the pie but fear that the other side has better information. To ensure you aren’t taken advantage of, set payments based on how big the pie turns out to be. This also applies when both sides are equally unsure about the size of the pie and would prefer not to take a risk.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>A negotiation solution should be consistently applied across any range of parameters.</strong> Part of selling your solution is demonstrating flaws with other approaches. A negotiation solution shouldn’t be ad hoc. It should be based on a single procedure that applies across a broad range of situations. One can’t make an argument in favor of proportional division in one context and then make an argument against proportional division in another when proportional division is no longer favorable. The consistency test leads to splitting the pie. With any other rule, there are always inconsistencies. In the pizza example, we saw how an equal division of the twelve slices fails the consistency test as it breaks down when one side has a BATNA of seven or more slices; a division in proportion to the BATNA fails when one of the BATNAs is close to zero. In the negotiation between Anju and Bharat, Anju showed that dividing up the interest in proportion to the amount invested was no longer fair (to Bharat) when the interest rate on a $20,000 and $25,000 CD were the same.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Anticipate potential objections to your proposal.</strong> You won’t need a plan if the other side says: “Great, I never thought of that. Let’s split the pie.” Since that is unlikely, have a plan for what to do when the other side says no. What are the objections you’d make if representing the other side and how can you counter them? Anticipate their proposal by considering what heuristic approach works best for them. Plan to show how their approach might hurt them if the numbers were different or how their heuristic breaks down as the numbers become extreme.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>When presenting a new idea, frame it in a way that the other side wants to hear.</strong> Be allocentric. Think about what they will like in the new idea, not what you like. If you plan to offer a big bonus and a low up-front payment, lead with the large bonus, not the low up-front payment. It seems obvious once you say it, but people tend to lead with the part of the deal they like the most. At that point, the other side may stop listening.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Employ contingent deals (II)</strong>. If you aren’t sure that you have the authority to try something new, propose two deals: one that is conventional and one that you both prefer if permitted.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Say “Yes if” rather than “No unless.”</strong> People are more willing to give you what you want if they know that doing so will lead to a deal. Figure out what it would take for you to say “Yes if.”</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Don’t overask.</strong> I started by advising you to ask. Don’t get carried away. If you are already getting half (or more) of the pie, accept what you’ve been offered. There’s an old saying: pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Beware opportunities to get more than half the pie</strong>. Even if the other side doesn’t understand the pie, you will have to rely on their misunderstanding. It’s not the best way to build trust.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Don’t fight fire with fire</strong>. Fight fire with water. If the other party says something inflammatory, instead of escalating, try to diffuse the situation. Use humor.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>If someone gives you an ultimatum, don’t give one in return.</strong> That’s fighting fire with fire. Instead, look to find an option that would make them clearly better off. Even if hypothethical, it demonstrates they are open to options other than the ultimatum.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Let them say no to you.</strong> Rather than saying no to an unfavorable deal, consider what it would take to get you to say yes. Ask for it. You have nothing to lose.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Choose a reasonable anchor.</strong> The first offer can affect the outcome of the negotiation, but being too aggressive may lead to no deal. Exact numbers are stickier than round numbers, e.g., $1,217 vs. $1,200. But be prepared to defend where your exact number came from.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Many procedures that sound fair aren’t.</strong> While it’s important to reciprocate in sharing information, there is nothing inherently fair about meeting in the middle of two arbitrary points or reciprocally taking options off the table.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>When there are more than two parties, things get complicated fast.</strong> The same idea of the pie applies, but the challenge is that the BATNAs are no longer exogenous. Consider who is likely to partner with whom if things go south.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Even if you have no power in a negotiation, you may have power in terms of changing what others get.</strong> Don’t settle for Diet Squirt. Get paid for changing the game.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Don’t tell white lies.</strong> White lies may seem harmless, but they can lead to misdirection. You don’t know what problems the other party can help you solve, and they don’t know what problems you have.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Don’t tell bald-faced lies</strong>. It is unethical. As a strategic matter, if you get caught in the lie, you may lose any chance to reach an agreement. Even if you don’t get caught, you may lose the agreement if the other side thinks your BATNA is better than what they can offer: “That’s a good offer, I would take it if I were you.”</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Care, but not too much.</strong> It’s easier to negotiate on behalf of others, instead of for yourself, because you’re not as emotionally invested. When you are negotiating for yourself, it may help to think of yourself as negotiating for this other person who happens to be a lot like you.</p></li>

<li><p><strong>Be aware of cultural differences.</strong> Listen to the other parties and be aware that what is important to them may not be important to you and vice versa. Herb Cohen says that every negotiation is cross-cultural. He explains: We don’t see things as they are, but as we are. Indeed, negotiating with someone who looks like you may be even harder as you assume you are being understood.</p></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Poems from my bb</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/poetry/poemsfrommybb/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/poetry/poemsfrommybb/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <p>If my bb was a baby<br />
She would be so lovely maybe</p>

<hr />

<p>If my kitten was a lady<br />
She would eat food slow and steady</p>

<hr />

<p>Every train that passes nightly<br />
Can&rsquo;t replace you smiling brightly</p>

<p>Every train that passes nightly<br />
Can&rsquo;t disturb us sleeping tightly</p>

<p>Every train that passes nightly<br />
Can&rsquo;t carry away you smiling brightly</p>

<hr />

<p>If my bb was a kitten<br />
I would be so often bitten</p>

<hr />

<p>It&rsquo;s very plain<br />
It doesn&rsquo;t rain<br />
So use your brain<br />
And ride a train</p>

<hr />

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Russian Songs</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/poetry/russiansongs/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/poetry/russiansongs/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <p><div id="header"></p>

<p><a href="#Кукушка">Кукушка|布谷鸟</a><br />
<a href="#Спокойная Ночь">Спокойная Ночь|静谧的夜晚</a><br />
<a href="#Закрой за мной дверь, я ухожу">Закрой за мной дверь, я ухожу|关上我身后的门，我要走了</a></p>

<p><strong><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFwhZjmS26Q">Кукушка</a></strong></p>

<p><a href="https://www.bilibili.com/video/av69655415">https://www.bilibili.com/video/av69655415</a></p>

<p><a href="https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Db41127wr/">https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Db41127wr/</a></p>

<p><em>Виктор Цой</em></p>

<p>Песен, ещё ненаписанных, сколько?<br />
Скажи, кукушка, пропой<br />
В городе мне жить или на выселках?<br />
Камнем лежать или гореть звездой, звездой?</p>

<p>还有多少歌谣没有写完？<br />
告诉我，布谷鸟，请唱完吧<br />
我应该住在城市还是乡村？<br />
像石头一样躺着，还是像星星一样燃烧？</p>

<p>Солнце моё, взгляни на меня<br />
Моя ладонь превратилась в кулак<br />
И если есть порох, дай огня<br />
Вот так</p>

<p>我的阳光，请垂青于我<br />
我的手掌攥成了拳头<br />
若有火药，就战斗吧<br />
像这样</p>

<p>Кто пойдёт по следу одинокому?<br />
Сильные да смелые головы сложили в поле, в бою<br />
Мало, кто остался в светлой памяти<br />
В трезвом уме да с твёрдой рукой в строю, в строю</p>

<p>是谁沿着孤独的足迹走下去？<br />
英勇的战士在田野中在战场上战斗<br />
却无几人能够被永远铭记<br />
头脑清醒，紧握拳头，我已整装待发</p>

<p>Солнце моё, взгляни на меня<br />
Моя ладонь превратилась в кулак<br />
И если есть порох, дай огня<br />
Вот так</p>

<p>Где же ты теперь, воля вольная?<br />
С кем же ты сейчас ласковый рассвет встречаешь, ответь<br />
Хорошо с тобой, да плохо без тебя<br />
Голову да плечи терпеливые под плеть, под плеть</p>

<p>自由的意志啊，如今在哪里？<br />
告诉我，你现在和谁一起迎接温柔的黎明？<br />
和你在一起有多好，和你分离就有多糟<br />
纵使皮鞭鞭笞于肩，我亦忍耐</p>

<p>Солнце моё, взгляни на меня<br />
Моя ладонь превратилась в кулак<br />
И если есть порох, дай огня<br />
Вот так</p>

<p>Солнце моё, взгляни на меня<br />
Моя ладонь превратилась в кулак<br />
И если есть порох, дай огня<br />
Вот так</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="Спокойная Ночь"></p>

<p><strong><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiDUIfMk7go">Спокойная Ночь</a></strong></p>

<p>Крыши домов дрожат под тяжестью дней,<br />
Небесный пастух пасет облака,<br />
Город стреляет в ночь дробью огней,<br />
Но ночь сильней, ее власть велика.</p>

<p>Тем, кто ложится спать - Спокойного сна.<br />
Спокойная ночь.</p>

<p>Я ждал это время, и вот это время пришло,<br />
Те, кто молчал, перестали молчать.<br />
Те, кому нечего ждать, садятся в седло,<br />
Их не догнать, уже не догнать.</p>

<p>Тем, кто ложится спать - Спокойного сна.<br />
Спокойная ночь.</p>

<p>Соседи приходят, им слышится стук копыт,<br />
Мешают уснуть, тревожат их сон.<br />
Те, кому нечего ждать, отправляются в путь<br />
Те, кто спасен, те, кто спасен.</p>

<p>Тем, кто ложится спать - Спокойного сна.<br />
Спокойная ночь.</p>

<p>房屋的屋顶在日子的重压下摇晃。<br />
天空中的牧羊人放牧着云朵。<br />
这座城市向黑夜射出一束灯光。<br />
但黑夜是强大的，它的力量是巨大的。</p>

<p>对那些入睡的人睡得好。<br />
静谧的夜晚。</p>

<p>我一直在等待这个时机，现在这个时机已经到来。<br />
那些一直沉默的人，不再沉默了。<br />
那些无事可等的人，就上马吧。<br />
他们赶不上了，他们赶不上了。</p>

<p>入睡的人睡得好。<br />
静谧的夜晚。</p>

<p>邻居们来了，他们听到了马蹄声。<br />
他们打扰了他们的睡眠，他们打扰了他们的睡眠。<br />
那些无所期待的人<br />
那些得救的人，那些得救的人。</p>

<p>入睡的人睡得好。<br />
静谧的夜晚。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="Закрой за мной дверь, я ухожу"></p>

<p><strong><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIjGAzFOPTg">Закрой за мной дверь, я ухожу</a></strong></p>

<p>Они говорят: им нельзя рисковать,<br />
Потому что у них есть дом, в доме горит свет.<br />
И я не знаю точно, кто из нас прав,<br />
Меня ждет на улице дождь, их ждет дома обед.<br />
Закрой за мной дверь. Я ухожу.<br />
Закрой за мной дверь. Я ухожу.<br />
И если тебе вдруг наскучит твой ласковый свет,<br />
Тебе найдется место у нас, дождя хватит на всех.<br />
Посмотри на часы, Посмотри на портрет на стене,<br />
Прислушайся - там, за окном, ты услышишь наш смех.<br />
Закрой за мной дверь. Я ухожу.<br />
Закрой за мной дверь. Я ухожу&hellip;</p>

<p>他们说：他们不能冒任何风险<br />
因为他们有房子，房子里的灯是亮的<br />
而且我不知道我们到底谁是对的<br />
我在外面等着下雨，他们在家里等着吃饭<br />
关上我身后的门，我要走了<br />
关上我身后的门，我要走了
如果你有一天厌倦了你的温柔之光<br />
我们已经为你找到了地方，有足够的雨水给大。<br />
看时钟 看墙上的画像<br />
听着窗外的笑声 听着我们的笑声<br />
关上我身后的门，我要走了<br />
关上我身后的门，我要走了</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Neil Bradbury: A Taste for Poison |毒药的味道】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/tasteforpoison/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/tasteforpoison/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="a-taste-for-poison-毒药的味道">A Taste for Poison |毒药的味道</h3>

<p>by Neil Bradbury</p>

<p><a href="#Insulin">Insulin and Mrs. Barlow’s Bathtub | 胰岛素</a><br />
<a href="#Atropine">Atropine and Alexandra’s Tonic ｜ 阿托品</a></p>

<p><div id="Insulin"></p>

<h3 id="insulin-and-mrs-barlow-s-bathtub-胰岛素">Insulin and Mrs. Barlow’s Bathtub | 胰岛素</h3>

<ul>
<li>What was the price of insulin&rsquo;s patent? | 胰岛素的专利卖了多少钱？</li>
</ul>

<p>One Canadian dollar. | 一加元。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Insulin was discovered by Frederick Banting and Charles Best, but its first production also involved James Collip and John Macleod. Unfortunately the amazing story of insulin’s discovery was marred by scientific jealousy, intense business competition, and even fistfights in the laboratory. Despite all four scientists being involved in testing insulin, only Banting and Macleod were given the Nobel Prize for insulin’s discovery. Banting and Collip sold the patent for insulin to the University of Toronto for one Canadian dollar.</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>Insulin shock therapy and &ldquo;A Beautiful Mind&rdquo; | 胰岛素休克疗法和《美丽心灵》</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>“When the patients were injected with insulin, it caused a dramatic drop in their blood glucose levels, depriving the brain of an essential component for normal physiological function. The patients began to sweat profusely, requiring repeated baths to wash away the sweat. As glucose levels fell further, patients became increasingly restless, followed by major convulsions that ended only when they entered into a coma, at which point the patients all had fixed, widely dilated pupils.”</p>

<p>“Although the symptoms of schizophrenia, including delusions, hallucinations, agitation, and inappropriate reactions, seemed to abate after insulin shock, no one knew whether the effect was due to the insulin itself or to the coma induced by the insulin.”</p>

<p>“Nobel Prize–winner and mathematician John Nash, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1994, suffered from schizophrenia, and was subjected to insulin shock therapy to treat his illness. His life story, and his insulin therapy, were portrayed in the 2001 movie A Beautiful Mind.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>当时人们认为，给人注射大量胰岛素，让他/她们昏迷和休克，可以用来治疗精神疾病。诺贝尔奖获得者、数学家纳什就是该疗法的体验者之一。2001年的电影《美丽心灵》讲述了他的人生故事以及胰岛素疗法。</p>

<ul>
<li>Controversies in science community | 科学界关于胰岛素休克疗法的“撕”</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>In 1953 Dr. Harold Bourne, an experienced British psychiatrist, published a paper titled “The Insulin Myth,” arguing that there was no sound scientific basis for the validity of insulin coma therapy. He maintained that the initial psychiatric diagnoses were most likely flawed and based on unreliable and questionable tests. Bourne also claimed that the results of insulin coma therapy were biased by selecting particular patients and ignoring others. More alarmingly, it became apparent that no two hospitals were performing the coma therapy in the same way, with some clinics inducing a coma for one hour and others for an astounding four hours.</p>

<p>The immediate response to Bourne’s concerns was not a “thank you for showing us where we’ve gone wrong,” but rather a wave of condemnation from the medical community. Leading psychiatrists sent letters to medical journals criticizing Bourne, with one stating: “it is clinical experience that counts here, despite all [evidence] to the contrary.” It would be another five years before a carefully controlled study on insulin coma therapy would be published, a study that clearly showed, beyond any doubt, that insulin coma therapy was a sham.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>1953年，经验丰富的英国精神病学家哈罗德-伯恩（Harold Bourne）博士发表了一篇题为《胰岛素的神话》的论文，认为胰岛素休克疗法的有效性没有合理的科学依据。医学界什么反应呢？一片谴责。其中一位指出： &ldquo;尽管所有的[证据]都是相反的，但临床经验在这里才是最重要的。&rdquo;</p>

<p>又过了五年，一项关于胰岛素休克疗法的精心设计严格实验的研究才得以发表，这项研究明确表明，胰岛素休克疗法是一个骗局。</p>

<ul>
<li>Uxoricide: husband killing wife | 胰岛素杀妻案</li>
</ul>

<p>1957, England, Bradford. Kenneth Barlow used insulin to kill his wife Elizabeth Barlow.</p>

<p>Kenneth, a nurse, claimed to have given his wife Elizabeth an injection of ergometrine (a drug used in obstetrics to prevent heavy bleeding after childbirth by causing uterine contractions and also to induce abortions) with her informed consent, yet what was actually injected into her body was a lethal dose of insulin.</p>

<p>Elizabeth&rsquo;s symptoms are the same as those of insulin shock: exhaustion, weakness, vomiting, profuse sweating, dilated pupils. She went to take a bath in the bathtub to feel better, only to fall into a coma and drown, or, after passing out, being pushed into the water by her husband.</p>

<p>身为护士的Kenneth声称在妻子Elizabeth知情同意的情况下，给她注射了麦角新碱（ergometrine，一种在产科使用的药物，通过引起子宫收缩来防止产后大出血，也可用于诱导堕胎），然而，真正注射到她体内的，却是致死剂量的胰岛素。</p>

<p>Elizabeth的症状和胰岛素休克的症状一样：疲惫，虚弱，燥热，呕吐，大汗淋漓，瞳孔散大，为了感觉好一点她去浴缸洗澡，结果却陷入昏迷，溺水而亡，或者，在昏迷后被丈夫推入水中而溺死。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>“After a grueling five-day trial, the presiding judge instructed the jury that there was only one crime of which Kenneth Barlow could be convicted: “This is murder or nothing,” he told them. “If you are satisfied that he injected insulin into his wife, and knowingly injected it, you will probably find no difficulty in reaching the decision that he did so with intent to kill.” The jury took eighty-five minutes to find Barlow guilty. Sentencing him to life imprisonment, the judge described Barlow as “a cold, cruel premeditated murderer who, but for a high degree of detective ability, would not have been found out.” (The jury was also excused from further service for ten years, because they had listened to “a long and harrowing case.”)”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>对Kenneth Barlow的案件审理长达五天。最后做出了有罪判决。该案的陪审团随后被免除了十年的服务，因为他们听了 &ldquo;一个漫长而痛苦的案件&rdquo;。</p>

<p>Kenneth Barlow的第一任妻子Nancy也死得很蹊跷，他们结婚十二年，在1956年突然“发病”，不到十二个小时就趋势了。在葬礼前曾有匿名电话打给警察让他们对Nancy进行尸检，但没有发现什么，只是脑部有轻微水肿。第一任妻子葬礼后两个月他就和第二任妻子Elizabeth结婚了，而她活了不到一年。</p>

<ul>
<li>Pharmaceutical insulin | 人造胰岛素</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>Although commercial insulin acts in the same way as the body’s natural insulin, small tweaks in the sequence of amino acids making up pharmaceutical insulin (to make it faster- or slower-acting) allow for easy confirmation that any excess insulin in a murder victim got there by nefarious means. In fact, murder by insulin poisoning is quite rare, with fewer than seventy documented cases worldwide, the vast majority occurring in the UK and the United States.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>为Kenneth Barlow辩护的律师提出来的一个论点是，后来在Elizabeth体内检测到的大量胰岛素不是外来注射的，而是身体自己产生的。当然这很荒谬，我们的身体在正常条件下不会不受控制产生致死剂量的胰岛素。现在人造胰岛素的氨基酸序列和自然产生的胰岛素并不完全一样，所以如果再有辩护律师用这个理由，就可以轻易反驳了。不过，胰岛素下毒案比较少见，世界范围内有记录的不到七十例。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<hr />

<p><div id="Atropine"></p>

<h3 id="atropine-and-alexandra-s-tonic-阿托品">Atropine and Alexandra’s Tonic ｜ 阿托品</h3>

<ul>
<li>Daredevil tomato eater ｜ 第一个吃番茄的勇士</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>“Members of the Solanaceae plant family, including such familiar foods as potatoes, eggplants (aubergines), chili peppers, and tomatoes, are eaten daily in homes across the country. Yet despite their regular appearance on present-day dinner tables, Solanaceae plants were initially treated with concern and suspicion. Tomatoes, brought to Europe from the New World by sixteenth-century Spanish conquistadores, saw merchants struggling to peddle this new fruit to consumers, who were convinced it would kill them. To combat this tomato phobia, vendors often employed people to eat tomatoes next to their stalls, giving what amounted to some of the earliest consumer reviews of products. The widespread use of tomatoes in cooking today is a clear testament to those early daring customers.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>茄科植物，比如土豆、茄子、辣椒和西红柿等，如今经常出现在餐桌上，但茄科植物最初作为食物却备受质疑。西红柿是由16世纪的西班牙征服者从新世界带到欧洲的，商人们努力向消费者兜售这种新水果，但消费者却不买账，认为这种水果会杀死他们。为了消除这种番茄恐惧症，商贩们经常雇人在他们的摊位旁边吃番茄。</p>

<ul>
<li>Deadly nightshade | 颠茄</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>“Among these is <em>Atropa belladonna</em>, an attractive plant with violet flowers that yield small shiny berries displaying a deep purple or black hue. A single berry incorporated into food or drink contains enough poison to cause death. Although the plant’s Latin name hints at its toxicity, its common name, deadly nightshade, leaves no doubt regarding its lethal qualities.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>人们害怕茄科植物，也并非意外。有的茄科植物看起来和番茄土豆差不多，但是却是致命的，比如颠茄，又名deadly nightshade.</p>

<ul>
<li>Atropos: the Fate who cut the thread of life | 剪断生命之线的命运之神</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>“In Greek mythology, when a newborn was three days old, three Fates would visit it to determine its destiny. Clotho (the Spinner), the youngest of the Fates, spun the thread of life from dark and light fibers. Lachesis (the Apportioner) determined the length of the thread of life, and Atropos (the Inevitable) held the shears to cut the thread of life, sealing the length of the person’s life. Little wonder, then, that Atropos lent her name to belladonna’s most lethal component, atropine.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>在希腊神话中，当一个新生儿出生三天后，三位命运之神会来拜访它，以决定它的命运。命运之神中最年轻的Clotho (the Spinner）用深色和浅色纤维纺出了生命之线。Lachesis (the Apportioner)决定生命之线的长度，而Atropos (the Inevitable)手持剪子剪断生命之线。 颠茄最致命的成分——阿托品——的名字由此而来。</p>

<ul>
<li>Atropine | 阿托品</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>“Atropine, when pure, is a white odorless crystalline powder, first purified from Atropa belladonna berries and leaves in 1833 by the German chemist Philipp Lounz Geiger and his Swiss student Germain Henri Hess”.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>阿托品是一种白色无味的结晶性粉末，1833年由德国化学家Philipp Lounz Geiger和他的瑞士学生Germain Henri Hess从颠茄的浆果和叶子中提纯出来。阿托品溶于水后很苦。颠茄果实也一样。</p>

<ul>
<li>Mona Lisa’s eyes | 蒙娜丽莎的眼睛</li>
</ul>

<p>颠茄的拉丁文名 <em>belladonna</em> 来源意大利语，意为美丽的女士。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Venetian actresses and courtesans would squeeze a drop of juice from a belladonna berry into their eyes to dilate their pupils and achieve a fashionably alluring appearance. It is alleged that part of the attraction of Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa is due to the belladonna-induced dilation of the Mona Lisa’s eyes.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>威尼斯的女演员和宫女会将颠茄果实的一滴汁液挤入眼睛，以扩大瞳孔，达到诱人的效果。据称，达芬奇的《蒙娜丽莎》的部分吸引力是由于颠茄引起的蒙娜丽莎眼睛的扩张。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Dilation of the pupil should permit more light into the eye to see clearly, but the atropine in belladonna also has the effect of relaxing the muscles controlling the lens, so that courtesans really couldn’t see who they were flirting with. Prolonged use of belladonna is also likely to lead to blindness. Although belladonna berries are no longer used to dilate pupils for romance, the same premise is still employed by restaurants that use dim lights and candles on the tables, causing the pupils to dilate spontaneously and allow more light into the eye.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>瞳孔的扩大允许更多的光线进入眼睛，以便看清楚，但颠茄中的阿托品也有放松控制晶状体的肌肉的作用，所以女士们其实看不到她们在和谁调情。长期使用颠茄素也可能导致失明。</p>

<ul>
<li>Soup and sparks | 汤和火花</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
<p>Based on careful examination of hundreds of brain slices, Cajal proposed his neuron doctrine, in which he concluded that the nervous system was not one gigantic mesh, but was in fact composed of many individual nerve cells, and that between each nerve cell was a tiny gap called a synapse.</p>

<p>The primary question at the turn of the twentieth century was how information crossed that gap. Always up for a good argument, scientists divided themselves into two camps. There were those who believed pulses of chemicals were sent across the gap—adherents of this position calling themselves “soups”—whereas those who believed that a jolt of electricity spanned the gap were self-styled “sparks.” Not even political meetings can attain the acrimony and bitterness of two groups of scientists, each convinced of the merits of their position, and the lack of any credibility in their opponents’ platform. Indeed, this scientific feud would shape neuroscience for the next fifty years.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>基于对数百个大脑切片的仔细检查，Cajal提出了他的神经元学说，他认为神经系统不是一个巨大的网状结构，而实际上是由许多单独的神经细胞组成的，每个神经细胞之间有一个微小的间隙，称为突触。</p>

<p>二十世纪之交的主要问题是:信息如何穿过这个间隙。科学家们总是喜欢争论，有一些人认为化学物质的脉冲被送过这个间隙，这一立场的支持者称自己为 &ldquo;汤&rdquo;；而那些认为是电的冲击跨越这个间隙的人则自称是 &ldquo;火花&rdquo;。即使是政治会议也无法比拟两组科学家争论的尖锐和激烈，每组科学家都坚持自己的立场，而坚信他们的对手缺乏任何可信度。事实上，这场科学上的争斗将在接下来的50年里塑造神经科学。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Intrigued by the sparks-and-soups debate, a young German scientist, Otto von Loewi, brashly decided that he would solve the riddle. If you were to look up “absentminded professor” on the internet, you might find a picture of Loewi. Even as a student, he often neglected his biology classes, favoring trips to the opera or philosophy lectures instead.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>to be cont.</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Fredrik Backman: A Man Called Ove ｜一个叫欧维的男人决定去死】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/amancalledove/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/amancalledove/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="a-man-called-ove-一个叫欧维的男人决定去死">A Man Called Ove ｜一个叫欧维的男人决定去死</h3>

<p>by Fredrik Backman</p>

<p><a href="#loveandhouse">To love someone is like moving into a house</a><br />
<a href="#deathstrange">Death is a strange thing</a><br />
<a href="#twiceasmuch">You have to love me twice as much now</a><br />
<a href="#driveacar">I&rsquo;m asking you to drive a car</a><br />
<a href="#herlaugh">Her laugh</a><br />
<a href="#other">Other quotes</a></p>

<p><div id="loveandhouse"></p>

<h3 id="to-love-someone-is-like-moving-into-a-house">To love someone is like moving into a house</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>To love someone is like moving into a house, Sonja used to say. At first you fall in love in everything new, you wonder every morning that this is one&rsquo;s own, as if they are afraid that someone will suddenly come tumbling through the door and say that there has been a serious mistake and that it simply was not meant to would live so fine. But as the years go by, the facade worn, the wood cracks here and there, and you start to love this house not so much for all the ways it is perfect in that for all the ways it is not. You become familiar with all its nooks and crannies. How to avoid that the key gets stuck in the lock if it is cold outside. Which floorboards have some give when you step on them, and exactly how to open the doors for them not to creak. That&rsquo;s it, all the little secrets that make it your home.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>爱上一个人就像搬进一座房子，一开始你会爱上新的一切，陶醉于拥有它的每一个清晨，就好像害怕会有人突然冲进房门指出这是个错误，你根本不该住得这么好。但是经年累月后，房子的外墙开始陈旧，木板七翘八裂，你会因为它本该完美的不完美而渐渐不再那么爱它。然后你渐渐谙熟它所有的破绽和瑕疵。天冷的时候如何避免钥匙卡在锁孔里；哪块地板踩上去的时候容易弯曲；怎么打开一扇橱门又不让它嘎吱作响。这些都是会赋予你归属感的小秘密。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="deathstrange"></p>

<h3 id="death-is-a-strange-thing">Death is a strange thing</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>Death is a strange thing. People live their whole lives as if it does not exist, and yet it&rsquo;s often one of the great motivations for living. Some of us, in time, become so conscious of it that we live harder, more obstinately, with more fury. Some need its constant presence to even be aware of its antithesis. Others become so preoccupied with it that they go into the waiting room long before it has announced its arrival. We fear it, yet most of us fear more than anything that it may take someone other than ourselves. For the greatest fear of death is always that it will pass us by. And leave us there alone.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>死亡是一桩奇怪的事情。人们终其一生都在假装它并不存在，尽管这是生命的最大动机之一。我们其中一些人有足够时间认识死亡，他们得以活得更努力、更执着、更壮烈。有些人却要等到它真正逼近时才意识到它的反义词有多美好。另一些人深受其困扰，在它宣布到来之前就早早地坐进等候室。我们害怕它，但我们更害怕它发生在身边的人身上。对死亡最大的恐惧，在于它与我们擦肩而过，留下我们独自一人。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="twiceasmuch"></p>

<h3 id="you-have-to-love-me-twice-as-much-now">You have to love me twice as much now</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>“You have to love me twice as much now,&rdquo; she said.<br />
And then Ove lied to her for the second - and last - time: he said that he would. Even though he knew it wasn&rsquo;t possible for him to love her anymore than he already did.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>他们沉默地站了很久，彼此拥抱着。最后她抬起头面向他，严肃地注视着他的眼睛。 “现在你得加倍爱我。”她要求道。 于是欧维对她撒了谎，说他会的。尽管他心里很清楚，他已经不可能比现在更爱她了。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="driveacar"></p>

<h3 id="i-m-asking-you-to-drive-a-car">I&rsquo;m asking you to drive a car</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>“Now you listen to me,&rdquo; says Ove calmly while he carefully closes the door. &ldquo;You&rsquo;ve given birth to two children and quite soon will be squeezing out a third. You&rsquo;ve come here from a land far away and most likely you fled war and persecution and all sorts of other nonsense. You&rsquo;ve learned a new language and got yourself an education and you&rsquo;re holding together a family of obvious incompetents. And I&rsquo;ll be damned if I&rsquo;ve seen you afraid of a single bloody thing in this world before now&hellip;.I&rsquo;m not asking for brain surgery. I&rsquo;m asking you to drive a car. It&rsquo;s got an accelerator, a brake and a clutch. Some of the greatest twits in world history have sorted out how it works. And you will as well.&rdquo; And then he utters seven words, which Parvaneh will always remember as the loveliest compliment he&rsquo;ll ever give her. &ldquo;Because you are not a complete twit.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>&ldquo;现在你听我说，&rdquo;欧维平静地说，同时他小心地关上了门。&rdquo;你已经生了两个孩子，而且很快就会有第三个。你从一个遥远的地方来到这里，很可能是为了躲避战争和迫害以及其他各种乱七八糟的事情。你学会了一门新的语言，并接受了教育，你还在维持一个明显无能的家庭&hellip;
我不是要你去操刀脑部手术，我只是要你开一辆车。它有一个油门、一个刹车和一个离合器。历史上一些最大的笨蛋已经弄清了它的工作原理。你也会的。&rdquo; 然后他说了一句话，帕尔瓦内将永远记住这句话，作为他对她最可爱的赞美。&rdquo;因为你不是一个完全的傻瓜。&rdquo;</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="herlaugh"></p>

<h3 id="her-laugh">Her laugh</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>She laughed and laughed and laughed until the vowels were rolling across the walls and floors, as if they meant to do away with the laws of time and space.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>她笑啊笑啊，直到元音在墙壁和地板上滚动，仿佛要无视时间和空间的法则。</p>

<p>He had never heard anything quite as amazing as that voice. She talked as if she was continuously on the verge of breaking into giggles. And when she giggled she sounded the way Ove imagined champagne bubbles would have sounded if they were capable of laughter.</p>

<p>他从来没有听到过像这种声音一样令人惊讶的东西。她说话时，仿佛一直处于笑声的边缘。当她咯咯笑的时候，她的声音就像欧维想象中的香槟酒泡，如果它们能够笑的话，听起来会是这样。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>And that laughter of hers, which, for the rest of his life, would make him feel as if someone was running around barefoot on the inside of his breast.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>在他的余生中，她的笑声会让他觉得好像有人在他的胸膛内赤脚奔跑。</p>

<p><a href="#header">⇜</a></p>

<p><div id="other"></p>

<h3 id="other-quotes">Other quotes</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>People said Ove saw the world in black and white. But she was color. All the color he had.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>人们说欧维看到的是黑白分明的世界。但她是彩色的，是他所拥有的所有颜色。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>You only need one ray of light to chase all the shadows away.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>你只需要一束光就能赶走所有的阴影。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>It is difficult to admit that one is wrong. Particularly when one has been wrong for a very long time.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>承认自己的错误是很困难的。特别是当一个人已经错了很久的时候。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>A job well done is a reward in its own right.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>做得好的工作本身就是一种奖励。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Ove feels an instinctive skepticism towards all people taller than six feet; the blood can’t quite make it all the way up to the brain.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>欧维对所有身高超过六英尺的人都有一种本能的怀疑；血液不能完全到达大脑。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>All people at root are time optimists. We always think there&rsquo;s enough time to do things with other people. Time to say things to them. And then something happens and then we stand there holding on to words like &lsquo;if&rsquo;.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>所有的人在根源上都是时间乐观主义者。我们总是认为有足够的时间与其他人一起做事情，有时间对他们说些什么。然后就发生了一些事情，然后我们站在那里，紧紧抓住&rdquo;如果&rdquo;这样的字眼。</p>

<blockquote>
<p>And time is a curious thing. Most of us only live for the time that lies right ahead of us. A few days, weeks, years. One of the most painful moments in a person&rsquo;s life probably comes with the insight that an age has been reached when there is more to look back on than ahead. And when time no longer lies ahead of one, other things have to be lived for. Memories, perhaps.</p>

<p>You miss the strangest things when you lose someone. Little things. Smiles. The way she turned over in her sleep. Even repainting a room for her.</p>

<p>The two men looked at each other for a moment. Then Sonja&rsquo;s father nodded. And Ove nodded curtly back. And then they rose to their feet, objective and determined, in the way two men might behave if they had just agreed to go and kill a third man.</p>

<p>They never had much, but they always had enough.</p>
</blockquote>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Brené Brown: The Gifts of Imperfection ｜不完美的礼物】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/thegiftsofimperfection/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 19 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/thegiftsofimperfection/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="the-gifts-of-imperfection-不完美的礼物">The Gifts of Imperfection ｜不完美的礼物</h3>

<p>by Brené Brown</p>

<p><a href="#numbing">Numbing</a></p>

<p><div id="numbing"></p>

<h3 id="numbing-自我麻痹">Numbing | 自我麻痹</h3>

<blockquote>
<p>The most powerful emotions that we experience have very sharp points, like the tip of a thorn. When they prick us, they cause discomfort and even pain. Just the anticipation or fear of these feelings can trigger intolerable vulnerability in us. We know it’s coming. For many of us, our first response to vulnerability and pain of these sharp points is not to lean into the discomfort and feel our way through but rather to make it go away. We do that by numbing and taking the edge off the pain with whatever provides the quickest relief. We can anesthetize with a whole bunch of stuff, including alcohol, drugs, food, sex, relationships, money, work, caretaking, gambling, staying busy, affairs, chaos, shopping, planning, perfectionism, constant change, and the Internet.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>我们所经历的最强烈的情绪就像尖锐的刺，当它们刺伤我们时，会引起不适甚至疼痛。仅仅是对这些情感的期待或恐惧，就会触发我们难以忍受的脆弱。当这样的情绪即将到来时，很多人对这种脆弱和尖锐刺痛的第一反应不是直面和感受，而是躲避，试图让它消失，用任何能快速缓解疼痛的方法来麻痹自己。有很多东西可以用来自我麻痹，包括酒精、毒品、食物、性、恋爱、金钱、工作、照料他人、赌博、忙碌、出轨、陷入混乱、购物、做计划、完美主义、不停改变和互联网。</p>

<p>to be cont.</p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>创作的震荡</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2021/02/frequencyofcreation/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2021/02/frequencyofcreation/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <p>&ldquo;先设定一个时段，增加尽可能增加的，再设定一个时段，削减尽可能削减的。执拗地一再重复这种做法，振幅便渐渐变小，文字量自然地稳定在了应当稳定之处，到达一个无法增加也无法减少一点的程度。自我被削除，多余的修饰被筛落，裸露无遗的逻辑退回了后堂。&rdquo;</p>

<p>村上春树的描述很精妙。文学创作是这样，写论文也如是。</p>

<p>波动，起伏，熵减，直至归一。</p>

<p>创作的过程，是不倦找寻&rdquo;增之一分则太长减之一分则太短&rdquo;的那个点，是梯度下降在最优解附近的震荡。</p>

<p>是向心公转，堕进漩涡，沉入湖底，欣赏月圆。</p>

<p>创作过程，有着独特的振幅和频率，甚至能想象出它的声音，高潮并非最响处，细微最动听。</p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Alice Munro: Something I&#39;ve Been Meaning to Tell You |我一直想要告诉你的事】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/sth_menro/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/sth_menro/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<p><div id="header"></p>

<h3 id="我一直想要告诉你的事">我一直想要告诉你的事</h3>

<p>by Alice Munro</p>

<h3 id="我一直想要告诉你的事-1">我一直想要告诉你的事</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>声音像奶油一般，半是讥嘲，半是怜爱。</p></li>

<li><p>他表情温柔，微笑里透着真诚，神情逐渐向深处、向内里收缩掘进一般（是男人做爱时高潮来临之际的表情吗？这个恩特可从没有见到过），这使得他看上去似乎想要成为一名深海潜水员，纵身跃入海洋深处，更深处，穿透所有的空虚、寒冷和残骸，一直去往他能够将一颗心安放的地方，这个地方玲珑而珍贵，很难确定具体的位置，就好像是落在海底的一颗红宝石。</p></li>

<li><p>她的美与彼时流行的印在月历上或雪茄盒上的美女那种羞怯的肉欲的美截然不同，她的美既锋芒毕露又精致优雅，让人无法直视，充满了挑战性。</p></li>

<li><p>传奇的某些品质是真实存在的，经常在你几乎毫无觉察的时候或不曾预料的地方悄然浮现。</p></li>

<li><p>恩特不喜欢矛盾，不喜欢失序，不喜欢神秘或极端事物。</p></li>

<li><p>为了让她的话听起来确凿有力，她的语调毫无悲痛之意，相反却几乎是带着逗乐性质，嘲笑他对默克山的人事所知如此之少。</p></li>

<li><p>莎尔的神情和气度对男人并没有吸引力，也许还有种逼退的力量。</p></li>

<li><p>她的这种担忧就像少女有时候怀揣的那种荒唐但实际上并不会付诸行动的顾虑，比如从窗户上跳下去，或者掐死一个坐在婴儿车里的小婴儿之类。尽管非她所为，她却心怀忧惧。</p></li>

<li><p>高大，轻盈，野心勃勃，带着一种危险的丰盈和满足。他们虽然分开坐，光芒却从他们俩身上同时散发出来。情人。这个词并不像人们想象的那样温柔，相反，它残酷，具有撕裂感。</p></li>

<li><p>在她终于能够收拾出一朵笑容面向他，并对他说“别犯傻了”之前，她的心里汹涌着巨大的轻蔑与愤怒的波涛。然后，她的微笑和眼神都在努力地想要抓住他，想要紧紧抱住他的善良不放（跟所有人一样，她也看到了他善良的心地，但恩特相信，如同他身上其他的特点，比如汗津津的额头和膨胀的乐观一样，他的善良只会最终惹恼莎尔），以免她体内沸腾的轻蔑和愤怒的巨浪再度折回，将她彻底裹挟而去。</p></li>

<li><p>他是这样小心翼翼地说出莎尔的名字，仿佛莎尔高踞于红尘之上，超拔于世俗之外，不啻为一个奇迹，一个不解之谜。任何人都没可能解出她这个谜题，仅仅获得思考这个谜题的机会就已经很幸运了。</p></li>

<li><p>他们只不过是些逆来顺受、无足轻重的存在，在他人的房屋外转悠，躲在房子后面的房间里缝纫，为获得每一口饭食而感恩戴德。</p></li>

<li><p>在她面前，她们总处于一种弱势，她的毒舌和女人们的紧身衣联合起来将顾客们置于这种境地。那些外表看起来坚毅而强大的女人，到了恩特这里，就变得束手束脚、低声下气。她们那战栗着的满是谦卑的大腿，不可救药地严重下垂的乳房上的皱纹，被怀孕和手术所摧残的吹胀了的肚皮，平日里一直被强行塞进紧身衣里，而在恩特面前，它们尽数暴露，一览无余。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="素材">素材</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>在我眼里，他们的虚荣心总是如此膨胀，话语间充斥着严重的偏见，不修边幅，邋里邋遢，被他们的学术生涯、文化生活和女人们纵容得不成样子。</p></li>

<li><p>任何人都无法对某个人或某件事始终保持不渝的忠诚。</p></li>

<li><p>他做爱的方式一开始让我觉得惊异，因为缺乏那种不顾一切的绝望感。这么说吧，他做爱时毫无重点，平铺直叙，没有罪孽感的驱使，也没有对堕落的希冀。</p></li>

<li><p>男人和女人身上到底哪些地方让人着迷生情，也许就像一口罗马尼亚口音或者一处眼睑的平缓曲线那样脆弱单薄，半真半假，该是某种说不清道不明的秘密吧。</p></li>

<li><p>他对那些可以在公众视野中展露峥嵘、无须仰仗任何特殊规则加以保护的职业感到心醉神迷。</p></li>

<li><p>他的表情里糅合了快乐与忧伤这截然相反的两面。一个拉伯雷式的作家。</p></li>

<li><p>无论是我，还是任何一个人，都会发现他人为我们披挂上的全套伪装，若你愿意也可称之为身份，是多么的陈腐粗糙，了无新意，轻易就能看穿。</p></li>

<li><p>看看你，雨果，你的形象不仅是虚假的，而且是完全过时的。你真应该说你在北方的深山里苦思冥想了一年；你真应该说你曾经给患自闭症的孩子们上过创意戏剧课；你真应该刮净你的脸，刮掉你的胡子，再穿上一身修道士的斗篷；你真应该闭嘴，雨果。</p></li>

<li><p>其实我也做过类似的事情，把词语收集起来并反复拿出来絮叨。</p></li>

<li><p>有句话说，拥有健康即使没有金钱也不要紧，但是如果你从来都没有得到过健康，也从没得到过金钱，又该怎么办？</p></li>

<li><p>多蒂的面部很平坦，线条柔和，如一个面团，苍白柔软，注定是要经受失败的那种类型。你经常会碰到这种女人，平庸无奇，茫然无措，提着购物袋，在车站等候着公交车。</p></li>

<li><p>她的房间里充斥着沉重的家具，都是从她消亡的两次婚姻里打捞上来的</p></li>

<li><p>雨果说每次看到她都会想起一个词语：呆滞，但他觉得她可能也是有营养的，像一碗燕麦粥。</p></li>

<li><p>我认为作家必备一种权威气度，但他身上显然是没有的。他总是神经兮兮，待人小气，过于自我卖弄。我笃信作家身上应该拥有沉静忧伤的气质和渊博深厚的学识。我笃信作家身上确实存在与常人不同的特质，他们应该是意志坚定，精力充沛，光芒四射的，几乎从不会让人望而却步。</p></li>

<li><p>我毫不知晓他这些狂喜或暴怒情绪缘何产生，我的存在与他的情绪毫不相干。</p></li>

<li><p>我们在一起度过的日子，我们婚姻生活中比较成功的部分，都是由这些游戏构成的。</p></li>

<li><p>多蒂总觉得自己不期然就会遭遇不幸，对享受生活向来非常克制，因此她几乎可以算得上是世界上最不可能去对这不幸背后的缘由寻根究底的人。</p></li>

<li><p>但是我没有这么做，我没有足够的能力保护或揭发他，只会用责备的话语鞭笞他，有时候让自己陷入极其绝望的境地，恨不得将他的脑袋撕开，好将我的想法一股脑都倒进去。我多么希望他能明白我的想法。多么专横。多么懦弱。多么邪恶。却无可避免。“你们的问题是彼此不能兼容。”我们的婚姻咨询师说。我们的婚姻咨询在温哥华北部市政厅进行，在那幢枯燥沉闷的大楼外，我们大笑不止，继而泪流满面。我们告诉对方，这就是我们的问题，彼此不能兼容，认识到这一点，真是如释重负。</p></li>

<li><p>当你讲话时，多蒂总是微微张开嘴唇，不停地点头，并且总在你说出一句话的最后一个字时插嘴。这个习惯让人既感动又恼火。她总是迫不及待要对你的看法表示赞同，希望表现出她能够听懂你的话。</p></li>

<li><p>我在想，我应该告诉他，意识到我和他曾经共享、至今仍然共享很多记忆，于我是件多么奇特的事。在我只是些鸡零狗碎不成片断的记忆，对他却是成熟而合用的，是一种有回报的投资。</p></li>

<li><p>他们都在努力掌控自己的世界。在与世界短兵相接时，遭遇所有事情，他们都要决定如何应对，采取什么态度，选择置之度外或为我所用。在那些有限的不稳定的方式中，他们体现了自我的权威。他们绝非无能为力之辈。或者绝不会认为自己是无能为力之辈。无论他们做出了什么安排，我都不能指责他们。</p></li>

<li><p>但跟往常一样，他尊重了我的不开心；尊重了我其实并非不开心，只是被这些草稿纸占据了心神并为其所苦，不堪其扰地伪装；他留下我独自煎熬，直至原谅，恢复。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="我是如何遇见我的丈夫的">我是如何遇见我的丈夫的</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>他们一厢情愿地以为你没有好奇心，而不仅仅是你不诚实，这远远不是事情的全部。他们一厢情愿地以为你没有注意到任何发生的事情，你所关心的只是他们爱吃什么，他们需要你把衣服熨烫成什么样子，诸如此类的琐事，此外你将不会再有任何其他方面的思索，不会对任何事情感到好奇和迷惑。</p></li>

<li><p>“进来。”他回应，但语气却像是在说滚出去。</p></li>

<li><p>从他身边离开，我由衷感到高兴，就好像他馈赠的礼物太多，堆得太高，我有些喘不过气；只有独自一人的时候，才能充分感受其中的快乐。</p></li>

<li><p>女人们应该同舟共济，互相支持，不应该这样故意撒谎，制造罅隙。我现在才领悟这个道理，但当时并不懂。当时我也无论如何不会想到最后自己会跟她处于一样悲惨的境地，面临一样的困扰和苦痛。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="水上行走">水上行走</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>他的目的是既提供给人们他们认为自己需要的东西，同时也可以保留自己的孤独空间不受侵扰。</p></li>

<li><p>他被敬畏和恐慌所占据，赶紧躲到尽可能远的角落，就好像目击了别人的做爱现场。</p></li>

<li><p>他所反对的，他跟尤金提起此事时这样说，是这一代人——如果真可以将他们概括为一代人的话，是他们无论做什么事情都喜欢炫耀和张扬。为什么做所有的事情都要制造这么多的噪声，如此喧哗，如此躁动，他问。如果不大声嚷嚷恭维自己的话，他们甚至没法种出一个胡萝卜。</p></li>

<li><p>“我觉得他们更多的是无聊，而不是虚伪。”尤金理智地回答，“就像早期基督徒。他们是觉得太无聊了。”</p></li>

<li><p>是的，他身上散发出的那种气质，正是那种会评估、测算并时刻监视自己康复状况的人所特有的。</p></li>

<li><p>“我们所相信和认可的世界，你知道的，就是外在现实世界，”尤金心情舒畅，正娓娓道来，“根本就不是我们被引导去相信的那么坚不可摧，那么确凿无疑。比起我们被限定了的认知范围，它受到更多控制因素的左右。”</p></li>

<li><p>把自己弄得像个傻子一样。哪个人能做到这一点？你怎么能把自己弄得像傻子？显示出你的愚蠢，这可以，将自己的愚蠢暴露出来，也可以，但难道这愚蠢不就是你自己吗？它不是一直都在那里吗？把你自己显示出来。除此之外还能怎样？”</p></li>

<li><p>他被这个时代甩到了后面，却没有办法，而且一直没有办法判断他们到底是不是疯了。</p></li>

<li><p>他听着同龄人谈论的内容，心想如果他们的脑子里再装入相关知识的十分之一，恐怕就会像鸡蛋那样裂出缝隙。</p></li>

<li><p>最初的找寻可能是轻松的，让人精神振奋的，但大多数时候，总会有一些说不清道不明也看不见的力量要扭转这一切，让整个找寻过程变得缓慢而艰难。</p></li>

<li><p>明智的做法是不要再对周围的世界留心注意，只要相信这仍然是当初生活的那个世界，虽然会有些可怕的偏差和畸形，但终究是可扭转和治疗的，永远不要试图去弄清为什么所有既有的秩序都在发生变化。</p></li>

<li><p>他们的期望难道不是属于同一个轨道吗？又是什么激发了他们同样的期望？是绝望之念，因为处在跑道的末尾而激发的绝望之念。虽然如此，骄傲却阻止了人们认清这一事实。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="对家人的宽容之心">对家人的宽容之心</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我越回头去看这些事情，就越觉得它们不真实。当你在生活中经历这些时，它们只是你用来填补时间空白所不得不做的事情，你一直以为生活将会裂开一道缝隙，让你发现自己，然后你才会在真实的生活中真正发现自己。你也并没有特别希望生活为你裂开这道缝，毕竟你在自己舒适的小日子里如鱼得水，但你确实在隐隐地期盼它发生。然后你慢慢走向死亡，你的母亲慢慢走向死亡，而塑料椅子、塑料植物，以及人们去采购杂货的寻常生活将依然故我，你所拥有的这些生活已经尘埃落定，变成了记忆，去图书馆、回来时带着书和葡萄、乘巴士上山这样的事情，现在真想返回去重新体验和经历，但是上帝啊，仅是希望回到过去这样的想法，就足以让人心碎。</p></li>

<li><p>你好容易做好了坏事即将发生的心理准备，结果它并没有发生，这导致的情绪变化太古怪了，你没法一下子调整好自己的情绪，几乎感到了一种失望。</p></li>

<li><p>对亲人的宽容之心，于我是一个谜，它从何而来，又能保持多久，我始终不得而知。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="回答我是或不是">回答我是或不是</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>你告诉我很多年前你爱过我。很多年前。我回答你说我也是，那时候我也曾爱着你。但其实我们都在夸大其词。</p></li>

<li><p>我们也会自艾自怜，但说实话这些成长的经历也不全是那么不堪的，有时候甚至会让我们感到很自在——日复一日重复不变的劳作，所得到的咖啡或香烟一类的小小酬劳，与其他女孩之间或绝望的或诙谐的或并无任何新意的交谈，还有因其稀少而备显珍贵的睡眠。</p></li>

<li><p>她们白天总是与婴孩、炉灶和盆盆罐罐密不可分，入夜则转换成另一种用途，这一用途的含义是隐秘的，与罪孽和光耀紧密相关，虽然这一含义正随着时代变迁而快速流失并逐渐消退。</p></li>

<li><p>多年后当我们再次遇到以前认识的某个人，我们会说这个人成熟了许多。不止你一人知道，其实大家都清楚，当时光流转，暮年降临，我们在一生的光阴里究竟都产生过哪些错觉和妄想。事后去嘲笑它们，或是声称成熟就是拥有自动洗衣机，就是不同意对方的政治主张时缄默以对，就是耽溺于生儿育女，就是购置旅行车，无疑都过于简单随意。结论轻浮草率，且不能涵盖全部事实，因为在我看来它遗漏了某些美好而动人的东西，这些东西存在于生命中不能承受之重和对生命本身的温顺降服，存在于我们爱的局限之中。</p></li>

<li><p>第一眼看到你，我就心生懊悔，恨不能马上折回家去，从头来过，细细梳理我的头发，再换上那件深灰色的磨毛羊绒衫。</p></li>

<li><p>次日，以及接踵而来的许多日子里，每当我如往常一样躺在睡椅上看书时，总感觉自己在下坠，下坠，堕入一个很自在的深处，思念着你，而这大概就是一切的开端，预示着将会有更多的故事要展开。于是我对你说：“我爱上你了。”</p></li>

<li><p>整整两年时间，这个锡制邮箱一直是我生活的中心，现在它终于回归到无关紧要的位置，不再向我允诺任何事情，也不再维系任何情感，就像是一种恒久的痛苦终于离我而去，这让我如释重负。没人知道我失去了什么，没人知道我生命中的那一部分，他们只不过耳闻了一些小道消息。</p></li>

<li><p>爱情无论如何都是不可避免的，它是人们做出的一个选择。困难之处在于时机的判断，即究竟在何时做出这个选择，或是在何时它会变得不可逆转。</p></li>

<li><p>我并不十分确定自己在想什么，却暗暗期待你能正确无误地理解我的心情。</p></li>

<li><p>我爱你，因为你身上维系着那个过去的我，那个年轻时推着婴儿车走过校园小路、纯洁而无辜、没有任何错处的我。如果那时我心里为你燃起了爱情的火焰，并能够将这火焰持续地燃烧到现在，那我所辜负的时光将会比预期少，少许多。我的生命就不会整体坍塌，破碎，如齑粉般消散在风中，渺然杳然，了无踪影。</p></li>

<li><p>那些满载着幸福的信，叽叽喳喳无休止地倾诉着爱情，写满了我最初的怵惕不安和最终的翘首期盼。</p></li>

<li><p>那个时候，无论是在我的信件里还是在我们在一起度过的时光中，我都在使出浑身解数想要迷惑你，误导你！陷于爱情中的我，一半的时间都在盘算如何粉饰爱情，装扮爱情，让它看上去既安全稳固又充满欢乐。这些猜谜游戏是多么丢人啊。而你，你只是微微一笑，不动声色，淡然温和。你目睹我做这一切，大概早已替我感到羞耻了吧。</p></li>

<li><p>我在你也许走过的人行道上走着，看到的景象，无疑你也都看到过。那些映照过你的影像的橱窗也同样映照了我的身影。</p></li>

<li><p>在某种意义上，你是顽固而强硬的，有着鲜明的棱角和锋芒，这一特点在你的身体和心灵上表现得淋漓尽致；你心思纯净，态度和蔼，但没有慈悲心。我得强调你身上存在着某种骑士风范。我确实期待你能真像一位骑士那样，由于遵循着某种秘密的旨令，行为举止便表现出某种过时了的自我牺牲精神和令人惊叹的勇敢气魄。</p></li>

<li><p>女性是如何将她们的爱情城堡建立在如此脆弱的地基之上的，这地基脆弱得甚至只能勉强维持一晚的庇护。由于自身生活的空虚和深植于内心的某种模糊不清却挥之不去的缺陷，她们总被无休止地榨取和利用，但她们却甘愿欺骗自己，并因此而不得不承受各种苦楚的折磨，可苦楚对改善她们的处境却毫无用处。</p></li>

<li><p>它们就像是颜色各异的奇异的溪流或宽阔的大河，在书店里蜿蜒游走，汇聚到一起，而与在水下呼吸相比，我恐怕更不能理解这些书里的内容。</p></li>

<li><p>在她面前我不无嫉妒，还隐约有种胜利的自豪感，以及这种轻率的极度渴望探知她的一切的好奇心。每次想到它们，我总是备感羞愧。</p></li>

<li><p>她会因为某些我们心知肚明的规则而忍受痛苦，这些规则毫无意义，却坚如磐石。当我想到她，正如人们一贯持有并正在持有的观看态度一样，我也如隔岸观火，所有类似的爱情都只是发生在远方；一场奇怪的冒险，甚至不会博取同情；出于某种不可知的信仰而举行的莫名其妙的仪式。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="一只被发现的船">一只被发现的船</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>女孩们抬头看到前方的街灯在锡制灯罩下发出荧荧的光，无数街灯点缀着街道，一直延伸到竖立在街道尽头的水管那里，给蜿蜒而上的梅奥街戴上了一条熠熠生辉的项链。</p></li>

<li><p>有什么东西从她们心里释放出去，散尽了，但她们却分明感到了不满足。</p></li>

<li><p>她回忆起克莱顿跟她开口说话的那片刻时光，他从浑然的孤寂中抽身出来，声音是那样静穆平和，待她如自家人般寻常自然。</p></li>

<li><p>他们获得了某种从悬崖上飞身跳下并随即展翅飞翔的快感。他们觉得此时此刻发生在自己身上的事情是如此特别，与以往遇过的所有事情都截然不同，而这一切都是因为那艘船，那片水，那铺头盖脸的阳光，废弃的幽暗的车站，还有他们这个群体中的每一个人。在一片晕眩中，他们已经忘记了彼此的姓名或长相，每个人都是互相应和的呼啸声，互相映照的影像，明目张胆，通体煞白，响亮喧攘，厚颜无耻，像一支支离弦的箭飞驰而过。</p></li>

<li><p>她们的笑声仿佛构成一个紧密的链条，当一个人的笑声衰竭下去，另一个人就会赶紧以高声大笑衔接住防止它中断。中间她们朝对方做出绝望而无助的表情——很快将会是真正的绝望和无助——然后深深弯下腰去，用力抓住自己，像是正在领受最强烈的痛楚。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="行刑人">行刑人</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>从那以后，我开始讨厌任何皮毛制成的衣服，讨厌它们的那种触感；太柔软，且过于私密，让人觉得羞耻。</p></li>

<li><p>我想象着自己躲在那儿，或任何一间位于高层的狭小的房间里，在小镇的包围下而能保全自身，安然无恙，被整个世界所忽视和遗忘。只有夜晚来临时，才会有人前来，给我带来食物。</p></li>

<li><p>在你竭力自保从现场飞快逃离的过程中，羞耻感尚没有这么强烈；此后，那油腻凝滞的耻辱感则会排山倒海一般压上心头，那些充满丑恶的秘密顽固不化地盘踞着，挥之不去。性格的脆弱和敏感本身就是一种耻辱。我们就是耻辱制造出来的生物。</p></li>

<li><p>他们总能将不利处境转变成令人羡慕的有利条件，将别人的嘲笑转变成颂歌。我总是将她的残疾视为她主动的选择，一个显示她的刚愎和强悍的符号。</p></li>

<li><p>罗宾娜说起他们时，语气里充满特殊的尊重和庄严，让你感觉他们身上发生的任何事情，他们的偏好、病痛、争执、语言习惯或生活经历，都非小事，都值得被认真对待。</p></li>

<li><p>他们的调侃对我而言，真真切切是一种识别和承认，是延迟实现的满足感。</p></li>

<li><p>我一直在蜕变，周围的一切也随之变化。我相信通过妥善的自我管理和上天的眷顾，我可以跟任何人平起平坐。事实上也确实如此。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="马拉喀什">马拉喀什</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>时光永在流转，风景倏忽流易，无数人的生活在变动中绵延久远，她却始终是那颗稳固的星辰，岿然不动。</p></li>

<li><p>多萝西和维奥拉对能够住在一起这件事非常满意。花费少了，还有了同伴，万一出事或生了病，彼此还能有个照应。她们从对方的存在中找到了安慰和舒适，就像吵闹不休的小孩子或是婚龄过长彼此不再投缘的夫妻，这种安慰和舒适深藏在生活的表层之下，远非语言所能描述，绝大部分无法被辨识出来，因此表面上呈现出来的（她们认为自己感受到的）大多是疲惫，厌倦，互相激怒，耍弄心思和机巧。</p></li>

<li><p>某些瞬间，她似乎比十年前的自己还要低幼，素面朝天的脸上苍白没有血色，嘴巴张得很大却讳莫如深。样子新鲜纯净，总是在做梦一般恍惚，沉浸在自己的小世界里。随即，若光线或心境或身体内的化学反应发生变化，这同一张脸也即刻呈现出另一副面貌，眼睛下方的肌肤从浅浅的枯萎皱缩变得青肿峥嵘。丰满和润泽偷偷溜走了。</p></li>

<li><p>无论什么事物她都可以看；美和丑已经不再重要，因为万事万物都有值得被发掘的地方。当她年岁渐长，这种感受潜入她的心里，但这种感受并非通常认为老年人会有的那种由它去吧与我无关的平常心；恰恰相反，她凝神琢磨事情时，常处于备感困惑、易被激怒的状态，这种感受就会随之而来。</p></li>

<li><p>她将不用再浮沉于世去体会悲剧这个词的深刻意义。</p></li>

<li><p>她的语气是弧形的吗？一半是谦恭，一半是蔑视？她收集起来准备以后再慢慢揣摩。</p></li>

<li><p>他们是如此嚣张，但在她看来却是如此绝望无助，像是坐在漂流筏上的人被猛推进激流狂湍之中绝望，危机四伏。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="西班牙女郎">西班牙女郎</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>生活并不像我所爱读的那些阴郁黯淡的讽刺小说，它更像是白天电视上播放的那些肥皂剧。情节毫不新鲜，充斥着陈词滥调，像生活中其他任何事情一样，总能让你泪流满面。</p></li>

<li><p>他说其他女性经常会夸奖她这种类型的女人，说她身上有某些特质特别吸引人，为什么呢？他自问自答，因为她对她们不构成任何威胁。</p></li>

<li><p>他们都很害羞，雨果和玛格丽特，社交时都会有些障碍，很容易感到紧张困扰。但可以确定的是，他们的心底是冷漠的，比我们这些轻易动用魅力和征服手段来卖弄风情的人要冷漠。他们将自己隐藏得极深。他们从不承认任何事情，从不强求自己讨论任何事情，是的，即使我死死钳住他们的皮肤，最终也只会是我的手指在流血。即使我冲着他们狂轰怒吼直到嗓子喊破，他们依然可以熟视无睹不为所动。他们狡诈的脸只会无情地转开，表情不会有丝毫改变。都是白肤金发碧眼，都容易紧张脸红，都是冷酷无情的嘲弄者。</p></li>

<li><p>我的运气和幸福是他们生活中仅存的一个征兆，告知他们生活并不完全是在走下坡路。</p></li>

<li><p>我听见自己发出一声长长的哀号，这哭声来自我身体内部和深处，令我吃惊的是，它在反抗。</p></li>

<li><p>玻璃杯捉住了阳光，在白色布垫上投下一圈透明的光环。这让杯子里的液体显得格外纯净，似乎喝下它就可以修补创伤，恢复元气，就像大山里的泉水。我无比饥渴地喝下了它。</p></li>

<li><p>他相貌英俊，却已然过了时，他清醒地知道自己的魅力，并顽强地想要保持住，时光却轻而易举地将其摧毁。</p></li>

<li><p>我是一个很有趣的聊天对象。原因是我可以听别人说任何事。也许跟我在青少年时代读过的那些杂志文章有关（任何文章标题上出现“流行”“大众性”之类的字眼，我都会把它读完，这些字眼让我既感到害怕又逼迫我必须往下看），它们推动着我，使我发展出善于聆听、海纳百川的社交艺术。</p></li>

<li><p>他正在读一本杂志。我跟他说话的时候，他总是在读着什么。他说自己不知道的时候，声音里满是厌烦和疲惫，微弱得几乎听不见。你无法从石头中榨出血来。</p></li>

<li><p>时光一年年流走，在我和雨果的婚姻里，过错层层叠叠地堆积在那里，翻过了错误，还是错误，永无止境，探不到底。</p></li>

<li><p>我们说了什么，感受到了什么，都不再是真实的，都有些偏离了主题。似乎很久以前我们缠绕在一起，脱离了控制，在那里旋转，喧哗，骚动，但被什么东西一点，全都突然静止下来，我们第一次看见了对方，彼此不再伤害，一切寂静无声。这是一个讯号。我真的相信这是一个讯号，但我不知道我该如何将它传递出去。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="冬日寒风">冬日寒风</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>即使是在暴风雪的日子，天上的云层也仍有可能在晚饭前裂开罅隙，陡然之间，阳光万丈，随后便隆重热烈地谢幕。</p></li>

<li><p>那种自命不凡，危机四伏，又饱含着自我牺牲的激情，从来没有被满足过，从来没有被冒险体验过，却持续贯穿了她的一生。</p></li>

<li><p>她们所有的时间都用在了等待上。等待邮件，等待晚饭，等待入睡。你也许会以为我母亲才是那个沉陷在无休止的等待中的人，其实并非如此。躺在沙发上，病体孱弱，几同废人，她满脑子却都是大胆的计划和幻想，不可能实现的希冀，不可能被厘清的内心挣扎和斗争；她始终让自己的思维在流动。</p></li>

<li><p>甚至在自己家读书和在祖母家读书，也是两回事。在祖母家，书籍无法施展开它们的抱负。萦绕屋里的那种气氛总是将它们拖拽回来，牵制着它们，使它们变得黯淡无光。空间太局促了，它们只能蜷缩着。在我自己家，尽管周围一团乱麻糟糕无序，所有的事物却都是自由自在的</p></li>

<li><p>泪珠在她的眼睛里寻出一点出口，缓缓流淌，令人感到自在，像是在做一件善事。</p></li>

<li><p>她知道但并不能理解为什么会这样，为什么会被区别对待，为什么她，一个在生活中遭遇重重阻碍却始终努力越过它们的女人，会变成这样一个衰老的人，别人欺骗她，安抚她，并渴望逃开，远离她。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="追思会">追思会</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我不想他们压抑自己的感情，但我也不想让他们的感情被虚假地激发出来。</p></li>

<li><p>这么明快活泼的调子，这么一本正经的态度，在这样轻飘活跃的言辞中间，难道透露出的不是某种挑衅，某种昭然若揭的想要控制全局的执着与坚持？</p></li>

<li><p>她希望能远离欺诳，不因琐碎细微的用途而侵占严肃的事物，不要通过将事物制作成时尚流行品的方式嘲弄那些事物。</p></li>

<li><p>如果说艾琳的生活无论如何总算是逐渐成形，略具面目，但同时也不断遭受风暴的击打摧折，被各种消遣享乐折腾得方向偏斜，朱恩的生活则是一砖一瓦地逐步建造起来，在周密的计划的指导下，日子过得有板有眼，有条有理，满满当当。她的生活里绝无偏离正途和百无聊赖这样的例外发生。她会最大限度地利用每一个机会。</p></li>

<li><p>他们的认真庄重绝不是个笑话。这是一套谨严的消解系统，为所有的存在寻找到目的。这个系统不固着于任何事物。日式花园，色情电影，偶然的死亡事件。所有这些都被它所接纳，咀嚼，继而改变形态，汇集，最终毁灭。</p></li>

<li><p>疾病和事故。它们理应被尊重，而不是被解释。语言是可耻的。它们应该在羞耻中崩毁粉碎。</p></li>

<li><p>所有的语言都是一丘之貉。如今在全然的确信中……语言本身不会行骗，骗局在你通过它说了什么。沉默才是唯一的可能。</p></li>

<li><p>他矗立在她跟前，携带着某种重量、密度和固执。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="渥太华峡谷">渥太华峡谷</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>在这纯粹而彻底的黑暗里，车灯切开了一条脆弱而单薄的光之路，上下颠簸的汽车仿佛会永远这么行驶下去，没有尽头。</p></li>

<li><p>我是如此哀矜于我的不幸遭遇，如此确信于自己理应享受的权利，甚至没有跟母亲道一声谢，就转过身用别针将裤袜上的腰带扣紧了。</p></li>

<li><p>须知她才是我费尽周折想要抵达的地方；这么一段漫长文字的旅程，只是要去接近她、触摸她，将她从人群中分离出来，描述她，照亮她，歌颂她，并最终，摆脱她。但我没能实现，她始终在离我太近之处若隐若现，她一贯就是如此。她一贯是这么重，比世界上任何的存在都要重，却又是不明晰的，她的边缘消融了，流逝了。这意味着她已经牢固地依附于我，像以往任何时候一样紧密贴近，拒绝抛弃，而我将负重前行，前行，使用我所能的技巧，践行我所能的手段，始终不变。</p></li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>【Olga Tokarczuk: Bieguni | Flights ｜云游】</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/bieguni/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/readings/bieguni/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        

<h3 id="bieguni-flights-云游">Bieguni | Flights ｜云游</h3>

<p>by Olga Tokarczuk |  奥尔加·托卡尔丘克</p>

<blockquote>
<p>《云游》的波兰版书名是Bieguni，这个词出自于十八世纪俄罗斯东正教的某个门派，其信徒相信，一直处于移动状态才能避开恶魔的魔爪。</p>
</blockquote>

<h3 id="裹得层层叠叠的流浪女说了些什么">裹得层层叠叠的流浪女说了些什么</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>摇摇，走走，摆摆。只有这一个办法能摆脱他。他统治世界，但没有权力统领移动中的东西，他知道，我们身体的移动是神圣的，只有动起来、离开原地的时候，你才能逃脱他的魔掌。他统治的是一切静止的、冻结的物事，每一样被动的、怠惰的东西。所以走吧，摇摆，步行，奔跑，坐飞机，因为你忘记这一点、站定的那一秒钟，他的巨掌就会攫住你，把你变成一只木偶，你就会困在他的气息中：充满了烟、雾和城外垃圾场的恶臭。他会把你多姿多彩的灵魂变得渺小又空瘪，像是用纸、报纸剪出来的，他还会用火、病和战争来威胁你，吓唬你，直到你心神不宁，没法睡觉。他会在你身上做好记号，在他的档案里留好你的资料，再将记录你沦陷的文献交给你。他会用无关紧要的琐事占据你的头脑，要买什么，要卖什么，哪里的东西更便宜，哪里的东西更贵。自此之后，你只会操心蝇头小事——汽油的价格，以及油价是如何影响我们还贷的。你会每天活在痛苦中，好像你这辈子已被判了死刑。但是，因为什么罪过呢？什么时候判决的？谁判的？你永远都不会知道。</p></li>

<li><p>这就是为什么所有暴君对游牧民族抱有根深蒂固的仇恨；为什么那些地狱的仆人要那样迫害吉普赛人和犹太人；为什么要强迫所有自由人定居下来；分配给我们的地址其实就是判给我们的徒刑。他们想缔造一种固化的秩序，篡改时间的路径。他们希望日复一日按部就班，没有变化；他们希望建起一台巨大的机器，每个生物都被迫占据一个位置，各就各位，展开虚假行动。各种机构和办公室，各种标记和通讯，等级制度，各种头衔和学历证明，申请和被拒，护照，编号，卡券，选举结果，折扣价和积分点，囤货，物物交换。他们想在条形码的协助下让这个世界举步维艰，给所有东西贴上标签，让所有人知道一切都是商品，你要为此花多少钱。不让人类读懂这门新新外语，只允许机器和机器人读取。就这样，到了夜里，他们就能在地下的超大商店里举办诗歌朗诵会，读的尽是他们自己的条形码。</p></li>

<li><p>行动起来。走动起来。离开的人是有福的。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="云游">云游</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>在白昼存在的一切颜色、阴影都将暴露自身存在之徒劳——米色家具布艺、花卉图案墙纸、流苏垂饰还有什么用意可言？绿色会让搭在椅背上的裙子有所不同吗？它被挂在商店橱窗里的衣架上时所迎受的贪恋的眼神，变得让人不能理解了。现在，没有纽扣、钩子和扣子了，黑暗中的手指只能摸到有东西含糊地凸起来，有粗略拼接的布片，硬物的团块。</p></li>

<li><p>夜晚把自然的初态还给了这世界，最初的样貌，没有糖衣；白昼是想象的飞翔，照亮一点脆弱的期许，一次疏忽，一次秩序的中断。实际上，这世界是黑暗的，几乎是全黑的。静止且冰冷。</p></li>

<li><p>他们好像被链子拴成了一串，快速滑向他们要去的地点，直奔城郊某处的十层楼，用被子蒙住头，陷入一场昼夜的碎片拼凑而成的睡梦。在现实的世界里，那场睡梦不会在清晨消散殆尽——那些碎片拼贴在一起，或有留白和漏洞；有些组合甚是英明，简直堪称先兆。</p></li>

<li><p>因而，她能看到他们终其一生都在无序的崩解状态中。我们的身体是贫瘠的、肮脏的、无用的——没有例外——但被物尽其用。</p></li>

<li><p>之所以存在那么白的白色，只是为了给黑暗缔造一个框架，而黑暗必然会越来越多。</p></li>

<li><p>现在回想起来，安努斯卡觉得每个人都有一种怪病，深藏在体内，在衣服下面：巨大的悲哀，或是某种比悲哀更辽远的东西，但她找不到确切的字眼去形容。</p></li>

<li><p>有些人在车厢里就睡着了。他们满含困意的呼吸给窗玻璃蒙上了水汽</p></li>

<li><p>她很快乐，因为她的头脑里没有哪怕一个念头，没有一样要关心的，没有一样要期待或渴望的。那是一种美妙的感受。</p></li>

<li><p>为什么她会记住这两个人？我猜想，那是因为他们始终不变，他们行动的方式似乎与众不同，更缓慢些。别的人都像急流劲涌的河，从这儿流到那儿，掀起浪花，转出漩涡，但都形态各异，飞逝而过，那条河流会把他们全部遗忘。然而，那两个人是逆流而行，所以在人群中才显得那样突出。河流的规则为什么无法束缚他们呢？我想，吸引安努斯卡的正是这个问题。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="我在这里">我在这里</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>黑暗从天而降，轻柔地弥漫开来，像黑色露水般落在一切物事上。</p></li>

<li><p>黑暗的蔓延止于家门，所有的喧嚣渐息，归于静默，就像热牛奶冷掉后凝成的那层厚厚的膜。房屋映衬在天空的背景里，渐渐失去了鲜明的边缘、分明的棱角，那种轮廓似乎能弥漫到无限远。</p></li>

<li><p>我自己的存在，就是眼下唯一具有鲜明轮廓的物事，一圈颤抖又起伏的轮廓，让人痛楚的颤抖和起伏。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="你头脑里的世界">你头脑里的世界</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>行驶在河中的某条平底大船，不被两岸注意，不被树木注意，不被站在河堤上的人注意，也许是靠不住的地标，所以不值得去注意，只有一个观众觉察到，那些船自身的移动优雅至极。</p></li>

<li><p>它在河流的等级里自有一席之地，后来我在地图上查找过——级别不高，但存在，好歹算得上亚马逊女王皇宫里的子爵夫人吧。但它对我来说已经够宏伟了，看起来庞然无际，随心所欲地流淌，不受任何阻挡，很容易泛滥成洪，完全无法预料。</p></li>

<li><p>当然，河对我毫不在意，只在乎它自己，河水涌动不息，令你不可能两次踏进同一条河——我长大后才知道这句话。</p></li>

<li><p>每一年，河水都要为承载那些沉重的船只索取高昂的代价——因为，每一年都有人溺死在这条河里，或是某个在炎炎夏日里下河戏水的孩子，或是某个在桥上发酒疯的醉汉，哪怕桥边有栏杆，醉汉还是会翻落到河里。</p></li>

<li><p>河水把他们的生命荡涤得一干二净，把他们的脸孔冲刷得面目全非，以至于他们的亲眷们在辨认尸体时都会觉得很艰难。</p></li>

<li><p>站在岸边、凝视河流的我明白了一件事：流动的物事总是比静止的好，哪怕，流动会带动出各式各样的风险；相比于恒久不变，改变总是更高尚的；静止的物事必将衰变、腐败、化为灰烬，而流动的物事却可以延续到永远。</p></li>

<li><p>从那时开始，那条河就像一根针，插入了我之前安稳的生活环境：公园里的景致，种着可怜巴巴的几排蔬菜的暖房，我们玩跳房子的水泥板铺就的人行道。这根针穿刺到底，标出了垂直发展的第三维度；被如此穿透后，我的童年世界就像一只漏气的橡胶玩具，在嘶嘶声中，气都漏光了。</p></li>

<li><p>客人用的染发剂留下污迹，看起来就像中国书法的一笔一画。</p></li>

<li><p>有意思的通常是有警事报道的版面，讲的无外乎是谁家地窖里的腌黄瓜和果酱罐被偷了。</p></li>

<li><p>其实，这样的旅行都逃不出家的轨道，都逃不出同一种形而上的归家引力。他们算不上真正的旅行者；他们离开是为了返回。等他们返回到原点就会如释重负，觉得自己圆满了某种职责。</p></li>

<li><p>然后，他们会安安稳稳地过上一年，每天清晨都回到前一晚留下的日常生活中，自家公寓的气息渗进他们的衣物，他们的双脚在同一块地毯上不知疲倦地磨出一条路径。</p></li>

<li><p>那种生活不适合我。在一处逗留时，不知不觉就开始扎根——不管是何种基因造成了这一点，我显然没有遗传到。我试过，很多次，但我的根总是很浅；最轻微的一阵小风都能把我连根吹跑。我不知道该如何生根发芽，天生不具备那种植物般的能力。我无法从大地中汲取营养，我是安泰俄斯①的对立面。我从移动中——从颤动起步的公车、轰隆作响的飞机、滚滚向前的火车和渡轮中——获取能量。</p></li>

<li><p>我总买平装本的书，以便不带懊悔地搁在月台上，留给找到它们的人去看。我不收藏任何东西。</p></li>

<li><p>我完成了学业，但从未真正掌握任何一门专业。</p></li>

<li><p>还有从原本的家园中出逃的难民——从他们的妻子、丈夫、父母身边逃出来的；还有在爱情中得不到幸福的人，困惑的人，忧郁的人，那些一直很冷漠的人。还有逃避法律的人，因为他们还不清债。流浪的人，漂泊的人。下一次发病时必会被送进医院的疯狂的人，</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="在这世间的你的头脑">在这世间的你的头脑</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>宽阔的走道像是用石头刻出来的，被人们的脚步磨得光滑；阶梯的边缘有所磨损；扶手被人们的手掌磨得光润，各种痕迹在空间里留下了印记。也许，那就是我们被那些死魂灵纠缠不放的缘由。</p></li>

<li><p>我们都是由防御、盾牌和盔甲组成的，我们都是一些看似城池，实则仅有墙垣、壁垒、营寨的庇护所。</p></li>

<li><p>生活总能与我保持一臂之遥。我顶多只能找到它的尾迹，发现它抛弃的旧皮囊。等到我可以确定它的方位了，它早已逃之夭夭。我能找到的，只是它曾经逗留此处的标记，俨如公园树干上某些人留下的“到此一游”的涂鸦。</p></li>

<li><p>任何尝试过写长篇小说的人都知道，写作是艰苦的重任，毫无疑问，也是让一个人永不得闲的最糟糕的方法之一。你必须时时刻刻待在自己的内心，自拘于孤绝境地。写作是可控的精神错乱，偏执狂的强迫工作，我们通常认为作家会有的羽毛笔、忙碌和威尼斯面具一概全无，相反，作家系着屠夫的围裙，穿着橡胶筒靴，手持剥除内脏的屠刀。从作家所在的地下室里看出去，你连路人的脚都看不清楚，只能听到人家鞋跟着地的踢踏声。偶尔会有人停下脚步，弯下腰，往地下室的窗里瞧，那么，你多少能瞥见一张人脸，说不定还能聊上几句。但说到底，心神已完全被自己的戏占据，亲自摆布舞台，再匆忙上阵，独自演出，临时拼凑的珍奇柜里塞满了奇奇怪怪的人：作者和角色、叙述者和读者、描述者和被描述者；那些脚、鞋、鞋跟和脸孔迟早都会化为那场戏里的道具。</p></li>

<li><p>别人剖白心迹通常只会让我烦闷，但又苦于坦承这一点。</p></li>

<li><p>我会带着疑虑，检验每一则评判，斟酌每一个观点，直到最终发现我一直想找到的答案：没有一个是正确的，全都是假说，冒牌货。我不想要既定观念，它们只是超重的行李。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="症候群">症候群</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>症候群，是一种小巧、轻便、偶发、不承担复杂理论重压的症状。你尽可用这个概念解释某些事情，然后就抛之脑后。一种可随意使用、用完即弃的认知工具。</p></li>

<li><p>我的病可称为：复发型脱瘾症候群。撇开花里胡哨的词汇，对这种综合征的精准描述是：人的意识顽固纠结于某些形象，甚或强迫性地去寻找它们。</p></li>

<li><p>我的症状表现为我总是被破损的、有瑕疵的、有缺陷的、破裂的东西所吸引。无论是什么形态，无论在制作过程中经历了什么样的失误，无论有没有前途，我都感兴趣。本该有所发展的，却因某种原因终止了；反过来也一样，最终的效果超出了最初的设计意图。任何偏离常态的东西，太大或太小，生长过度或不完整，畸形的或让人无法接受的东西。不对称的形态，以指数方式猛增，满溢或迸发的姿态，或是相反的：整体规模退缩到单一结构。那些经得起精准测量、会让每个人的脸上都露出满意而相似的笑容的典范形态，我统统不感兴趣。我的弱点就在于对畸形学、非常态感兴趣。我坚定不移，也不无痛苦地相信：生物正是在非常态中冲破表象，展现其真实本性的。不小心突然泄露的真相。伴随着令人尴尬的哎呀一声。完美的百褶裙下露出开缝的内裤。包着天鹅绒的家具里突然弹出了隐藏其中的金属支架，填得软蓬蓬的扶手椅里突然爆出一串弹簧，无耻地揭穿了任何关于柔软的幻觉。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="珍奇柜">珍奇柜</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我绝对有这种倒霉的症候群。我不会被摆放在正中央的正经藏品所吸引，反倒会走向靠近医院的地方，去看那些常被挪到地下室的展品，因为人们认定它们配不上有价值的展厅，因为它们暗示了最初的收藏者的趣味很可疑。有两条尾巴的火蜥蜴，脸朝上，被收纳在一只椭圆形的长罐子里，等待着它的审判日——因为世上的所有标本最终都将得以复活。一只海豚的肾浸泡在福尔马林溶液里。一只异常的绵羊头骨，有两对眼窝、两双耳朵、两张嘴，俨如代表双重性的古老神像。一个被串珠和标签包起来的人类胎儿，标签上用拉丁文小心翼翼地写着“埃塞俄庇斯人，五个月大的胎儿”。经年累月的收藏，自然界里的异类，双头的，无头的，未出世的，全都懒洋洋地浮在福尔马林溶液里。再比如说：至今仍在宾夕法尼亚的一家博物馆里展出的“连体双胞胎”有一个头、两个身体，其病理形态表现出不容置疑的1=2，足以让人去质疑逻辑的基础。还要提一下始终在变化的食物标本：1848年的几只苹果，浸泡在酒精中，每一只都奇形怪状。显然有人认定，自然界中的畸形异类是不朽的：只有与众不同，才能存活下来。</p></li>

<li><p>这些年来，时间已成我的盟友，如同它对每一个女人所做的那样——我已变成透明的隐身人。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="看见即知晓">看见即知晓</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>这个展示柜里收纳的几十个人彼此没有亲缘关系，在地理和年代上也相差很多——现在却聚在如此美丽的歇息处，宽敞，干燥，灯光通明，在一座博物馆里被宣判永存于世。他们肯定很羡慕那些永远困在大地下、与泥土缠斗不休的骨头吧。但他们之中难道没有人——也许是天主教徒的骨头——会担忧吗：到了审判日，他们怎么才能被找到呢？他们的骨头被分散到了不同地方，到时候，又如何能够重构那些犯下罪过，也有过善举的躯体呢？</p></li>

<li><p>各种头骨，涵盖你能想象到的所有生长结构形态，带着弹孔的，或是别的武器留下的孔洞，或是萎缩的。手骨，被关节炎折磨变形。一条手臂骨，在多处骨折后，随其自然地愈合，想必经历了令人恐慌的长期疼痛。</p></li>

<li><p>太短的长骨，太长的短骨，骨结核，覆盖骨头表面的病变迹象会让你觉得：这骨头已被树皮甲虫啃过了。可怜的人类头骨，在维多利亚式展示柜的背灯照耀下，用咧嘴大笑的方式展露所有的牙齿。比方说，这一位，前额正中央有一个大洞，但牙齿却很完美。谁知道那个洞是不是致命伤呢？不一定。以前有个铁路工程师，脑部被一根铁棍直通而过，但他带着那样的伤口又活了很多年；不用说，这对神经心理学家来说是非常好用的现成案例，因为它向所有人宣告了一点：从根本上说，我们是靠大脑生存的。他没有死，但他整个人都变了。据说，他变成了和以前完全不同的人。既然我们是谁取决于我们的大脑，那就让我们直接朝左转，进入陈列大脑的展厅吧。都在这儿呢！存放在溶液中的奶油色海葵状大脑，有的大，有的小，有的非常聪明，有的从一数到二都做不到。</p></li>

<li><p>再往下走就是胎儿专区，迷你版的小人儿。这儿有玩偶般的、最小的标本——每一样东西都很小，所以整个人能装进一只小玻璃罐。有些最年幼的小人儿就像小鱼、小青蛙，确切说是胚胎，吊在一根马毛上，漂浮在一大瓶福尔马林溶液里，一眼望去，你甚至都看不到它们。稍大一点的胎儿已展现出妙不可言的人类躯体的外表。尚未成人的小碎粒，半原始的幼仔，他们的生命从未冲破潜在的可能性，从未跨越那种魔法的边界线。他们拥有了恰好的形态，但灵魂从未入驻其中——灵魂是否现身，恐怕终究和形态的大小有关。在他们的身体里，物质开始运作，顽固地嗜睡，为生存做好准备，积攒生物组织，让各个器官运转，让各个系统贯通；眼部的功能正在启动，肺部已准备就绪，当然，应对光线和空气还需要别的系统。</p></li>

<li><p>下一排展柜里也摆放着人体器官，但已是发育成熟的，在外部条件允许的情况下，它们欣然接受了自己该有的、完备的尺寸。完备？它们怎么能知道自己能长到多大、长到何时就停止呢？有些真的不知道：这儿有一条肠子，长啊长啊，以至于我们的教授们很难找到能装下它们的标本瓶。更难想象的是：它们怎么能装进这个男人的肚子？他的姓名首字母缩写被标在了肠子的标签上。</p></li>

<li><p>心脏。最后一步，揭示有关心脏的所有秘密——这种块状组织有拳头大小，不够匀称，脏脏的淡褐色。请注意，这其实就是我们身体的颜色：发灰的褐色，很丑。我们不会想把这种颜色用在自家墙壁上或汽车里。那是内部的颜色，黑暗的颜色，光线到不了的地方的颜色，物质都掩匿在潮湿的内部，躲开了旁人的凝视，这样的内部色彩没必要自我炫耀。唯一可堪浮夸的就只有血液了：血是一种警告，用红色拉响警报——身体的外表已出现缺口，整合的皮肤已被划破。实际上，我们在身体内部是看不到颜色的。当心脏把血液压进血管时，血看起来就像鼻涕。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="七年之旅">七年之旅</h3>

<ul>
<li>“我见过的东西，现在都是我的了。”年轻人突然回过神来，做出了总结，手掌拍了一下大腿。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="齐奥朗的指引">齐奥朗的指引</h3>

<ul>
<li>“我不注意过路行人的脸，相反，我看他们的脚，匆忙的各色人等缩略为匆忙的脚步——走向何处？我很明白，我们的使命就是摩挲尘埃，去探寻一种尽除严肃性的神秘感。”</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="库尼茨基-水-1">库尼茨基：水（1）</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>寂静很刺耳，恰如一种不间断的尖锐噪音。</p></li>

<li><p>没有风。没有阳光。静止的白色天空看似一顶帐篷的天盖。天很闷热，水分子在空气中互相推挤，到处弥漫着海的气味——电、臭氧和鱼的气味。</p></li>

<li><p>时间的流动和过去不一样了，厚重而苦涩，有序了。</p></li>

<li><p>持续很久的鸣笛有如哀悼之音，像是野兽发出来的嘶吼。鸣笛停止后，余波颤动，在蝉鸣的轻微回音中粉碎了。</p></li>

<li><p>太阳变成了橘红色；巨大，肿胀，就在他们眼前渐渐衰落下去。很快，他们就能直视太阳了。</p></li>

<li><p>肿胀的太阳</p></li>

<li><p>在睡梦中，他听到水缓缓地从天而降，一滴又一滴，即将变为一场短命的暴雨。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="有福者至-当受赞颂">有福者至，当受赞颂</h3>

<ul>
<li>高速公路上的四月天，阳光在沥青路面留下红色条纹，最近的雨水如彩釉，精美地装饰了整个世界——像复活节的蛋糕。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="库尼茨基-水-2">库尼茨基：水（2）</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>这天肯定会变得很热、很亮，一切都像在过度曝光的照片里。中午之前，照片上的所有物像就将在白色中一一消失。</p></li>

<li><p>库尼茨基突然想起来，他们来这座岛时坐的渡轮叫作波塞冬号。很多东西——很多酒吧、商店、船只——都叫“波塞冬”。这两个名字就像过量的贝壳，全被大海吐出来了。你该如何向一位神明征求版权？库尼茨基很想知道答案。你们打算用什么支付版权费呢？</p></li>

<li><p>这两个名字就像过量的贝壳，全被大海吐出来了。</p></li>

<li><p>马达的轰鸣声震耳欲聋，但只过了一会儿，大脑就习惯了，如同在冬天，大脑会习惯性地相信，穿上厚衣服就能把身体和外部世界隔开。</p></li>

<li><p>厨房窗台上的龙舌兰花犹如不顾一切向天空发射时被凝固的烟花，一次成功的喷射。</p></li>

<li><p>在越来越浓重的黑暗中，光亮也越来越显著，各不相同，颗粒分明——抵达岸边的游船上的灯光和岛民家中的灯光是不一样的；广告牌和店面的灯光和晃动的车灯是迥然不同的。那是被驯服的平凡世界，给人安全感的景象。</p></li>

<li><p>所有墓碑都面朝大海，像是在古罗马的圆形剧场里，以便让死者们细细观瞻以缓慢的节奏日夜反复的海港景致。</p></li>

<li><p>他穿着衣服平躺着，躺在从她的手袋里倒出来的东西之中。他用专注的眼神去检视它们：犹如星群，有各自不同的位置，不同的指向，不同的形状。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="处处-无处">处处，无处</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我认为有很多像我这样的人。找不到人，已然消失。他们突然出现在到达航站楼里，在海关官员在他们的护照上敲下入港章，或是在哪个酒店里拿到彬彬有礼的前台服务员递给他们的房间钥匙时突然存在于世。那时候，他们肯定意识到了自身的动荡，他们的存在其实依赖于地点、钟表显示的时间，依赖于语言、城市及其氛围。可迁徙、流动性、虚幻性——正是因有这些素质，我们才变得文明。野蛮人不旅行。野蛮人只是去目的地，或是去围捕猎物。</p></li>

<li><p>定居者和农夫更喜欢时间循环的概念所带来的愉悦，在循环的时间里，每一样物件、每一个事件都将必然回归起点，重新蜷缩成胚胎状，重复成熟到死亡的过程。</p></li>

<li><p>在那种被延展的线性时间里，只有一种幸存的方法，那就是保持距离，不要一步到位，那有点像先接近、再后退的组合舞步：一步向前，一步向后，一步向左，一步向右——简单好记。世界越大，你就能舞动得更远，跨越七大洋、两种语言、一整套信仰。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="机场">机场</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>曾几何时，机场都在郊外，就像火车站那样，在辅助性的城郊。但机场已获得独立解放，时至今日，它们都有各自的身份和特征。很快，我们可能要这么说：城市才是机场的辅助设施，就像车间、卧室那样。毕竟，众所周知——生命在于运动。</p></li>

<li><p>机场不仅仅是旅行中的交通枢纽，而是一种特殊类别的城邦：地理位置稳定不变，但城民在流动。机场都是“机场共和国”，是全球机场联合国的成员，虽然它们在联合国还没有一席之地，但那只是时间问题。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="回到你的根">回到你的根</h3>

<ul>
<li>他们总在夜里抵达青年旅社，吃饭时总是问“老三样”：你是哪里人？上一站在哪里？下一站要去哪儿？第一个问题决定了垂直坐标，另外两个问题构建了水平坐标。就是这样，这些背包客创建出一套坐标系统；当他们在这种地图上标注出另一个人的二维位置后，就能安心入睡了。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行装">旅行装</h3>

<ul>
<li>旅行已是普及全球的现象，在化妆品业者看来，旅行者似乎就该照搬定居者的生活方式，只不过是小尺寸的，俨如可爱的婴儿版。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="原作及其复制品">原作及其复制品</h3>

<ul>
<li>他们带着热诚的专注，崇拜似的站在列昂纳多·达·芬奇的一幅画作前。偶尔，也会有人受不了，便会传来一声清晰可辨的相机快门声，听上去就像用一种数码新语言说出的“阿门”。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="胆小鬼的火车">胆小鬼的火车</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>每一公里都要亲自移动，每一座桥都要亲自越过，穿过每一座贯通河道和山谷的高架桥，穿过每一条隧道。不能省略任何东西，不能凭空越过任何东西。这段路上的每一毫米都要被车轮触碰到，每一瞬间都能成为车轮与地面的切点，而且，这将是永远无法重复的组合——车轮和铁轨，时间和空间，穿透宇宙的独一无二的时刻。</p></li>

<li><p>无论如何，他们在移动中，在能在黑暗空间里穿行的空间里。黑夜带着他们前行。谁也不认识谁，谁也认不出谁。人人都从自己的生活中逃离出来了，之后，还会被安全地护送回去。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="被弃的房间">被弃的房间</h3>

<ul>
<li>房间不明白发生了什么事。这套房间认为，它的主人已经死了。自从房门乓的一声被关上后，自从钥匙在锁眼里转动一圈后，所有声响都被闷在里面，所有东西都失去了阴影和轮廓，像是在一摊模模糊糊的污迹里。空间压缩，无人使用，没有微小的气流、窗帘的摩擦声扰动空气，就在这种彻底的静止中，过往的痕迹开始试探着凝聚成型，在门口的地板和天花板之间，暂时性地悬停着。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="恶行书">恶行书</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>“有人说，建造机场的时候必须牺牲一些活物，”她说，“可以挡掉一些灾祸。”</p></li>

<li><p>我不着急。我从来都不必在某个特定时间出现在某个特定地点。让时间追着我跑吧，别让我追着时间跑。</p></li>

<li><p>“但是，你不能让自己被这种多样性骗了——那是很肤浅的，”她说，“那些都是骗人的迷障。实际上，哪里都一样。动物也好，我们和动物的互动方式也好，都一样。”</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行指南">旅行指南</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>描述和滥用是同一类事件——都是破坏：色彩被磨灭，边角失去清晰的轮廓，到最后，被描述的东西开始褪色，继而消亡。如果其对象是某个地点，这种说法尤为适用。旅行文学已经造成了巨大的破坏——是名副其实的祸害，广泛蔓延的疾病。旅行指南给这个星球上所有的好地方带去了致命的一击；出版量数以百万计，有各种语言的版本，那些书挖空了每个地方，再盖棺定论，令其面目模糊。甚至我自己，在天真的年轻时代，也曾在被描述的景点前留下到此一游的快照。但后来故地重游时——当我用力地深呼吸，吸入那里强烈的存在感，乃至让自己透不过气来时；当我努力去听萦绕在那里的呢喃低语时——我总是免不了被震惊到。真相是可怕的：描述就是破坏。</p></li>

<li><p>所以，你必须非常小心。最好不要动用名字：避开它，遮掩它，提及地址时要万分谨慎，以免让什么人备受鼓舞，按图索骥，亲自寻访。说到底，他们在那儿能找到什么呢？死掉的地方，尘土，好像干透的苹果核。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="新雅典">新雅典</h3>

<ul>
<li>只要是人，不管出生在哪里，不管在形体、肤色、嗓音、举止上与我们有多少不同，只要这个人是善良、聪明、灵魂中有智慧，就不可避免的是人类始祖亚当的后裔，因此是可以被救赎的。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="维基百科">维基百科</h3>

<ul>
<li>我们应该有一些其他类型的知识积累，以便和百科全书里有的那些知识相抵相衡——那些知识的反面或内在线索，我们所不知道的一切，所有无法被任何一种目录框住的事物，不能被任何一种搜索引擎处理的内容。因为这种内容广博无边，无法以语词转述——你必须站到词与词之间，立于想法与想法之间深不可测的深渊。每迈出一步，我们都会坠跌。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="世界公民-拿起你的笔">世界公民，拿起你的笔！</h3>

<ul>
<li>把看书视为一个人对手足同胞的道德义务。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行心理学-长书短读">旅行心理学：长书短读</h3>

<ul>
<li>旅行心理学所设想的人处在同等的权重境遇中，无须试图让人的生活有连续性，哪怕是近似连续的状态。生活是由各种境遇组成的。当然，某些行为确实有重复的倾向。然而，这种重复并不意味着我们应该在想象中屈从于任何一种恒定整体的表象。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="正确的时间-正确的地点">正确的时间，正确的地点</h3>

<ul>
<li>很多人相信，这个世界的坐标系上存在一个“时间和空间和谐一致”的完美交点。这或许就是这些人旅行的原因：远离家园，希望抵达那个点，哪怕只能用纷乱的旅行方式完成位移，多少也能增加偶遇的概率。在正确的时间降落在正确的地点——抓住机遇，把握当下，绝不放手——就意味着破解了保险箱的密码，真相即将呈现。不再被漠视、冷落，不再有起伏不定的巧合、意外和命运的转折。你不需要做什么——你只需要出现在那里，在那个独一无二的时空点，完成你的签到。在那里，你将找到你的挚爱、幸福、一张中大奖的彩票、证悟凡人白白耗费多年百思不得其解的秘密，也可能找到死亡。有时候，你会在清晨萌生一种感觉，那个时刻即将到来，今天就可能是早晚会来的那一天。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="圣灰礼拜三①的盛宴">圣灰礼拜三①的盛宴</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>因为每一天都像用岸电绞缆机的旧渡轮，从岸的一边到另一边，走过固定航线，经过同样的红色浮标，其职责就是打破水对浩瀚的垄断，让水面变得有刻度，并由此制造出一种控制的假象。</p></li>

<li><p>在这里，你会看到什么？世界尽头，时间被空荡荡的水岸反射出去，失望地转身离去，直奔大陆，不带一丝惋惜地抛下这里，任其永远苦忍下去。</p></li>

<li><p>他说不上来日子怎么会在生命里抄了条近道，飞一般地过去了——轻飘飘的了无痕迹。顶多就是在他的身体上留下印记，尤其是在他的肝脏。但那都是后来的事了。</p></li>

<li><p>旅行心理学家会将这种现象归于“共时性”名下，作为世界自有其意义的证据：证明了在这片美丽的混乱中，意义的千头万绪贯穿四面八方，奇特的逻辑遍布成网，如果有人要信仰上帝，就请看承载着圣者指尖划下的这一切错综缠绕的印记。</p></li>

<li><p>对一个没有出处的人来说，每一次移动都会拐进一条回头路，因为人面对近似空无的引力时，什么力道都使不出来。</p></li>

<li><p>必须特别提及：中国人有两个名字，一个是家人取的乳名，用来唤孩子的，责怪和打骂时也可以用，但又会由此产生出满怀爱意的昵称。但当孩子长大入世后，就会用另一个名字，在家庭之外、世人皆知、正式使用的大名。如同穿上制服，斜襟的正装，连身狱服，出席正式酒会的行头。这个在外面使用的名字很有用处，也很好记。因为它将证实一个人是谁，所谓名副其实。</p></li>

<li><p>只有一件事让他忧心——伊莱扎的女儿穿着淡蓝色的外套，（每一个海上勇士都知道）那是传说中出海时的恶兆。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="岛屿心理学">岛屿心理学</h3>

<ul>
<li>岛屿的状态，就是一种囿于自身界线的状态，不被任何外界影响所干扰，与某种自恋、甚或自闭状态有相似之处。自给自足。只有自己看似真实；他者不过是幽冥缥缈，不过是乍现在遥远海平线上的“飞翔的荷兰人”号幽灵船。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="肃清地图">肃清地图</h3>

<ul>
<li>如果有东西伤害了我，我就把它从头脑中的地图上抹去。我跌倒过、绊脚过的地方，被人打败的地方，戳到我痛处的地方，物事让人痛苦的地方——都不复存在，就这么简单。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="追击夜晚">追击夜晚</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>你举着遥控器，就像手持武器，对准屏幕中央连续射击。一枪击毙一个频道，但立刻就有新的频道接踵而来。</p></li>

<li><p>先想象出一个地球，再想象出一条黑色疤痕在弧形球面上缓缓推移——那条疤痕揭示了过去的伤：接受大胆的分离手术，光明和黑暗的连体婴被一分为二。</p></li>

<li><p>夜晚，平息了喋喋不休、咄咄逼人的新闻、天气预报和电影频道，把白昼的喧嚣推到一边去，再用性和宗教构成的极简坐标取而代之。肉身和圣灵。生理学和神学。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="卫生巾">卫生巾</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我在药妆店买了卫生巾，每个包装袋上都印了逗趣的词条：</p>

<ul>
<li>词性遗忘：形容你无论如何想不起来自己想要说的那个词。</li>
<li>微物画：绘画用语，形容画家格外重视刻画细枝末节。</li>
<li>卑贱画：描绘腐败、恶心、卑贱事物的画作。</li>
<li>剪刀：是列奥那多·达·芬奇发明的。</li>
</ul></li>

<li><p>我在洗手间把整盒卫生巾打开时看到了这些有趣的教学内容，突然灵光乍现：这不正是即将涵盖一切、正在渐渐补完的新百科全书项目的另一个组成部分吗？于是，我又回去药妆店，在货架上仔细翻检，想找出这家公司的名字——这家决意把必要性和实用性别出心裁地加以结合的公司。在卫生巾包装纸上印满花朵和草莓究竟有什么意义？发明纸张就是为了传递思想。包装纸纯粹是被浪费掉的，理应被禁止使用。不过，假设你真的需要包什么东西，就只能包在小说和诗歌里面，这应该是可以办到的；长此以往，被包裹的东西和包裹上的东西才能有某些关联。</p></li>

<li><p>因为地球在自转，当你把一样东西抛向西面，它在空中飞翔的距离比抛向东面时更远。人类体内含有的硫黄平均值足以杀死一条狗。花生酱黏上颚恐惧症：害怕花生酱黏在你的上颚。但最触动我的一句是：人体中最强健的肌肉是舌头。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="蜡像藏品">蜡像藏品</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>子宫，是一组很养眼的肌肉——纤细，匀称，有曲线美；很难想象古人会相信它会在身体内部周游并激发歇斯底里。不可能有任何疑虑——各个器官煞费苦心地装载于一具身体内，为一场重大的旅行做好了准备。她的阴道也被切开了，但这次是纵向的，隐秘一览无遗：那短小的隧道其实是一条死路，看起来毫无用处，因为它并不是进入她的真正的入口。它的尽头是一个什么都看不见的房间。</p></li>

<li><p>我筋疲力尽，在窗边的硬木长椅上坐下，正对这群沉默的蜡像，只觉得无言以对。是哪条肌肉把我的喉咙压迫得那么紧？叫什么名字？是谁创建了人体？继而引发的新问题是：是谁永远拥有人体的著作权？</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="布劳医生的旅行-1">布劳医生的旅行（1）</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>拥有强壮大腿的女人就好比一把胡桃钳：在那样的双腿间探险，你很可能被夹得粉碎，无异于拆弹。</p></li>

<li><p>人体大同小异，从本质上讲都没有神秘感。但阴部不一样。就像指纹那样。事实上，完全可以用令人难堪的器官作为身份证明——它们绝对是独一无二的——当然，警方尚不允许这么做。像极了用形色招蜂引蝶的兰花，同样美丽。这想法多奇怪啊——这套植物机制甚至在人类发展的某个阶段被尽数保留。要说只是因为它有效，恐怕太保守了。在他看来，基于花瓣的这种构想似乎让大自然自得其乐，于是，大自然决意更进一步，完全不管一个事实：人类终会精神失常，失去自控力，把生长得精妙无比的东西隐藏起来。藏在内裤里，藏在暗示里，藏在沉默里。</p></li>

<li><p>被做成木乃伊是一种相当可悲的人体保存法。它制造的是幻觉，好像一切都呈现在我们面前。实际上是显而易见的骗局。马戏团用的伎俩。因为它保留的只是人体的形状、体外的衣裳。躯体本身已经被损毁了，换言之，从理念上来说恰恰与保存人体背道而驰。野蛮。</p></li>

<li><p>Nicolo Zeno的北欧地图于1558年在意大利城市威尼斯出版，文艺复兴时期的读者认为地图描绘了未知的北域，但实际上这份地图上的很多岛屿并不存在。这份地图曾被刊登在1561年托勒密的著作中；后世的很多地图也以此为参照，甚至直至十九世纪初。芝诺的北欧地图被称作最巧妙、最成功、最持久的骗局之一，但无疑提高了芝诺家族的名气，也提升了威尼斯的地位。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="约瑟芬妮-索利曼致奥地利皇帝弗朗茨一世的第一封信">约瑟芬妮·索利曼致奥地利皇帝弗朗茨一世的第一封信</h3>

<ul>
<li>只要人们不知晓人类可以对同类做出何等可怕而恶劣的事，就能保有天真。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="布劳医生的旅行-2">布劳医生的旅行（2）</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>在布劳看来，他们像是一种特殊的物种，并不是靠空气活的，而是靠另一种元素：二氧化碳和烟雾的混合气体。他隔着玻璃观望他们，隐约露出惊异的神情，好像在看玻璃养育箱里的动物——在飞机上，他们看起来和他是那么相似，但在这里，他们显著的生物特征就一览无遗了。</p></li>

<li><p>他不是很确定事情是怎么发生的——这个个头一般、穿着浅色裤子和弹力T恤的女人，带着一种难以言喻、也许是眉毛的动作引发的微妙姿态，一下子就颠覆了医生曾期待、准备和幻想过的一切情形，乃至整个空间。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行心理学-长书短读-2">旅行心理学：长书短读（2）</h3>

<ul>
<li>我们对空间的感受源于我们有移动能力。我们对时间的感受，则源于生物个体所经历的明显改变的状态。所以，时间只是源源不断的改变。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="同胞">同胞</h3>

<ul>
<li>在异国他乡遇到同胞绝对不会让我高兴。我总是假装听不懂自己的母语。我宁可装成无名的陌生人。我用眼角的余光观望他们，他们没有意识到有人听得懂他们在讲什么，我觉得这挺耐人寻味的。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行心理学-结语">旅行心理学：结语</h3>

<ul>
<li>有一种很有名的综合征是以司汤达命名的。患有司汤达综合征的人先是通过文学和其他艺术作品了解了一个地方，亲身抵达后，感受过于强烈，因而出现虚弱、甚或晕倒的状况。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="说啊-说啊">说啊！说啊！</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>说啊！说啊！听进去再说出来，对自己也对别人，描述每一种情形，命名每一种状态；搜肠刮肚，斟酌词句，仿佛在寻找能让灰姑娘变成公主的那只有魔法的水晶鞋。摆弄词句，仿佛在轮盘赌的数字上放下筹码。也许这次会押对？也许这一把会赢？</p></li>

<li><p>没有掌握说话的艺术的人，就会永远陷在困境里。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="青蛙与飞鸟">青蛙与飞鸟</h3>

<ul>
<li>我们是这个世界的一次又一次神经冲动，一次又一次瞬间的分解，仅仅是允许改变——从加到减，或从减到加——的那一小部分，从而使万物保持持续的流转。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="线条-平面和实体">线条，平面和实体</h3>

<ul>
<li>生活？没有所谓的生活。我看到的是线条，平面和实体，看到它们随着时间变换形态。与此同时，时间，似乎是用来测量微小变化的简单工具，极简的小学生用尺，上面只有三个刻度：过去、现在和将来。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="菲利普-费尔海恩简史-由其学生和密友威廉-范-霍森撰写">菲利普·费尔海恩简史，由其学生和密友威廉·范·霍森撰写</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>我敢说，我们都认不出反写的命运，而那正是神圣的雕刻师为我们刻下的。只有当它们凝聚成人类认不得的形态时，才会以黑与白呈现在我们眼前。上帝用左手，对着镜子反写。</p></li>

<li><p>浸没在酒精里，陷入永不消散的迷雾，做着兀自奔跑的白日梦，还会梦见被晨露打湿的草地，沙滩上温暖的细沙。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="写给截肢的信">写给截肢的信</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>在任何情况下，执念都是一种征兆，预示一套不可复制的私人语言即将出现，若我们谨慎使用，就能发现其中隐藏的真相。我们必须循着这种征兆，进入别人可能觉得荒谬或疯狂的领域。我不知道为什么这种阐述真相的语言在有些人听来像天使之音，而另一些人听来却像数学符号。但有些人就是会用非常奇特的方式说出他们的灵光闪念。</p></li>

<li><p>他坚持认为，最高级的理性是直觉的，而非逻辑性的。靠直觉去知晓、去领悟，我们就能立刻觉察到万物存在的必要性：不可避免的存在。每一样必要的东西都只能是那样，不可能是别的样子。真切认知到这一点，我们才将体验到极致的解脱和净化。我们将不再为了失去财物、失去时间、失去青春甚或生命而焦虑不安。这样一来，我们终将能自控情绪，免除喜怒哀乐的折磨，获得心灵的平静。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="旅行故事">旅行故事</h3>

<ul>
<li>故事自带一种固有的惯性，历来不可能被完全操纵。故事需要我这样的人——没有安全感，优柔寡断，很容易被引入歧途。天真。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="30-000荷兰盾">30,000荷兰盾</h3>

<ul>
<li>时间总能仁慈地灭除男人和女人的差别</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="人间天堂①">人间天堂①</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>她的娘家人以前常说，出远门之前，你得安静地坐上一分钟——波兰乡下人的一种古老习俗；但在这个巴掌大的门厅里没地方好坐，没有椅子。所以，她就站在那儿，在心里设定了时间，开启了体内的计时器，也就是放之四海而皆准的办法：根据呼吸频率启动的血肉计时法。</p></li>

<li><p>近几年来，她有所发现：你只需要当个没有任何显著特点的老女人，就能成为隐身人，效果自动引发，你什么都不用做。不仅能对男人隐形，也能对女人隐形，因为她不会在任何方面成为她们的劲敌。这是一种崭新的、惊人的体验，清楚地感知到人们的目光就那样飘忽掠过她的脸，从她的脸颊、鼻子前面一扫而过，甚至都不落在脸面上。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="别害怕">别害怕</h3>

<ul>
<li>他还说，我们在移动中时就没时间体会这种闲思沉想了。所以，在旅行中的人们看来，一切都像是崭新的，洁净的，无瑕的，从某种角度来说，也是不朽的。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="豪华大酒店的迎宾区">豪华大酒店的迎宾区</h3>

<ul>
<li>有时候他们太着急，反而被绕在旋转门里，好像进了磨盘，眨眼间就会被磨成齑粉。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="戏剧与动作">戏剧与动作</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>离家很远的地方，有一家录影带租售店，我在货架上翻翻找找时，顺口骂了句波兰语的粗话。突然，有个女人走到我身边站定，她不胖不瘦不高不矮，五十岁上下，用蹩脚的波兰语问道：“波兰人吗？你是在说波兰语吗？你好。”</p>

<p>天啊，她的波兰语库存就此告罄。就这么几句。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="哪怕">哪怕</h3>

<ul>
<li>哪怕开车时，我驶过了一块广告牌，上面用黑白两色的英文字母写着“哪怕是你，耶稣也会爱”。这种出人意料的鼓舞让我登时意气风发。那两个字，“哪怕”，只让我稍有警醒而已。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="希维博津">希维博津</h3>

<ul>
<li>我把那个地名大声念出来：Świebodzin，从那一瞬间开始，我的心中就留下了一幅画面：越过大海、丝兰叶丛和陡峭的山壁，有人蒙上了一层不透明的薄膜。那个滑稽又难读的地名让舌头打结，那个轻柔又反常的Ś立刻带动出一种朦胧感，像是铺在厨房餐桌上的冷油布，一篮子刚从乡村田园里摘下的红番茄，煤气炉散发出的烟火气。所有意象融合起来，只为了让Świebodzin成为唯一真实的东西。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="库尼茨基-陆">库尼茨基：陆</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>不完整的每一部分都在痛，锯齿状的缺口出于天性而渴望圆满。</p></li>

<li><p>他发现，不睡觉有一个好处——他可以听见她睡梦中讲的话。这样一来，最深藏不露的秘密也会自我暴露。像一阵烟，自情自愿地溜出来，即刻散尽，你必须守在唇边，及时逮住它们。</p></li>

<li><p>路是他非常熟悉的，此刻却在他眼里呈现出惊人的清晰度，处处都是骇人的标志。都是给他一个人看的讯息。单一出口圆环标志，黄色三角标志，蓝色方形标志，绿白双色标志，箭头标志，文字标志。灯。漆在柏油马路上的线标，机动车辆标志，警告，提示。广告牌上的微笑，那也是无关紧要的符号。就在那天早上，他还见过这些标识物，还可以视而不见，但那时他不懂其意，现在不同了，现在的他无法无视它们。现在，它们都在与他沟通，悄无声息，直截了当，还有很多它们的同类，事实上，已没有哪里是它们未曾占领的了。商店的招牌，广告，邮局的符号，药房，银行，幼儿园老师护送孩子们过马路时高举的停车标牌，穿透这个符号的那个符号，跨过这个符号的那个符号，指示这个符号的那个符号——再过分一点是：占据这个符号的那个符号；再过分一点是：符号与符号的共谋，所有符号的网络，一套背着他达成的默契。没什么是无辜的，没什么是无关紧要的，全都是一幅巨大无边的拼图的组成部分。</p></li>

<li><p>互联网是个骗子。它承诺了太多，口口声声表示会执行你的每一个指令，会找到你想找到的答案，完成你的任务，圆满你的期待，奖赏你的付出。但就本质而言，这种承诺实为诱饵，因为你立刻就会陷入迷狂，像被催眠了那样。路径迅速分叉，加倍，翻几倍，你乖乖地沿路而下，哪怕现在的前景已模糊不清，哪怕某种变异正在发生，你仍然不依不饶地追着最初的目标。你脚下已没有根基，你出发的起点已被遗忘，而你的目标也将最终消弭，迷失在一闪而过、越来越多的页面中，这种商业模式夸下海口却不能兑现，无耻地假装有另一个宇宙藏在扁平的屏幕背后。</p></li>

<li><p>架上的书本只将书脊显露给人们，库尼茨基心想，这就好像你只能看到别人的侧影。它们不用色彩缤纷的封面诱惑你，也不用每一句都夸大其词的腰封糊弄你，就像是遭受惩罚的新兵，它们只能展现最基本的事实：书名，作者，仅此而已。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="岛屿对称说">岛屿对称说</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>根据旅行心理学，任何两个地方的相似度和两者的距离成正比。离得最近的两个地方看起来绝对不会相似，就像两个国度。我们能找到的最惊人的相似处常常出现在——根据旅行心理学所说——世界的另一边。</p></li>

<li><p>岛屿与岛屿的对称现象特别有趣。这种现象莫测高深，无法解释，似乎只是自得其乐，自享其成。瑞典的哥特兰岛和希腊的罗德岛，冰岛和新西兰。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="凯洛斯">凯洛斯</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>她经常反省自己的人生，并且得出了结论，真相很简单：男人需要女人，甚过女人需要男人。实际上，凯伦想过，要是没有男人，女人和女人也会相处得更融洽。女人善于忍耐孤独，善于照料自己的安康，善于培养友情，也更长情</p></li>

<li><p>竟然能把这么多知识储纳在他心里，这几乎有种非人性的感觉——肯定需要某种特殊的生物演化过程，才能让知识扎根在他的心血体肤，让他的肉身为此敞开，变成人类和知识的杂交物种。要不然，简直是不可能的。</p></li>

<li><p>显而易见，如此庞大体量的学识储备是很难被归拢整齐的，因而要改换到海绵的形态——这种深海珊瑚生长多年，最终长出不可思议的姿态。这种体量的学识已超过临界量，产生了群聚效应，进入另一种状态——它似乎会繁殖，会增量，会组织复杂的二元形态。不寻常的路径会滋生关联，事情会出现在你万万想不到的地方——就像巴西电视台的肥皂剧，总会惊现亲缘关系：任何人都可能变成另一个人的孩子或丈夫或姐妹。最多人走的路往往是最没有价值的，大家都认为走不通的路反而会成为捷径。在教授的头脑里，多年来都没有意义的事情会突然变成出发点，引出重大的启示，地地道道的范式转移。</p></li>

<li><p>他讲演的时候，脸会发生微妙的变化，好像讲出的词句荡涤了衰老和疲惫。另一张脸孔出现了：双目炯炯，脸颊提升并更紧致。几分钟前那张脸还像戴着面具，但那种令人不悦的感受现已消退。很像服药后产生的变化，小剂量的安非他明。她知道，药效一过——不管是什么药——他的脸又会回到之前的模样，眼睛会失去光泽，身体会瘫软在离他最近的扶手椅里，又会回到她再熟悉不过的那种无助的样子。</p></li>

<li><p>时间里的不同时刻悬停在空间里，就像屏幕一样被某个瞬间点亮；世界是由这些凝固的瞬间组成的，这些伟大的元影像，我们只不过是从一个瞬间跳到另一个罢了。</p></li>

<li><p>在现实中，不存在移动。就像芝诺悖论里的那只乌龟，我们并没有朝向任何地方，就算有所移动，我们也不过是在片刻之内游走，没有尽头，没有任何目的地。</p></li>

<li><p>谈论那些未曾被众所周知的著名书籍记载的小神，那些荷马没有提及、奥维德忽略的小神，那些无法在戏剧或罗曼史中为自己扬名立传的小神，那些不够骇人、不够狡猾、不太有仙气的小神，你只能从岩石的碎片、口耳相传、被焚毁的图书馆仅存的文献里看到他们。但也多亏了这样，他们保存了众所周知的大神们永远失去的东西——神圣的缥缈感，不可捉摸，多变的形态，不可考的血统。他们从阴影里浮现，从无可名状的状态中出现，继而再次屈从于逼近的黑暗。比方说：凯洛斯，总是在线性的人类时间和线性的神的时间——循环的时间——的交汇点显示神力。在空间和时间的交叉点，在瞬间开合的时刻，安置唯一的、正确的、不可重现的机遇。那个时间点，就是从无名之地到无名之地的直线——在那个瞬间——与时间循环的交点。</p></li>

<li><p>然而，裹挟着鲜血的河流泛滥，他头脑中的深红色海洋涨潮般涌起，慢慢地，一片区域接着一片区域被淹没——首当其冲的是欧洲平原，他土生土长之地。一座座城市在水下消失，还有他的祖先们世世代代、想方设法修建的桥梁和水坝。海水漫上他们铺着芦苇屋顶的家宅的门槛，贸然地闯入屋内。海水推开那些石材地板的红色地毯，冲刷每周六都有人擦洗的厨房地板，最终，浸熄了壁炉里的火焰，占据了橱柜，涌上了桌面。接着，海水灌入让教授周游世界的火车站和机场。他游历过的城镇都没入水下，他曾暂住的小街租屋，他曾留宿的廉价旅店，他曾用餐的小饭馆。现在，微光摇曳的红色海水游到了他最喜欢的图书馆，浸没了最低的那层书架，书页膨胀，包括封面上印着他名字的那些书。红色的水舌舔过文字，黑色的印刷体消融得干干净净。地板被浸成了红色，还有他曾走上走下、为他的孩子们攒齐毕业证明的楼梯，还有他在接受教授职称的典礼上走过的长廊。红色水渍也漫上了床单，那是他和凯伦第一次相拥而卧，解开束带，彼此袒露苍老而笨拙的身体的地方。这黏稠的液体将他的钱包夹层永久封存，那是他放信用卡、机票和孙辈照片的地方。水流漫过火车站、铁轨、机场、跑道——再也不会有飞机在此起落，再也不会有驶向任何目的地的列车出发。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="最终的时刻表">最终的时刻表</h3>

<ul>
<li>尤其是肾脏，独具一格，特别吸睛，像一颗领受了地下女神赐福的大菜豆。</li>
</ul>

<h3 id="登机">登机</h3>

<ul>
<li><p>事实上，有很多像我们这样把事物写下来的人。我们不让彼此互相看到，我们不让目光离开自己的鞋子。我们只是把对方写下来，那才是最安全的沟通方式，最安全的传输方式；我们互为互文，把对方转换为文字和大写字母，让彼此永生，将彼此塑化，将彼此浸没在福尔马林溶液般的长篇短句里</p></li>

<li><p>天使般美好的空乘人员检查一番，确保我们可以出发，然后，用一种善意的手势欢迎我们踏入铺着地毯、弧度柔和的通道，由此登机，迈入一条冷峻的空中道路，通向崭新的世界。她们的笑容里隐含着一种承诺——我们因此深受震撼——也许，现在的我们有了焕然重生的机会，这一次，会在正确的时间，正确的地点。</p></li>
</ul>

<h3 id="译后记">译后记</h3>

<ul>
<li>托卡尔丘克曾对中国记者特别提到：“现实主义写法不足以描述这个世界，因为人在世界上的体验必然承载更多，包括情感、直觉、困惑、奇异的巧合、怪诞的情境以及幻想。通过写作，我们应该稍微突破这种所谓的理性主义，并用这种方式去反过来强化它。我们生活在一个不断给人惊喜、不可预知的世界。我所理解的写作是一种拉伸运动，它拉伸着我们的经验，超越它们，建立起一个更广阔的意识。我喜欢把现实与幻想糅在一起，但我也写了基于十八世纪事实基础的历史小说。”</li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Serenity prayer and Irish coffee</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2019/06/myserenityprayer/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2019/06/myserenityprayer/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <blockquote>
<p>God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,<br />
Courage to change the things I can,<br />
And wisdom to know the difference.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Give me coffee to change the things I can,<br />
Alcohol to accept those that I cannot,<br />
And I mix them together if I don&rsquo;t know the difference.</p>

<p>── Dedicated to one of my favourite drinks, Irish coffee</p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>分裂| Schism</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2018/06/schism/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <author>Hete Zen</author>
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/writings/2018/06/schism/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <p>线上线下<br />
墙内墙外<br />
分裂出至少四个<br />
截然不同的世界</p>

<p>被蒙住的眼<br />
被捂住的口<br />
被堵住的耳<br />
被隔断的时空<br />
破碎的你和我</p>

<p>Online, offline<br />
Inside, outside<br />
Split up into at least four<br />
completely different worlds</p>

<p>Plugged ears<br />
Blindfolded Eyes<br />
Muffled mouths<br />
Separated time, isolated space<br />
Broken us</p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>About</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/about/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/about/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <ul>
<li>Email: hetezen@gmail.com</li>
</ul>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Tags</title>
      <link>https://hetezen.netlify.app/tag/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://hetezen.netlify.app/tag/</guid>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[
        <p><a href="../tags/literature/">literature|文学</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/science/">science|科学</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/scifi/">scifi|科幻</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/philosophy/">philosophy|哲学</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/sociology/">sociology|社会学</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/history/">history|历史</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/biography/">biography|人物传记</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/negotiation/">negotiation|谈判</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/psychology/">psychology|心理学</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/classics/">classics|经典</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/selfhelp/">self help</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/feminism/">feminism|女性主义</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/women/">women|女性</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/novel/">novel|小说</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/essay/">essay|文章</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/shortstory/">short story|短篇小说</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/poland/">Poland|波兰</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/北欧/">北欧</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="../tags/治愈/">治愈</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

        
        ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    
    
  </channel>
</rss>
