作品，評論，與評者

"That is what the highest criticism really is, the record of one's own soul." - Oscar Wilde, 'The Critic as Artist'

早前，我與倉海君同為電影評論學會的「說影再生花」節目撰文，討論茨威格（ Stefan Zweig ）小說《陌生女子的來信》（ Letter From an Unknown Woman ）及奧福斯（ Max Ophuls ）的電影改編。

倉海君的文章見此：玫瑰的秘密──讀〈陌生女子的來信〉

拙文見此：《陌生女子的來信》的改編及其他

當時（或者直到而今）我折服於他的博學及清晰思辯，但不同意其觀點，認為原著小說算不上突出。我私下對倉海君說，那是了不起的 creative work ，認為他投射了一些一廂情願的解讀，就如艾柯（ Umberto Eco ）說的利用文本，而非解讀文本。

最近讀完法國文學教授 Pierre Bayard 的 How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read （本書是在 Fremantle 偶然買下，為著題名夠反叛），對倉海君的文章有全新看法。

不要被書名誤導， How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read 不是指南，你也不會學到任何竅門，因為要談論未讀過的書，比談論讀過的書，需要更多智慧，而那智慧，不可能靠讀一兩本書得來。書中羅列小說、電影或現實中各種「談論未看過的書」之情況，其中包括《玫瑰的名字》（ The Name of the Rose ）中威廉瞭如指掌談論他未讀過的阿里士多德之《詩學第二部》，也談及蒙田、巴爾札克、夏目漱石等，例子深而博。本書其實非常刁詭，假如作者未曾讀過他提及的書，又怎能侃侃而談，利用它們作為支持其論點？

應該說，這其實是一部關於閱讀閱讀，或閱讀非閱讀（作者稱為 non-reading ）的後設書籍（？）。他並細分出各種不同程度的「非閱讀」，不過這些都不是重點。

作者的終極目的是解除知識份子的「閱讀」心結，及文明加諸我們身上的對閱讀/書籍的崇拜感，認為不需為未看過某些書而慚愧，因並不妨礙有趣及有創意的討論。歸根結柢，其實令讀者更愛閱讀，也更愛談論書籍，談論閱讀。

最後一節針對文藝評論，引用王爾德（ Oscar Wilde ）的文章，論述文藝評論的終極中心，不是作品，而是評論本身，或進一步說，是作者本身。

以下轉引王爾德 'The Critic as Artist' 的段落


"To an artist so creative as the critic, what does subject-matter signify? No more and no less than it does to the novelist and the painter. Like them, he can find his motives everywhere. Treatment is the test. There is nothing that has not in it suggestion of challenge."

"Nay, more, I would say that the highest Criticism, being the purest form of personal impression, is in its way more creative than creation, as it has least reference to any standard external to itself, and is, in fact, its own reason for existing, and, as the Greeks would put it, in itself, and to itself, an end."

"That is what the highest criticism really is, the record of one's own soul. It is more fascinating than history, as it is concerned simply with oneself. It is more delightful than philosophy, as its subject is concrete and not abstract, real and not vague. It is the only civilised form of autobiography..."

作者補充：

"For the critic, thus, literature or art occupy the same secondary position as nature for the writer or painter. Their function is not to serve as the object of his work, but to stimulate him to write. For the only true object or criticism is not the work it discuss, but itself."

"When you enter a book in order to critique it, you risk losing what is most yourself..."

"In the end, we need not fear lying about the text, but only lying about ourselves"

回到倉海君的文章，因有他對茨威格生平及相關文本的熟悉，其解讀獨到而深層次，同時也因有「他」在其中，成為終極的，自我完成的評論。憑藉 Pierre Bayard 論述的嶄新角度，我現在方得以更全面地欣賞倉海君的評論。