高斯在芝加哥大學舉辦的「中國經濟改革研討會」圓滿地結束了。我不在場，但在場的朋友沒有一個不認為是難得一見的成功研討會議。高斯作結語後，全場站起來鼓掌達三分鐘之久，流淚者眾，而據說高斯自己也熱淚盈眶。是中國經改的三十週年，最成功的研討會竟然在芝加哥出現，可謂異數。沒有誰不同意芝大曆來是學術氣氛最濃厚的重鎮，是此「異數」幫了個大忙吧。不知神州大地要到何年何日才有這樣的學術氣氛呢？在國內搞學術的朋友要客觀地注意一下。炎黃子孫的天賦不下於人，改革三十年，高樓大廈無數，但思想學問還是搞不起！
這次參與芝加哥研討的約半是中國人，出自神州，其中不少算是「土佬」的（一笑），但表現卻非常出色。可見土佬既然有天賦，把他們放在適當的氣氛環境下，上蒼賜予的思想本領就冒出來了。事後高斯有所感慨，說：「如果這次會議見到的中國人有代表性，我再不用替中國憂心了！」
老人家把他的諾貝爾獎金拿出來搞這次研討會議，搏到盡。認識了他四十多年，知道他歷來的執著與堅持，但畢竟是九十七歲了，我不能不捨命陪君子。為該會議提供的開場文稿我用心地寫了一整年，而籌備中的招兵買馬，我插手指導，因為老人家的品味我知得清楚：高斯重視真實世界，要知道中國究竟發生了些什麼事，對不著邊際的理論沒有興趣。為此，我建議多邀請中國的企業家與地區幹部，結果是這兩組人（約佔講話的四成人馬）為該會議增加了無限的光彩。
第一天，老人家清早起床，晩上十一時半才睡覺，電話中顯得很興奮。通常他只能應酬兩三個小時，這次我有點恐怕他會累死了，不斷地催他休息。跟著的幾天他當然不能全日參與，但天天到，靜坐聆聽，感動著年輕的神州學子。這些學子中不少會執筆敘述他們的所見所感，我不多說了。
高斯作了引言，也作了結語。前者是事前用心寫好的；後者只寫了片刻，講時不依文稿，情之所至，隨意地說了些心中話——這是不少人哭了出來的原因。這結語要等他們整理好錄音才能刊登。我徵求得老人家同意，在這裡先刊出他的引言文稿——七月十四日的開場話。前思後想，決定刊登全文，在《信報》發表用不著翻譯了。如下：
I now have the very pleasant task of welcoming you to this Conference on China's Economic Transformation. When Steven Cheung wrote in 1982 his pamphlet for the Institute of Economic Affairs in London on the question 「Will China go capitalist?」 a question that he answered in the affirmative, I was one of the few people who agreed with him. But I thought in terms of 100 or 200 years, not 25 or 30 years. What happened in China was a complete surprise to me, its scale, its character and speed –– which means that I did not understand what was going on. I therefore determined to hold a conference that would uncover the facts about this extraordinary series of events. We sought out those best able to inform us, academics, businessmen, government officials, about the facts about what happened. I think we succeeded. We have a series of fine papers that greatly enlighten us about what has happened in the years since 1978. As we intent to publish an edited version of these papers (and of the discussions) in a book, they will inform a much wider audience. Of course, although we will learn a great deal about what happened, it is not to be expected, although some things will be made clear, that there will be complete agreement in the views expressed –– nor is it desirable that there should be. A subject in which everyone says the same thing is a dead subject and one which will not progress. Competition in the market for ideas is as valuable as in the market for goods. The truth is found as a result of the clash of ideas. And it will be so at this conference.
Our first paper by Steven Cheung will be delivered by him on DVD. It is long (about 2 hours) and I decided to divide it into two parts, each about an hour in length with an interval with refreshments in between. Unfortunately, one of our important discussants, Professor Mundell, will not be able to attend on the first day but will give his views on Tuesday morning. I should explain here that while I speak as though I organized this conference, in fact all I did was to have the idea that such a conference would be a good thing. The actual organization of the conference was carried out by Ning Wang, assisted more recently by Lennon Choy and Marjorie Holme. I have been largely a spectator and admirer of their work. I should also say that, approaching 98 years of age later this year, I get extremely tired and almost certainly will not be able to attend all the sessions. But those who present papers at sessions I do not attend should realize that my absence is in no sense of judgment on the worth of their papers.
I now turn to Steven Cheung's talk. I came to know Steven when he came to Chicago from UCLA in 1967 on a fellowship and was later in 1968 appointed an assistant professor. I don't remember how we met. But when we did, we formed an immediate bond and we had the most enjoyable and productive talks together. Unfortunately for Chicago, he decided to leave Chicago and go to the University of Washington where he had as colleagues Douglass North and Yoram Barzel. However, our relationship did not end and Steve wrote a series of splendid articles published in the Journal of Law and Economics of which I was editor. Then, in 1981, Steve received an offer from the University of Hong Kong. I urged him to accept. I thought it would be a fine place to observe what was happening in China. Just how valuable it would be I did not then realize. But you will learn from his talk what he has gained from his close observation of events in China over the years. I won't hold up this really important talk any longer. So here we have Steven Cheung speaking on China's Economic Transformation.
整篇引言的重點，當然是第一段的最後幾句。太重要了，我要另文申述。這裡刊出全文，是要指出其它兩點，遠為次要的，但中國的學子們要跪下來學習一下。
第一點是九十七歲的高斯，其思想的清晰，推理邏輯的緊密，今天在網上大吵大鬧的青年拍馬也跟不上。為什麼呢？說二三十歲的腦子機能比不上九十七歲的，上帝不會同意吧。那是為什麼？我認為那是起於高斯從小就接受了英國傳統的學問修養，看事客觀，下筆時心平氣和。毫無磨斧痕跡的文字，要寫到這樣才算是真的到家。
第二點是高斯的英文實在好。四十年前以文筆知名天下的夏理·莊遜，清楚地對我說，論英語的文字功力，沒有誰比得上高斯。懂英文的中國人可能認為高斯的文字火花不足，或變化不夠，或瀟灑欠奉，但我是過來人，下過苦功，知道這樣的文字看似平凡，其實高不可攀。直寫、清晰，既不轉彎，也不賣弄，有英國人的幽默（例如第三句），而更重要是誠懇與善意溢於紙上。
年多前讀到香港搞語文教育的專家的文字，不管是中還是英，老實說，讀來不舒服，其它不便多說。看來香港的語文教育要從零開始了。
No comments:
Post a Comment