Many of the young people in China are still too simpleminded that they are easily irritated, as far as they are allowed to be. When they are thrown into a fury with something like that CNN's deliberate provoking remarks with the most derogatory terms, their face turn red and their temper get short. They are just angry.
Well, why shouldn't they when they are called 'goons' and 'thugs'! Yet they don't really have a complete tool kit at their disposal for deterring their provoker. Their speech and behaviour are under the scrutiny of an authoritarian government, whose communist sovereignty must have something to do with the inducement of such a stupid irrational attack from that seriously biased American news network. The restrained and subtle way of expressing their anger might be the only option they can comfortably enjoy. Yet quite unexpectedly they seemed to have found another way: sueing the commentator.
Now this long biased news network has done something really wrong to expose one of its anchors' very sick hearts. The 'aristocrats' and elite of the Chinese Communist Party should perhaps do more profound passive reflection, so as to figure out what steps should be taken to improve the nation's image, so that its nationals won't look like thieves or robbers and its officials not goons and thugs any more in front of that kind of ill trained western barking canines which see themselves honest watchdogs.
Now just a tiny little fraction of the Chinese population has got rich, they fly out to the West to rush-purchase the most expensive luxuries; just a tiny little fraction has gone industrialized, cheap Chinese products of poor quality are everywhere; just a tiny little fraction has become obese, prices of foodstuff are rocketing high.
How could those narrow-minded Western barking watchdogs not blame and hate this fast developing China!
The Western attitudes towards China are mixed. But it must be common sense that a chaotic China will surely do more harm than good to the Western world. They want China to change and assimilate gradually, not collapse all on a sudden like the former Soviet Union. Some stupid radical democrats might have gone too extreme. And some insane racists might even want to trample every single Chinese dead, but you can hardly find more than a handful of them in Western countries.
The Olympic Games has surely provided an opportunity for those who oppose Beijing, on both the Tibet issue and also human rights violations, to play rough with it. China has unfortunately remained under authoritarian rule. Yet all those Western challengers may add up but to a small number. If the Chinese Government doesn't commit big mistakes in Tibet, the majority of the Western nations, most of which have a democratic government, won't bother to stand on high ground of ethics to condemn it.
Though still a non-democratic nation, whose communist government the U.S. neoconservatives would always instinctively want to help overthrow whenever there is a possibility, China has so far kept friends with most of the nations in the world. This is one of the reasons why it has accumulated an astronomical foreign exchange reserve. Some very narrow-minded racists in the U.S. simply see the accumulation their money. They can do nothing about that but think the Chinese are thieves.
If China is not capable of making cheap stuff, which CNN's Jack Cafferty called junk, for so many countries other than the U.S., the U.S. - China trade deficit simply wouldn't exist. Then that angry Jack could have no time to attack China, for his badly-off fellow Americans would make headlines everyday for not being able to afford expensive stuff in Wal-Mart.
2008/04/25
2008/04/16
CNN's got an insane commentator
The CNN commentator by the name of Jack Cafferty is no doubt not a real and complete racist, he sounds much less than being one. Nor is he anti-Chinese, he is too timid to admit he is.
His hatred towards the Chinese as a nation with a communist government made him say the following:
"Well, I don't know if China is any different, but our relationship with China is certainly different. We're in hock to the Chinese up to our eyeballs because of the war in Iraq, for one thing. They're holding hundreds of billions of dollars worth of our paper. We also are running hundred of billions of dollars worth of trade deficits with them, as we continue to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food and export, you know, jobs to places where you can pay workers a dollar a month to turn out the stuff that we're buying from Wal-Mart. So I think our relationship with China has certainly changed. I think they're basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years."
He later said he was referring to the Chinese Government and not to the Chinese people or Chinese Americans. The Chinese Americans seemed to be content with his clarification.
There is no doubt this extremely narrow-minded guy was referring to the nation under communist rule as he was saying 'for the last 50 years'. But such strong evil hatred shown is certainly not confined to referring only to the Chinese Government. How could he be that benevolent!
The Chinese Government, no matter how thuggish it might seem to this stupid guy, deserves an apology from the CNN.
As a Chinese I'd rather not demand an apology from such an insane being. How would one expect a mad dog to say sorry for its foolish barking!
His hatred towards the Chinese as a nation with a communist government made him say the following:
"Well, I don't know if China is any different, but our relationship with China is certainly different. We're in hock to the Chinese up to our eyeballs because of the war in Iraq, for one thing. They're holding hundreds of billions of dollars worth of our paper. We also are running hundred of billions of dollars worth of trade deficits with them, as we continue to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food and export, you know, jobs to places where you can pay workers a dollar a month to turn out the stuff that we're buying from Wal-Mart. So I think our relationship with China has certainly changed. I think they're basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years."
He later said he was referring to the Chinese Government and not to the Chinese people or Chinese Americans. The Chinese Americans seemed to be content with his clarification.
There is no doubt this extremely narrow-minded guy was referring to the nation under communist rule as he was saying 'for the last 50 years'. But such strong evil hatred shown is certainly not confined to referring only to the Chinese Government. How could he be that benevolent!
The Chinese Government, no matter how thuggish it might seem to this stupid guy, deserves an apology from the CNN.
As a Chinese I'd rather not demand an apology from such an insane being. How would one expect a mad dog to say sorry for its foolish barking!
2008/04/14
2008/04/12
奧林匹克精神
為了迎接奧林匹克運動會，我國首都市民學禮貌，練英語，戒吐痰，減污染。 舉辦這四年一度的世界盛會，不管怎麼說，於首都市民而言，在文明進階的步速上，肯定會起到史無前例的促進作用；它也給了我國領導人，一次再好不過的機會，在主動接受西方文化衝激的同時，被動地學習在政治思想和行為上，朝著和西方價值接軌的方向，走上不歸路。
雖說我有聖人教誨：君子和而不同；雖說我有特別國情，決不全盤西化；雖說我還只是一個發展中國家，各等教育尚未充分普及；可這西方就是不管，它就是鍥而不捨地全方位向我猛攻，誓要迫我歸順，向我強掗西方價值，要求一切符合西方標準。
際此盛會的序曲已經奏起，奧運火炬正在境外傳遞，沒想到這藏獨分子竟然內外呼應，到處鬧騰，弄得事件頻仍，日日新鮮，各方天天對罵，惡言相向！
西藏問題既是政治軍事問題，也是民族、文化問題，又是社會、經濟、教育問題，更是宗教問題，而且是共產黨和達賴喇嘛之間的問題，真是再複雜沒有了！
藏獨分子的目的非常簡單，就是要西藏獨立於中國之外；而西方朝野，一般比較現實，雖然感情上多半同情藏獨，焦點卻大致只在人權。
客觀言之，無論在民主或人權上，中國與一般西方標準距離尚遠，觀點歧異巨大。 這麼一來，在今天的國際政治經濟形勢下，隨著藏區的對外開放，就只能給西藏問題平添複雜性，在中央政府對西藏自治區的管治上，就只能增加重重的困難。加之過去統治失誤造成的舊恨難忘，而近年由經濟發展產生的社會矛盾又不斷積累，僧俗兩界的排漢情緒，和對中央的抗拒，難免一觸即發，一瀉千里。
要認真探討西藏問題，並不容易。 如果從未虔誠信奉那位超脫輪迴，代代轉世的大海上師為領袖，又不絕對遵奉社會主義共和國中央政府的神聖和權威，強行論之，那就一定難以確知從何談起，無可避免信口雌黃了。 看來，這不好說了，還是談談那敵對雙方都會引用的所謂「奧運精神」吧。
說到奧運，儘管排除國際政治的干擾，回歸到選手們單純的競技層面，也就三天三夜說不完了！ 這裏必得再簡而化之，只說奧運金牌，而且只說賽跑的金牌吧。
如果你是一位百米賽跑男選手，今年到北京去參加奧運，在決賽上跑個9.85秒的成績，大抵取得金牌的機會就很高了。可是，倘若你的同伴選手跑得竟然跟你一般快，並且在起跑反應上以0.175秒把你的0.186秒比了下去，結果跑出一個9.84秒的成績，那麼你就要輸給他了。
這0.01秒，也就是千分之1.015的差異，就足以定輸贏，就足以叫人飲恨終身，也必須以此定輸贏，必須以此叫有些想不通的選手飲恨終身，我看，這才是奧林匹克精神的真諦！ 因此，為了勝利，不惜一切，賽前服藥的普遍現象，久矣是人神共知的事實。 當然你要用得高明，你要用得先進，別讓精密的儀器檢測出來，否則金牌被褫，你的奧運精神就難免隨之渙散了。
雖說我有聖人教誨：君子和而不同；雖說我有特別國情，決不全盤西化；雖說我還只是一個發展中國家，各等教育尚未充分普及；可這西方就是不管，它就是鍥而不捨地全方位向我猛攻，誓要迫我歸順，向我強掗西方價值，要求一切符合西方標準。
際此盛會的序曲已經奏起，奧運火炬正在境外傳遞，沒想到這藏獨分子竟然內外呼應，到處鬧騰，弄得事件頻仍，日日新鮮，各方天天對罵，惡言相向！
西藏問題既是政治軍事問題，也是民族、文化問題，又是社會、經濟、教育問題，更是宗教問題，而且是共產黨和達賴喇嘛之間的問題，真是再複雜沒有了！
藏獨分子的目的非常簡單，就是要西藏獨立於中國之外；而西方朝野，一般比較現實，雖然感情上多半同情藏獨，焦點卻大致只在人權。
客觀言之，無論在民主或人權上，中國與一般西方標準距離尚遠，觀點歧異巨大。 這麼一來，在今天的國際政治經濟形勢下，隨著藏區的對外開放，就只能給西藏問題平添複雜性，在中央政府對西藏自治區的管治上，就只能增加重重的困難。加之過去統治失誤造成的舊恨難忘，而近年由經濟發展產生的社會矛盾又不斷積累，僧俗兩界的排漢情緒，和對中央的抗拒，難免一觸即發，一瀉千里。
要認真探討西藏問題，並不容易。 如果從未虔誠信奉那位超脫輪迴，代代轉世的大海上師為領袖，又不絕對遵奉社會主義共和國中央政府的神聖和權威，強行論之，那就一定難以確知從何談起，無可避免信口雌黃了。 看來，這不好說了，還是談談那敵對雙方都會引用的所謂「奧運精神」吧。
說到奧運，儘管排除國際政治的干擾，回歸到選手們單純的競技層面，也就三天三夜說不完了！ 這裏必得再簡而化之，只說奧運金牌，而且只說賽跑的金牌吧。
如果你是一位百米賽跑男選手，今年到北京去參加奧運，在決賽上跑個9.85秒的成績，大抵取得金牌的機會就很高了。可是，倘若你的同伴選手跑得竟然跟你一般快，並且在起跑反應上以0.175秒把你的0.186秒比了下去，結果跑出一個9.84秒的成績，那麼你就要輸給他了。
這0.01秒，也就是千分之1.015的差異，就足以定輸贏，就足以叫人飲恨終身，也必須以此定輸贏，必須以此叫有些想不通的選手飲恨終身，我看，這才是奧林匹克精神的真諦！ 因此，為了勝利，不惜一切，賽前服藥的普遍現象，久矣是人神共知的事實。 當然你要用得高明，你要用得先進，別讓精密的儀器檢測出來，否則金牌被褫，你的奧運精神就難免隨之渙散了。
On THE MOON AND SIXPENCE by W.S. Maugham
Many believe that Maugham was inspired by the life of the French primitivist Paul Gauguin to create Strickland, who deserts his wealth, his wife and young daughter to live his second life embracing painting. Even hunger and leprosy cannot deter him from pursuing his ultimate artistic goal till his last days.
According to the story told, Maugham the author doesn't seem to perceive much of his protagonist, and he also seems not to pretend he does. Much less still does he tell about those two poor women who irrationally adore the extremely selfish and egoistic painter.
Could it be that Maugham chooses to avoid telling what he actually is aware about all that, just like he deliberately doesn't give a clue for how the MOON up there should have something to do with a SIXPENCE down here?
I would boldly guess, if Maugham were not homosexual, and were much older when he wrote the novel, he'd rather let the heterosexual Strickland himself tell his own story than that ME do the task with quite limited capability.
The Dutchman's English wife who is spellbound and the Tahitian teen girl who likes white men are both no more than a means by which Strickland achieves temporary settlement of his uncontrollable, yet very artistic urges. Such urges definitely have something to do with the basic male animal instinct of reproduction, of which he has already had substantial outcome with his wife of an Indian blood. She has born him a beautiful daughter who must be really beautiful.
To this genius, a real whole woman of flesh and soul is primitive and raw, and the meaning of such would become null once the superficial beauty of the body has been transferred onto the canvas of primitivism, absolutely superficially with rawness of course, through his primeval senses and sophisticated, yet seriously distorting artistic perceptions.
Yet to the eyes of an absolute artistic beholder, the image of a naked woman on a canvas is anything but skin-deep, it has to have three souls, namely that of the object woman, that of the painter, and that of the beholder; while the real woman has only one, normally with characteristics and defects that can hardly be transferred onto the canvas by applying paints.
It happens that the ordinary, normal Dutchman is capable of perceiving a very prodigious genius through Strickland's paintings. But he has no idea about the great artist's soaking in certain incomprehensible senses and perceptions. He is fascinated with the spectacular works of the artist in terms of the light reflecting from the canvas, yet he doesn't see the very source of creativity hidden deep in the mind of this very masculine human being, in the forms of humble bio-molecules.
Deep inside this singular Strickland, the reproduction instinct is ornamented and diverted to an extent that certain irrelevant things, or beings, such as the moon, or a coconut tree, etc. could be perceived as something extremely appealing with the strong instinctive effect of sexual interest. His sensuality is subconsciously switched to such irrelevant objects, more or less in a sexual fetishistic manner with either heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual nature. Such subconscious diversion might have come from certain intricate implications from God knows where and of God knows what kinds. It is simply untold to the readers. Maugham had never studied modern psychology, I guess.
As Strickland cannot actually have simple intimacy with the moon or a coconut tree, painting them like he does the female body is the furthest he can go, and also the only one-way relationship he can actually enjoy with the object as a form of sensuality.
It seems that Strickland would paint whatever nude female body he can take. The three women are of no significance at all in terms of the inspiration of the rather insane yet extremely artistic behaviour of the primitivist. He has been very much self-inspired. Unlike Maugham and Gauguin, his creativity is very much original.
I would boldly suggest that this genius might even have an incestuous desire for painting his own lovely young daughter nude. This might be the only plausible reason that perfectly justifies his leaving abruptly his wife and daughter for good as though he hates them so very much, giving such an extremely absurd yet simple reason that he wants to paint! Fractions of his consciousness and morals might still have prevented him from doing something too destructive to his wife and daughter. And this could be something Maugham, if he is subtly aware of, doesn't want to explicate. He simply leaves it to the readers for guessing, together with the puzzling title consisting of two round objects some 300 thousand kilometres apart.
Now we know that Maugham the author was homosexual. He could be no more empathetic for Strickland, than that clubfooted Philip Carey in his other novel OF HUMAN BONDAGE. Strickland and Carey are both heterosexual. If a man's sexual interest is oriented not to the fair sex so as to serve Mother Nature's purpose, I would speculate, he could have more empathy for a person who admires the beauty of a sixpence as exactly he does that of the bright full moon.
OF HUMAN BONDAGE's Carey's deformity in the eyes of the vulgar Mildred, which is believed by many to correspond to the author's homosexuality, is unspeakable to the medical 'stoodent' himself, so is Strickland's real reason for abandoning his wife and daughter altogether.
According to the story told, Maugham the author doesn't seem to perceive much of his protagonist, and he also seems not to pretend he does. Much less still does he tell about those two poor women who irrationally adore the extremely selfish and egoistic painter.
Could it be that Maugham chooses to avoid telling what he actually is aware about all that, just like he deliberately doesn't give a clue for how the MOON up there should have something to do with a SIXPENCE down here?
I would boldly guess, if Maugham were not homosexual, and were much older when he wrote the novel, he'd rather let the heterosexual Strickland himself tell his own story than that ME do the task with quite limited capability.
The Dutchman's English wife who is spellbound and the Tahitian teen girl who likes white men are both no more than a means by which Strickland achieves temporary settlement of his uncontrollable, yet very artistic urges. Such urges definitely have something to do with the basic male animal instinct of reproduction, of which he has already had substantial outcome with his wife of an Indian blood. She has born him a beautiful daughter who must be really beautiful.
To this genius, a real whole woman of flesh and soul is primitive and raw, and the meaning of such would become null once the superficial beauty of the body has been transferred onto the canvas of primitivism, absolutely superficially with rawness of course, through his primeval senses and sophisticated, yet seriously distorting artistic perceptions.
Yet to the eyes of an absolute artistic beholder, the image of a naked woman on a canvas is anything but skin-deep, it has to have three souls, namely that of the object woman, that of the painter, and that of the beholder; while the real woman has only one, normally with characteristics and defects that can hardly be transferred onto the canvas by applying paints.
It happens that the ordinary, normal Dutchman is capable of perceiving a very prodigious genius through Strickland's paintings. But he has no idea about the great artist's soaking in certain incomprehensible senses and perceptions. He is fascinated with the spectacular works of the artist in terms of the light reflecting from the canvas, yet he doesn't see the very source of creativity hidden deep in the mind of this very masculine human being, in the forms of humble bio-molecules.
Deep inside this singular Strickland, the reproduction instinct is ornamented and diverted to an extent that certain irrelevant things, or beings, such as the moon, or a coconut tree, etc. could be perceived as something extremely appealing with the strong instinctive effect of sexual interest. His sensuality is subconsciously switched to such irrelevant objects, more or less in a sexual fetishistic manner with either heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual nature. Such subconscious diversion might have come from certain intricate implications from God knows where and of God knows what kinds. It is simply untold to the readers. Maugham had never studied modern psychology, I guess.
As Strickland cannot actually have simple intimacy with the moon or a coconut tree, painting them like he does the female body is the furthest he can go, and also the only one-way relationship he can actually enjoy with the object as a form of sensuality.
It seems that Strickland would paint whatever nude female body he can take. The three women are of no significance at all in terms of the inspiration of the rather insane yet extremely artistic behaviour of the primitivist. He has been very much self-inspired. Unlike Maugham and Gauguin, his creativity is very much original.
I would boldly suggest that this genius might even have an incestuous desire for painting his own lovely young daughter nude. This might be the only plausible reason that perfectly justifies his leaving abruptly his wife and daughter for good as though he hates them so very much, giving such an extremely absurd yet simple reason that he wants to paint! Fractions of his consciousness and morals might still have prevented him from doing something too destructive to his wife and daughter. And this could be something Maugham, if he is subtly aware of, doesn't want to explicate. He simply leaves it to the readers for guessing, together with the puzzling title consisting of two round objects some 300 thousand kilometres apart.
Now we know that Maugham the author was homosexual. He could be no more empathetic for Strickland, than that clubfooted Philip Carey in his other novel OF HUMAN BONDAGE. Strickland and Carey are both heterosexual. If a man's sexual interest is oriented not to the fair sex so as to serve Mother Nature's purpose, I would speculate, he could have more empathy for a person who admires the beauty of a sixpence as exactly he does that of the bright full moon.
OF HUMAN BONDAGE's Carey's deformity in the eyes of the vulgar Mildred, which is believed by many to correspond to the author's homosexuality, is unspeakable to the medical 'stoodent' himself, so is Strickland's real reason for abandoning his wife and daughter altogether.
2008/04/02
粵文七律—清明節近有感並序
序
嗰頭啱啱過佐年，一斬眼到清明邊。 唐詩有云，「清明時節雨紛紛」。 落雨，係春季常規氣象。 但係根據「香港天文台」嘅「天氣預測」，今歲節期當日，展望樂觀，大概冇乜機會落雨。 郊遊拜山，適值良辰。
既近掃墓時節，自然諗起墳場。 香港地小人稠，墳場處處，雖無國家公墓或者革命陵園之類嘅勝景，但有別具風格，環境幽雅嘅細塊墓地，散處香港各區。其中赤柱軍人墳場早成遊覽景點，頗受歡迎，大概因為位於市郊，交通方便，環境幽美恬靜。 呢片墳場終年吸引不少遊人，尤其係情侶。沙灘漫步之後，燭光晚餐之前，偶爾流連此中，倚碑依偎，除鞋踏青，你都咪話唔浪漫！
位於跑馬地，亦即係「快活谷」，毗鄰鬧市嘅天主教聖彌額爾墳場，亦都堪稱遠近聞名。佢之所以出名，除佐有幾位名人安息其中，同埋場內藝術氣氛濃厚，宗教雕像林立，仲有就係墳場入口嗰對門聯，乍睇一讀，足以令人赫然醒覺：「今夕吾軀歸故土，他朝君體也相同。」
愚意認為，此聯實未盡善，略有催人入園，早投主懷嘅意味。 若從對聯結構嘅角度嚟睇，兩句末尾亦對得唔多工整。上句「歸故土」，下句「也相同」，明顯唔係幾對得埋欄喎。另外，「故土」一詞，並非直解「泥土」，而係「故鄉」嘅意思。此義自唐以來未有改變。 我估，埋葬喺裏便嘅全部墓主人，怕者都冇乜邊個嘅「故土」，會係香港快活谷；亦大概唔會只係暫埋本地，等住他日歸葬故鄉。 另外，靈柩入土，多數選擇日光日白嘅吉時，絕少會喺夜晚，「今夕」一詞，似乎唔夠貼切嘞。 如果我係當年題寫門聯嗰位神父，或者我會噉寫法：
「今日吾軀歸土穴，他朝君魄住天堂。」
噉樣一嚟，除佐提醒生命無常，亦附帶幾分略有靈性嘅鼓勵。贈人以良好祝願，誰曰不宜？ 當然，必須強調，噉講只不過係鼓勵，最終上唔上得到天堂，人人都知道，要自己先做好，再等天主嚟話事。
嗐呀，扯到去邊度？要返入正題至得啦！ 講番香港最大嘅墳場：和合石。 和合石其實唔係一個單一嘅墳場，而係包括好幾個墳區或者獨立墓園嘅墳山，其中「浩園」安葬殉職公務員，「景仰園」安葬因見義勇為而犧牲嘅市民。 浩園環境幽美，有保安員巡察，園名取「浩氣長存」之意，但係比起有孫中山先生「浩氣長存」親筆題匾，名列「全國第一批重點文物保護單位」嘅廣州黃花崗七十二烈士墓園，就清靜好多咯。
舊年我去黃花崗，購票入園，竟然聽到林木之中，傳嚟陣陣粵劇練腔之聲，此起彼落，不絕於耳；碑亭之下，更有老漢赤腳歪坐，放聲爭論，興致方酣，旁若無人。
當然，和合石嘅浩園能保清靜，只在平日，一旦到佐清明前後、重九左近，怕者真係唔只喧嘩雜遝咁簡單，仲會搞到隨地垃圾，污糟邋遢添。 拜祭先人之後，盡興墳山短逗留，喺涼亭之下，赤膊斬燒豬，咿牙嚓雞髀，開襟飲汽水，棟腳嘆涼啤，自然就唔在話下咯。不過個亭真係好細咖咋，先到者先得，遲嚟要排隊。
個浩園尚且如此，山上其餘墳區，就更係一句講完：不堪入目！ 所有墓地，似乎一向冇人清理。 好多孝子賢孫，對於保持墓地清潔，毫無意識。 任何廢物，隨手拋棄。膠樽膠袋、發泡膠盒、紙碟紙杯、即棄筷子、紙巾，仲有元寶蠟燭、衣紙冥鈔嘅火後殘留碎屑，真係琳瑯滿目乜都有！ 呢啲廢物年年累積，歲歲增加，冇人見到會作嘔，政府無須去清理，聽任徑旁草中，自然分解，五十年如一日！
清明祭祖拜山時，是否真誠邊個知！
往日捱窮爭的士，今朝暴發坐奔馳！
燒豬美點墳前嚓，膠袋空樽墓側遺。
垃圾琳瑯唔覺眼，無心放火未為衰。
嗰頭啱啱過佐年，一斬眼到清明邊。 唐詩有云，「清明時節雨紛紛」。 落雨，係春季常規氣象。 但係根據「香港天文台」嘅「天氣預測」，今歲節期當日，展望樂觀，大概冇乜機會落雨。 郊遊拜山，適值良辰。
既近掃墓時節，自然諗起墳場。 香港地小人稠，墳場處處，雖無國家公墓或者革命陵園之類嘅勝景，但有別具風格，環境幽雅嘅細塊墓地，散處香港各區。其中赤柱軍人墳場早成遊覽景點，頗受歡迎，大概因為位於市郊，交通方便，環境幽美恬靜。 呢片墳場終年吸引不少遊人，尤其係情侶。沙灘漫步之後，燭光晚餐之前，偶爾流連此中，倚碑依偎，除鞋踏青，你都咪話唔浪漫！
位於跑馬地，亦即係「快活谷」，毗鄰鬧市嘅天主教聖彌額爾墳場，亦都堪稱遠近聞名。佢之所以出名，除佐有幾位名人安息其中，同埋場內藝術氣氛濃厚，宗教雕像林立，仲有就係墳場入口嗰對門聯，乍睇一讀，足以令人赫然醒覺：「今夕吾軀歸故土，他朝君體也相同。」
愚意認為，此聯實未盡善，略有催人入園，早投主懷嘅意味。 若從對聯結構嘅角度嚟睇，兩句末尾亦對得唔多工整。上句「歸故土」，下句「也相同」，明顯唔係幾對得埋欄喎。另外，「故土」一詞，並非直解「泥土」，而係「故鄉」嘅意思。此義自唐以來未有改變。 我估，埋葬喺裏便嘅全部墓主人，怕者都冇乜邊個嘅「故土」，會係香港快活谷；亦大概唔會只係暫埋本地，等住他日歸葬故鄉。 另外，靈柩入土，多數選擇日光日白嘅吉時，絕少會喺夜晚，「今夕」一詞，似乎唔夠貼切嘞。 如果我係當年題寫門聯嗰位神父，或者我會噉寫法：
「今日吾軀歸土穴，他朝君魄住天堂。」
噉樣一嚟，除佐提醒生命無常，亦附帶幾分略有靈性嘅鼓勵。贈人以良好祝願，誰曰不宜？ 當然，必須強調，噉講只不過係鼓勵，最終上唔上得到天堂，人人都知道，要自己先做好，再等天主嚟話事。
嗐呀，扯到去邊度？要返入正題至得啦！ 講番香港最大嘅墳場：和合石。 和合石其實唔係一個單一嘅墳場，而係包括好幾個墳區或者獨立墓園嘅墳山，其中「浩園」安葬殉職公務員，「景仰園」安葬因見義勇為而犧牲嘅市民。 浩園環境幽美，有保安員巡察，園名取「浩氣長存」之意，但係比起有孫中山先生「浩氣長存」親筆題匾，名列「全國第一批重點文物保護單位」嘅廣州黃花崗七十二烈士墓園，就清靜好多咯。
舊年我去黃花崗，購票入園，竟然聽到林木之中，傳嚟陣陣粵劇練腔之聲，此起彼落，不絕於耳；碑亭之下，更有老漢赤腳歪坐，放聲爭論，興致方酣，旁若無人。
當然，和合石嘅浩園能保清靜，只在平日，一旦到佐清明前後、重九左近，怕者真係唔只喧嘩雜遝咁簡單，仲會搞到隨地垃圾，污糟邋遢添。 拜祭先人之後，盡興墳山短逗留，喺涼亭之下，赤膊斬燒豬，咿牙嚓雞髀，開襟飲汽水，棟腳嘆涼啤，自然就唔在話下咯。不過個亭真係好細咖咋，先到者先得，遲嚟要排隊。
個浩園尚且如此，山上其餘墳區，就更係一句講完：不堪入目！ 所有墓地，似乎一向冇人清理。 好多孝子賢孫，對於保持墓地清潔，毫無意識。 任何廢物，隨手拋棄。膠樽膠袋、發泡膠盒、紙碟紙杯、即棄筷子、紙巾，仲有元寶蠟燭、衣紙冥鈔嘅火後殘留碎屑，真係琳瑯滿目乜都有！ 呢啲廢物年年累積，歲歲增加，冇人見到會作嘔，政府無須去清理，聽任徑旁草中，自然分解，五十年如一日！
清明祭祖拜山時，是否真誠邊個知！
往日捱窮爭的士，今朝暴發坐奔馳！
燒豬美點墳前嚓，膠袋空樽墓側遺。
垃圾琳瑯唔覺眼，無心放火未為衰。
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)