Years of Poems and Spirits

As much as I believe the credit crunch is over, I found myself still fascinated by the discussions about credit, interest rate, economy and the Fed. I know it is a little silly but I just can’t help it …

Anyway, yet another great article from Grep Ip, “Bernanke Breaks Greenspan Mold”

Key points:
1. Are the two major duties of the Fed–maintaining financial stability and controlling inflation–so intertwined that a disturbance in credit market will necessarily cause chaos in economy?
2. Historically, Fed has been careful not to lower federal fund rates to deal with credit crsis. Instead, the more “technical” tool of easying discount rate was much more preferred.
3. This was the case until Greenspan came along. He drastically lowered fund rates on two occasions: 1987 and 1998.
4. Greenspan’s rationale: when the animal spirit founders, so will the economy. Therefore, it is necessary to use economy emergency kit to stop credit bleeding.
5. The moral hazard criticism, aka the Greenspan Put.

Thoughts:
I have long had the doubt whether a credit crunch would spill over into the larger economy? This can happen if investor capital is the one most critical element in economic growth. But is this true?

I suspect that today’s economy is so diversified and there are so many sources of growth that neither the investor capital nor capital itself dominates the growth trajectory.

First, many companies may finance their cap ex by their own cash reserves. We all heard about how cap ex lagged behind consumer spending since 2001 yet corporate profits has been good for just as long.

Secondly, the injection of cheap labor may change the production equation: instead of relying on capital-intensive technologies, more and more companies find labor substitute a viable solution.

Therefore, even if capital and economy was as intertwined as Greenspan envisioned back then, they may not be so today.

If Ip was somewhat ambiguous of what he thinks, James Surowiecki made his point pretty clear in a recent New Yorker column. Although he made basically the same argument as Ip did, Surowiecki is a bit unfair toward Bernanke by applying the “moral hazard” label on him. If one looks at the Fed’s track record as compiled by Ip, Bernanke is a “strict constructionist”, borrowing a judicial term, in that he is very careful in distinguishing financial market and the larger economy.

Keywords: lust, confusion, Ang Lee, Eileen Chang, Mérimée, Kundera, MacBeth

最近网上常看到关于李安刚刚拍完的《色·戒》，今天好奇读了一些关于电影和张爱玲原作的材料，又读了一遍小说。看完不禁拍案。写得实在出色，短短几页，不禁让我联想起以前读过的梅里美（Prosper Mérimée）的”Mateo Falcone”，昆德拉（Milan Kundera）的 “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”，和莎翁的MacBeth。

小说的高潮是在王佳芝一个人在珠宝店里无声沉思的时候。到了她低声说“快走”时候，实在是“于无声处听惊雷”。但这一个高潮又是多亏了以前几个微妙的铺陈。“偏偏是梁闰生！”简单一个感叹却道出莫名的辛酸：为了能以一个商人妇的身份去接近目标，她不得不把初夜给了同仁中唯一一个嫖过妓的。如果从中国传统文化的角度去看的话，王佳芝的作为完全可以和专诸，荆轲相比，可是作者并没有给她“风萧萧兮易水寒”的待遇，而是天大的事随笔带过。为什么？

也许张爱玲正是想通过这一个扭曲把读者带回到一个非常时期。如果是这样的话，在这个国破家亡的时代，为什么张爱玲又偏偏把一个一身侠气的女子写成一个失败者？最要命的是，王佳芝不光是个失败者，而且是个“自找”的失败者（“这个人是真爱我的，她突然想，心下轰然一声，若有所失。”）？

也许张爱玲是在以周遭的大环境为杠杆，把爱情抬到一个更高的高度？也许爱情是一个不屈的杠杆，找到一个合适的支点，它可以挪动世界？小说中有一段写的也许可供参考，“他们是原始的猎人与猎物的关系，虎与伥的关系，最终极的占有。她这才生是他的人，死是他的鬼。”

不论张爱玲是在为爱情悲歌，还是在感叹爱情背后原始的权力关系，小说写的实在出色。我之所以想到”Mateo Falcone”，是因为这个故事也是写发生在一天的事，复杂背景都通过简洁的旁白和对话传达出来。而且越是惊天动地的事，似乎处理的越平淡。“他一脱险马上一个电话打去，把那一带都封锁起来，一网打尽，不到晚上十点钟统统枪毙了”让我想起Falcone问他的太太，“Do we have a son?” 而看到王佳芝在身负重命的中间，竟然能超脱地回到自我，又让我想起“不可承受的生命之轻”中的主人公，虽然深受当局的折磨，决定不从儿子之请，最终不在声讨信上签名，几乎是“君子有所为，有所不为”的一个后现代的解读。

写到这里，再回头看看，为什么张爱玲起名《色·戒》？李安的电影名为“Lust, Caution”，Lust还可以，Caution也许欠一些深意, 或许Abstention甚至Severance可能更贴切一些？食色性也，任性则为纵欲，纵欲早晚难逃嗔痴 (à la Dangerous Liaisons)， 故而要“戒”。

说道这里，难免想到MacBeth。虽然MacBeth在莎翁著作里算第二梯队，但我对它是一直是情有独钟。MacBeth并不是一开始就想定要弑君篡位，引诱他下水的也不是旷野里的巫婆们，而是他自己。

MacBeth的悲剧不在于他的“野心”。所谓“野心”乃是胜者对败者最后的羞辱。MacBeth对Sovereignty的追求，和其他人对各自梦想的追求没什么区别。他的悲剧在于他下水的过程，Banquo的一段话很点睛：

And often times, to win us to our harm,
The instruments of darkness tell us truths,
Win us with honest trifles, to betray’s
In deepest consequence.

任性则为纵欲，纵欲早晚难逃嗔痴。这恐怕是常理。但如果之所以任性是因为自身以外原因的话，那恐怕算得上是悲剧了。

难道王佳芝是注定要死在一个汉奸的手里吗?而且是为对他的感情自愿去死？对我来说，这正是她的悲剧之所在： 要不是国破家亡的话，王佳芝也许不会看着一个身材矮小的老头子在昏暗台灯下的侧影, 突然感悟到爱情的真谛。国破家亡的日子，既可以成就秋瑾，也可能害死王佳芝。

也许这正是张爱玲的本意？

（幸亏张爱玲“名声在外”，否则我可能会以为又发现了一个宝贝，去读她的全集去了）

Date: late May (or really early June) 2007
Place: Shultzy’s on the Ave
Event: Last gathering of JSIS General International Studies 07 class.

It was a pleasant early summer evening. Later when we left, the sky was blue with a hue of gold color from the street lights. Totally delightful.

Prof. Ken Guy assigned Hobsbawm’s Age of Empire in our first class together. In the introduction, the English historian wrote with nostalgia of the vanishing past.

I feel the same sensation as I am looking at this picture. I probably should write down whatever I remember now.