黃軍禮網誌│中國會因馬航事件與馬來西亞交惡嗎?

夏瑋騏

-小英國人

《小英國人》,顧名思義,是小英國人。正因這個「小」字,才可看「大」;有如法國印象派畫家德加(Edgar Degas)站於房間邊陲繪畫,造就其名作《芭蕾舞課》(La Classe de Danse),方知得到最大視野,往往需經歷練,一切從小角開始。

夏瑋騏網誌│彭定康的預言

2014-3-29 09:52
字體: A A A

不用多說,末代港督彭定康勳爵訪港,喚起不少港人的「戀英情意結」。當中有人揮舞英國國旗、播放英國國歌,更有人見到他的真身後,忍不著熱淚盈眶。此情此景,彭定康毫不動容,斷言一國兩制會實施到2047年,換句說,就是香港不能回復英治。特區米已成炊、人有夢醒時分,一眾高登「巴打」知悉其言後,彷彿雷電交加,手上的英國國民(海外)護照,頓時變成廢紙。

此時法國作家普魯斯特(Marcel Proust)的一句正好說明:「似水年華,往事不過是一片腦海幻象。」(註一)不錯,懷念是因為現在痛苦,而「歸英」亦似乎自作多情。對此,彭定康不想多談,強調自己是以牛津大學校監身份出席活動,表面看似冷酷無情,但還記得筆者早前提過的「我永遠都會」嗎?彭定康其實廿年前已經看穿了香港回歸後的局勢,在辭行前特別埋下錦囊,為港人度身訂造了一個萬用急救箱。

近年傳媒拆解時局,往往斷章取義,引述彭定康於1996年在《施政報告》的結語:「我不擔心北京干預香港的自主;我最怕是香港有人自動獻媚,將自主權逐一抵押出去。」(註二)不過這幾十字僅道出他對香港的憂慮。事實上彭定康是有補充的:「如果港人想有自主權,那麼則需要每人挺身捍衞——不論你是商人、政客、記者、學者,抑或是其他社會權貴,還有我們的公務員。」(註三)。

如此一來,經過李慧玲、劉進圖、鍾庭耀事件以後,正好契合彭定康說的「香港會在亂局中成長」(Hong Kong will take tomorrow by storm),這亦是他在回歸前可以預見的:「港人的優良特質、信念與理想,不僅奠定了今天的基業,而且必會繼續為香港開創美好的明天。」(註四)

更甚,是彭定康在1997《香港年報》撰寫的〈香港歷史〉文章,現在重讀卻更顯神來之筆:「儘管這(殖民)政府已幾乎由本地人組成,但較諸『港人治港』(如果名符其實的話),它始終不是「人民的政府」。不過當我離開香港時,大家便有機會看清楚,殖民地統治一頁撕去後,究竟留下甚麼?不是壯志未酬、意識對抗和怒火怨忿的沸騰景像,而是一個發展成熟、均衡和諧的社會。」(註五)

然後文章末段,他以廟街相士的姿態,如先知般告戒港人:「事實上,沒有人可以忘記過去。如果今天參與譜寫香港歷史的人,只懂回憶過去,而漠視現況,對香港以至其他方面都會極之不幸。回顧歷史令人忐忑不安,但更大的害處,不是因為把歷史忘記,而是把歷史當作意識形態的工具,試圖修補已發展的史實。與其這樣,倒不如敞開胸懷,把握現在,排解紛爭,開創新猷。」(註六)

世事都讓彭督看透,讀到如斯好的文章,比起那些「方方面面」、「加大力度」、「一籃子」之類的匪語,猶如遇上一池碧水。可惜彭定康早已遠去,人去樓空,剩下是一座孤城。「人窮則反本」,沒有辦法,有時候人要屢歷失去,才會學懂珍惜,是以理解,或許這就是當天趕在彭定康背後那撮揮旗的人的內心掙扎。「Hong Kong will take tomorrow by storm」道出了民主化過程難以避免的陣痛;走筆至此,我對於彭定康的「預言」沒有補充,還待讀者自行細味。

註一:Remembrance of things past is not necessarily the remembrance of things as they were.

註二:My anxiety is not that this community’s autonomy would be usurped by Peking, but that it could be given away bit by bit by some people in Hong Kong.

註三:If we in Hong Kong want our autonomy, then it needs to be defended and asserted by everyone here – by businessmen, politicians, journalists, academics and other community leaders, as well as by public servants.

註四:The qualities, the beliefs, the ideals that have made Hong Kong’s present will still be here to shape Hong Kong’s future.

註五:To ask China to forget the colonial episode is no more realistic than to expect local people to have any deep commitment to a colonial administration, an administration that, despite near-complete localisation, could never become “our government” in the way that “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong” might do if the words are allowed to mean what they say. But when the convenient paper target of the last veneer of colonial rule is peeled away with my departure at midnight on the 30th of June, there is an opportunity to look afresh at what lies underneath. And what is that? Not some seething pot of repressed ambitions, conflicting ideologies and burning grievances, but a mature, well-balanced society.

註六:It would be a tragedy for far more than Hong Kong if anyone who has a hand in shaping Hong Kong’s history today is blinded to that by remembrance of things past. Looking back at history can be an uncomfortable experience at the best of times, but the dangers come not from forgetting but from making history a tool of ideology, from attempts to rectify a past that is already fixed, rather than to respond open-heartedly to what the present has to offer, to welcome reconciliation and the building of new things.

所有博客及專欄文章只代表作者本人意見,並不代表本報立場。
請支持我們持續發展,透過PayPal或其他方法贊助我們!
金額:
分類:|發表於2014年3月29日 上午9:52

發表評論

讀取中…
擇宅藍網誌│低價賣地的啟示