英文小說連載《朗讀者The Reader》8&9
導讀：教書育人楷模，更好地指導自己的學習，讓自己不斷成長。讓我們一起到本站一起學習吧!下面本站網的小編給你們帶來了《英文小說連載《朗讀者The Reader》8&9》供考生們參考。
英文小說連載《朗讀者The Reader》Part 2 Chapter 8
THE GERMAN version of the book that the daughter had written about her time in the camps did not appear until after the trial. During the trial the manuscript was available， but to those directly involved. I had to read the book in English， an unfamiliar and laborious exercise at the time. And as always， the alien language， unmastered and struggled over， created a strange concatenation of distance and immediacy. I worked through the book with particular thoroughness and yet did not make it my own. It remained as alien as the language itself.
Years later I reread it and discovered that it is the book that creates distance. It does not invite one to identify with it and makes no one sympathetic， neither the mother nor the daughter， nor those who shared their fate in various camps and finally in Auschwitz and the satellite camp near Cracow. It never gives the barracks leaders， the female guards， or the uniformed security force clear enough faces or shapes for the reader to be able to relate to them， to judge their acts for better or worse. It exudes the very numbness I have tried to describe before. But even in her numbness the daughter did not lose the ability to observe and analyze. And she had not allowed herself to be corrupted either by self-pity or by the self-confidence she had obviously drawn from the fact that she had survived and not only come through the years in the camps but given literary form to them. She writes about herself and her pubescent， precocious， and， when necessary， cunning behavior with the same sobriety she uses to describe everything else.
Hanna is neither named in the book， nor is she recognizable or identifiable in any way. Sometimes I thought I recognized her in one of the guards， who was described as young， pretty， and conscientiously unscrupulous in the fulfillment of her duties， but I wasnt sure. When I considered the other defendants， only Hanna could be the guard described. But there had been other guards. In one camp the daughter had known a guard who was called Mare， also young， beautiful， and diligent， but cruel and uncontrolled. The guard in the camp reminded her of that one. Had others drawn the same comparison? Did Hanna know about it? Did she remember it? Was that why she was upset when I compared her to a horse?
The camp near Cracow was the last stop for mother and daughter after Auschwitz. It was a step forward; the work was hard， but easier， the food was better， and it was better to sleep six women to a room than a hundred to a barracks. And it was warmer; the women could forage for wood on the way from the factory to the camp， and bring it back with them. There was the fear of selections， but it wasnt as bad as at Auschwitz. Sixty women were sent back each month， sixty out of around twelve hundred; that meant each prisoner had a life expectancy of twenty months， even if she only possessed average strength， and there was always the hope of being stronger than the average. Moreover， there was also the hope that the war would be over in less than twenty months.
The misery began when the camp was closed and the prisoners set off towards the west. It was winter， it was snowing， and the clothing in which the women had frozen in the factory and just managed to hold out in the camp was completely inadequate， but not as inadequate as what was on their feet， often rags and sheets of newspaper tied so as to stay on when they stood or walked around， but impossible to make withstand long marches in snow and ice. And the women did not just march; they were driven， and forced to run. Death march? asks the daughter in the book， and answers， No， death trot， death gallop. Many collapsed along the way; others never got to their feet again after nights spent in barns or leaning against a wall. After a week， almost half the women were dead.
The church made a better shelter than the barns and walls the women had had before. When they had passed abandoned farms and stayed overnight， the uniformed security force and the female guards had taken the living quarters for themselves. Here， in the almost deserted village， they could commandeer the priests house and still leave the prisoners something more than a barn or a wall. That they did it， and that the prisoners even got something warm to eat in the village seemed to promise an end to the misery. The women went to sleep. Shortly afterwards the bombs fell. As long as the steeple was the only thing burning， the fire could be heard in the church， but not seen. When the tip of the steeple collapsed and crashed down onto the rafters， it took several minutes for the glow of the fire to become visible. By then the flames were already licking downwards and setting clothes alight， collapsing burning beams set fire to the pews and pulpit， and soon the whole roof crashed into the nave and started a general conflagration.
The daughter thinks the women could have saved themselves if they had immediately gotten together to break down one of the doors. But by the time they realized what had happened and was going to happen， and that no one was coming to open the doors， it was too late. It was completely dark when the sound of the falling bombs woke them. For a while they heard nothing but an eerie， frightening noise in the steeple， and kept absolutely quiet， so as to hear the noise better and figure out what it was. That it was the crackling and snapping of a fire， that it was the glow of flames that flared up now and again behind the windows， that the crash above their heads signaled the spreading of the fire from the steeple to the roofall this the women realized only once the rafters began to burn. They realized， they screamed in horror， screamed for help， threw themselves at the doors， shook them， beat at them， screamed.
When the burning roof crashed into the nave， the shell of the walls acted like a chimney. Most of the women did not suffocate， but burned to death in the brilliant roar of the flames. In the end， the fire even burned its glowing way through the ironclad church doors. But that was hours later.
Mother and daughter survived because the mother did the right thing for the wrong reasons. When the women began to panic， she couldnt bear to be among them anymore. She fled to the gallery. She didnt care that she was closer to the flames， she just wanted to be alone， away from the screaming， thrashing， burning women. The gallery was narrow， so narrow that it was barely touched by the burning beams. Mother and daughter stood pressed against the wall and saw and heard the raging of the fire. Next day they didnt dare come down and out of the church. In the darkness of the following night， they were afraid of not finding the stairs and the way out. When they left the church in the dawn of the day after that， they met some of the villagers， who gaped at them in silent astonishment， but gave them clothing and food and let them walk on.
那位女兒寫的關於她在集中營生活的那本書的德文版，在法庭審判結束後纔出版。雖然在法庭審理期間已經有草稿，但是，只有與此案有關的人才能得到。我只好讀英文版的，這對當時的我來說是件非同尋常和頗爲吃力的事情。運用一門尚未完全掌握的外語，總會讓人產生一種特有的若即若離、似是而非的感覺。儘管人們特別仔細認真地讀過那本書，但仍舊沒把它變爲自己的東西。就像對書寫它的這門外語一樣，人們對它的內容也感到陌生。
多年以後，我又重讀了那本書，並且發現，這種距離感是書本身造成的。它沒能讓你從中辨認出任何人，也不使任何人讓你同情，包括那母女倆以及和她們一起在不同的集中營裏呆過，最後在奧斯威辛和克拉科夫遭受了共同命運的那些人。無論是集中營元老、女看守，還是警衛，他們的形象都不鮮明，以致人們無法褒貶他們的行爲。書中充斥着我在前面已經描述過的那種麻木不仁。然而，在這種麻木不仁中，那位女兒並沒有失去記錄和分析事實的能力。她沒有垮下來，她的自憐和由此產生的自覺意識沒有使她垮下來。她活下來了，集中營裏的那幾年，她不但熬過來了，而且還用文學形式又把它再現了出來。她冷靜客觀地描述一切，描寫她自己v她的青春期和她的早熟，如果必要的話還有她的機智。
書中既沒有出現漢娜的名字，也沒有任何東西可以讓人聯想到或辨認出她。有時候，我認爲書中的某一位年輕漂亮的女看守就是漢娜：執行任務時認真到喪盡天良的地步，但是，我又不能肯定。如果我仔細地對照一下其他被告的話，那個女看守又只能是漢娜。但是書中還有其他女看守。在一所集中營裏，那位女兒領教了一位被稱做牡馬的女看守的厲害，她年輕漂亮，俗盡職守，殘酷無情，放蕩不羈，正是這些令作者回憶起了這個集中營裏這一位女看守。其他人也做過這種比喻嗎?漢娜知道這些嗎?當我把她比喻爲一匹馬時，她是不是回想起了這些，因而觸及了她的要害?
克拉科夫集中營是那母女倆去奧斯威辛的最後一站。相比之下，到那裏算是改善。那兒的活雖然繁重，但是生活容易些，伙食好些，而且六個人睡在一個房間總也比上百號人睡在一間臨時搭建的木板房裏要好。房裏也暖和一些，女犯們可以從工廠回集中營的路上撿一些木材帶回來。人們恐怕被挑選出來，但是這種恐懼感也不像在奧斯威辛那樣嚴重。每個月有六十名女犯要被送回去，這六十名是從大約一千二百名中被挑選出來的。這樣一來，人們只需擁有一般體力就有希望繼續活二十個月，而且，人們甚至可以希望其體力超過一般水平。此外，人們也可以期望這場戰爭在不到二十個月的時間裏就會結束。
隨着集中營的被解散和囚犯的西遷，悲慘再次降臨。當時正值隆冬時節，冰天雪地。女囚們身上穿的衣服在工廠裏已是薄不可耐，在集中營裏尚能讓人承受，但是在冰天雪地裏就不足以抵寒了。她們的鞋子就更慘了，它們通常是用破布或報紙做的，這樣的鞋在站立和慢走時還能不散架子，但是在冰天雪地裏進行長途跋涉就不可能不散架子了。那些女人不僅僅要長途跋涉，她們常被驅趕着小跑。向死亡進軍?那位女兒在書中這樣問道並回答道，不，是趕死，是向死亡飛奔!許多人在路上就垮掉了，又有許多人在糧倉裏，或者在一面牆下過夜後就再也爬不起來了。一個星期之後，這些婦女中幾乎一半都死掉了。
教堂要比那些女囚此前的棲身之處糧倉或牆下要好多了。在這之前，當她們經過被遺棄的庭院並在那過夜時，警衛隊和女看守們就分別佔據能住人的房間。但在這裏，一個正在被遺棄的村莊，看守們住進了教士住宅，而讓女囚們住進了一個比糧倉和牆角好得多的教堂裏。她們這樣做了。在村子裏她們甚至還得到了熱湯喝，好像結束這種痛苦不堪的生活變得有希望了。這些婦女就這樣入睡了。隨後不久炸彈就落了下來。教堂的塔尖在燃燒時，在教堂裏面只能聽得見燃燒聲卻看不見火焰。塔尖坍塌並砸到屋架後，又過了幾分鐘纔看得見火光，隨後火焰也一點一點地躥了進來，點燃了衣服。燃燒着的房樑掉下來點燃了座椅和佈道壇。屋架很快塌人大堂，一切都熊熊燃燒了起來。
那位女兒認爲，如果那些女人馬上齊心協力地砸開其中的一扇門的話，她們還是可以得救的。但是當她們明白過來，知道發生了什麼事，什麼事將要發生，以及沒人給她們開門時，爲時已晚。當擊中教堂的炸彈把她們驚醒時，正值漆黑的夜晚，有好一會兒工夫，她們只聽得見塔頂上的一種令人奇怪和驚恐雜音。爲了能更好地聽清楚、弄明白那雜音是怎麼一回事，她們都屏住了呼吸。那是火焰發出劈劈啪啪的聲音，火光時而在窗後閃爍，那是投在她們頭頂上的炸彈，那意味着大火由塔頂蔓延到了房頂，女人們直到屋架上的火焰明顯地看得見的時候，才意識到這些。她們一旦意識到了這些，就開始大喊大叫，她們驚慌失措呼喊救命，向大門衝去，一邊叫喊，一邊拼命地搖撼和捶打着大門。
當燃燒的房頂轟轟隆隆地塌到教堂裏面時，教堂裏面的牆皮脫落下來使火勢更旺，就像一座壁爐一樣。大多數女人並不是窒息而死，而是被熊熊燃燒的大火給活活燒死的。最後，大火甚至燒透、燒紅了教堂的鐵皮大門，不過那是幾個小時之後的事情了。那母女倆能活下來，完全是僥倖。當那些女人陷入驚慌失措時，她們也在其中。由於實在無法忍受，她們逃到了教堂的廊臺上。儘管她們在那兒離火焰更近，但是這無所謂，她們只想單獨呆着，遠離那些吱哇亂叫的、擠來又擠去的、渾身上下着火的女人。廊臺上很狹窄，狹窄到燃燒着的房頂都沒有觸及到它。母女倆緊緊地挨在一起，站在牆邊，看着。聽着那大火的肆意燃燒。就是第二天她們都不敢走下臺階來，不敢走出去。夜幕降臨後，在黑暗中又擔心害怕摸不到臺階，找不到路。在第三天的黎明時分，當她們從教堂裏走出來時，遇到了幾位村民。村民們不知所措，目瞪口呆地凝視着她們而說不出話來。他們給了她們衣物和食物，然後讓她們逃走了。
英文小說連載《朗讀者The Reader》Part 2 Chapter 9
W HY DID you not unlock the doors? The presiding judge put the question to one defendant after another. One after the other， they gave the same answer. They couldnt unlock the doors. Why? They had been wounded when the bombs hit the priests house. Or they had been in shock as a result of the bombardment. Or they had been busy after the bombs hit， with the wounded guard contingent， pulling them out of the rubble， bandaging them， taking care of them. They had not thought about the church， had not seen the fire in the church， had not heard the screams from the church.
The judge made the same statement to one defendant after another. The record indicated otherwise. This was deliberately phrased with caution. To say that the record found in the SS archives said otherwise would be wrong. But it was true that it suggested something different. It listed the names of those who had been killed in the priests house and those who had been wounded， those who had brought the wounded to a field hospital in a truck， and those who had accompanied the truck in a jeep. It indicated that the women guards had stayed behind to wait out the end of the fires， to prevent any of them from spreading and to prevent any attempts to escape under the cover of the flames. It referred to the death of the prisoners.
The fact that the names of the defendants appeared nowhere in the report suggested that the defendants were among the female guards who had remained behind. That these guards had remained behind to prevent attempts at escape indicated that the affair didnt end with the rescue of the wounded from the priests house and the departure of the transport to the field hospital. The guards who remained behind， the report indicated， had allowed the fire to rage in the church and had kept the church doors locked. Among the guards who remained behind， the report indicated， were the defendants.
No， said one defendant after the other， that is not the way it was. The report was wrong. That much was evident from the fact that it mentioned the obligation of the guards to prevent the fires from spreading. How could they have carried out that responsibility? It was ridiculous， as was the other responsibility of preventing attempted escapes under the cover of the fires. Attempted escapes? By the time they no longer had to worry about their own people and could worry about the others， the prisoners， there was no one left to escape. No， the report completely ignored what they had done and achieved and suffered that night. How could such a false report have been filed? They didnt know.
Until it was the turn of the plump and vicious defendant. She knew. Ask that one there! She pointed at Hanna. She wrote the report. Shes the guilty one， she did it all， and she wanted to use the report to cover it up and drag us into it.
The judge asked Hanna. But it was his last question. His first was Why did you not unlock the doors?
We were . . . we had . . . Hanna was groping for the answer. We didnt have any alternative.
You had no alternative?
Some of us were dead， and the others had left. They said they were taking the wounded to the field hospital and would come back， but they knew they werent coming back， and so did we. Perhaps they didnt even go to the hospital， the wounded were not that badly hurt. We would have gone with them， but they said they needed the room for the wounded， and anyway they didnt . . . they werent keen to have so many women along. I dont know where they went.
What did you do?
We didnt know what to do. It all happened so fast， with the priests house burning and the church spire， and the men and the cart were there one minute and gone the next， and suddenly we were alone with the women in the church. They left behind some weapons， but we didnt know how to use them， and even if we had， what good would it have done， since we were only a handful of women? How could we have guarded all those women? A line like that is very long， even if you keep it as tight together as possible， and to guard such a long column， you need far more people than we had. Hanna paused. Then the screaming began and got worse and worse. If we had opened the doors and they had all come rushing out . . .
The judge waited a moment. Were you afraid? Were you afraid the prisoners would overpower you?
That they would . . . no， but how could we have restored order? There would have been chaos， and we had no way to handle that. And if theyd tried to escape . . .
Once again the judge waited， but Hanna didnt finish the sentence. Were you afraid that if they escaped， you would be arrested， convicted， shot?
We couldnt just let them escape! We were responsible for them . . . I mean， we had guarded them the whole time， in the camp and on the march， that was the point， that we had to guard them and not let them escape. Thats why we didnt know what to do. We also had no idea how many of the women would survive the next few days. So many had died already， and the ones who were still alive were so weak . . .
Hanna realized that what she was saying wasnt doing her case any good. But she couldnt say anything else. She could only try to say what she was saying better， to describe it better and explain it. But the more she said， the worse it looked for her. Because she was at her wits end， she turned to the judge again.
What would you have done?
But this time she knew she would get no answer. She wasnt expecting one. Nobody was. The judge shook his head silently.
Not that it was impossible to imagine the confusion and helplessness Hanna described. The night， the cold， the snow， the fire， the screaming of the women in the church， the sudden departure of the people who had commanded and escorted the female guardshow could the situation have been easy? But could an acknowledgment that the situation had been hard be any mitigation for what the defendants had done or not done? As if it had been a car accident on a lonely road on a cold winter night， with injuries and totaled vehicles， and no one knowing what to do? Or as if it had been a conflict between two equally compelling duties that required action? That is how one could imagine what Hanna was describing， but nobody was willing to look at it in such terms.
Did you write the report?
We all discussed what we should write. We didnt want to hang any of the blame on the ones who had left. But we didnt want to attract charges that we had done anything wrong either.
So youre saying you talked it through together. Who wrote it?
You! The other defendant pointed at Hanna.
No， I didnt write it. Does it matter who did?
A prosecutor suggested that an expert be called to compare the handwriting in the report and the handwriting of the defendant Schmitz.
My handwriting? You want my handwriting? . . .
The judge， the prosecutor， and Hannas lawyer discussed whether a persons handwriting retains its character over more than fifteen years and can be identified. Hanna listened and tried several times to say or ask something， and was becoming increasingly alarmed. Then she said， You dont have to call an expert. I admit I wrote the report.
您爲什麼不把門打開?
審判長一個接一個地向每個被告都提出同樣的問題，每個被告都給予了同樣的回答：她們無法打開。爲什麼?有的說，當炸彈擊中教士住宅時，她受傷了。有的說，她被轟炸嚇得呆若木雞。有的說，在轟炸之後，她要照料受傷的警衛隊員和其他受傷的女看守，她把她們從廢墟中救出來，爲她們包紮，護理她們。有的說，她沒有想到教堂，她不在教堂附近，沒有看到教堂着火，也沒聽見從教堂裏傳來的呼救聲。
審判長一個接一個地警告她們：報告讀上去可全不是這麼回事。這是經過深思熟慮後的一種謹慎表達方式。如果說從納粹黨衛隊的檔案裏發現的報告所記載的是另外一回事;那就錯了。但報告讀上去的確是另一番情形。報告裏指名道姓地提到誰在教土住宅裏被炸死了，誰受了傷，誰把傷員用貨車送到了一家野戰醫院，還有誰乘坐軍用吉普車陪送。報告提到，女看守們被留了下來，目的是讓她們等候大火燒盡，防止火勢蔓延和阻止囚犯們趁火逃跑。報告中也提到了囚犯們的死亡。
被告們的名字不在名單裏面，這說明她們屬於留下來的女看守之列。既然把女看守們留下來是爲了阻止囚犯們逃跑，這說明從教士住宅搶救傷員並把他們送到野戰醫院的工作還沒有全部結束。從報告中可以看出，那些留守下來的女看守讓教堂裏的大火肆意瘋狂地燃燒，並堅持不打開教堂的大門。在那些被留下來的女看守中間，正如從報告中可以看到的那樣，有這幾位被告在內。
不，根本不是這麼回事。被告們一個接着一個地這樣說。他們說那篇報告是錯的。報告裏講，被留下的女看守的任務是阻止火勢的蔓延，只憑這一點就可以看到那篇報告的荒謬。她們怎麼能來完成這項任務。這是胡說八道，而且另外的一項任務，即阻止囚犯趁火逃跑，同樣也是胡說八道。阻止逃跑?好像她們不必要照料自己人了似的，也好像不能去照料囚犯了似的，好像沒有任何人可以跑掉似的。不!那篇報告把她們那天晚上的所作所爲，她們的功績和所遭受的痛苦，完全顛倒了。怎麼會有這樣一篇如此錯誤的報告?她們也都自稱不知道。
輪到那位慢條斯理、尖酸刻毒的被告人時，她說她知道。您問她吧!她用手指着漢娜說：是她寫的那篇報告，她有罪，只她一人有罪，她在報告中隱瞞了自己而想把我們扯進去。
審判長就此問了漢娜，不過，那是他的最後的問題。他的第一個問題是：您爲什麼沒有把門打開?
我們在我們要漢娜在尋找答案，我們不知道該怎樣幫助他們纔是。
你們不知道該怎樣幫助他們纔是?
我們當中的一些人死掉了，一些人開小差了。他們說，他們要把傷員送往野戰醫院，然後再返回來。但是他們心裏明白他們不會再回來了，我們對此也十分清楚。也許他們根本就沒去野戰醫院，傷員們的傷勢並非十分嚴重。他們還說，傷員需要地方，他們正好沒有什麼東西正好不願帶着這麼多的女人一起走，否則我們也一起走了。我不知道他們去了哪兒。
您都幹了什麼?
我們不知道該做什麼，一切都發生得很快。教士住宅起火了，還有教堂的塔頂。男人們，還有小汽車開始時還都在，隨後他們就離開了。轉眼之間只剩下我們和教堂裏的女囚。他們給我們留下了一些武器，但是我們不會用。假使我們會用它們的話，這對我們幾個女人來說又能幫上什麼忙呢?我們該如何看守住這麼多的女囚呢?走起路來長長的一列，就是緊湊一起也夠長的，看守這樣長的隊伍，需要比我們這幾個女人多得多的人力。漢娜稍稍停頓了一下，然後她們開始喊叫起來，而且越來越嚴重。如果我們此時把門打開讓所有的人都跑出來的話
審判長等了一會問：您害怕嗎?您害怕被囚犯們戰勝嗎?
囚犯會把我們不，不會。但是，我們怎樣才能使她們重新就範呢?那一定會亂作一團的，我們一定對付不了這種局面，而且一旦她們企圖逃跑的話
審判長又等了一會兒，但是，漢娜沒有把那句話說完。您害怕一旦逃跑的事情發生，您會被捕，會被判決，會被槍斃嗎?
我們當然不會輕易地讓她們逃跑的，我們就是幹這個的我的意思是我們一直都在看守她們，在集中營，在行軍的路上。我們看守她們的意義所在正是不讓她們逃跑。正因爲如此，我們纔不知道如何做是好，我們也不知道有多少囚犯在後來的日子裏能活下來。已經死了那麼多了，剩下這些活着的也已經如此虛弱
漢娜注意到，她所說的事情無助於事，但是她又沒別的可說。她只能盡力而爲他說好她所要說的事情，更好地去描述，去解釋。但是她說得越多，事情對她就越糟糕。由於她感到進退維谷，就又轉向了審判長問道：
要是您的話會怎麼做呢?
但是，這一次她自己也知道她不會得到回答。她不期待回答，沒有人期望得到一個回答。審判長默不作聲地搖着頭。
不是人們對漢娜所描述的那種不知所措和無助的情形無法想象。那個夜晚的情景：寒冷，冰雪，大火，教堂裏女人的喊叫，那些曾命令她們和陪同她們的人的逃之夭夭。在這樣的情況下，把囚犯放出來該會是什麼樣子呢!但是，認爲當時這些被告的處境確實很難就可以相對減輕她們的罪責嗎?人們就可以對她們的行爲不那麼感到震驚了嗎?就可以把它看做是在一個寒冷的冬夜裏，在一條人煙稀少的道路上發生的一場造成人員傷亡的車禍，而認爲人們在這種情況下本來不知道如何是好?或者，這是不是反映了我們都應該擔負的兩種責任之間的矛盾呢?人們可以這樣做，但是人們不願意去想象漢娜所描述的情景。
報告是您寫的嗎?
我們在一起商量了該寫什麼，我們不想把責任都推到那些開小差的人的身上，但是我們也不想把責任都攬到我們自己身上。
您說，你們一起商量了。誰執的筆呢?
稱!另外的那位被告又用手指着漢娜。
不，我沒有寫。誰寫的，這重要嗎?
一位律師建議請一位鑑定專家對報告的字體和被告人史密蘭女士的字體進行比較鑑定。
我的字體?您想要我的字體
審判長、那位律師還有漢娜的辯護律師在討論了一個人的字體超過十五年之後是否還能保持它的同一性，是否還能讓人辨認出來。漢娜注意聽着，幾次想插話說什麼，或者要問什麼，越來越坐立不安。最後她說：您不需要請鑑定專家，我承認報告是我寫的。
