我們這代人的《星球大戰》

Three important things happened in the middle of 1977, each separated by a little more than a month: “Star Wars” was released, I celebrated my 11th birthday and Elvis Presley died. One of those things is not like the others, I know, and strictly speaking there wasn’t then and isn’t now anything beyond calendar coincidence that links them together. But those random events nonetheless go a long way toward explaining my relationship to popular culture.

1977年中期發生了三件重要的事，時間分別間隔一個月多一點：《星球大戰》(Star Wars)上映、我慶祝11歲生日、還有埃爾維斯·普萊斯利(Elvis Presley)去世。我知道其中一件事和另外兩件不大一樣，而且嚴格來說，無論是在當時還是現在，除了日期上的巧合，這三件事之間其實沒什麼聯繫。不過，這些隨機事件仍然可以在很大程度上解釋我同流行文化之間的關係。

And not only mine, of course. Modern life is a series of generational milestones. We calibrate our collective identities according to the shared experience of public events, including hit movies and popular songs. Whether we like them or not, those become part of the architecture of our private selves and also a kind of currency we trade with our peers. Elvis, in his mid-40s at the time of his death, was for kids like me immutably the property of the old, a reminder of the moment in our parents’ youth when everything had changed. The Beatles represented a similar, slightly more recent earthquake: They too belonged to the past. We had sung their songs in nursery school and heard them on “Sesame Street.” Nostalgia had claimed them. “Star Wars” was different. It was ours — our own special tectonic shift, after which the landscape was forever altered.

當然，不僅僅是我一個人同流行文化的關係。現代生活由一系列不同世代的里程碑組成。我們用公共事件中的共同體驗來精確調整我們的集體身份認同，熱門電影和流行歌曲也在在這些公共事件之列。無論我們喜歡與否，它們都參與建構了我們的個人身份，也是我們與同齡人交流的一種硬通貨。貓王去世時40多歲，對於我這樣的孩子來說，他屬於舊時代的產物，這一點是無可改變的，他提醒我們想起父母的年輕時代，那時候一切都變了。披頭士(The Beatles)樂隊象徵着類似的文化地震，只是時間距現在更近一點：然而他們也屬於過去。我們在幼兒園裏唱他們的歌，在《芝麻街》(Sesame Street)裏聽到他們的歌。他們已經屬於懷舊了。但《星球大戰》是不同的。它是我們的——屬於我們自己的地殼板塊漂移，之後大陸的面貌永遠改變了。

Or so the story goes, in both its heroic and tragic versions. The wild success of the film now known as “Episode IV — A New Hope” has been held responsible for much of what followed, the good along with the bad. “Star Wars” supposedly helped put an end to the risk-taking and artistic ambition of 1970s New Hollywood and ushered in an era of blockbuster domination that continues to this day. Twenty-first century grown-ups who bemoan the hegemony of fantasy-based franchise movies — which is to say most of us, at one time or another — have only our own youthful enthusiasms to blame. But the first “Star Wars” trilogy is also credited with opening up a dazzling world of fan culture, liberating nerds and geeks from the condescension of their elders and the mockery of their classmates and placing their passions at the center of the universe. Like rock ’n’ roll before it, this cultural dispensation may not have been immediately respectable, but it proved to be instantly profitable and endlessly renewable.

故事就這樣發展下去，無論是其中英雄的一面還是悲劇的一面。這部電影如今被稱爲《星球大戰第四集——新希望》(Episode IV — A New Hope)，它的巨大成功導致了其後發生的許多事情，好壞參半。據說《星球大戰》在終結1970年代新好萊塢的冒險精神與藝術野心方面發揮了作用，令我們迎來了持續至今的大片統治時代。21世紀的成年人——我是指我們當中的大多數人——時不時就會哀嘆一下奇幻商業大片的霸權，但這隻能怪到我們自己年輕時代熱衷的東西。不過，第一個《星球大戰》三部曲也被譽爲開闢了一個令人目眩的粉絲文化世界，讓那些怪胎和書呆們得以擺脫長輩的居高臨下與同學們的嘲笑，在宇宙中心釋放自己的激情。就像之前的搖滾樂那樣，這種文化系統可能不會立即受到尊重，但它被證明可以很快帶來利潤，並且可以無休止地自我更新。

How new was it, really? History has a way of making novelty look secondhand. Elvis made his indelible mark on baby boomer consciousness by putting a white face and an adolescent pout on a style of black Southern music that had been around a long time. Beatlemania was built mostly on echoes of Elvis and Chuck Berry. “Star Wars” was, if anything, an even more self-conscious throwback, a film student’s act of promiscuous homage, a hodgepodge of styles and allusions.

這種事到底有多新鮮？歷史有一種特點，可以讓新奇的東西看上去像是二手貨。貓王爲一種南方黑人的音樂風格賦予了一張白人的面孔和青春期少男的陰鬱神情，從而在嬰兒潮一代心中留下了不可磨滅的印記。披頭士狂熱主要建立在貓王與查克·貝里(Chuck Berry)的回聲之上。如果說有什麼不一樣的話，《星球大戰》是一個更具自我意識的迴歸，是一個電影學生五花八門的致敬，是各種風格與典故的大雜燴。

In his generous, slightly patronizing New York Times review, Vincent Canby noted the movie’s evocation of “Flash Gordon” serials and “a variety of literature that is nothing if not eclectic: ‘Quo Vadis?,’ ‘Buck Rogers,’ ‘Ivanhoe,’ ‘Superman,’ ‘The Wizard of Oz,’ ‘The Gospel According to St. Matthew,’ the legend of King Arthur and the knights of the Round Table.” George Lucas’s fellow cinephiles could point out his debts to John Ford and Akira Kurosawa. “Star Wars” might have looked like science fiction and played like an aerial-combat film, but it was also a western, a samurai epic and, at least when Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford were on screen together, a screwball comedy. An exemplary act of what some of us would learn, in college a few years later, to identify as the distinctive postmodern aesthetic strategy of pastiche.

文森特·坎比(Vincent Canby)當年在《紐約時報》上發表了一篇寬宏大量、略帶降尊紆貴之感的評論，他指出，這部電影令人想起《飛俠哥頓》(Flash Gordon)系列，以及“各種各樣的文學作品，只能說是無所不包：《暴君焚城記》(Quo Vadis?)、《巴克羅傑斯》(Buck Rogers)、《劫後英雄傳》(Ivanhoe)、《超人》(Superman)、《綠野仙蹤》(The Wizard of Oz)、《馬太福音》(The Gospel According to St. Matthew)、還有亞瑟王和圓桌騎士傳奇故事”。喬治·盧卡斯的影迷可以看出他對約翰·福特(John Ford)與黑澤明(Akira Kurosawa)的借鑑。《星球大戰》看上去可能很科幻，又表現得像是空戰片，但它同時也是西部片和日本武士片，當凱莉·費雪(Carrie Fisher)和哈里森·福特(Harrison Ford)在銀幕上並肩而立的時候，看上去也像是怪誕喜劇。幾年之後，我們當中的一些人將在大學裏學到，這是一個典範之作，被視爲獨特的後現代美學集大成策略。

But what, at the time, did any of us know about any of that? If you were 11 in 1977, “Star Wars” was something new under the sun. Which doesn’t mean we thought it came out of nowhere. There were action-adventure movies, multi-sequel science-fiction allegories, comic books that had initiated generations of fans in the pleasures of serial narration. There was “The Lord of the Rings” (the books and Ralph Bakshi’s animated movie); “Planet of the Apes” (the movie and the animated Saturday morning cartoon spinoff); “Star Trek”; Mad magazine. Plenty of fuel to feed a fan’s budding imagination.

但在當時呢，我們當中有誰知道這些事？如果1977年的你是個11歲的孩子，《星球大戰》對你來說就是這個世界上的新鮮事物。但這並不意味着我們認爲它是憑空而來的。在這之前，動作冒險電影、系列科幻小說和漫畫書已經吸引了好幾代的粉絲享受連載敘事的樂趣。還有《指環王》（The Lord of the Rings，包括原著小說和拉爾夫·巴克希[Ralph Bakshi]的動畫片）；《猿人星球》（Planet of the Apes，包括電影和週六上午播放的漫畫改編動畫）；《星際迷航》(Star Trek)；以及《瘋狂》(Mad)雜誌。它們都爲粉絲萌芽中的想象力提供了豐富的燃料。

All of those were the kindling, and it’s possible that if Mr. Lucas hadn’t struck the match, the explosion would have happened anyway. What ignited in the summer of 1977 may not have been only — even primarily — the love of a particular film. In retrospect, the larger phenomenon of “Star Wars” represented what looks like the inevitable product of demographic and social forces.

所有這些都能引發人們的激情，如果沒有盧卡斯來點燃導火索，這場爆炸或許同樣會發生。1977年夏天被點燃的東西可能不僅僅是——甚至也不主要是——對某一部電影的熱愛。回想起來，《星球大戰》所代表的更廣泛的現象，看上去像是人口特徵和社會力量的必然產物。

The “great man” theory of history always does battle with more deterministic accounts. Here was the nascent population not yet known as Generation X, hungry for novelty, distraction, comfort, order, mythology, heroism — whatever it was that our post-’60s, recessionary moment seemed not to be supplying. All we needed was a baby boomer to give it to us, get rich in the process and incur both our worship and our resentment for the rest of our lives. He would be the inventor, but we would be the end users, and we would make the thing ours. What was true of “Star Wars” would be true, a few years later, of the personal computer. And both would eventually provide a further generational bridge, between the now-graying X-ers and the ascendant millennials.

“偉人”史觀總在與更具決定性的說法抗爭。這是一個剛剛涌現的世代，還沒有被命名爲X世代，他們渴望新鮮的體驗、消遣、慰籍、秩序、神話和英勇精神，即經濟衰退的60後時期所沒有的東西。只需要有一個嬰兒潮一代的人把它帶給我們，他會在這個過程中暴富，導致我們在餘生裏既崇拜又怨恨他。他會成爲發明者，但我們纔是最終的用戶，我們會讓這個東西成爲我們的。《星球大戰》是這樣，幾年後出現的個人電腦也是如此。這兩樣東西最終還會加大現在日益老去的X世代與正在蒸蒸日上的千禧一代之間的代溝。

But more about that in a minute. I’m the ancient mariner here, and this is still my story. I’m not sure how many times I saw “Star Wars” the year it came out, but I am certain that until the arrival of my children, a DVD player and a copy of “Toy Story 2,” there is no movie I have seen as often in such rapid succession.

但這點容我以後再講。在這裏，我是那名老水手，這依然是我的故事。我不確定《星球大戰》上映那一年，我看了有多少遍，但我敢肯定，直到我的第二個孩子出世、DVD播放機出現，以及《玩具總動員2》(Toy Story 2)上映之前，我從來不曾以那麼快的頻率把一部影片看過那麼多遍。

The novelist Jonathan Lethem, two years older than I am, has written (in a piercing essay called “13, 21, 1977”) about seeing it 21 times, usually by himself, during an especially painful period in his life. I can’t quite match that total, and there was no pattern to the viewings. I think my parents took me the first time. Later, I took my little sister. Another time I went with a girl from my sixth-grade class on some awkward early approximation of a date. At least one friend’s birthday party involved a “Star Wars” outing. Going to see it was, in my recollection, a casual habit. You would be in someone’s rec room playing air hockey, or trying to pop wheelies on your bike, and you’d get bored with that and, if you hadn’t already spent your allowance, you’d head to the theater where the movie had been playing continuously since the end of the previous school year. It was something to do.

比我大兩歲的小說家喬納森·萊瑟姆(Jonathan Lethem)曾經在一篇名爲《13, 21, 1977》的文章中）寫過，他看了21遍，通常是一個人，而且在他人生中尤其痛苦的一段時期。我看的次數沒那麼多，也沒有什麼觀影規律。我想第一次應該是父母帶我去的。後來，我帶着妹妹去看。還有一次，是和我所在的六年級班級裏的一個女孩一起去看，那算是我早期經歷的一次有點尷尬的類似約會的活動。至少有一個朋友的生日會有安排去看《星球大戰》。在我記憶裏，去看這部電影就是一種習慣。你會在某人的娛樂室玩桌上曲棍球，或者嘗試把車頭擡起的自行車特技，但你會厭倦。要不是零花錢已經用完，你就去劇院了，那裏從上個學年末開始就在連續播放這部電影。也算有事可幹。

For some, like Mr. Lethem, it was also a gateway into more sophisticated cinematic pleasures, and a first step on a backward path through movie history. In his case, “Star Wars” was replaced first by “2001: A Space Odyssey” and then by “The Searchers,” both of them, not coincidentally, among the identifiable ancestors of “A New Hope.” Others held fast to childish things and formed a Rebel Alliance against the Empire of adulthood. It’s hardly an accident that J. J. Abrams, director of “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” is one of us. He turned 11 about two weeks before I did.

對有些人來說——比如萊瑟姆——它是通往更高深的電影娛樂的大門，是回溯電影歷史的第一步。對萊瑟姆來說，《星球大戰》首先被《2001太空漫遊》(2001: A Space Odyssey)、而後被《搜索者》(The Searchers)所取代。這兩部電影顯然都是《星球大戰4：新希望》的鼻祖，這並非偶然。還有些人固守孩童的本真，組成了一個反叛者聯盟，對抗成人的帝國。《星球大戰7：原力覺醒》(Star Wars: The Force Awakens)的導演J·J·艾布拉姆斯(J.J. Abrams)也是我們中的一員，這也絕非偶然。他比我大約早兩個星期度過11歲生日。

The legend of “Star Wars” was something that arose later. In 1977, we were innocent of Joseph Campbell and the further annotations Mr. Lucas and others would provide. The allegorical meanings — the battle of good and evil, the mystery of the Force — rest lightly on the jaunty surface of “A New Hope.” There would be richer intimations of depth and darkness in “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi,” or maybe, since we were a few years older, we were more inclined to see them.

《星球大戰》的傳奇是後來纔出現的。1977年，我們不瞭解約瑟夫·坎貝爾(Joseph Campbell)，也沒有體會到盧卡斯等人提供的進一步暗示。那些寓意——正邪之戰，力量的神祕之處——膚淺地停留在《星球大戰4：新希望》歡快的表面。《星球大戰2：帝國反擊戰》(The Empire Strikes Back)和《星球大戰3：絕地歸來》(Return of the Jedi)對深度和黑暗的暗示更豐富，或者，也許是因爲我們又年長了幾歲，所以更容易看出這些。

And then we kind of moved on, at least until 1999, when Mr. Lucas returned with “The Phantom Menace” and the Gen X legacy of ambivalence and confusion blossomed anew. That movie was terrible! So was “Attack of the Clones.” But it didn’t seem to matter. Everyone went to see those movies anyway, and the awfulness cast a rosy and perhaps unmerited glow on the first trilogy. Those movies weren’t all that good either. And that didn’t matter. They existed — the whole cosmos, or gestalt, or whatever it is, exists — in a realm beyond such judgments, and also beyond the ordinary operations of nostalgia. “Star Wars” is an old movie now, older now than Elvis Presley’s first records were in 1977. The film moves slowly and shows its predigital seams. It’s more charming than sublime, a silly pop-culture throwaway full of funny creatures, terrible dialogue and breathless acting. It’s exactly the same as I remember it, and watching it again I wonder what I ever saw in it. I find my lack of faith disturbing. And yet, I’m still a believer.

然後，我們算是放下了，至少直到1999年，盧卡斯攜《星球大戰前傳1：幽靈的威脅》(The Phantom Menace)迴歸，X一代的矛盾情緒和迷惑再次爆發。那部電影糟糕透了！《星球大戰前傳2：克隆人的進攻》(Attack of the Clones)也是如此。不過，這似乎無關緊要。反正大家都去看了那些電影，它們的糟糕給第一個三部曲帶上了它不配有的美麗光環。其實，第一個三部曲也沒有那麼精彩。那無關緊要。它們——整個宇宙，或者說格式塔，或者隨便叫什麼——存在於另一個層面，它們超越這些判斷，也超越尋常的懷舊。到現在，《星球大戰》算是一部老電影了，比1977年時貓王的早期專輯還顯得古老。這部電影推進得很慢，還暴露出前數字時代的破綻。它最多隻能算是“迷人”，遠談不上“絕妙”，它就是一部愚蠢的流行文化消費品，充滿好玩的生物、糟糕的對白和氣喘吁吁的表演——和我記憶中的一樣。我再次觀看時，很想知道自己從前是看上了它哪一點。我爲自己不再崇拜它感到不安。不過，我依然是一個擁有信仰的人。