一場改變美國電視新聞歷史的辯論
Before partisan panels, split-screen shoutfests and brash personalities became ubiquitous on cable news, there were two men who despised each other sitting side by side on a drab soundstage, debating politics in prime time during the presidential nominating conventions of 1968. There were Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley Jr.
在有線電視新聞還沒有被黨派分明的嘉賓、分屏隔岸的對罵和粗蠻的人身攻擊淹沒的年代，兩個誓不兩立的男人，肩並肩坐在佈置單調的演播室裏，以1968年總統候選人提名大會爲背景，在黃金時段展開了一場政治辯論。他們就是戈爾·維達爾(Gore Vidal)和小威廉·F·巴克利(William F. Buckley Jr.)。
Literary aristocrats and ideological foes, Vidal and Buckley attracted millions of viewers to what, at the time, was a highly irregular experiment: the spectacle of two brilliant minds slugging it out — once, almost literally — on live television. It was witty, erudite and ultimately vicious, an early intrusion of full-contact punditry into the staid pastures of the evening news.
兩位文學高士，意識形態的死對頭，吸引了數百萬觀衆前來圍觀這場在當時極不尋常的實驗：兩個卓逸不羣的頭腦在直播電視節目上決一死戰——一度幾乎發展成肉體相搏。他們的言語詼諧、博學，但終究是惡毒的，這是張牙舞爪的意見領袖入侵古板晚間新聞的早期案例。
What transpired would alter both men’s lives — and, as a new documentary argues, help change the course of how the American political media reports the news. “Best of Enemies,” which opens July 31, makes the case that their on-screen feuding opened the floodgates for today’s opinionated, conflict-driven coverage.
辯論改變了他們的一生——而如一部新近出品的紀錄片所說，它還將改變美國政治媒體的新聞報道方式。7月31日上映的《最佳死敵》(Best of Enemies)提出，維達爾和巴克利的熒屏夙怨，爲今天熱衷於撩撥爭議和成見的報道開了先河。
The film might have been a sober lesson in the erosion of our civic discourse, timed to the start of yet another 24/7 presidential campaign. But its directors, Morgan Neville and Robert Gordon, present their ideas with a wide scope, exploring the rivalry between their subjects and evoking an era when public intellectuals like Vidal appeared on “Playboy After Dark” and magazine editors like Buckley, the founder of National Review, ran for mayor of New York. (He lost.)
在又一場不眠不休的總統競選大戰開始之際，這部影片也許可以讓我們對公民話語的頹敗有一個清醒的認識。然而，導演摩根·內維爾(Morgan Neville)和羅伯特·戈登(Robert Gordon)是透過一個寬闊的視角來呈現他們的理念的，在探究兩位人物的角力的同時，影片也喚起了我們對一個時代的記憶——那時候，像維達爾這樣的公共知識分子可以登上《花花公子深夜秀》(Playboy After Dark)之類的節目，而身爲雜誌編輯、《國家評論》(National Review)創始人的巴克利可以競選紐約市長。（沒能獲勝。）
“They don’t make people like Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley anymore,” Mr. Neville said in a recent interview. “Their lives are the kind of American lives that people don’t have anymore. To me, just on a theatrical level, it seemed operatic: this kind of grand battle.”
“戈爾·維達爾和威廉·F·巴克利這樣的人已經停產了，”內維爾在近日的一次訪談中說。“他們過着一種現在的人不可能有的美國生活。在我看來，僅從戲劇性的層面來講，這就像一部歌劇：一場盛況空前的大戰。”
The film’s trump card is the debates themselves — first during the Republicans’ convention in Miami, then three weeks later during the Democrats’ in Chicago — resurrected in rarely seen footage that, 47 years on, remains almost giddily entertaining: “Crossfire” with a script by No氀 Coward.
影片的主要賣點就是辯論本身——先是在共和黨的邁阿密大會期間，三週後在民主黨的芝加哥大會期間又有一場，47年前的罕見文獻獲得重生，至今看來仍然讓人大呼過癮，就像是照着諾埃爾·科沃德(No氀 Coward)的稿子排演的一集《交叉火力》(Crossfire)脫口秀。
Vidal tells Buckley that he was an inspiration for Myra Breckinridge, Vidal’s transgender literary creation: “passionate and irrelevant.” Buckley mocks Vidal’s failed screenplays and produces a note from Robert F. Kennedy, killed weeks earlier, suggesting that Vidal be deported to Vietnam. (Vidal, examining the letter, notes that the handwriting is slanted upward: “sign of a manic-depressive,” he says coolly.)
維達爾對巴克利說，自己筆下的跨性別人士邁拉·佈雷肯裏奇(Myra Breckinridge)這個形象，就是受他的啓發創造的：“激情飽滿，不知所云。”巴克利則嘲笑了維達爾的爛電影劇本，並給將於兩週後遇刺的羅伯特·F·肯尼迪(Robert F. Kennedy)寫了張便條，建議把維達爾驅逐到越南。（維達爾看了條子，發現巴克利的字向上傾斜：“躁狂抑鬱的跡象，”他冷冷地說。）
Anchors like Howard K. Smith and Walter Cronkite had occasionally offered commentaries on the news, “but that was very civil,” Mr. Neville said. “What they brought,” he added, referring to Vidal and Buckley, “was a whole other level of incivility that television hadn’t really seen.”
霍華德·K·史密斯(Howard K. Smith)和沃爾特·克朗凱特(Walter Cronkite)這樣的主持人會發表對新聞的評論，“但那都是很文明的，”內維爾說。維達爾和巴克利“帶來了一種當時的電視上見識不到的粗魯。”
Mr. Neville, who won the feature documentary Oscar for “20 Feet From Stardom,” and Mr. Gordon, a longtime collaborator, first watched the debates in 2010, on a bootleg copy from a friend. “I immediately was taken by how contemporary it was,” Mr. Gordon said, noting that between zingers, Buckley and Vidal were debating foreign wars, racial justice and states’ rights.
曾憑藉《離巨星二十英尺》(20 Feet From Stardom)獲得奧斯卡最佳紀錄長片的內維爾，在2010年和長期合作伙伴戈登一起看到這場辯論，當時是通過一個朋友的私錄影像。“看上去太像當代的東西，我當場被鎮住了，”戈登說，他注意到在刀光劍影之間，兩人辯論的是外國戰爭、種族正義和聯邦諸州的權力。
But the directors, both former journalists, also discovered that the debates’ legacy became more about ire than ideas.
然而兩位作過記者的導演還發現，辯論留下的傳奇更多側重於憤怒而不是理念。
Buckley showcased provocative debate on “Firing Line,” his program which had its debut in 1966; Vidal was a mischievous guest on talk shows. But the film presents network news in 1968 as a gray affair. When ABC hired Buckley and Vidal to hold daily debates during its convention coverage — essentially a ratings stunt by a network ranked last in the ratings — it was breaking from the gavel-to-gavel norm.
在他自己的一個首播於1966年的節目《火線》(Firing Line)中，巴克利展現了極具挑釁性的辯術；脫口秀上的維達爾也是出了名的毒舌。但在影片中，1968年的電視網新聞處在一種灰色狀態。ABC請來巴克利和維達爾，要他們在政黨大會報道期間進行每日例行的辯論，目的是背離按部就班的節目常態——根本上是一個收視率墊底的電視網在博人眼球。
And then some. On a night of riots at the Democratic convention in Chicago, Buckley and Vidal had their own climactic on-air clash. Vidal called Buckley a “crypto-Nazi,” prompting a reaction that still stuns.
結果何止是背離。在舉行芝加哥民主黨大會的那個暴戾的夜晚，巴克利和維達爾的衝突在衆目睽睽之下達至頂峯。維達爾稱巴克利是個“祕密納粹”，後者的反應至今看來仍十分驚人。
“Now listen, you queer,” Buckley replied, “stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in the goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered.” He was nearly out of his chair, inches from Vidal, his face, as Christopher Hitchens recalls in the film, “a rictus of loathing.”
“你這個娘娘腔給我聽好了，”巴克利說，“再說我是祕密納粹，我就給你那張臭臉上來一下，讓你就一直這麼癱着。”他幾乎已經從離開自己的椅子，離維達爾只有幾釐米，克里斯托弗·希欽斯(Christopher Hitchens)在片中回憶，巴克利的臉上帶着“一種憎惡的獰笑”。
Such slurs are rarely heard on television today; at the time, they were deeply profane, and the exchange was cut from the West Coast broadcast, according to Mr. Gordon. Vidal saw it as a triumph; Buckley almost never spoke of it again.
這樣的詆譭，在今天的電視上已經很難見到了；據戈登說，當時兩人都粗口連篇，這段對話在ABC的西海岸播出中被刪掉。維達爾認爲這是一場勝利；巴克利此後幾乎再也不提此事。
“Best of Enemies” documents the aftermath: News producers, intrigued by ABC’s ratings increase, began pitting liberals against conservatives. A montage features an old “Point/Counterpoint” segment from “60 Minutes”; Jon Stewart berating the hosts of CNN’s “Crossfire”; and shouty clips from Fox News.
《最佳死敵》還記錄了節目播出後的情形：在ABC收視率飆升的刺激下，新聞製片人們開始有意安排自由派和保守派人士的較量。片中收錄了一系列節目片段：《60分鐘》(60 Minutes)的一段“針鋒相對”(Point/Counterpoint)老畫面；喬恩·斯圖爾特(Jon Stewart)痛斥CNN《交叉火力》的主持人；以及Fox新聞頻道(Fox News)上的咆哮。
The film, which debuted this year at Sundance, has resonated: The screenwriter Aaron Sorkin recently signed on to write a feature-length dramatic adaptation. “I’d never heard about the Vidal/Buckley debates before seeing the documentary,” Mr. Sorkin said by email, comparing the climactic debate to “a classic courtroom scene.”
這部今年在聖丹斯電影節(Sundance)上首映的影片引發了共鳴：電影劇作家艾倫·索爾金(Aaron Sorkin)近日簽下了一個故事長片劇本改編合同。“在看到這個紀錄片之前，我完全沒聽說過維達爾和巴克利的辯論，”索爾金在電子郵件中寫道，他把辯論的高潮部分比作“一場經典法庭戲”。
Research for the documentary took years, with the directors plumbing archives for gems like Vidal’s handwritten debate notes. (Many of his supposed ad-libs were, in fact, rehearsed.) The directors interviewed Vidal in 2010, two years before his death, at his Hollywood home, where he initially accused them of being Buckley partisans. “It was like a scene from ‘Sunset Boulevard,’ ” Mr. Neville recalled.
影片進行了數年的調研，兩位導演挖到了許多珍貴的史料，比如維達爾手寫的辯論筆記（他的許多看似即興的講話，實際上是經過排練的）。導演在2010年前往維達爾在好萊塢的家中採訪了他，那時距離他去世還有兩年。維達爾一開始指責兩人是巴克利的黨羽。“簡直就像《日落大道》(Sunset Boulevard)裏的場景，”內維爾說。
That interview does not appear in the film; Buckley died in 2008, and the directors felt allowing only Vidal to speak would unbalance the film. Instead, they draw on journalists, media critics and relatives, including Buckley’s brother Reid. Buckley’s son, Christopher, declined to speak. “I think it was honoring his father’s intentions to not ever speak of the V-word again,” Mr. Neville said.
影片中沒有出現那段採訪；巴克利是2008年去世的，他們不想只有維達爾在說話，導致影片失衡。他們採訪了記者、媒體評論人和親屬，包括巴克利的弟弟瑞德(Reid)。巴克利的兒子克里斯托弗(Christopher)拒絕接受採訪。“我認爲他是在遵照父親的意願，永遠不再提那個V打頭的詞，”內維爾說。
Mr. Neville, who briefly worked as a fact-checker for Vidal after college (“One of the most thankless jobs I’ve ever had”), said that audiences frequently tell him how relevant the film seems to today’s media culture. Mr. Gordon regards that as a hopeful sign. “People are hungry for the public intellectual,” Mr. Gordon said. Buckley and Vidal “had 15 minutes a night, uninterrupted. Imagine that today. Imagine having two witty, literate heavy thinkers having a go at each other for 15 minutes without someone in the headset saying, ‘Quick, talk about Monica Lewinsky’s underwear.’ ”
內維爾大學畢業後曾爲維達爾作過一陣子的事實覈查工作（“這輩子最吃力不討好的差事”），他說時常有觀衆告訴他，影片放在當下的媒體文化中是十分切題的。戈登認爲這是個喜人的跡象。“人們迫切需要公共知識分子，”戈登說。巴克利和維達爾“每晚有不間斷的15分鐘。再看看今天。你能想象兩個滿腹經綸的思想家就這樣你來我往15分鐘，中間不會聽到耳機裏傳來一個聲音，‘快，說說莫妮卡·萊溫斯基的內衣。’”
Mr. Neville agreed. “Now, you watch cable news, and you know what everybody’s going to say before they open their mouth,” he said. Buckley and Vidal “were independent thinkers, and independent thinkers aren’t given a lot of time on television today.”
內維爾也這樣看。“你去看有線電視新聞，這些人一張嘴，你就知道他們要說什麼，”他說。巴克利和維達爾“是獨立的思想者，獨立的思想者在今天的電視上得不到多少機會”。
Few current news programs can match the lexical fireworks of the Buckley-Vidal debates, and it is true that the words “Latinate” and “hobgoblinization” are unlikely to be heard on CNN anytime soon.
在如今的新聞節目裏，巴克利-維達爾論戰這樣排山倒海的詞彙量已經很難見到，在CNN聽到“Latinate”（類拉丁文的）和“hobgoblinization”（精靈化）之類的詞機會很渺茫。
But “Best of Enemies” also proves something else: that even during a more genteel era in television news, the most pedigreed and respected intellects could descend into name-calling and, for a moment, the threat of physical violence.
然而《最佳死敵》還證明了一件事：即使在電視新聞還正襟危坐的年代，最受敬仰、最純粹的知識分子也會墮落到人身攻擊的層次，甚至一度要訴諸肢體暴力。
Mr. Sorkin, who lamented the state of television news in his HBO series, “The Newsroom,” was asked what today’s news media might learn from these debates nearly half a century old.
索爾金曾在他的HBO劇集《新聞編輯室》(The Newsroom)中哀嘆電視新聞的現狀，那麼他認爲今天的新聞媒體能從將近半個世紀前的辯論中學到什麼呢？
“I think they’ve learned it,” Mr. Sorkin replied. “Incivility rates.”
“我認爲他們已經學到了，”索爾金答道。“無禮言行有收視率。”
