I. Introduction

Roland Barthes (1915–1980) was a French literary theorist, philosopher, critic, and semiotician. His study of signs, known as semiotics, is inspiring in subverting the dominant bourgeois culture. He dissects the implied meaning of cultural signs by analyzing a signifier and its related signified. For example, a picture of a full, dark bottle is a signifier that relates to a specific signified: a fermented, alcoholic beverage. However, the bourgeoisie relate it to a new signified: the idea of healthy, robust, relaxing experience. His insight on various cultural phenomena reveals the manipulation of the dominant class, highlighting the ideology working behind the surface meaning. In A Lover’s Discourse: Fragments, his aim is not so much to debunk the bourgeois hegemony as to reveal the illusion of love. Devoid of sentimentality, this book is a fragmented meditation of an unrequited lover. The predominant theme is that the lover, I, can never truly find the beloved, You, for love itself is doomed to be a fabrication of mass culture and therefore a desire beyond one’s control.

「享受吧，一個人的旅行」(Eat, Pay, Love)，作者(Eliazath Gilbert)以第一人稱的角度，娓娓道來她的自我追尋。副標題(OneWoman’s Search for Everything across Italy, India and Indonesia)揭示這是一個女人的故事，她的追尋橫跨了義大利、印度及巴里島。故事的主角Lisa在三十幾歲出頭時，就已擁有時下美國女性該擁有的一切，包括有成就的丈夫、鄉村別墅、以及成功的事業，然而她卻感受不到滿足與喜悅，反而因困惑與驚恐而被受煎熬。故事從這裏開展，接下來就描繪她如何放下世人所欣羨的成功表象，轉而去追尋自己真正想要的東西。她用一年的時間，到三個不同的國家旅行，體察三種不同的文化，也發掘出最真實的自我。她在義大利體驗愉悅(pleasure)， 在印度發掘虔誠(devotion)， 最後在巴里島找到世俗享樂(wordly enjoyment)及靈性超越(divine transcendence)兩者間的平衡。

以西方文學的類別來區分，本書可視為是一本成長小說(Bildungsroman)，主角從匱乏到富足，從中學習人生的寶貴經驗(from rags to riches)。此中的匱乏，可以是實際的物質或金錢，亦可以是心靈的枯竭。故事開始於主角的一無所有，必須赤手空拳面對世間的挑戰，但經由勇氣與智慧，或得到貴人的相助，最後終能享有成功的果實。此文類的代表作有狄更斯的大衛考伯菲爾，伯朗特的簡愛等。Lisa從離婚的一無所有，到最後在巴里島找到真愛的過程，就是一部成長小說的典範。用「三」這個數字，代表的是平衡、和諧與禪定。東方的佛教徒或瑜伽行者，在修行時手上的念珠有108顆。108這個數字是三位數，總合加起來是9，亦是三的平方數。西方基督教有三位一體(Holy Trinity)的說法，意思為聖父、聖子及聖靈，可見三所代表的吉祥意涵。作者將她的追尋分成三部分，以呼應它在宗教上的神聖意涵。Lisa在三個不同的文化中，看見潛藏於本性中的渴求，也釋放了真實的自我。透過三種文化的洗禮，她得到了真正的平靜和喜悅，這正是宗教的最終意義----讓世人離苦得樂。

     Some readers accuse Amy Chua’s Chinese way of parenting as child abuse while some identify with it. What’s the essential part of Chinese parenting that raises such controversy? To begin with, the demand for excellence imposes great pressure on children, which has a lot to do with the Chinese conception of success. To prepare kids for future success is the grave responsibility of Chinese parents. As Amy claims, “nothing is fun until you are good at it.” The only way to gain fun for everything is through tenacious practice, without which you can never achieve anything significant and therefore you cannot possibly have fun from it. She asserts the value of rote repetition: “Tenacious practice, practice, practice is crucial for excellence” Through rote learning, kids will have a good command of such skills as math, piano or ballet. Only when they get praise or admiraiton can they feel satisfied and confident. And it is the very confidence that makes the once boring activity fun.

Conversations with God (與神對話) by Neale Donald Walsch is a morale booster meant to encourage the wretched people struck hard by fate. It may well be called a modern version of the Book of Job. Job is a God-fearing and righteous man, just as Neale is an ordinary, law-abiding guy. Yet, both are afflicted with misery for no reason --- the one suddenly deprived of all the possessions and cursing in dust and ashes, while the latter breaking his neck in a car accident, losing his job and becoming a  homeless bum struggling to stay alive. Both have consoling friends to help them weather through the difficulty. But Job's are beguiling, God-blaspheming ones while Neale's are kind-hearted ones who help him survive the harsh living condition. Both stories deal with a complete loser full of anger and bitterness toward God. Both have the theme of redemption embodied through the repentace for human ignorance. Through God's enlightening words, both characters are awakened from their dark world and regain their life.

     二十世紀中葉的歐陸，有一群後結構主義(post-structuralist)的思想家，沸沸揚揚地撻伐理性主義的主體觀(subjectivity)。他們解構單一(single)、自主(autonomous) 的身分認同，強調一切主體皆是由文化霸權(cultural hegemony)所建構出來的，沒有人能逃離社會文化的論述(discourse)框架。所以我們的主體不是一種固定而不變的存在(fixed entity)；相反地，它隨著時空、隨著內在的潛意識力量而變動。種族、性別的自我認同就是最好的例證。一個生在現代的文明社會，和生在古希臘社會的男人或女人，對自我的認知、價值觀就會不同。所以我們所謂的主體，其實只是對某種論述的臣服而已。我們感應某種論述的召喚(hail)，進而在不知不覺中了接受了這個主體的位置(position)，而後在這個位置上，和處於別的位置的人，進行權力與意志的爭鬥，這就是一般人的生命相貌。叔本華(Schopenhauer, 1788-1860) 在【意志和表象的世界】一書中，對此有精彩的論述: ：「意志自身在本質上是沒有一切目的，一切止境的，它是一個無盡的追求。」所以後結構主義的主體觀，基本上延續了叔本華的看法，強調人只是意志的表現現象；而此意志又受制於不同時空下的不同論述。由此我們得到的真知灼見就是，人從生下來的那一刻開始，就是不自由的，無法自主的。

生苦、老苦、病苦、死苦，
憂悲惱苦、怨憎會苦，

恩愛別離苦、所欲不得苦。
取要言之：五盛陰苦，

是謂名為苦諦。

~ 增一阿含經，佛告五比丘

「目送」一書為龍應台女士在2008年出版的散文集，她以平實的文字述說著人與人之間的情感，談到她為人父母，也為人子女所感受到的點點滴滴。 所有篇章流露出佛家所說的苦締，尤其是八苦中的愛別離苦---生命注定是要與親愛的人分離；感情再濃郁的兩人，就像暫時聚首的同林鳥，大限來時還是得各自飛。所以讀完此書，更加堅定我對佛法苦締的信念，從而策勵自己學會珍惜而後放下。

書中第一篇文章是「目送」－當作者看著自己的兒子一天一天長大，於是她發現，在他的人生道路上，似乎只能望著她兒子的背影逐漸離去。她試著了解她兒子的想法，試著走近她兒子的內心世界，然而他所走的路，她卻無法同行。於是龍應台想起，她與她父親的關係，似乎也是如此，很多時候，她只能一次又一次地目送她的父親背影離開，生離是，死別更是。文章中最貼近人心的一段話：「我慢慢地、慢慢地了解到，所謂父女母子一場，只不過意味著，你和他的緣分就是今生今世不斷地在目送他的背影漸行漸遠。你站立在小路的這一端，看著他逐漸消失在小路轉彎的地方，而且，他用背影默默告訴你：不必追」。

     Susan Sontag’s comments on photography are so penetrating!

     For those hard-working people, taking pictures enthusiastically on vacations means to appease the anxiety of not working. They are supposed to have fun on vacation, so they take pictures, which is a friendly imitation of work.

     For a family, not to take pictures of one’s children, particularly when they are small, is a sign of parental indifference, just as not turning for one’s graduation picture is a gesture of adolescence rebellion. We like to take pictures of kids when they are so small and cute. That’s to record the youth and vigor which will fade away with the passage of time.

     The same thing with taking pictures of a beautiful landscape. We record the space which we do not possess, so that later, when we look at the picture, it is as if we owned the fantastic sight there. Everything shot by cameras is our belongings. Therefore, to record is to possess; taking pictures is nothing more than a gesture to claim the ownership of space and time.    

     For most people, photography is not practiced as an art. it is mainly a social rite, a defense against anxiety, and a tool of power. Having a camera has transformed a person into something active, a voyeur! The adjustable lens of a camera are just like the penis of a male---to extend and to shot is to invade. How terribly true it is!!

Going on tours is a must-do for me in summer or winter vacations. There is somthing profound in this tourist mentality.For one thing, the meals in airplanes signify the desire for the control over space. In Roland Barthes’ words, “the methodical filling of stomachs”off ground is to claim “the triumph of freedom over necessity.”(The Eiffel Tower and Other Mythologies, 142) Indeed, we can do without any meals on planes if the trip takes a couple of hours only. But it becomes a rule for passengers to be fed on planes. The image, in Barthes’formulation, is ridiculous yet precise: The meal is merely a series of discontinuous takes: we ingest, we wait, like ruminants in their stalls, passively fed according to a series of mouthfuls which sweating keepers busily and fairly distribute down a long service corridor.  .”(The Eiffel Tower and Other Mythologies, 143) So, we as passengers are like pigs waiting to be fed by our dutiful keepers, the flight attendants. How cynical a comparison! What lies behind this is the sense of insecurity. Each time we detach ourselves from the ground, we require the guarantee of a house. Each time we travel, we experience the sense of displacement, which, in turn, engenders the the denial of constraints and desire for the freedom to control space. Therefore, traveling manifests the human illusion of transported immobility.

Morrie, a spiritual mentor in this book, says wise words as a parting gift to his student. Those are valuable lessons from someone who has lived a meaningful life. They are worth memorizing and pondering over again and again!

"Aging isn’t just decay; it’s growth. It’s more than the negative that you’re going to die. It’s also the positive that you understand you’re going to die, and that you live a better life because of it.”

He also mentions the essence of happy love and marriage: “If you don’t respect the other person, you’re gonna have a lot of trouble. If you don’t know how to compromise. . . . If you can’t talk openly about what goes on between you. . . . If you don’t have a common set of values. . . “ 

I came across a passage by Kant, an inaccessible philospher in my view. I used to keep his writings at a distance, for they are too difficult for a simple mind like me. But this passage is so surprisingly comprehensible: “There is many a person whom one esteems much too highly to be able to love him. He inspires admiration, but is too far above us to approach him with the familiarity of love.”How true it is when I reflect on the love affair in my old school days. The boy I fell in love then has become a scholar now. He was, is and will be so far above me that I dare not appraoch him with love. No wonder Kant remains single all his life, for fear of the pollution from love?