seeker9999
知名会员
- 注册
- 2013-08-23
- 消息
- 293
- 荣誉分数
- 106
- 声望点数
- 153
估计是某大作家谈治国理政系列丛书，销量遥遥领先，村头厕所纸源无比之充足！
美国诺贝尔文学奖小说「愤怒的葡萄」，写的是资本家的贪婪和农民的苦难与暴动，可惜缺乏毛泽东那样的领袖，所以从悲惨走向更加悲惨
- 主题发起人 向问天
- 开始时间
- 注册
- 2012-09-04
- 消息
- 63,034
- 荣誉分数
- 11,344
- 声望点数
- 1,373
感谢信息，向遇罗克致敬，又一笔被历史湮没的文革血债。
遇罗克 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书
zh.wikipedia.org
美国也杀因言获罪的人
Ethel Rosenberg: An American Tragedy https://a.co/d/awY9hkG
seeker9999
知名会员
- 注册
- 2013-08-23
- 消息
- 293
- 荣誉分数
- 106
- 声望点数
- 153
这个并不是因言获罪，而是间谍罪，或许是一起冤案，或者是一起判决过重的错案，但整个过程公开透明还有不少不同声音和同情，和遇罗克的不经审判的斩立决，天壤之别。
而且这对夫妇可能并不是完全清白：
1995年，美国国家安全局公开了“维诺那计划”的文件，此计划旨在破解苏联特工与克格勃和人民内务委员会之间的秘密联络信息。1944年从纽约发往莫斯科的一则电报表明，朱利叶斯的确参与了间谍活动，但他提供情报的重要性并不确定，因为苏联当时是从克劳斯·富赫斯和唐纳德·麦克林那里获取核情报的。“维诺那计划”的文件再一次显示艾瑟尔并没有参与间谍活动，因为在对情报破解后发现，凡是提到朱利叶斯时，都用“天线”或者“自由人”来代替，而提到艾瑟尔时仍然是艾瑟尔，这证明了她并没有卷入这件具体的间谍活动。不过“维诺那计划”的文件在审判罗森堡夫妇时因为无法公开未为外界知晓。
在1990年出版的赫鲁晓夫回忆录中，他称赞夫妇二人“极大程度上协助了我们制造核弹”。但他说的是否属实仍然有争议[4]。而且与富克斯提供给苏联的情报相比（后来公开的原苏联文件显示他对研究情况非常熟悉），戴维·格林格拉斯所声称得夫妇二人泄漏的信息基本没有用处。
况且，后来又有影视作品反思此事，也并未被禁止。要说拍一部关于遇罗克的电影反思一下文革，在大陆公映，你能想象？他只不过喊出了一句几百年前的口号“王侯将相，宁有种乎”，就掉了脑袋，可见比起几百年前并未进步，可叹。
- 注册
- 2012-09-04
- 消息
- 63,034
- 荣誉分数
- 11,344
- 声望点数
- 1,373
seeker9999
知名会员
- 注册
- 2013-08-23
- 消息
- 293
- 荣誉分数
- 106
- 声望点数
- 153
- 注册
- 2012-09-04
- 消息
- 63,034
- 荣誉分数
- 11,344
- 声望点数
- 1,373
- 注册
- 2008-05-09
- 消息
- 33,767
- 荣誉分数
- 7,658
- 声望点数
- 373
握爪，安娜·卡列尼娜我也没看懂；卡门也看不懂；茶花女也看不懂……大二的时候从图书馆借了本英文版的，居然看完了，但是没看懂多少
还借了本《黑郁金香》，也是看完了，同样没看懂多少
chicago666
资深人士
- 注册
- 2015-09-07
- 消息
- 7,048
- 荣誉分数
- 1,226
- 声望点数
- 223
As previous respondents have explained the expression “Grapes of Wrath” comes from the Bible: Revelation 14:19–20 (New Testament) and Isaiah 63 (Old Testament). The expression was re-used in the lyrics of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” written during the American Civil War.
(If you investigate the history of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” you will find additional reasons that it was a good choice as the title of the novel. The Battle Hymn of the Republic.)
You have asked what this expression means. The simplest answer is that it means “anger”; more specifically the growing anger that eventually leads to bloodshed. However, the expression is ambiguous because it is an oxymoron; meaning that it combines two terms that seem to contradict each other. In this case “grapes” which are a sweet and highly desirable fruit and “wrath” meaning extreme anger which we metaphorically think of as “bitter.”
Oxymorons tend to be ambiguous, and we have to look at the context of their use to understand them. We understand what Juliet means when she tells Romeo that “Parting is such sweet sorrow,” and what Othello means when he talks about Desdemona’s “cruel tears.” Out of context it is pretty hard to say exactly what “sweet sorrow” and “cruel tears” mean.
(For more Quora discussion on “oxymorons” see Jay Sour's answer to What is the difference between "contradiction in terms" and "oxymoron"?)
The Bible describes the Angel of Death with his sickle cutting down the grapevines at the end of the world (the Apocalypse). The reference to “grapes of wrath” is a metaphor (or conceit, meaning extended metaphor) for what happens next. All the people that God is angry with will be put in a winepress and their blood forced out of them just as wine is pressed from grapes.
It makes sense that when we think of the expression, we think about how the migrants from Oklahoma and, in particular, the Joad family were treated by many of the people they encounter. They were having the life blood squeezed out of them. But “grapes of wrath” also implies the need for punishment and even vengeance in order to serve justice. This is the way the expression seems to be used in “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.”
In the novel the expression “grapes of wrath” is used only once, in chapter 25. Here is the context:
“There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must fill in the certificate—died of malnutrition—because the food must rot, must be forced to rot.
The people come with nets to fish for potatoes in the river, and the guards hold them back; they come in rattling cars to get the dumped oranges, but the kerosene is sprayed. And they stand still and watch the potatoes float by, listen to the screaming pigs being killed in a ditch and covered with quick-lime, watch the mountains of oranges slop down to a putrefying ooze; and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.” (Chapter 25)
What is being described is the destruction of food (part of what is known as supply management economics) in order to maintain higher prices, even though some people were starving. The people are getting very angry and frustrated; they are being filled with wrath, but the novel remains ambiguous about what happens next. Does “grapes of wrath” mean there is about to be a revolution with the people rising against their oppressors? Or does “grapes of wrath” mean that these people are simply going to be destroyed, the life blood being squeezed out of them?
At this the midway through the novel, we know that “grapes” are used to create a bitter irony. In the earlier chapters of the novel the characters repeatedly talk about the wonderful, delicious grapes they are going to be able to eat when they reach California. The only encounter with grapes they have is when the kids eat green grapes and develop “skitters” (diarrhea ), and then we are given the above reference to “grapes of wrath.”
It is important to recognize that the final scene of the novel is directing us away from Apocalyptic images, to something other than “grapes of wrath,” to human kindness and charity. There was an attempt to censure the final paragraph of the novel which was inspired by the famous Rubin painting “Roman Charity.”
(If you investigate the history of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” you will find additional reasons that it was a good choice as the title of the novel. The Battle Hymn of the Republic.)
You have asked what this expression means. The simplest answer is that it means “anger”; more specifically the growing anger that eventually leads to bloodshed. However, the expression is ambiguous because it is an oxymoron; meaning that it combines two terms that seem to contradict each other. In this case “grapes” which are a sweet and highly desirable fruit and “wrath” meaning extreme anger which we metaphorically think of as “bitter.”
Oxymorons tend to be ambiguous, and we have to look at the context of their use to understand them. We understand what Juliet means when she tells Romeo that “Parting is such sweet sorrow,” and what Othello means when he talks about Desdemona’s “cruel tears.” Out of context it is pretty hard to say exactly what “sweet sorrow” and “cruel tears” mean.
(For more Quora discussion on “oxymorons” see Jay Sour's answer to What is the difference between "contradiction in terms" and "oxymoron"?)
The Bible describes the Angel of Death with his sickle cutting down the grapevines at the end of the world (the Apocalypse). The reference to “grapes of wrath” is a metaphor (or conceit, meaning extended metaphor) for what happens next. All the people that God is angry with will be put in a winepress and their blood forced out of them just as wine is pressed from grapes.
It makes sense that when we think of the expression, we think about how the migrants from Oklahoma and, in particular, the Joad family were treated by many of the people they encounter. They were having the life blood squeezed out of them. But “grapes of wrath” also implies the need for punishment and even vengeance in order to serve justice. This is the way the expression seems to be used in “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.”
In the novel the expression “grapes of wrath” is used only once, in chapter 25. Here is the context:
“There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must fill in the certificate—died of malnutrition—because the food must rot, must be forced to rot.
The people come with nets to fish for potatoes in the river, and the guards hold them back; they come in rattling cars to get the dumped oranges, but the kerosene is sprayed. And they stand still and watch the potatoes float by, listen to the screaming pigs being killed in a ditch and covered with quick-lime, watch the mountains of oranges slop down to a putrefying ooze; and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.” (Chapter 25)
What is being described is the destruction of food (part of what is known as supply management economics) in order to maintain higher prices, even though some people were starving. The people are getting very angry and frustrated; they are being filled with wrath, but the novel remains ambiguous about what happens next. Does “grapes of wrath” mean there is about to be a revolution with the people rising against their oppressors? Or does “grapes of wrath” mean that these people are simply going to be destroyed, the life blood being squeezed out of them?
At this the midway through the novel, we know that “grapes” are used to create a bitter irony. In the earlier chapters of the novel the characters repeatedly talk about the wonderful, delicious grapes they are going to be able to eat when they reach California. The only encounter with grapes they have is when the kids eat green grapes and develop “skitters” (diarrhea ), and then we are given the above reference to “grapes of wrath.”
It is important to recognize that the final scene of the novel is directing us away from Apocalyptic images, to something other than “grapes of wrath,” to human kindness and charity. There was an attempt to censure the final paragraph of the novel which was inspired by the famous Rubin painting “Roman Charity.”
