2011年2月26日 星期六

《大江大海騙了你》:既狂且辣的李敖

  2009年9月,龍應台的《大江大海一九四九》,出版了。

  2011年2月,李敖追擊龍應台的《大江大海騙了你》,面世了。

  李敖在書中毫不掩飾,出書的原因,是要拆穿龍應台虛假的面具。

  要拆穿面具,必須先看清面具。當龍應台的名聲,旋風式帶動一片閱讀《大江大海一九四九》的氣氛,不少名人、學者、政客,皆大力推荐這本講述中國變天、國民黨丟掉一大片土地的作品。沒有勇氣和睿智,是說不出李敖這番狂語。李敖的狂,不是一般普通人所能比擬。

  不需李敖出手,《大江大海一九四九》的部份問題,早已在自己之前的一篇書評中寫了下來。當然,自己的能力跟李敖差遠了,寥寥數百字,怎及李敖的詳文論著,也沒有以學術的文筆,評價龍應台的文字。整部《大江大海一九四九》,我欣賞龍的文筆,但卻認為龍的落腳論據不扎實,論點前後矛盾,內容的覆蓋,跟書名有一定的脫節,似是只為銷路造勢。書評的最後部份,我已帶出書中最觸動我心的,是那些黑白照片,這也是對龍的文字,另類的保留。

  但大師李敖可不是玩小孩堆沙,衝擊龍應台的文字既狠且辣,一點餘地也沒有留下。他批評龍應台沒有足夠的寫歷史能力,不懂分析和處理材料。李敖也認定龍應台只是那類替國民黨辦文宣的寫手,試圖在民間以文字替國民黨說話。毫無疑問,李敖單刀直入把政治的牌子,掛在龍應台的身上,認定《大江大海一九四九》是一部軟性政治推銷作品,是「蔣介石超渡派」。李敖最簡單直接的評語,是蔣介石在一九四九年,剩下的,是殘山剩水,不是大江大海,龍應台是在欺騙所有讀者。

  其實,在《大江大海騙了你》中,龍應台也只是一個象徵而已,李敖真正的衝擊對象,是奉承國民黨的媚眼心態,與及國民黨和蔣介石的虛偽。李敖以覆蓋面更廣的史料,正面否定龍應台的論據,直接指出龍應台是選擇性擺放材料,而非歷史的真貌。李敖認為龍應台只寫了「現象」,卻寫不出原因,或是不敢寫出原因。李敖對龍應台嚴厲的批評,包括隻字不提蔣介石賣國地同意外蒙獨立、228事件只採納單方面說法、沒有提及長春戰事時蔣介石的守城命令、退下總統職位後蔣介石不是以普通黨員待遇移到台灣、老戰友家破人亡的苦況等等。

  從讀者的角度來比較兩書,李敖論據的扎實程度,的確比龍應台超出很多。這不是因為之前對龍應台一書,已作出一些評語,而是以卷論卷、以事論事。以前做過一些近代史研究時,也掀過李敖二十多年前所著的《蔣介石研究》,全書材料豐富,見解精警,是有水平的歷史書。(這本作品,坊間不易找,簡體字版可能是較實際的選擇。)龍應台的寫作方法,像章詒和及張戎,把書當成故事書一樣去寫,而且有些歷史事件,的確是有意迴避。看畢李敖這書,會讓你對文章和書本的批判力有所提高。這不是完全肯定李敖在書內的每一個論點,而是李敖的文字,的確是尖銳而又帶啟發性,有學習價值。而在史料補充方面,像宋希濂、杜聿明、彭克立、龔德柏、喬家才等人的事跡,的確讓龍應台,有被全面修理的感覺。

  李敖的狂、字裡行間的傲、對蔣介石和龍應台主觀的批評,不一定能取得所有人的認同,畢竟一些評語說得很盡,不是主流的寫作方法。而李敖對錢穆、柏楊、余光中、余英時、張玉法等人的批評和責備,更是超出大部份人所理解的面貌。李敖對知識份子的定義,很傳統,局限在那種懂得批判和創造知識、而又不屑屈服於恐怖政權的人士身上;在李敖眼中,錢穆、柏楊、余光中、余英時、張玉法等人對國民黨的依附和不盡言的品格,配不上知識份子這四個字。錢穆貪婪蔣介石不合法的恩惠,無德;柏楊不敢直罵國民黨和蔣介石,把怨氣幅射到所有中國人,無勇;余光中在蔣介石死後還拍其馬屁,無恥;余英時死抱中華民國,無智;張玉法漂白了國民黨的歷史,無道。是不是同意李敖的見解,讀者可自行判斷,多讀不同觀點的書籍,不盡信政權的宣傳,是提升自己的前提。

  《大江大海騙了你》散發著另類的文字風格、獨特的視野,很有閱讀價值。若讀過《大江大海一九四九》的話,李敖的觀點更有深入一層的參考價值。

  的確,政治不是一般人拿得準。相信與被騙,只是毫釐之差而已。


李敖在《大江大海騙了你》,把龍應台修理得很透徹。

龍應台的《大江大海一九四九》,是否一無是處,留待各位自行判斷。




12 則留言:

  1. 這本書一出我就看了,沒想到龍應台是這樣的人,還好有李大師為文發聲討伐,不然還傻傻的持續被洗腦。任何有良知的人都該讀的一本書,可以讓人知道在獨裁統治下那些不為人知的斑斑血淚。

    回覆刪除
  2. 書已看了,我只想從中理解一下我父母那年代是怎樣,生長在香港,共党或國民党跟我沒關,沒有包袱,也沒當歷史書來看,我手寫我心,作者說自己的故事和感受,讀者也是獨立個體,請尊重個人的思考能力,怎能說洗腦?你假設你高人一等吧.至於李敖跟龍的題的書未看,沒動力看,要追打追唱的我可沒興趣,如果多些那年代的人說,我會看.每個人有自己的觀點角度,說出來也會加入感情因素,聽者會自己判斷,當然也會加入自己的角度和感情,不會洗腦.

    回覆刪除
  3. 多謝7月25日那位匿名朋友的留言。很同意做人和做事不宜有包袱。

    回覆刪除
  4. 李敖咪就係嗰個年代從大陸走到台灣囉。

    回覆刪除
  5. 李敖現在在共產黨跟前不敢放肆、不敢批評共產黨,靠著批評國民黨、民進黨當然能在中國吃香喝辣。若真有良心,怎不見他對共產黨狂傲?這不是屈服於共產黨嗎?多會寫都不是重點,重要的是這兩位的心誠不誠實?批判別人是一套嚴格的標準,而對自己相同的行為卻是假裝沒事。對於這兩位都討好中國共產黨的作家,個人覺得實在沒什麼好敬佩的。

    回覆刪除
  6. 謝謝上面那位朋友的留言。你說的,大致都可以理解。但客觀地,我想補充數句。李敖不是沒有罵共產黨,而是沒有出書罵,也沒有罵得這麼兇。若果不大罵一個黨,便不算合格,那麼從不罵國民黨的錢穆和余英時,又應怎樣評價?李敖2005年在北大的演講,在Youtube可以找得到,他有沒有罵共產黨,看過便知曉。又如果李敖只罵國民黨和民進黨,為甚麼中共不年年請他到北京演講,繼續灌輸李敖概念給民眾?這些留給大家去想想。最後的一點小小愚見,是李敖狂妄自大,滿地都是罵共產黨的書,拾人牙慧之事,不似李敖的作風。

    回覆刪除
  7. 看起來好像跟國民黨有關係的人都是無恥了
    不過我是覺得從血海走出來的人都是值得尊敬的
    蔣介石在怎樣
    好歹也抗日抗了很久
    會輸是當然的
    國民軍成立是要打日軍不是要打中國人的
    軍心渙散當然不用打了
    這是愚見

    回覆刪除
  8. 批評李敖者不懂李敖, 也沒那智慧理解李敖. 李敖不罵共產黨卻罵國民黨, 在北大的演講大罵國民黨專制, 看來很奇怪. 可是, 共產黨這麼多年被罵倒了嗎? 罵不倒. 蔣介石沒成功, 民運人士沒成功, 美國沒成功, 李登輝陳水扁也沒成功. 要反共產黨, 以大陸人心之變為主, 靠這些"外人"來罵, 是不會成功的. 因此, 吸引大陸同胞的目光才是李敖要務. 李敖的言論不能在大陸被封殺, 思想才能傳播, 才有機會改變大陸同胞的腦袋. 他罵國民黨不自由不民主假人權等等, 實是藉著罵國民黨之機會, 宣傳正確的觀念. 大陸同胞如能認同李敖理念, 必將反思共產黨, 這才是李敖高妙之處! 豈是一般凡夫俗子所能窺見? 是乎, 不罵共產黨反而成了這批村夫村婦的批評材料, 可笑至極.

    回覆刪除
  9. When I saw Long Ying-tai's book release in 2009, I was not sure if I should buy it, because of the book title, BIG RIVER BIG SEA, sounded as though there was "water" and "sea" such elements involved - why did this made me hesitate in buying her book ? - because 12 years ago in 2002, I read one of her articles, in which she mentioned the story of why she had never managed to learn swimming in her childhood, and that was because all of Taiwan's coastlines were military zones, while all Taiwan people were forbidden to swim in the sea. I felt this was not right and so, emailed her at her designated email address at the then Hong Kong City Polytechnic College. I informed her that as a school-girl like herself who was born in 1952, my life experience was totally different from hers - as I used to swim in the sea down in Gaoshiung and in Kenting, while swimming in the sea was my whole family's favourite sport then. I never received response back from Long, although I did email her for the second time. Then, in 2011, I was really shocked to discover from You Tube that Long Ying-tai had given talks and lectures in the West (Canada, USA, etc) to her Western audiences, promoting her book, BIG RIVE BIG SEA. She opened those talks telling her audiences the same old story about Taiwan's coastlines being all only military zones and people were forbidden to swim in the sea. I was truly shocked that she totally ignored my sincere email about my genuine childhood swimming experience in the sea, and still told the whole world about her same old untruthful story ! This really made me unable to buy her book, no matter what she might write in her BIG RIVER BIG SEA - I could not believe those stories about those dead KMT soldiers she wrote could have been all 100% genuine, because here I am still alive, of Long's contemporary, from southern Taiwan, loving swimming in the sea so much as a child, and she totally ignored my true life story ! If she so disrespected my genuine life story - and I am not dead yet, how could she be truthful about stories of those dead people, whether they were KMTs or Taiwan people or other races ??? I therefore lost all of my curiosity and interest in wishing to read her BIG RIVER BIG SEA, as I had heard so many of those KMT soldiers' stories already from my old close KMT classmates from my school days, with no need to hear Long's doubtful ones which she probably had painted with her own fantasy imagination. Moreover, this year in March and April, realising she now had become Taiwan's Cultural Minister, I decided to request her to do something about her untruthful story about my childhood Taiwan coastlines - I wrote to her jointly with my husband who had visited Taiwan during 1980 for the first time and took many photos of people swimming in the sea down in Kenting. We asked Long to edit her untruthful videos on You Tube, or simply remove those wrong parts about Taiwan. To date, we received no response back from Long, and those mis-informed story of her videos are still on You Tube ! As a reader of her many books (most of them), I have found Long extremely arrogant and indulgent, totally disrespectful towards others, and most of all, completely NON-DEMOCRATIC and UTTERLY uncivilized. She must be a very ruthless opportunist, only cares about her celebrity-status and is best at grabbing advantages from dead people who no longer could act as true witnesses about history.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Beckett, I really thank for your posting and the historical information about swimming in the sea. It offers another visual angle for the readers.

      刪除
  10. 批評龍 只會舔李畜生一群人渣 都快去死啦 幹你娘

    回覆刪除