2012年7月28日 星期六

Roger Payne, Alastair Burnet

 

 

Alastair Burnet

Sir Alastair Burnet, journalist, broadcaster and editor of The Economist from 1965-74, died on July 20th, aged 84


FEW editors of The Economist have been famous faces. Alastair Burnet was an exception. Even before he took up his post in 1965, he had gained a degree of fame as a political reporter on television. He continued to broadcast during his ten years as editor, and indeed long after, becoming most celebrated as the face and voice of ITN’s “News at Ten”, the first, highly successful, half-hour newscast on British television. Later he was a commentator whose calm, even tones, with a slightly amused and Scottish edge, were in demand for national events. When he stopped, in 1991, he had guided viewers through a series of general elections, demystified a couple of royal weddings and a moon landing (“There it is, the old Moon—the one the cow jumped over”) and presented the news several thousand times.
Although he sometimes worked for the BBC, he preferred the more lowbrow independent television. He was interested, he said, in presenting news that the “plain folk” would talk about the next day. So perhaps it was no surprise that the most obvious way in which he changed The Economist was to make its appearance less austere, its headlines and captions more chatty and its style more punchy.
Some considered this commercial, and they were partly right: the circulation rose by 60% during Alastair’s tenure, to 123,000 in 1974. A few considered it vulgar, and thought it reflected a lack of seriousness on the part of the editor. They were reinforced in this view by Alastair’s jocular banter, his easy resort to mimicry and his habit of taking the Monday morning editorial meeting with a gin and tonic in his hand. Worse, he commissioned regular articles on golf, and had an undisguised interest in football (this was before every intellectual affected a fascination for Aston Villa) and an even greater love for the turf. To his evident pleasure, The Economist bought a racehorse, which once appeared, beribboned in its owner’s colours, at the foot of the new skyscraper in St James’s Street that by then housed the newspaper. Anyone expecting of this Scot a high-minded, humourless Puritan would have been surprised.
And also deceived. Alastair was a confident public performer but fundamentally a shy man, often ill-at-ease with others, especially women. The banter and facetiae were devices to keep at an amiable arm’s length anyone not in his close coterie. Those who considered him lightweight misjudged him. He had turned down his second-class history degree from Oxford because, in his opinion, he deserved a first. Only occasionally did he show his learning—as when he was heard on air to describe as “very Voltairean” a politician who spoke of going off to do some gardening—but he was a fluent writer, well read, well informed, numerate and immensely hard-working.
He was also principled. He was loyal to his staff, quite ready to defend them before an overbearing chairman. Never was he grasping. He refused a golden, or perhaps silver, handshake after 18 not-very-successful months editing the middle-market Daily Express, to which he had inexplicably gone after The Economist.
The cross of Vietnam
His economic views were less pronounced than his political ones, possibly explaining why he was the first editor of The Economist to appoint an economics editor. In politics his sympathies were with Conservatism, albeit of a leftish sort. This put him firmly behind the forlorn attempts of Edward Heath’s government to reform Britain’s trade unions. He also readily supported Britain’s entry into the European common market, which he saw as posing no threat to an even more important attachment, the Atlantic alliance.
That attachment was surely deepened by, if not born of, Alastair’s year in America as a Commonwealth Fund Fellow in 1956-57. Whether, but for this, the most controversial policy of his editorship—the paper’s enduring support for the Vietnam war—would have been any different cannot be known. Most of the leaders on this subject were written by the foreign editor, Brian Beedham, but Alastair never seemed unhappy with their line.
He also trenchantly defended immigration. When, in 1968, the Labour government decided to deny Asians in east Africa who had British passports the right to settle in the United Kingdom, he ran a cover portraying a British passport lying among rubbish beneath the words, “If that’s what it’s worth”. When, in 1972, Uganda’s Asians were expelled, he put on the cover a picture of an airport arrivals door with a sign reading, “Welcome, British Passport Holders”. The use of covers to make a telling editorial point may have been his most lasting legacy at The Economist.
Alastair was not of analytical bent, nor was his mind notably original; he was impelled above all by the news and a desire to present it well. Appointed to the editorship at the age of 37, he could easily have had a second career in business or politics, but eschewed them for a very public role in journalism that somehow showed little of his character. Utterly unassuming, he listed his home address and telephone number in “Who’s Who” and, at the height of his televisual renown, spent each morning answering the cascade of letters brought by every post. Despite such openness, his was a very private public face.

 

Roger Payne

Roger Payne, alpinist and avalanche expert, died on July 12th, aged 55


MOST climbers simply chafe to reach the tops of mountains. Roger Payne was different. Although he had several first ascents to his name—Mount Grosvenor in China, Khan Tengri and Pobeda in Kazakhstan, in a career spanning 30 years—his priority was to go lightly, and leave no trace. His heroes were the alpinists of the early 20th century, George Mallory, Tom Longstaff, Freddie Chapman and the rest, who had climbed the world’s greatest peaks in tweed jackets and leather boots. Like them, he went in a tiny team, often only with his wife, Julie-Ann Clyma, who was also a mountaineer. He took no oxygen, and avoided using fixed ropes. Every piece of rubbish or equipment was brought down off the mountain: not only his own, but also the tattered tents and empty cartons discarded by other people. In 1993, on K2, he also found and carried down the light, clean bones and ragged clothing of Art Gilkey, an American climber swept away by an avalanche in 1953.
He went lightly and purposefully, but with great care. The mountains he loved so passionately were fickle, and demanded vigilance. Lithe and smiling, proud of his “boot-shaped” and blister-proof feet, he moved on exposed rock faces with the grace of a dancer and the fearlessness of a boy. He did things right: tents were dug in with proper snow-walls, supplies stored in well-marked snow-holes, attempts quickly abandoned if tiredness or bad weather struck. He would never push his luck on mountains, though he himself was never tired, leaping up from a schnapps-heavy evening to pull on his head-torch for a 1am start, and in booming cockney (“Are you climbing, or what?”) encouraging laggards onwards and upwards.
As he went, despite the stream of merry chatter about the relative merits of waterproof fabrics, or the perfect pH of beer, he was on the watch. For snow that was fresh and powdery, or piled into a cornice; for slopes that were too steep; for debris of fallen rocks, or the mid-morning heat of the sun. All these were omens of avalanches. He was expert on them, teaching climbers and students—especially in the Alps, where he lived later on—to recognise the warning signs, and developing a safety code that came to be used across Europe.
He knew avalanches at close quarters—at times, way too close. On Pumari Chhish in Pakistan in 1999 he and Julie-Ann had spent five nights trapped on an icefield, with avalanches breaking over their tent. On Nanda Devi East in 1994 they had to descend an avalanche, and just made it; but he had taken the precaution of appeasing the mountain gods with a prayer-flag planted at the summit. Like the Romantic poets (like Byron’s Childe Harold, which he would quote in reams, word-perfect, as he climbed), he believed that mountains were sublime. He had a special love for the compactness of Sikkim, squeezed between Tibet and India, whose elegant, shining peaks he helped open again to mountaineering. A camera went with him always, strapped tight against his sternum, to record for others the beauty he saw. But some of his favourite quotations weighed up the beauty against the risk.
Diplomacy at 7,000 metres
Down at sea-level, he was a tireless organiser. Everything to do with mountains demanded his attention and his infectious energy. He didn’t belong behind a desk, and at Sunderland Poly, where he took a teaching degree in 1983, he bunked off lectures to go climbing. But if he had to protect and promote the peaks by doing paperwork, he would.
For 12 years he took charge at the British Mountaineering Council, swelling both membership and revenues, arranging competitions and writing memos late and long, until he would bolt from the Manchester office to scale the nearest crags. He brought mountaineering to schoolchildren (remembering how he had discovered it in the Scouts in Hammersmith), and to the disabled. He also took his expertise abroad, teaching young Iranians to climb and Sikkimese to become guides like himself; and he became a diplomat of the Greater Ranges, urging Indian and Pakistani climbers to forget their countries’ long rivalry over the Siachen glacier.
The people of the mountains he remembered, too. On his ascent of K2 he took a pair of micro-hydroelectric systems to give non-smoky light and heat to two remote villages. This made the trip for him, though he never reached the top. He kept a watch on how climate change was affecting both the Himalayas and the Alps. But he never wanted to be part of any large and overstuffed expedition. Nor did he seek out the celebrity peaks, or brag about “conquering” the unsung 6,000-7,000-metre peaks he preferred.
For that reason, he was not among the best-known mountaineers. The first many people had heard of him was when, in early July, an avalanche caused by a toppling ice-block swept him away, with eight others, on Mont Maudit, beside Mont Blanc. He was guiding two clients along a popular route; the way and the weather looked safe. He was travelling light, on what he liked to call “another day in the office”. As no one knew better than himself, there was no perfect safety in mountains. But he would not have been in any other place, for, in Byron’s words, “Where rose the mountains, there to him were friends”.





Childe Harold's Pilgrimage

By George Gordon, Lord Byron


Canto the Third


   XII

But soon he knew himself the most unfit     100
Of men to herd with Man; with whom he held
Little in common; untaught to submit
His thoughts to others, though his soul was quell'd
In youth by his own thoughts; still uncompell'd,
He would not yield dominion of his mind
To spirits against whom his own rebell'd;
Proud though in desolation; which could find
A life within itself, to breathe without mankind.


2012年7月26日 星期四

the Church of Kopimism


Isak Gerson, left, and Gustav Nipe of the newly registered Church of Kopimism, whose central dogma is that file sharing is sacred.
Casper Hedberg for The New York Times
Stockholm Journal

Taking File Sharing to Heart, and Church

The Swedish government has recognized the Church of Kopimism, whose central dogma is that file sharing is sacred. Above, Isak Gerson, left, and Gustav Nipe. 



Missionary Church of Kopimism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Kopimi symbol
Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V
The Missionary Church of Kopimism (in Swedish Missionerande Kopimistsamfundet), founded by 19-year-old philosophy student Isak Gerson,[1] is a congregation of file sharers who believe that copying information is a sacred virtue.[2][3][4] The Church, based in Sweden, has been officially recognized by the Swedish Legal, Financial and Administrative Services Agency ("kammarkollegiet") as a religious community, after three application attempts.[1][5]
Gerson has denied any connection between the Church and filesharing site the Pirate Bay.[6]

Contents

Tenets

The followers of the religion are called Kopimists from copy me. A "Kopimist" or "Kopimist intellectual" is a person who has the philosophical belief that all information should be freely distributed and unrestricted. This philosophy opposes the monopolization of knowledge in all its forms, such as copyright, and encourages piracy of all types of media including music, movies, TV shows, and software.[7]
According to the church, "In our belief, communication is sacred."[2] No belief in gods or supernatural phenomena is mentioned on their web site. CTRL+C and CTRL+V, the computer shortcut keys for "Copy" and "Paste," are considered sacred symbols.
Kopimism made simple[8]:
  • All knowledge to all
  • The search for knowledge is sacred
  • The circulation of knowledge is sacred
  • The act of copying is sacred.
According to the Kopimist constitution [9] :
  • Copying of information is ethically right.
  • Dissemination of information is ethically right.
  • Copymixing is a sacred kind of copying, moreso than the perfect, digital copying, because it expands and enhances the existing wealth of information
  • Copying or remixing information communicated by another person is seen as an act of respect and a strong expression of acceptance and Kopimistic faith.
  • The Internet is holy.
  • Code is law.
On January 5, 2012, Kopimism was accepted by Sweden as a legitimate religion. The religion's association with illegal file sharing[where?] has been said not to be a sign that illegal file-sharing will be excused from Sweden's zero-tolerance approach to the matter.[1]

First wedding

On April 28th, 2012, the Missionary Church of Kopimism held their first wedding.[10] The wedding took place in Belgrade, Serbia, between a Romanian woman and an Italian man. The holy ceremony was conducted by a man wearing a Guy Fawkes mask whose voice was distorted by a voice modulator.
The church said, "We are very happy today. Love is all about sharing. A married couple share everything with each other. Hopefully, they will copy and remix some DNA-cells and create a new human being. That is the spirit of Kopimism. Feel the love and share that information. Copy all of its holiness."
The missionary leader of the Church of Kopimism, Isak Gerson, attended as a witness during the wedding.

Sharing of information in religions

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c "Sweden recognises new file-sharing religion Kopimism". BBC News. 5 January 2012. Retrieved 5 January 2012.
  2. ^ a b Jackson, Nicholas (10 April 2011). "The Information Will Get Out: A New Religion for File-Sharers". The Atlantic. Retrieved 25 April 2011.
  3. ^ "File-Sharers Await Official Recognition of New Religion". TorrentFreak. 10 April 2011. Retrieved 25 April 2011.
  4. ^ Citrome, Michael (14 April 2011). "NETWORTHY: Copy, paste, amen". Montreal Mirror. Retrieved 25 April 2011.
  5. ^ "File-Sharing Recognized as Official Religion in Sweden". TorrentFreak. 4 January 2012. Retrieved 5 January 2012.
  6. ^ Privitera, Salvatore. "File-sharing as a religion, do we really need it?". Retrieved 29 January 2012.
  7. ^ Worman, Jenny (4 January 2012). "Sweden Recognizes File Sharing as a Religion". RevoluTimes. Retrieved 2 February 2012.
  8. ^ "Welcome to the missionary church of kopimism". Retrieved 2 February 2012.
  9. ^ "Kopimist Constitution". The First Church of Kopimism for the USA. 2012. Retrieved 1 April 2012.
  10. ^ "First Kopimist Wedding". 28 April 2012. Retrieved 10 May 2012.




2012年7月25日 星期三

夏漢民長住台南榮民之家

成大前校長 夏漢民返台定居台南
 
記者莊宗勳、修瑞瑩台南25日電
July 25, 2012
81歲成大前校長夏漢民(右)上周從美國返台,和妻子王壽美搬進台南榮民之家長住,享受「第二故鄉」台南的陽光、空氣。(記者莊宗勳/攝影)
81歲成大前校長夏漢民(右)上周從美國返台,和妻子王壽美搬進台南榮民之家長住,享受「第二故鄉」台南的陽光、空氣。(記者莊宗勳/攝影) 
 
「我是個台灣人,找不到任何理由旅居美國」,81歲的成功大學前校長夏漢民,上周自美返台,捨棄台北精華地帶的房子,搬進台南榮民之家,他說,「這裡才是我的家」。夏漢民早年出身於海軍官校、成大機械研究所、美國奧克拉荷馬州大博士,曾任教北塔科達州立大學。雖然喜歡美國的研究環境,「但我終究是台灣人」,他將綠卡、美國公民申請書揉成紙團,回到成大擔任機械系客座副教授。

1980年夏漢民接任成大校長,並一路催生成大醫學院、醫院。之後也擔任過國科會主委、政務委員等職位。

16年前退休後,夏漢民赴美傳教,與妻子創辦華美福音會,近些年因年紀漸長,開始思考返鄉。

夏漢民說,他在台北有房子,但當年在台北官場不愉快,印象最深刻的還是篳路藍縷創辦成大醫學院的過程。他也懷念台南的人情味,且台南溫暖氣候適合老人居住,生病了,可就近到成大醫院治療,「天時、地利、人和,樣樣具備」。

徐小虎 (Joan Stanley-Baker)

徐小虎著,許燕貞譯,《日本美術史》(台北:南天書局,1996) [民85].

1975-1980 加拿大 維多利亞美術館首任東方藝術部長
徐小虎(Joan Stanley-Baker)

教育程度及學術專長:


1987 英國 牛津大學 東方研究所 博士
(元明清書畫史研究、日本藝術史、書畫鑑定)

教學及行政經歷:

1996-2003 國立台南藝術學院 史評所教授兼學務長、專題講座教授

1991-1995 國立清華大學 副教授、教授

1991-1994 國立清華大學 藝術中心主任

1993-1994 台灣省立美術館 評審委員

1993 加拿大亞爾伯他大學 名譽客座教授(二至三月)

1994 行政院文化建設委員會 美術評審委員

1994 中原大學 建築系所室內設計課兼任授課

1987-1990 澳洲 墨爾本大學 藝術系所副教授

1980-1984 國立台灣大學外文系專任講師

1975-1980 加拿大 維多利亞美術館首任東方藝術部長



場次:第6場
主講者
徐小虎(Joan Stanley-Baker)
時間
11月07日(星期日)下午14:30-16:00
(後半小時為觀眾提問時間)
講題
古代中國與希臘之交流
地點
藝象藝文中心B1(第一會議室)

一、演講大要
中國與希臘兩大古文明是東、西文化的源頭,其強大的影響力使其文化能往外傳播得極為遙遠。因此,即使中希有很大的地理區隔,但從文獻記載與考古發現等直接、間接的證據都能證明二者在古代便有密切交往,甚至遠從商、周時期開始就有希臘的東西傳至中國等東方世界。
在希臘到中國、甚至日、韓的傳播路徑上,我們可以發現有許多圖像造型或藝術形式存在著流傳與演變的跡象。而下述的幾個話題或許可以提供有趣的探討:何以許 多地區都出現雙手各臥一禽或一獸的人像?希臘的月桂冠是否為其他地區頭冠形式的源頭?銅器時代克里特島女神的束髮與日本佛像的髮式是否有關?克里特島銅器 時代的金飾為何與古代韓國墓葬出土的金飾採用了相似的表面顆粒裝飾?
二、大綱

古代中國與希臘之交流
1. 希臘古稱Hellas是由中文發音(Xila)而來?
2. 希臘與中國之文化交流
3. 希臘與東方之文化交流
4. 文化交流之證據-圖像之比較

徐小虎委員學術著作表
(A)???? 期刊論文
2003‘Identifying Shen Zhou (1427-1509): Methodological Problems in Authentication’ 〈沈周書法鑑定中的方法論問題〉scheduled for publication in Oriental Art (June?) (附件一)
2003〈什麼是台灣藝術史?〉 (劉智遠譯) 《台灣美術 51號》台中。一月? (‘What is Taiwan Art History?’ Journal of Taiwan Museum of Art No.51, January) (附件二)
2002〈中國繪畫辨偽問題的爭議:一個評論〉(黃翠梅譯),國立台南藝術學院《史評集刊》,
創刊號。(附件三)
2002‘Plying the Past. Baroque Mannerisms in Qing Painting’ accepted for publication by Zurich, Artibus Asiae. (附件四)
2002<尋根與求新- 台灣藝術文化之危機> (劉智遠譯),《藝術家》No.329?? 2002.10 (附件五)
2002<砂中瀝金- 李安成> (劉智遠譯),《藝術家》No.324?? 2002.05 (附件六)
2002〈中國文化中來自游牧民族傳統若干中亞例子〉福州《福建漢學2000會議論文集》
(‘Nomadic Traditions in Chinese Culture: Some Central Asian Themes’ in Proceedings, Fujian Han Study Group Conference on Sinology, Quanzhou ) (Conf Aug 2000)? 199-208頁? (附件七)
2002 "Antichrist in Zaitun? Non-Chinese Sources on 13th and 14th c. Zaitun (Quanzhou). A Preliminary Overview of Franciscan Epistolae’ in The Chinese Face of Jesus Christ. Spring, Sankt Augustin, Monumenta Serica. (附件八)
2001 ‘Notes on the Maritime Silk Road: Non-Chinese Sources on 13th & 14th Century Zaitun (Quanzhou)’(〈梵蒂岡宮圖書館所提共的一些關於宋末元初活躍於中國的船教師信件〉),? Chi-Nan University Journal of History Studies, 《暨南史學》No.3, (June, 2000, 1-62). (附件九)
2001「關于13-14世紀刺桐的外文資料─對方各會修士信函的初步看法」。《海交史研究》,中國海外交通史研究會、泉州海外交通史博物館,2001.1,p.43-53 (附件十)
2001 Feminine Modes of Relating: Exploring Evidence Across Eurasia iin Coral Lake? Arts Festival Cross-Boundary Dialogues of the Arts Colleted Papers, Tainan, 112-145? 藝術史與考古學:從視像上之表現—尋找歐亞遺跡中的女性意識〉《跨界藝談論文集》,國立臺南藝術學院發行)(附件十一)
2000‘Issues of Authentication in The Field of Chinese Painting: A Critique’(〈中國繪畫領域中的辨偽爭議:一個評論〉)Oriental Art, XLVI.3? 106-117 (附件十二)
2000‘Anatomy and Physiology of Chinese Painting’ 〈中國繪畫之解剖學與生理學〉Chung Yuan University (1999) colloquy on Arts in Education, published in Spring, 2000. (附件十三)
2000 Japanese Art?? (see above) Spanish Edition. September? (附件十四)
2000 Japanese Art? Revised Edition. London and New York, Thames &? Hudson, March, (French edition 1990, Chinese edition 1996) (附件十五)
(B)國際研討會論文:
2002‘Liu Guosong: Tradition in Renewal’, 〈劉國松:傳統中之創新 〉,at Liu’s 70th Anniversary Retrospective and Conference sponsored by the Ministry of Culture May 20, at the History Museum, Beijing. (附件十六)
2000'Feminine Modes of Relating: Art-Historical Approaches' for the conference: East Asia - St Petersburg - Europe: InterCivilization Contacts and Perspectives on Economic Cooperation.? International symposium, St Petersburg State University Oriental Faculty. Proceedings, Oct. 〈女性意識從視像上之表現─比較克利特島銅器時代與日本平安時代的文物藝術〉(附件十七)
(C)? Contemporary and Public? Art, Theory, Criticism, Reviews, Personal Exhibits
2002‘From Taiwan Regionalism to Globalization” in A Different Voice, Conversations with the Rev. Shengyan Fashi. In Dharma Drum Journal (Feb-March) (附件十八)
2002‘The Magic of Vibrant Space: A Gathering of Intelligence and Vision’ in Tsing Hua University's Public Art Project: Enlivening a Space (pp.5-9) (附件十九)
2002‘Public Art Project #2 At NTHUAC: An Announcement’ in as above (pp.21-24) (附件二十)
2002‘Male Pregnancy’ Conceptual Art Project by Li Mingwei, Panel at Museum of Contemporary Art., Taipei. (附件二十一)
2001‘State of Taiwan Sculpture Today: A Conversation with sculptor Tu Kuo-wei’, in Contemporary Art. Taipei, Taipei Fine Arts Museum? Bimonthly, April Issue,? #95. (附件二十二)
2001‘Architecture and Art in the Life of Chen Qikuan’ Tunghai University Architecture Department Conference Publication, (附件二十三)
2001‘Liu Guosong on His Role in Twentieth-Century Art’ in Orientations, April. (附件二十四)
2001 ‘A Poem-Critique’. Yishujia Magazine, March issue:? page 324. (附件二十五)
2001‘White Paper On Higher Education’大學教育政策白皮書,英譯者:徐小虎. (附件二十六)


2007/12/26

祈禱之手 from Prof.徐小虎

祈禱之手
德國藝術大師
Albecht Durer 杜勒,有一幅名畫『祈禱之手』,這幅畫的背後有一則愛與犧牲的故事

十五世紀時,在德國的一個小村莊裡,住了一個有十八個孩子的家庭。父親是一名冶金匠為了維持一家生計,他每天工作十八個小時。
生活儘管窘迫逼人,然而這個家庭其中兩個孩子卻有一個同樣的夢想。他們是法蘭西斯和亞爾伯,兩人都希望可以發展自己在藝術方面的天份。不過他們也瞭解到父親無法在經濟上供他們兩到藝術學院讀書。
晚上,兩兄弟在床上討論一番後,得到一個結論:以擲銅板決定─勝方到藝術學院讀書,敗方則到礦場工作賺錢;四年後,在礦場工作的那一個再到藝術學院讀書,由學成畢業那一個賺錢支持。結果,弟弟亞爾伯勝出。
亞爾伯在藝術學院表現很突出,他的作品比教授的還要好。他畢業後,並沒有忘記他的承諾,立刻返回自己的村莊,尋找四年來一值在礦場工作,供他讀書的哥哥法蘭西斯。
他返回家鄉那一天,家人為他準備了盛宴,慶祝他學成歸來。席間,亞爾伯起立答謝法蘭西斯幾年來對他的支持『現在輪到你了,哥哥,我會全力支持你到藝術學院攻讀,實現你的夢想!』
親友目光都轉移到法蘭西斯身上,只見法蘭西斯兩行眼淚直流。他垂下頭,邊搖頭邊說:『不 ........
他站起來,望著心愛的弟弟亞爾伯,握著他的手說:『看看我雙手,四年來在礦場工作,毀了我的手,關節動彈不得,現在我的手連舉杯為你慶賀也不可能,何況是揮動畫筆或雕刻刀呢?弟弟,太遲了....不過看到你能實現你的夢想,我十分高興。』
幾天後,亞爾伯不經意的看到法蘭西斯跪在地上,合起他那粗糙的手祈禱著:「主啊!我這雙手已無法讓我實現成為藝術家的夢想,願您將我的才華與能力加倍賜於我弟弟亞爾伯。」
原本對哥哥已十分感激的亞爾伯,見到這一幕立刻決定繪下哥哥的這一雙手。
時至四百五十年後的今天,亞爾伯‧杜勒的速寫、素描、水彩畫、木刻、銅刻可以在世界各地博物館找到;不過最為人熟悉的,莫過於他的『祈禱之手』。


徐小虎>講座<收藏現代水墨畫> 在典藏創意空間2008/09/07下午- 閒 ...





Prof.徐小虎



"徐小虎教授是個很可愛的教授,一上曾經去聽她關於繪畫真偽的演講。
她講到關於趙孟頫畫的馬時,說了這麼一句話:

「那個馬的腳好像是裝上去的一樣!」就這麼一本正經地說出這句話。"

2012年7月1日 星期日

Elinor Ostrom,

Elinor Ostrom, Winner of Nobel in Economics, Dies at 78

Professor Ostrom’s prizewinning work examined how people collaborate and organize themselves to manage common resources like forests or fisheries, even when governments are not involved.


経済学者のオストロム氏死去 女性初のノーベル経済学賞

写真オストロム氏=インディアナ大提供
エリノア・オストロムさん(米国のノーベル経済学賞受賞者、米インディアナ大教授)が12日、インディアナ州の病院で死去、78歳。同大によると、死因はがん。

2009年に女性で初めてノーベル経済学賞を受賞した。政府などが管理していない牧草地や森林などの共有資源は荒れ果てると考えられてきたが、使う人たちが自分たちで規則をつくって利害調整し、うまく運営されることを解明した。

10年には環境問題に貢献した人に贈られる「KYOTO地球環境の殿堂」に、12年には米タイム誌の「世界で最も影響力がある100人」に選ばれた。(ワシントン)





Elinor Ostrom, defender of the commons, died on June 12th, aged 78



IT SEEMED to Elinor Ostrom that the world contained a large body of common sense. People, left to themselves, would sort out rational ways of surviving and getting along. Although the world’s arable land, forests, fresh water and fisheries were all finite, it was possible to share them without depleting them and to care for them without fighting. While others wrote gloomily of the tragedy of the commons, seeing only overfishing and overfarming in a free-for-all of greed, Mrs Ostrom, with her loud laugh and louder tops, cut a cheery and contrarian figure.
Years of fieldwork, by herself and others, had shown her that humans were not trapped and helpless amid diminishing supplies. She had looked at forests in Nepal, irrigation systems in Spain, mountain villages in Switzerland and Japan, fisheries in Maine and Indonesia. She had even, as part of her PhD at the University of California, Los Angeles, studied the water wars and pumping races going on in the 1950s in her own dry backyard.
All these cases had taught her that, over time, human beings tended to draw up sensible rules for the use of common-pool resources. Neighbours set boundaries and assigned shares, with each individual taking it in turn to use water, or to graze cows on a certain meadow. Common tasks, such as clearing canals or cutting timber, were done together at a certain time. Monitors watched out for rule-breakers, fining or eventually excluding them. The schemes were mutual and reciprocal, and many had worked well for centuries.

Best of all, they were not imposed from above. Mrs Ostrom put no faith in governments, nor in large conservation schemes paid for with aid money and crawling with concrete-bearing engineers. “Polycentrism” was her ideal. Caring for the commons had to be a multiple task, organised from the ground up and shaped to cultural norms. It had to be discussed face to face, and based on trust. Mrs Ostrom, besides poring over satellite data and quizzing lobstermen herself, enjoyed employing game theory to try to predict the behaviour of people faced with limited resources. In her Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at the University of Indiana—set up with her husband Vincent, a political scientist, in 1973—her students were given shares in a notional commons. When they simply discussed what they should do before they did it, their rate of return from their “investments” more than doubled.

“Small is beautiful” sometimes seemed to be her creed. Her workshop looked somewhat like a large, cluttered cottage, reflecting her and Vincent’s idea that science was a form of artisanship. When the vogue in America was all for consolidation of public services, she ran against it. For some years she compared police forces in the town of Speedway and the city of Indianapolis, finding that forces of 25-50 officers performed better by almost every measure than 100-strong metropolitan teams. But smaller institutions, she cautioned, might not work better in every case. As she travelled the world, giving out good and sharp advice, “No panaceas!” was her cry.

Scarves for the troops
Rather than littleness, collaboration was her watchword. Neighbours thrived if they worked together. The best-laid communal schemes would fall apart once people began to act only as individuals, or formed elites. Born poor herself, to a jobless film-set-maker in Los Angeles who soon left her mother alone, she despaired of people who wanted only a grand house or a fancy car. Her childhood world was coloured by digging a wartime “victory” vegetable garden, knitting scarves for the troops, buying her clothes in a charity store: mutual efforts to a mutual end.
The same approach was valuable in academia, too. Her own field, institutional economics (or “the study of social dilemmas”, as she thought of it), straddled political science, ecology, psychology and anthropology. She liked to learn from all of them, marching boldly across the demarcation lines to hammer out good policy, and she welcomed workshop-partners from any discipline, singing folk songs with them, too, if anyone had a guitar. They were family. Pure economists looked askance at this perky, untidy figure, especially when she became the first woman to win a shared Nobel prize for economics in 2009. She was not put out; it was the workshop’s prize, anyway, she said, and the money would go for scholarships.

Yet the incident shed a keen light on one particular sort of collaboration: that between men and women. Lin (as everyone called her) and Vincent, both much-honoured professors, were joint stars of their university in old age. But she had been dissuaded from studying economics at UCLA because, being a girl, she had been steered away from maths at high school; and she was dissuaded from doing political science because, being a girl, she could not hope for a good university post. As a graduate, she had been offered only secretarial jobs; and her first post at Indiana involved teaching a 7.30am class in government that no one else would take.
There was, she believed, a great common fund of sense and wisdom in the world. But it had been an uphill struggle to show that it reposed in both women and men; and that humanity would do best if it could exploit it to the full.