國立清華大學National Tsing Hua University
張錯
許杏晨


石牧民


English Literature info


Chicago Architecture Center


Francis Bacon (artist)


CNA
Jeff Jarvis
Todd Alcott
What Vance did yesterday, in Hollywood terms, is called "The Stranger in the Room." Screenwriters, especially, are well aware of the role of The Stranger in the Room. The Stranger in the Room is anyone in a meeting who is just there "as a friend," someone who has no creative authority on, and no stake in, the project being discussed, anyone in the room who is a last-minute addition. Sometimes it's a 20-something intern, sometimes it's an executive from a sister office, sometimes it's someone from marketing, sometimes it's an older, more experienced producer who's lending a hand for a day.
Example: I was once pitching a legacy reboot project to a legendary producer, a real lion of the industry. His 22-year-old daughter was also in the room. She interrupted my pitch to say "Right, but we don't want, like, any conflict in the movie."
The purpose of The Stranger in the Room is to destroy the project. The Stranger in the Room is the one who, after the writer and producer and director have all agreed on the direction of the story, says "How will that play in China?" or "This sounds a lot like [movie X]" or "But isn't this movie really about love?"
The Stranger in the Room is always, always there at the behest of the most powerful person in the room. Whether the Stranger understands it or not, they are acting on the behalf of the studio, and it is the studio's natural desire to say "no," because no one has ever gotten fired for saying "no," and Hollywood executives, more than anything else, spend their entire careers terrified they're going to lose their jobs for saying "yes."
But they don't want to be disliked by creatives, so instead of saying "no," they bring in a friend, either a protege or an ally from another department, or just grab someone from the hallway, a producer on another project, and ask them to sit in on the meeting. They don't know what they're looking for, they hear a hundred pitches a day, they don't know what, if anything, will please their bosses, so they bring in an ally to get another viewpoint, any viewpoint, on the project, so that they can then say "no" without looking like an asshole. Instead, they can say "Yes, that's a good point, we have to keep in mind the China market," or "Yeah, this DOES sound a lot like [movie X] now that I hear it out loud," or "Yeah, what about love? We're forgetting all about love, why isn't your action movie pitch really about love?"
And then, suddenly, the balance in the room shifts. Suddenly, a collaboration, a negotiation as it were, becomes an argument. Where, just moments earlier, everyone was agreeing on how awesome the project sounded, now, suddenly, the creatives are on one side and the suits are on the other, and the meeting becomes a power struggle, one the creatives can only lose, because the suits have the money and the creatives only have the art.
So, in Hollywood terms, Zelenskyy was the writer/director/producer, Trump was studio executive terrified of losing his job, and Vance was the disinterested ally brought in to bring up some random point that would turn the negotiation into an argument that the writer/director/producer cannot possibly win. I'll leave it up to you to figure out who studio head is.
Behind the Collision: Trump Jettisons Ukraine on His Way to a Larger Goal
經濟學人· 週五的災難讓基輔政壇的大部分人都陷入了震驚的沉默。現在,關於弗拉基米爾·澤連斯基是否仍然是領導國家的合適人選的爭論日益激烈 https://econ.trib.al/UYoZfjg 照片:法新社
The shock of Friday’s disaster has left much of political Kyiv in stunned silence. There is now a growing debate about whether Volodymyr Zelensky is still the right person to lead the country https://econ.trib.al/UYoZfjg
Photo: AFP

The New Yorker
With No Buy-in From Egypt or Jordan, Trump Appears to Back Away From His Gaza Plan
Earlier this month, the president said he favored taking control of Gaza and displacing the Palestinian population of the devastated seaside enclave. But Egypt and Jordan flatly rejected cooperating.
Europeans Are Left Wondering Where U.S. Stands on Ukraine and Russia
In public, Secretary of State Marco Rubio signaled a rapprochement with Moscow. In private, he tried to reassure European leaders that U.S. policy wasn’t changing.

Like last Saturday, Times Opinion is using today’s newsletter to stay on top of President Trump’s moves, putting a spotlight on where Americans can’t afford to turn away from.
Where America Stands: Trump smeared the founding fathers in Week 5 by declaring himself “king” — of the United States? The world? His narcissism knows no bounds — as he grasped for godlike power to pronounce congestion pricing “dead” in Manhattan. Calling himself “king” denigrates every American who has fought and died for democracy, but Trump sees those heroes as “losers” anyway. Of course, he doesn’t have a king’s power, but his efforts to remake America pay no heed to the rule of law.
What Mattered Most This Week: Ukraine. Trump sent mixed messages, which he sees as core to his deal making, but make no mistake about his pro-Putin posture. Trump accused Ukraine of launching the war and called its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a dictator — both lies — while squeezing Kyiv for an earth minerals deal and a cease-fire in the war with Russia. Now, it’s worth keeping in mind, Trump is not alone in disliking Zelensky; the Biden White House deeply mistrusted him too. But Trump approaches Ukraine with a dangerous moral relativism: He doesn’t care about good and evil, as he showed Friday when he said he was “tired” of hearing about Putin’s war crimes. Trump cares about strength and leverage. “He has no cards,” he said of Zelensky. Trump sees the world as his casino and all that matters is your cards.
Worth reading: My colleagues Bret Stephens and M. Gessen went deep on Ukraine, Putin, Trump and Europe in this round table, and the Times Opinion editorial board weighed in today on Ukraine. Susan Glasser of The New Yorker has a good piece on Trump’s “Putinization of America,” and The Wall Street Journal had strong reporting about the implications for NATO.
The Most Important Long Game in Washington: Elon Musk. He and his youthful goon squad are running amok across federal agencies, with more layoffs hitting disaster relief programs, the Interior Department and the I.R.S. Americans want competence from their government, not chaos; Musk may enjoy breaking things, but the laws of political gravity suggest Republicans will pay the price.
Worth reading: A Politico story about Republican lawmakers’ panic over the DOGE firing spree even as they cheer it in public; a Washington Post story along similar lines but about executive officials; and this Journal story about how X is effectively cashing in on Musk’s position. My colleague Zeynep Tufekci had a great column Friday on the digital clues to what Musk is up to.
The Most Important Development Below the Radar: The Trump administration’s intervention on behalf of Andrew Tate. Trump’s moral relativism goes into overdrive when it comes to defending male predators.
Watching Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: The health and human services secretary said “nothing” is off limits in his new plans to scrutinize childhood vaccine schedules, psychiatric medications and other public health issues. Every senator who confirmed Kennedy while harboring private doubts about him are now officially on the hook for the future of children’s health.
川普真的對自己欲罷不能
2025 年 2 月 22 日
川普總統在拉什莫爾山前擺姿勢。
圖片來源:Saul Loeb/法新社 — Getty Images
分享全文
派崔克·希利
派崔克·希利
副觀點編輯
您正在閱讀《今日觀點》新聞通訊。 獲得專家對新聞的分析以及影響世界的偉大思想的指南。將其發送到您的收件匣。
就像上週六一樣,《時代觀點》利用今天的新聞通訊來關注川普總統的動向,將焦點放在美國人無法忽視的地方。
美國的立場:川普在第五週宣稱自己是美國“國王”,以此誹謗開國元勳?世界?他的自戀無止境——他利用神一般的權力宣布曼哈頓的擁堵收費「死亡」。自稱「國王」貶低了每一位為民主而戰鬥和犧牲的美國人,但川普無論如何都把這些英雄視為「失敗者」。當然,他沒有國王的權力,但他重塑美國的努力卻無視法治。
本週最重要的事:烏克蘭。川普發出了混合訊息,他認為這是達成協議的核心,但毫無疑問他的親普丁姿態。川普指責烏克蘭發動戰爭,並稱烏克蘭總統澤倫斯基為獨裁者——這都是謊言——同時向基輔施壓,要求達成地球礦產協議並停止與俄羅斯的戰爭。現在,值得記住的是,川普並不是唯一一個不喜歡澤連斯基的人;拜登白宮也對他深深不信任。但川普以一種危險的道德相對主義來對待烏克蘭問題:他不在乎善惡,正如他在周五表示「厭倦」聽到普丁的戰爭罪行時所表現出來的。川普關心的是實力和影響力。他談到澤連斯基時說:“他沒有底牌。”川普將世界視為他的賭場,最重要的就是你的牌。
值得一讀:我的同事 Bret Stephens 和 M. Gessen 在這場圓桌會議上深入探討了烏克蘭、普丁、川普和歐洲議題,《紐約時報》雜誌觀點版編輯委員會今天也對烏克蘭問題發表了看法。 《紐約客》的蘇珊·格拉瑟撰寫了一篇有關川普「美國普丁化」的精彩文章,《華爾街日報》也對其對北約的影響進行了詳盡報道。
華盛頓最重要的長期遊戲:伊隆馬斯克。他和他的年輕打手在聯邦機構中橫行霸道,導致救災計畫、內政部和國稅局遭到進一步裁員。美國人希望政府有能力,而不是混亂;馬斯克也許喜歡打破常規,但政治引力定律顯示共和黨將付出代價。
值得一讀:Politico 的一篇報導講述了共和黨議員在公開場合為 DOGE 瘋狂解僱而感到恐慌; 《華盛頓郵報》的一篇類似報道,但涉及行政官員; 《華爾街日報》的這篇報導講述了 X 如何有效利用馬斯克的地位來賺錢。我的同事 Zeynep Tufekci 週五發表了一篇精彩的專欄文章,從數位線索揭示了馬斯克的所作所為。
未被注意到的最重要的進展:川普政府代表安德魯泰特 (Andrew Tate) 進行干 預。當談到為男性色狼辯護時,川普的道德相對主義就變得更加極端。
關注小羅伯特·F·甘迺迪:衛生與公眾服務部部長表示,他計劃嚴格審查兒童疫苗接種時間表、精神藥物和其他公共衛生問題,新計劃「沒有任何」限制。每一個在確認甘迺迪上任的同時卻對甘迺迪心存私疑慮的參議員,現在都要為兒童的未來健康承擔責任。
-----The Economist兩封面 主編Zanny Minton Beddoes說此期要點:
我從事記者工作已有三十年,在這三十年裡,很少有像這個星期這樣令人頭暈目眩的一周。 9/11襲擊、全球金融危機的某些時刻以及新冠疫情的初期,都是世界似乎在幾天之內發生根本性變化的罕見例子。對我們歐洲人來說,本週的地緣政治變化似乎同樣具有重大意義。唐納德·川普總統似乎正在拋棄烏克蘭,背棄自第二次世界大戰以來一直存在的跨大西洋聯盟,並完全認同弗拉基米爾·普丁的言論。
在上週末的慕尼黑安全會議上,美國對其歐洲盟友的公開態度轉向了徹底的敵視,我感覺自己彷彿坐在前排,親眼見證了歷史的誕生。自此以後,大西洋兩岸的事件發展迅速。在歐洲,人們感到恐慌,因為歐洲大陸的領導人認為,創建北約聯盟的國家現在似乎準備摧毀它。
同時,在美國,隨著川普總統任期的第一個月結束,他繼續快速突破自身權力的界限。為了反映這些重大事件,本週我們非常不同尋常地推出了兩期以川普先生為主角的不同封面。
在歐洲,我們的設計師讓川普坐在一張普丁風格的長桌首席,與俄羅斯總統進行磋商。你會注意到空著的座位——如果烏克蘭總統弗拉基米爾·澤連斯基沒有被川普排除在初步談判之外,他可能就坐在這裡。兩人之間的口水戰正在升級。在川普的領導下,烏克蘭被背叛,俄羅斯正在重建,美國不再能在戰爭時期向歐洲提供援助。這對歐洲安全的影響是嚴重的,但正如我們的領導人所說,歐洲大陸的領導人和人民尚未意識到這一點。
我們在其他地方的封面上展示了戴著王冠的川普先生。自從重返政壇以來,他讓自己的支持者歡欣鼓舞,而讓對手感到震驚。總統表示他正在清除浪費、欺詐和濫用。他的反對者警告說,他正在將國家帶入憲法危機,甚至是川普式的獨裁。我們的領導和隨行簡報以冷靜的事實分析和仔細的歷史回顧來評估川普先生任職的第一個月。總統有權為官僚機構設定新的目標。川普並不是橢圓形辦公室裡第一個抱持極端主義野心的人。他距離推翻美國的憲法秩序還很遠。但川普實現其目標的方式——有時甚至是肆意殘忍——是危險和錯誤的。而川普這個人,會考慮任何極端做法。為艱苦的鬥爭做好準備。
|
|
|




沒有留言:
張貼留言