MY life with Walter Lippmann began casually enough and initially came about more by accident than design.
我的生活與華特·李普曼的交集開始得相當隨意，最初更是出於偶然而非刻意安排。

It turned into an involvement that lasted for a decade. In 1969, I was working as a political journalist in New York, having returned from several years in Europe where I had written two books on American foreign policy. One morning I got a phone call from Richard Rovere, the well-known political columnist for The New Yorker, a man I knew only by reputation. He surprised me by asking whether I might be interested in working with him on a book about Walter Lippmann. Of course I knew Lippmann as the nation's most eminent journalist, almost an institution in himself. But Rovere also revealed to me how deeply Lippmann had delved into politics - far more so than any of his readers had realized.
它變成了一段持續十年的投入。1969 年，我在紐約擔任政治記者，剛從歐洲回來，在那裡我寫了兩本關於美國外交政策的書。一天早上，我接到理查德·羅維（Richard Rovere）的電話，他是《紐約客》的知名政治專欄作家，我只聞其名。他令我驚訝地問我是否有興趣與他合作寫一本關於沃爾特·李普曼（Walter Lippmann）的書。當然，我知道李普曼是國家最傑出的記者，幾乎是他自己的一個機構。但羅維也向我透露了李普曼對政治的深入研究——遠超過他的讀者所意識到的。

Rovere, once he had hooked me, happily withdrew from the project completely. He much preferred to write his magazine column than to get bogged down in what he feared might be a very long project. There were times when I realized how wise he had been. Lippmann was then 80, and his life was a panorama of virtually everything that had happened to America in the 20th century - Bull Moose progressivism, Greenwich Village modernism, saving the world for democracy, the Jazz Age and ''normalcy,'' Teapot Dome and the Lindbergh baby, the New Deal, Stalin and Hitler, the cold war, Kennedy's Camelot and, topping it all, the current crisis, the Vietnam War, which Lippmann now so passionately opposed.
羅維爾一旦把我吸引進來，便高興地完全退出了這個專案。他寧願撰寫他的雜誌專欄，也不願意陷入他擔心可能會非常漫長的專案中。有時我意識到他是多麼明智。當時李普曼已經 80 歲了，他的一生幾乎涵蓋了 20 世紀美國所經歷的一切——公鹿進步主義、格林威治村現代主義、為民主拯救世界、爵士時代和「正常狀態」、茶壺山醜聞和林德伯格嬰兒案、新政、史達林和希特勒、冷戰、肯尼迪的卡美洛王朝，以及最為尖銳的當前危機，越南戰爭，李普曼現在對此強烈反對。

After several conversations with Lippmann, whom I had met only briefly a few years before, he generously agreed to give me full and exclusive access to his voluminous papers. He also offered to let me use them in virtually any way I pleased within the confines of biography. Now that the preliminaries were out of the way, all I had to do was to learn everything there was to know about the life of Walter Lippmann. I settled down at Yale University, deep in the neo-Gothic bowels of the manuscripts and archives collection where the papers were housed. With the help of a friendly staff, I slowly began working my way through the immense collection. In addition to some 100,000 personal and business letters, it included nearly everything Lippmann had ever written for publication, including his editorials over the years for The New Republic and The World (the New York daily he edited through most of the 1920's), hundreds of magazine articles, more than a score of books, and of course the newspaper columns he wrote for 36 years.
在與李普曼進行幾次交談後，我之前只與他短暫見過幾面，他慷慨地同意給予我全面且獨家的權限，使用他龐大的文件資料。他還表示，只要在傳記的範疇內，我可以隨意使用這些資料。既然前期的準備工作已經完成，接下來我要做的就是盡可能地了解華特·李普曼的一生。我安頓在耶魯大學，深處新哥特式建築的文稿和檔案館中，這裡存放著他的文件。在友好工作人員的幫助下，我逐漸開始研究這龐大的收藏。除了約 10 萬封個人及商業信件外，還包括李普曼幾乎所有為出版而寫的內容，包括他多年來為《新共和》和《世界報》（他在 1920 年代大部分時間擔任主編的紐約日報）撰寫的社論、數百篇雜誌文章、超過二十本書籍，以及當然還有他 36 年來撰寫的報紙專欄。

Continue reading the main story

Robert O. Anthony, a retired businessman who had made an avocation of collecting Lippmann's published works, was the curator of the Lippmann papers and saved me from a great many perils. He also knew what I only gradually learned: that Lippmann had led a far more complex life than anyone like myself, who had become aware of him only in the 1960's, could ever have imagined.
羅伯特·O·安東尼，一位退休商人，將收集李普曼的出版作品當作副業，他是李普曼文件的策展人，並讓我免於許多危險。他也知道我逐漸才明白的事：李普曼的生活遠比像我這樣只在 1960 年代才開始注意到他的人所能想像的更加複雜。

Here was a man, I later discovered, who was not quite so comfortable as it seemed with who he was; a man who had been born to privilege and who won almost every honor, but was long denied happiness; and a man who, in middle age, had his emotional life turned upside down when he ran off with his best friend's wife. What had begun as an exercise in exposition increasingly became a detective story with the subject both my client and my quarry. As I went through the yellowing articles and columns, I was sometimes surprised or puzzled by the views he took. Why, for example, did the young man who served Woodrow Wilson enthusiastically and drafted most of the Fourteen Points so vehemently denounce the Treaty of Versailles in 1919? Why did the former Fabian Socialist become so conservative in the 1920's and 1930's - but then less conservative as he grew older? Why did he excitedly support Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 and then turn violently against the New Deal only three years later? Why was he so out of step with the new cold war consensus in the late 1940's? And why did such a Washington insider and team player become such an impassioned critic of the Vietnam War and the intellectual elite who prosecuted it?
這是一個我後來發現並不完全如表面那般自在的人；一個出生於優渥環境、贏得幾乎所有榮譽，卻長期被幸福拒之門外的人；一個在 middle age 時，因與摯友的妻子私奔而情感生活徹底顛倒的人。起初僅是闡述的練習，漸漸變成了一個偵探故事，主角既是我的委託人也是我的獵物。當我翻閱那些泛黃的文章和專欄時，有時會對他所持的觀點感到驚訝或困惑。例如，為什麼這位熱情服務於伍德羅·威爾遜並起草大部分「十四點原則」的年輕人，在 1919 年會如此激烈地抨擊《凡爾賽條約》？為什麼這位前費邊社會主義者在 1920 年代和 1930 年代變得如此保守——但隨著年齡增長又變得較不保守？為什麼他在 1932 年激動地支持富蘭克林·D·羅斯福，僅三年後卻又激烈反對「新政」？為什麼他在 1940 年代末期與新的冷戰共識如此不合拍？ 為何這位華盛頓內部人士和團隊合作者會成為如此激昂的越南戰爭批評者，以及抨擊那些推動這場戰爭的知識精英？

If certain things perplexed me, why didn't I just ask him? Sometimes I did, but the answers were not always illuminating. Though he had volunteered to cooperate fully with me, he had not anticipated that I would ask anything ''personal.'' I soon learned that his definition of personal was quite broad. One day I asked him, in all innocence, what it was that his father had done for a living. I knew the family had been wealthy and that the wealth was connected to real estate, but I wasn't sure how. He looked at me with his slightly bulging, heavy-hooded eyes for what seemed like minutes, and then said solemnly: ''I wouldn't want you to make a novel of this.''
如果某些事情讓我困惑，為什麼我不直接問他？有時候我確實這麼做了，但答案並不總是那麼明瞭。雖然他主動表示要全力配合我，但他沒有料到我会問任何「個人」問題。我很快就發現，他對「個人」的定義相當廣泛。有一天，我完全無心地問他，他的父親是做什麼工作的。我知道他家境富裕，而且這份財富與房地產有關，但我不確切知道是如何相關的。他用那雙略微突出、厚重眼皮的眼睛看著我，似乎盯了好幾分鐘，然後莊重地說：「我不希望你把這件事寫成小說。」

Naturally my curiosity was aroused, and my perfunctory question began to assume considerable significance. What could Lippmann's father have been? I asked myself. A drunkard, a gangster, a convict? The truth, as I later learned, was quite prosaic. He amassed rents and clipped coupons. But the incident had been revealing. It had shown Lippmann's extreme sense of privacy and also his sensitivity regarding his parents.
自然我的好奇心被激起，我原本敷衍的問題開始顯得相當重要。李普曼的父親究竟是什麼樣的人？我問自己。是個酒鬼、幫派分子、還是罪犯？然而，正如我後來所知，真相相當平淡無奇。他只是收取租金和剪下息票。但這件事卻透露出許多。它展現了李普曼極端的隱私意識，以及他對父母的高度敏感。

The episode made me realize that I would have to become a detective. I could not simply rely on Lippmann's recollections to understand what and who had been important in his life. I put increasing importance on what other people could tell me about him. Unsurprisingly, the person I most wanted to talk to was the one he least wanted me to see. This was the woman he had married as a young man and then divorced 20 years later in a messy scandal. He would not discuss her, nor would he tell me where I could find her. In fact, he claimed not to know whether she was still alive. After much sleuthing, I located her in what had once been their summer home on Long Island. Elated at my discovery, I felt that at last I would learn about Lippmann's life during those shadowy years between the end of the First World War and the beginning of the second.
這段經歷讓我意識到，我必須成為一名偵探。我無法僅僅依賴李普曼的回憶來理解他生命中重要的人和事。我越來越重視其他人能夠告訴我關於他的事情。不出所料，我最想談話的人正是他最不希望我見到的人。這位女士是他年輕時娶的妻子，20 年後在一場醜聞中離婚。他拒絕談論她，也不會告訴我能在哪裡找到她。實際上，他聲稱不知道她是否還在世。經過大量調查，我在他們曾經的長島夏日別墅中找到了她。對於這一發現我感到欣喜若狂，覺得終於能夠了解李普曼在第一次世界大戰結束到第二次世界大戰開始之間那段陰影歲月的生活。

But locating her was only the beginning. At first she would not see me. It took me months to persuade her to do so, and only with the promise that I would ask nothing ''personal.'' Then she insisted that I obtain Lippmann's written permission. Somewhat sheepishly I approached him with the news that his first wife was indeed alive and living not far away. He seemed neither particularly surprised nor interested. Then I told him of the condition she had imposed. He sat down and wrote a short note, not addressed to her, but To Whom It May Concern, stating that he had no objection to her speaking to me.
但找到她只是開始。起初她不肯見我。我花了好幾個月的時間才說服她，而且還是答應不問任何「私人」問題的條件下。然後她堅持要我取得李普曼的書面同意。我有些尷尬地去找他，告訴他他的第一任妻子確實還健在，而且就住在不遠的地方。他似乎並不特別驚訝或感興趣。然後我告訴他那個條件。他坐下來寫了一張短箋，不是寫給她的，而是給「有關人士」，表示他不反對她跟我談話。

Note in hand I drove out to an unfashionable village on the North Shore of Long Island. There I found a modest wooden house that had seen better days and a sprightly woman in her late 70's with a hearty laugh and an unaffected manner. She was - with her sequined glasses - not at all what I had expected. Yet I liked her and we had a nice time together. The first Mrs. Lippmann seemed to bear no grudges at all, but neither did she appear to have much insight into the man with whom she had lived for so long. I was not surprised that, when the opportunity came, he left her. Also I came away feeling that I had established a connection with his life quite independent of the parameters he had set out for me. Increasingly, I realized that I could not merely tell his story. Rather, I would have to tell my story about him. Inevitably that would put us into competition and even into conflict. He would want his story told in a certain way, although he would never have said so directly. That is what he had meant by his admonition that I not get too personal.
手握筆記，我開車前往長島北岸一個不起眼的村莊。在那裡，我找到了一棟曾經風光過的簡樸木屋，以及一位年近八十、活力充沛、笑聲洪亮、舉止自然的女士。她戴著閃亮的眼鏡，與我預期中的模樣截然不同。然而，我喜歡她，我們相處得很愉快。第一任李普曼夫人似乎毫無怨言，但她對於與之共度多年生活的男人也似乎沒有多少洞察。當機會來臨時，他離開她，我並不感到意外。此外，我離開時感覺到自己與他的生活建立了一種連結，這種連結完全獨立於他所為我設定的範疇。我越來越意識到，我無法僅僅讲述他的故事。相反，我必須讲述關於他的我的故事。這不可避免地會使我們處於競爭甚至衝突之中。他希望他的故事以某種方式被讲述，盡管他從未直接這樣說過。那就是他所謂的警告我不要過於 personal 的意思。

Although Faye (to myself, though not to them, I had come to call all the people in his life by their first names) had been discreet, two things she mentioned intrigued me. One was that Walter Lippmann disliked his mother (perhaps for that worldly woman's lack of interest in him during his childhood), and felt contemptuous of his acquiescent father, from whom he had refused to accept money once he discovered that part of the family fortune came from tenements. The other was that he made it a point to avoid resort hotels that discriminated against Jews. U NTIL that time I had no indication that he had any particular feelings about being Jewish. His grandparents had come from Germany in the 1840's, and he had grown up at a time when it was fashionable to be ''cosmopolitan'' and eschew parochial loyalties. Judge Louis Brandeis of the Supreme Court, before his conversion to Zionism, expressed his disapproval of the ''hyphenated American.'' Among many in Lippmann's social class in New York at the turn of the century, to be ''ethnic'' was to be narrow-minded. Lippmann was neither religious nor did he take any part in what could be called Jewish affairs. Only rarely did he write about the Jews as such. Most of his readers probably did not think of him as Jewish. Indeed, as one of his gentile friends once said to me, ''Walter simply decided that he wasn't Jewish, and that was that.''
雖然費伊（對我自己而言，雖然不是對他們，我已經習慣以名字稱呼他生命中的人）一直很謹慎，但她提到的兩件事引起了我的興趣。一是沃爾特·李普曼不喜歡他的母親（或許是因為這位世故的婦女在他童年時對他不感興趣），並且對他那順從的父親感到輕蔑，他曾拒絕接受父親的錢，因為他發現家產的一部分來自於出租屋。另一件事是他刻意避免那些歧視猶太人的度假酒店。直到那時，我才知道他對自己的猶太身份有特別的感受。他的祖父母在 1840 年代從德國來到美國，他成長的時代，時髦的是要「世界主義」並避免狹隘的地方忠誠。最高法院的法官路易斯·布蘭代斯在皈依猶太復國主義之前，曾表達過對「帶連字符的美國人」的不滿。在 20 世紀初紐約李普曼所屬的社會階層中，被視為「族群」意味著心胸狹窄。李普曼既不信教，也沒有參與任何可以稱為猶太事務的活動。 他很少特別撰寫關於猶太人的文章。大多數讀者可能並不認為他是猶太人。的確，正如他的一位非猶太朋友 once 對我說的，「Walter simply decided that he wasn't Jewish, and that was that.」

Continue reading the main story

But that, as it turned out, wasn't that. It rarely is. Lippmann had a complicated attitude toward his own Jewishness. This I learned not from him but from others. First, with the help of an enterprising student at Yale, I discovered a lost manuscript and a series of letters between him and the editor of a Jew-ish magazine. In the 1920's, he had written several articles - one so intemperate that he withdrew it before publication - criticizing Jews for being clannish and vulgar. Second, a colleague who was writing a biography of one of Lippmann's contemporaries sent me an exchange of letters with Felix Frankfurter, who later also sat on the Supreme Court, that left little question as to Lippmann's sensitivity to the issue. HE and Frankfurter had been close friends for nearly two decades. Suddenly in 1933, both their correspondence and their friendship came to an end. When I asked Lippmann why, he professed not to remember. However, from the material my colleague had sent me, I discovered that Frankfurter had taken bitter exception to a column Lippmann wrote in 1933, shortly after Hitler came to power, in which he called for tolerance toward the German ''revolution,'' despite its abuses. Frankfurter saw it as an apology for Hitler and a lack of sympathy for the Jews. He was so angry that he broke all connection with Lippmann. Regardless of the circumstances of the case or the merits of his action, this was a significant event. Lippmann could hardly not have remembered it. With a little trepidation I confronted him with Frankfurter's own account of the episode. He seemed a bit annoyed, though not surprised, and said that Frankfurter always dramatized things. He would pursue the subject no further.
但結果證明，並非如此。事情往往不盡如此。李普曼對自己的猶太身份持有複雜的態度。這一點我並非從他本人那裡得知，而是從其他人那裡得知的。首先，在一位耶魯大學有創業精神學生的幫助下，我發現了一部失落的手稿以及他與一家猶太雜誌編輯之間的一系列信件。在 1920 年代，他曾撰寫了幾篇文章——其中一篇言辭激烈到他在發表前撤回了——批評猶太人宗族意識強烈且粗俗。其次，一位正在撰寫李普曼同時代人物傳記的同事寄給我一封與費利克斯·法蘭克福特的通信，後者後來也擔任了最高法院法官，這些信件毫無疑問地顯示了李普曼對這一問題的敏感。他和法蘭克福特曾經是近二十年的密友。然而在 1933 年，他們的通信和友誼突然中斷。當我問李普曼為什麼時，他假裝不記得了。 然而，從同事寄給我的資料中，我發現法蘭克福特對於李普曼在 1933 年，希特勒上台不久後所寫的一篇專欄文章感到極為不滿，該文章呼籲對德國「革命」保持容忍，儘管其存在濫用情況。法蘭克福特認為這是為希特勒辯解，並缺乏對猶太人的同情。他氣憤到與李普曼斷絕了所有聯繫。無論這個事件的具體情況或他的行為是否正當，這都是一件重大事件。李普曼幾乎不可能不記得這件事。我帶著一絲忐忑，向他提出法蘭克福特親自描述的這段插曲。他看起來有點不高興，但並不驚訝，並說法蘭克福特總是喜歡誇大其詞。他不願再進一步討論這個話題。

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Please verify you're not a robot by clicking the box.

Invalid email address. Please re-enter.

You must select a newsletter to subscribe to.

Sign Up

You will receive emails containing news content, updates and promotions from The New York Times. You may opt-out at any time.

You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

• See Sample
• Manage Email Preferences
• Not you?
• Privacy Policy
• Opt out or contact us anytime
• Opt out or contact us anytime

I now realized that though this was a subject he might not want to confront, I had to. This went beyond the realm of the ''personal.'' I had to write about the Jewish issue not because Lippmann was Jewish, but because - as I learned from this and other episodes - it aroused his deepest feelings. It affected the kind of person he became, and even his approach to political issues. There was no way I could not deal with it. In doing so, I hoped only that I did him no injustice.
我現在明白，雖然這是他可能不願意面對的話題，但我必須這麼做。這已經超出了「個人」的範疇。我必須寫到猶太人問題，不是因為李普曼是猶太人，而是因為——正如我從這一事件及其他事件中得知的——這觸動了他最深沉的情感。這影響了他成為怎樣的人，甚至影響了他對政治問題的處理方式。我無法不處理這個問題。在這麼做的過程中，我只希望沒有對他不公。

If Lippmann was not a confiding man by nature, neither was he an outgoing one. While cordial, he was not easily approachable, especially as he grew older, and we kept a polite but friendly distance from one another. Perhaps that is the only way it could have been. I was, after all, prying into his life, evoking people and events long forgotten and emotions long repressed. We were colleagues in a mutual endeavor, and also adversaries. Any closer relationship would have made it hard for me to be objective. I might have been tempted to make excuses for him, fill in blanks, give too many benefits of the doubt.
如果李普曼天生不是個善於傾訴的人，那他也絕非一個外向的人。儘管他態度和藹，卻不易親近，尤其是隨著年齡的增長，我們彼此保持著禮貌而友好的距離。或許這是唯一可行的辦法。畢竟，我正在窺探他的生活，喚起那些早已被遺忘的人和事，以及長久被壓抑的情感。我們是共同事業的同事，同時也是對手。任何更親密的關係都可能使我難以保持客觀。我可能會忍不住為他找藉口，填補空白，給予過多的疑點利益。

It might seem that it is a wonderful break for a biographer to know the subject of his work. In a way it is. But in another way it complicates things. An intruder steps between the writer and his work, an intruder who can't easily be chased away because he, as subject, has every right to be there. There were times when I actually tried to avoid Lippmann so that I could see him as someone other than the person across the table. This was not always easy, for once he retired from doing his column, time hung heavy on his hands. He no longer had the energy to write another book, and the people who used to besiege him with invitations or requests had stopped calling. From his office where the telephone now rarely rang, Lippmann would call me often to lunch with him. It gave a shape to the day of a man who had once thought that each day was too short.
對於一位傳記作家來說，了解自己作品的題材似乎是一個美妙的轉折。在某種程度上確實如此。但在另一方面，這也使事情變得複雜。一個入侵者介入了作家和他的作品之間，這個入侵者並不容易驅逐，因為作為題材的他，有充分的權利存在於那裡。有時候我實際上試圖避開李普曼，以便能夠將他視為坐在對面的人以外的某個人。這並不總是容易的，因為一旦他停止撰寫他的專欄，時間對他來說就顯得沉重。他不再有精力去寫另一本書，而那些曾經圍著他發出邀請或請求的人也不再打電話了。在他那裡電話現在很少響起的辦公室裡，李普曼經常會打電話約我一起吃午飯。這給一個曾經認為每一天都太短的人的日子帶來了某種形態。

Although I spent a considerable amount of time with him, there was much he would not tell me. Often these were the things that mattered most. Not what he thought about ''issues,'' but how he felt about the most important choices he had made: to marry his first wife, to leave her 20 years later for another woman, to use the greater part of his remarkable talents analyzing the headlines of the day and the antics of the momentarily mighty. He did not want to talk about questions like that. I am not sure that he even wanted to think about them. If so, he did not want to share those thoughts with me or anyone else. I can understand that, but I am sorry he did not put them to paper.
雖然我與他共度了相當長的時間，但仍有許多事情他並未告訴我。通常這些都是最為重要的部分。不是他對「議題」的看法，而是他對自己所作出的重大選擇的感受：與第一任妻子結婚，20 年後離開她另娶他人，將自己卓越才能的大部分用於分析當日的頭條新聞和那些一時權傾朝野者的滑稽行為。他不想談論這類問題。我不確定他是否甚至願意去思考這些問題。如果是這樣，他也不想與我或其他人分享這些想法。我能理解這一點，但遺憾的是他並未將這些記錄下來。

There was another man behind the self-confident monument the world knew. But to find him I would need the help of others. The interviews I held with his friends and associates were sometimes illuminating, more often frustrating. Some sincerely wanted to help me understand him, others seemed to think they were doing him a favor by being obtuse. There were some people I wanted to shake and say: ''You know what really happened. Tell me.''
在世人所知的自信 monument 背後，還有另一個男人。但要找到他，我需要他人的幫助。我與他的朋友和同事進行的訪談，有時候頗具啟發性，更多時候則令人沮喪。有些人真心想幫助我理解他，其他人則似乎認為他們通過含糊其辭是在幫他忙。有些時候，我真想搖醒那些人說：「你們知道真相到底是什麼。告訴我。」

From the beginning I knew I must talk to his second wife, Helen. For a long time I held off, not wanting to give him the impression that I was going behind his back. Then as his health began to fail quickly and markedly, I felt I should no longer delay. But it was she who made the first move. As he languished in his nursing home, she told me that the time had come for us to talk. ''I know you've heard about how Walter and I came to love each other, of our double divorces and the scandal that ensued,'' she said to me one afternoon over tea at their apartment in Manhattan. ''And I know that you must write about it. That is why it is important that you understand exactly how it all happened.''
從一開始我就知道我必須與他的第二任妻子海倫談談。我很長一段時間都遲遲未行動，不想讓他覺得我在背後搞鬼。然而，當他的健康狀況迅速且明顯地惡化時，我覺得不能再拖延了。但最終是她主動出擊。在他於療養院中衰弱之際，她告訴我，我們談話的時機到了。「我知道你聽說過沃爾特和我如何相愛，我們的雙重離婚以及隨之而來的醜聞，」一天下午，在曼哈頓他們的公寓裡喝茶時她對我說。「而且我知道你必須寫下這一切。這就是為什麼你必須完全了解這一切是如何發生的。」

She then proceeded to relate the dramatic story of how these two old friends fell in love, left their spouses, fled from New York to Washington and embarked upon a new life together. I realized not only from her but from his own writings how that second marriage restored his belief in his own emotions and in a real sense saved his life. From the love letters she let me read - letters he had written her during the exuberant, anxious months of their affair and in the interval while waiting for their divorces - I saw a different Walter Lippmann from the one he had shown to the world, or that I was even sure existed. Here was a Lippmann who could be lyrical, passionate, awkward and even a little bit absurd. Here was a man who, at the age of 48, wrote love letters as rapturous and repetitive as those of any teen-ager. The excitement he felt infused even his writings about politics during that period. Helen Lippmann helped me glimpse a man no one but she really knew. I felt a deep gratitude to this complex, often difficult woman for her confidence in letting me use this intensely personal material in the way I thought best.
她接著敘述了這兩位老朋友如何墜入愛河、拋棄各自的配偶、從紐約逃到華盛頓並開啟新生活的戲劇性故事。我從她那裡以及他自己的著作中意識到，那段第二段婚姻不僅恢復了他對自己情感的信心，而且在某種程度上挽救了他的生命。從她讓我閱讀的愛情信件中——那些他在他們 affair 狂熱、焦慮的月分裡以及等待離婚期間寫給她的信——我看見了一個與世人所見、甚至我都不確定是否存在的 Walter Lippmann 截然不同的形象。這裡的 Lippmann 可以是抒情的、熱情的、笨拙的，甚至有點荒謬。這是一個在 48 歲時仍能寫出如青少年般熱烈而重複的愛情信件的男人。那段時間他所感受到的興奮甚至滲透到他的政治著作中。Helen Lippmann 幫助我瞥見了一個只有她真正了解的男人。我對這位複雜且常讓人感到為難的女性深懷感激，因為她信任我，讓我以我認為最合適的方式使用這些極度私人的材料。

If I never grew really close to Walter Lippmann, I nonetheless came to respect him enormously for his intelligence, his integrity and his decency. He was a man who, in his 80's, could still be outraged by folly, and who, despite all the public idiocies he had witnessed, did not become cynical. Even when I grew exasperated with him for a judgment made or an action taken, I could not forget that he never stopped trying to make men listen to reason or believing that they could be made better.
如果我從未真正親近華特·李普曼，我還是極其尊敬他的智慧、正直和體面。他是個在八十多歲時仍能對愚蠢行為感到憤慨的人，儘管見證了所有公共愚行，他並未變得犬儒。即使我對他的某個判斷或行動感到厭煩，我仍無法忘記他從未停止嘗試讓人們傾聽理性，或相信人們可以變得更好。

Continue reading the main story

I had hoped that he would not ask to see the drafts of my book. And he did not, except once, just a few months before he died. Surprisingly, he was not interested in what I thought of his opinions of the great political issues he had been involved in, or of the monumental egos he had observed. The only thing he cared to see was what I had written about his time at Harvard. He wanted, in those last days, to evoke the moments of his own spring - when William James came knocking on his door to introduce himself to the Yard's brightest sophomore, when the fearsome Santayana invited him to dinner and made him blush with terrible gossip of the philosophy faculty, when he himself hovered between the pre-Raphaelite estheticism of the Circolo Italiano and the earnest moral endeavor of the Socialist Club. B Y the time he died in 1974 Lippmann had, I think, long since made his peace with himself and was willing to let others make their judgments as they would. He did not seem particularly concerned with posterity. He had done the best he could, and beyond that no one could ask more.
我原本希望他不會要求看我的書稿。而他確實沒有，除了在他去世前幾個月的那一次。令人驚訝的是，他對我對他所參與的重大政治問題的看法，或對他所觀察到的那些偉大自我意識的評價並不感興趣。他唯一想看的是我對他在哈佛大學時代的描寫。在那些最後的日子裡，他想喚起自己青春的瞬間——當威廉·詹姆斯敲響他的門，向校園中最聰明的二年級生自我介紹時；當可怕的薩特亞納邀請他共進晚餐，並用哲學系可怕的八卦讓他羞紅了臉時；當他自己徘徊在意大利圈子前拉斐爾式的美學主義和社會主義俱樂部的認真道德努力之間時。到 1974 年他去世時，我認為利普曼早已與自己和解，並願意讓他人按自己的判斷行事。他似乎並不太在意後世。他已盡其所能，除此之外，無人能要求更多。

What he taught me is that one can be a part of one's time without surrendering to it, that even accomplishments such as his are three parts hard work to one part genius, and that the greatest pitfall is not worldly fame but ceasing to care about making a difference. He was very much like his youthful hero, H. G. Wells, of whom he once wrote, he ''seemed to win by a constant renewal of effort in which he refused to sink either into placid acceptance of the world, or into self-contained satisfaction with his vision.'' That was the Walter Lippmann I came most to admire, a man who made a very long journey -one of endless discoveries.
他所教導我的是，一個人可以屬於自己所處的時代，而不必向其屈服；即使是像他那樣的成就，也是三分努力、一分天賦；而最大的陷阱並非世俗的名聲，而是停止關心是否能有所改變。他非常像他年輕時的偶像 H. G. Wells，他曾經寫道，Wells「似乎透過不斷的努力更新而獲勝，他拒絕沉溺於對世界的平靜接受，或對自己視野的自我滿足。」那就是我最欽佩的 Walter Lippmann，一個走過非常漫長旅程的人——充滿無盡的發現。

''The Biographer as Detective,'' an essay by Ronald Steel in the July 21 Book Review, was not properly credited. It was adapted from a lecture in a series on the art and craft of American biography, held at the New York Public Library and sponsored by the Book-of-the-Month Club.
「傳記作家如同偵探」，羅納德·斯蒂爾於 7 月 21 日書評中發表的文章，未得到適當的署名。該文章改編自一系列關於美國傳記藝術與技藝的講座，該講座在紐約公共圖書館舉行，由每月書籍俱樂部贊助。