The Press: The Man Who Stands Apart
出版社：那位特立獨行的人

Twice a week after breakfast, Walter Lippmann sequesters himself in the study of his ivy-clad home on Washington’s sedate Woodley Road to write his syndicated column, “Today and Tomorrow.” The study is manifestly a scholar’s lair. Ceiling-high, Pompeian red bookcases line three walls; the fourth is decked with framed pictures of Lippmann friends, living and dead: Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, Georges Clemenceau. A snow of documents mantles the oaken desk.
每週兩次早餐後，華特·李普曼（Walter Lippmann）會把自己隔絕在華盛頓寧靜的伍德利路（Woodley Road）上，他那爬滿常春藤的家中書房裡，撰寫他的聯合專欄「今日與明日」。這間書房明顯是一位學者的巢穴。天花板高的、龐貝紅色的書架排列在三面牆上；第四面牆上則掛著李普曼朋友們的框裝照片，包括在世和已故的：大法官奧利弗·溫德爾·霍姆斯（Oliver Wendell Holmes）、伍德羅·威爾遜（Woodrow Wilson）、溫斯頓·邱吉爾（Winston Churchill）、喬治·克萊蒙梭（Georges Clemenceau）。一層文件雪般覆蓋在橡木書桌上。

For an event of such intellectual moment as the birth of a Lippmann column, the setting is deceptively casual. Lippmann, a lean, angular and agile man of 69. is dressed carelessly in his writing habit: grey pullover sweater, corduroy slacks, white wool socks and loafers. He has taken breakfast with his wife Helen, a handsome woman decidedly Lippmann’s intellectual peer. He has paid brief but fond attention to his French poodles, Vicky and Coquet. He has concluded thoughtful tours of three morning papers, with stops at all the international datelines. Across Woodley Road and through his study windows drifts the gay, playtime treble of his neighbors, the girls at National Cathedral School.
對於如此智識性的事件，如利普曼專欄的誕生，其環境設置看似隨意。六十九歲的利普曼，身形瘦削、 angular 且靈敏，穿著他寫作時的隨意裝束：灰色套頭毛衣、灯芯绒褲、白色羊毛襪和便鞋。他剛與妻子海倫共進早餐，這位 handsome 的女性無疑是利普曼的智識伴侶。他對他的法國鬥牛犬維琪和科凱投以短暫但充滿愛意的關注。他深思熟慮地瀏覽了三份晨報，並在所有國際日期變更線處停留。穿過伍德利路，透過他的書房窗戶，飄來鄰居們歡快的遊戲聲音，那是國家大教堂學校的女孩們。

Lippmann scarcely notices. The coils of a creative mood have been steadily tightening since 6 o’clock, when he awakened and lay awhile in bed, reflecting. Now it is 9. In two hours or so, writing with ink in a pinched, illegible script, abbreviating wherever possible (“negotiate” becomes “nego”), he composes 750 to 1,000 carefully chosen words. He declaims his handiwork into a Dictaphone, punctuation and all: “It is not probable comma I think comma that on the whole . . .” After his staff types and checks his message, it is read over the long-distance telephone to an automatic recording device at the Herald Tribune in New York.
李普曼幾乎沒有察覺。自早上六點醒來後，創作情緒的螺旋已經逐漸緊繃，當時他躺在床上沉思了一會兒。現在是九點。大約兩個小時後，他用墨水以緊湊難辨的字跡寫作，盡可能縮寫（「negotiate」變成「nego」），構思出 750 到 1000 個精心挑選的詞語。他將自己的作品朗讀進口述錄音機，連標點符號都一應俱全：「這並不太可能逗號我認為逗號總的來說……」在他的工作人員打字並核對他的訊息後，這段話會透過長途電話讀給紐約《先鋒論壇報》的自動錄音設備聽。

By then the author has left his chore behind him. His interest is that of the scholar, advancing but not selling ideas and thoughts. He is as heedless of praise as censure, has no idea how many readers attend him, and does not care: “To worry about the size of your audience is like taking your blood pressure every day.”
當時作者已將日常瑣事拋諸腦後。他的興趣在於學者的追求，推進而非販賣思想和觀點。他對讚譽和批評都漠不關心，不清楚有多少讀者關注他，也不在乎：「擔心你的觀眾數量，就像每天量血壓一樣。」

Think, Think, Think. All these are components of a ritual that has been called “the one continuous act of cerebration” in journalism. “Today and Tomorrow” runs in the Oslo Morgenbladet, the Calcutta Hindustan Standard, the Tokyo Yomiuri Shimbun, the Fayetteville Northwest Arkansas Times and some 270 other papers in the U.S. and abroad, with a combined multilingual circulation estimated at 20 million. Lippmann’s pronouncements on foreign policy are weighed with gravity, awe, annoyance, respect, and sometimes envy, by editors, pedagogues, logicians and statesmen, if not by the average reader.
思考，思考，再思考。這些都是被稱為新聞界「持續不斷的腦力活動」儀式的一部分。「今日與明日」在奧斯陸的《晨報》、加爾各答的《印度斯坦標準報》、東京的《讀賣新聞》、費耶特維爾的《西北阿肯色時報》以及美國和海外約 270 家其他報紙上刊登，其多語種發行量估計達到 2000 萬。李普曼對外交政策的論述受到編輯、教育工作者、邏輯學家和政治家們的重視、敬畏、煩惱、尊敬，有時甚至是嫉妒，儘管普通讀者可能並非如此。

Behind those pronouncements lie 45 years of uninterrupted heavy thinking. Walter Lippmann never stops thinking, not even when scrambling around the Maine rocks with Helen at their summer place near Bar Harbor. “Walter,” fretted his wife one day as he tripped over a boulder, “look. Don’t think.” For Lippmann, this is the idlest advice. He cannot help thinking. Where other journalists run after the news, Lippmann prefers to ponder it.
在這些宣告背後，是 45 年不間斷的深沉思考。華特·李普曼從未停止思考，即使是在緬因州巴港附近的夏日別墅與海倫一起在岩石間攀爬時也不例外。「華特，」有一天當他絆倒在一塊巨石上時，妻子焦慮地說，「看著點，別想了。」對李普曼來說，這是最無聊的建議。他無法不思考。當其他記者追逐新聞時，李普曼更喜歡沉思它。

Disengage, Neutralize, Withdraw. For years the Lippmann headlight has focused on U.S. foreign policy. He stands a head above the field. A few other columnists, notably Joseph Alsop (TIME, Oct. 27) and Roscoe Drummond, regularly thrash through the international thicket, but they gomainly as temporal critics and observers. Lippmann is critical, too, in an Olympian, undisputatious manner transcending shifts in the policy line, substitutions in the diplomatic team and, all too often, the hard practicalities of statesmanship, which must daily translate fine theories into action.
脫離、中立、撤回。多年來，李普曼的聚光燈一直聚焦於美國外交政策。他在這個領域中獨占鰲頭。還有一些其他專欄作家，特別是約瑟夫·艾爾索普（《時代》雜誌，10 月 27 日）和羅斯科·德魯蒙德，他們經常在國際叢林中披荊斬棘，但主要還是作為時事評論者和觀察者。李普曼也持批判態度，但他的方式如同奧林匹斯山上的神祇，超脫於政策路線的變化、外交團隊的更替，以及那些必須將精妙理論轉化為日常行動的國家治理實務之上。

Pundit Lippmann has evolved a foreign policy of his own, which rests on his premise that 20th century diplomacy is no more than a chain of tragic errors leading to war. Lippmann’s contemporary recipe for the survival of liberty: disengagement from Russia and Red China, neutralization of nations not big enough or ambitious enough to enter the power fight, and, ultimately, withdrawal of West from East. At times even his closest friends have read Lippmann and muttered, “Appeasement.” There is, in a Lippmann way, a quality of isolationism about his policy. He prefers the word “accommodation.” “The world,” he has written, “will have to be big enough to let differing systems of life and of government exist side by side.”
評論家李普曼發展出了一套他自己的外交政策，其基於他的前提：20 世紀的外交不過是一連串導致戰爭的悲劇性錯誤。李普曼對於自由存續的當代處方是：與俄羅斯和赤色中國脫鉤，將那些不夠大或不夠野心勃勃參與權力鬥爭的國家中立化，並最終讓西方從東方撤出。有時候，即使是他的至親好友閱讀李普曼的文章也會喃喃自語：「姑息。」在李普曼的方式中，他的政策確實帶有一種孤立主義的質地。他更喜歡用「調適」這個詞。「世界，」他寫道，「必須夠大，足以讓不同的生活制度和政府制度並存。」

This Lippmann conviction even embraces Red China. He thinks that Communist China should be seated in the United Nations, and that the U.S. should pull Chiang Kai-shek off Quemoy and Matsu. On Germany, he rejects the U.S. “standpat” policy and the holding of free elections on both sides of the German partition, endorses “confederation” of East and West Germany and withdrawal of Russian and Allied occupation troops, leaving two neutralized German fractions to work out their own common denominator. He is undismayed by the fact that many of his readers might find it hard to distinguish between his solutions and those preferred by the Kremlin.
這種李普曼的信念甚至包括紅色中國。他認為共產黨中國應該在聯合國中占有一席之地，並且美國應該將蔣介石從金門和馬祖撤走。在德國問題上，他反對美國的「堅持現狀」政策以及在不分東西德兩邊舉行自由選舉，贊成東西德「聯邦」並撤走俄羅斯和盟軍的占領部隊，讓兩個中立化的德國部分自行尋求共通點。他對於許多讀者可能很難區分他的解決方案與克里姆林宮偏好的方案這一事實並不感到氣餒。

Getting into Trim. Columnist Lippmann has spent a lifetime getting into cortical trim for his continuous act of cerebration. The only child of well-to-do German-Jewish parents living in New York City, he was encouraged in his appetite for art, scholarship, travel abroad, and the intellectual ferment of the time. As a brilliant Harvard undergraduate, he fell into step briefly with the Fabian Socialists, a tepid movement whose very tepidity appealed to him. After graduation with honors (’10), Lippmann served a hitch as secretary to the Rev. George R. Lunn of Schenectady, New York State’s first Socialist mayor. In 1914 he helped found The New Republic. During World War I he became, successively, a member of The Inquiry, Wilson’s clandestine architects of the terms of peace, an intelligence agent in France, and the author of an interpretation of Wilson’s Fourteen Points.
進入最佳狀態。專欄作家李普曼（Lippmann）終其一生都在為他持續的思考活動進入大腦皮層的最佳狀態。作為紐約市富裕德裔猶太家庭的獨子，他對藝術、學術、海外旅行以及當時的知識分子熱潮的渴望得到了鼓勵。作為一名出色的哈佛大學本科生，他曾短暫地與費邊社會主義者（Fabian Socialists）步調一致，這是一個溫和的運動，其溫和性正是吸引他的地方。畢業時榮獲殊榮（1910 年），李普曼擔任紐約州斯克內克塔迪市首位社會主義市長喬治·R·倫恩牧師的秘書。1914 年，他幫助創立了《新共和》雜誌。第一次世界大戰期間，他先後成為「調查小組」（The Inquiry）的成員，這是威爾遜祕密的和平條款設計者，法國的情報特工，以及威爾遜「十四點原則」的解讀者。

In 1921 Lippmann was hired on Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World as an editorial writer, and subsequently as editor. When the World died in 1931, Lippmann, by then author of ten books and one of the most authoritative voices of liberalism in the U.S., was invited aboard the then staunchly conservative Herald Tribune as a bylined columnist. The invitation intrigued him. “It was absolutely a new idea,” he said. “It was the first time a paper had ever asked someone with opposite views to write for it.”
在 1921 年，李普曼受聘於約瑟夫·普利策的《紐約世界報》擔任社論作家，隨後成為編輯。當《世界報》在 1931 年停刊時，李普曼已經是十本書的作者，並且是美國最權威的自由主義聲音之一，他被邀請加入當時堅定保守的《先鋒論壇報》擔任署名專欄作家。這個邀請引起了他的興趣。「這絕對是一個新想法，」他說。「這是第一次有報紙邀請持有相反觀點的人為其撰寫文章。」

During 27 years of association, the Herald Tribune has treated Columnist Lippmann with awe-struck respect, even going so far as to pass a typist’s error in punctuation. The column, originally syndicated to twelve papers, has consistently picked up new subscribers. Today Lippmann is the most widely quoted and acclaimed pundit in the world; Pravda has reprinted at least one of his pieces verbatim; Historian James Truslow Adams solemnly declared after Lippmann joined the Trib that “what happens to Lippmann in the next decade may be of greater interest than what happens to any other single figure now on the American scene.”
在 27 年的合作中，赫爾德 Tribune 對專欄作家李普曼懷著敬畏的尊重，甚至連打字員的標點錯誤也放過。該專欄最初被十二家報紙聯合刊登，並一直穩步增加新的訂戶。如今，李普曼是全球被引用最多、最受讚譽的評論家；《真理報》至少全文轉載過他的一篇文章；歷史學家詹姆斯·特魯斯洛·亞當斯在李普曼加入 Trib 後莊重地宣稱：“接下來十年李普曼的命運可能比美國現今任何單一人物的命運更引人關注。”

“Obfuscator de Luxe.” Not all of his readers join in the paean of praise. Novelist James M. Cain, an associate on the World, said of him: “He may be thinking in terms quite divorced from what the American people are worrying about, which occasionally gives his work an extremely farfetched quality.” The late Heywood Broun, a Harvard classmate and a World staffer, wrote wryly that Lippmann is “quite apt to score a field goal for Harvard and a touchdown for Yale in one and the same play.” Liberal Lawyer Amos Pinchot gave him the title “Obfuscator de Luxe.”
「奢華的混淆者。」並非所有讀者都加入對他的頌歌。小說家詹姆斯·M·凱恩（James M. Cain），《世界報》的同事，這樣評論他：「他的思維可能與美國民眾所擔憂的問題完全脫節，這使得他的作品偶爾顯得極其牽強。」已故的海伍德·布魯恩（Heywood Broun），哈佛的同班同學兼《世界報》員工，諷刺地寫道，李普曼「很擅長在同一場比賽中為哈佛射進一個三分球，同時為耶魯達陣。」自由派律師阿莫斯·平肖特（Amos Pinchot）給了他「奢華的混淆者」這個稱號。

These thrusts are as valid as the accolades. As a columnist, writing for a potential readership of some 20 million, Lippmann has a reach far short of his grasp. His work is literate but can also be obtuse, repetitious, and obscure. The reader is expected to know all about “the long Soviet note to Berlin” and the ideology of John Maynard Keynes; Columnist Lippmann will not enlighten him. “I do not assume,” he says, “that I am writing for anybody of a lower grade of intelligence than my own.”
這些論述與讚譽同樣有效。作為一位專欄作家，為可能達到兩千萬的讀者群撰寫文章，李普曼的影響力遠不及他的掌握範圍。他的作品學識淵博，但也可能晦澀難懂、重複且模糊。讀者被期望對「蘇聯致柏林的長篇大論」以及約翰·梅納德·凱恩斯的意識形態了如指掌；專欄作家李普曼不會為他們解惑。「我不假設，」他說，「我是在為智力低於我的人撰寫文章。」

As a reporter Lippmann is by self-concession unqualified and unaspiring, consistently ignores opportunities for scoops. As an artificer of foreign policy, he locks himself in his quiet citadel, far from the diplomatic battleground where fragile theories, however finely spun, can die. As his convictions change and his errors become apparent, he abandons previous positions without apology. This can be confusing, especially to the dogged few who follow him with the patience, the tuition and the comprehension with which any serious Lippmann reader must come fully endowed.
作為一名記者，李普曼自認為不夠資格且無意追求，始終忽略挖掘獨家新聞的機會。作為外交政策的策劃者，他把自己鎖在安靜的堡壘中，遠離外交戰場，在那裡脆弱的理論，無論編織得多麼精細，都可能瞬間瓦解。隨著他的信念改變，錯誤逐漸顯露，他毫不猶豫地拋棄先前的立場，不作任何道歉。這可能會令人困惑，尤其是對那些堅持不懈追隨他的少數人來說，他們必須具備耐心、學費和透徹的理解，這是任何認真的李普曼讀者都必須完全具備的。

20th Century Dialectician. A neutralist at heart, Pundit Lippmann swears allegiance to no political party, describes himself as “a liberal democrat—with a lower case d.” When he called last October on Khrushchev in the Kremlin, he went not as a newsman but as a 20th century dialectician. From this interview he returned to write some 5,000 intricately convoluted words which were more of a testament to Lippmann’s reliance on the ultimate ascendancy of reason than an insight into the machinations of the Soviet mind.
20 世紀辯證法家。內心深處的中立主義者，評論家李普曼不效忠任何政黨，自稱為「一個小寫 d 的自由民主主義者」。去年十月他在克里姆林宮拜訪赫魯曉夫時，並非以新聞記者的身份前往，而是作為一位 20 世紀辯證法家。從這次會談回來後，他寫下了約 5000 字錯綜複雜的文章，這些文字更多地體現了李普曼對理性最終勝利的依賴，而非對蘇聯心機的深刻洞察。

Walter Lippmann can wait peacefully, unperturbed, for the golden rule of reason. A quarter-century ago he had this advice for graduating seniors at Columbia University: “The world will go on somehow, and more crises will follow. It will go on best, however, if among us there are men who have stood apart, who refused to be anxious or too much concerned, who were cool and inquiring, and had their eyes on a longer past and a longer future.”
華特·李普曼可以平靜地等待，不受干擾，等待理性的黃金法則。四分之一世紀前，他對哥倫比亞大學的畢業生提出了這樣的建議：「世界總會以某種方式繼續前行，更多的危機將接踵而至。然而，如果在我們之中有一些人能夠獨立於眾，拒絕焦慮或過分擔憂，保持冷靜和探究的精神，並將目光投向更長遠的過去和未來，那麼世界將會更好地前行。」

Obviously, Walter Lippmann is confident he is one of those men.
顯然，沃爾特·李普曼自信他是那些人中的一員。