[節錄]論大學生之貧乏(College students)

給大學生及曾為大學生的我們

由來:

1966年, 法國的史特拉斯堡學生會為打壓六名經常對抗學生會和校政的異見人士, 在校內低投票率的狀況下成功把這六名學生推上學生會領導層的位置, 迫使他們難以下台. 這六名學生其後與創勢國際聯手, 運用了學生會的資金印制了一萬份小冊子, 記下了大學以及大學生這種存在的各種狀況並對此作出評論,史稱史特拉斯堡醜聞(scandale de strasbourg)

以下為中英譯本的一小段節錄, 有興趣的自行食用
[注: 中譯版有部分言詞本人認為較偏, 最少喜歡巨乳的胡適先生沒有被描述得那麼糟糕]
On the Poverty of Student Life:
considered in its economic, political, psychological, sexual, and particularly intellectual aspects, and a modest proposal for its remedy
by U.N.E.F. Strasbourg


論大學生之貧乏- 從經濟、政治、心理、兩性關係 特別是思想方面觀之及一些補救辦法
譯: 魯智深



「大學生日常生活的貧乏馬上在商業化的文化鴉片裡找到一個虛幻的補償品。在戲劇化的文化裡，大學生自然又做他忠實門徒的老角色。雖然是近水樓台，他却無權進入這個「文化聖殿」裡，只能像一個虔誠的觀眾來模拜這「摩登文化」。在這個藝術已死亡的時代，大學生還是劇院及電影會的忠實觀眾。他貪婪他吞噬自助商場裡大批銷出的冷藏藝術屍體，並且毫無保留，毫無距離，不加思索地投身進去。這是他的個性。就算那些「文化館」不存在的話，這些大學生也會製造一個出來。他的行為證實了美國市場研究的結論：廣告宣傳能使消費者在同樣無用的商品內作不同愛好的選擇。」

"The real poverty of his everyday life finds its immediate, phantastic compensation in the opium of cultural commodities. In the cultural spectacle he is allotted his habitual role of the dutiful disciple. Although he is close to the production-point, access to the Sanctuary of Thought is forbidden, and he is obliged to discover "modern culture" as an admiring spectator. Art is dead, but the student is necrophiliac. He peeks at the corpse in cine-clubs and theaters, buys its fish-fingers from the cultural supermarket. Consuming unreservedly, he is in his element: he is the living proof of all the platitudes of American market research: a conspicuous consumer, complete with induced irrational preference for Brand X (Camus, for example), and irrational prejudice against Brand Y (Sartre, perhaps)."
References:

U.N.E.F. Strasbourg (1966). On the Poverty of Student Life:
considered in its economic, political, psychological, sexual, and particularly intellectual aspects, and a modest proposal for its remedy. Retrieved 14 February, 2013 from http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/display/4


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International