從黎明到衰頹（全三冊）

內(nèi)容概要

普林斯敦大學(xué)余英時教授唯一親筆推薦的西洋文化史。如果你一輩子只看一本歷史書，就是這一本！◎ Amazon讀者四顆星強(qiáng)力推薦、美國邦諾書店Top100推薦、每月之書俱樂部選書，蟬連暢銷書排行榜達(dá)數(shù)月之久，紐約時報書評評為絕世之作。
◎ 入選美國國家圖書獎2000年度非小說好書。民主政體、社會主義、個人自由、女權(quán)運(yùn)動、性解放、工業(yè)化社會、原子彈、網(wǎng)際網(wǎng)路──西方文明帶來的美德與罪惡，幾乎已經(jīng)完全滲透全球每個人的生活，你可知道這一切從何開始？讓二十世紀(jì)碩果僅存的史學(xué)大師巴森帶你回到過去，細(xì)說西方文明如何在五百年中漸漸開花結(jié)果，帶來我們?nèi)缃袼姷氖澜?；又如何盛極而衰，面臨再生的瓶頸......
巴森認(rèn)為西方有四場「真正的革命」：宗教改革、君主集權(quán)、法國大革命、俄國革命；大師以此為主軸，詳述這些變革對思想與物質(zhì)層面所帶來的衝擊，這些衝擊又如何交互作用出今日我們所見的世界。在巴森的流暢文筆之下，五百年的歷史故事也能像《紅樓夢》一樣，出場人物個個栩栩如生，「劇情」高潮迭起，無處不精彩！不論是名列史傳卻面目模糊的名士、或是名不見經(jīng)傳的小人物，巴森都能還他們有血有肉的真面目；書中有爆炸性的大事件，也有乍看瑣碎卻寓意深遠(yuǎn)的瑣事，經(jīng)過大師提綱挈領(lǐng)，五百年來多不勝數(shù)的種種事件人物，逐漸融合成一幅屬於西方文明的立體圖像。
五百年時空之旅到了尾聲，巴森敏銳地指出現(xiàn)今面對的問題：除了科學(xué)與技術(shù)之外，文化發(fā)展似乎陷入停滯。文化進(jìn)入衰退期了嗎？未來還有希望嗎？妙的是，五百多年前也曾有史學(xué)家預(yù)言歷史的結(jié)束......巴森怎麼說？打開這本書，走過五百年，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)整本書就是對這個問題的絕妙答案。

作者簡介

巴森（Jacques Barzun）
西方文化史大師，一九○七年生於法國，一九二○年隨父抵美，進(jìn)入哥倫比亞大學(xué)研讀歷史與法律。畢業(yè)後即留校執(zhí)教，歷任該校羅塞斯歷史講座教授，後曾任教務(wù)長、院長，同時為劍橋大學(xué)邱吉爾學(xué)院的榮譽(yù)研究員。七十年來，巴森教授編著有卅餘部著作，內(nèi)容無所不談，包含音樂、思想史，當(dāng)代藝術(shù)、科學(xué)評論，甚至還有偵探小說的導(dǎo)讀。他獲有美國國家藝術(shù)人文學(xué)會金質(zhì)獎?wù)?，兩度任該會主席。目前定居於德州?/pre>


書籍目錄
PROLOGUE:
From Current Concerns
to the Subject of This Book ? xiii
PART I:
From Luther's Ninety-five Theses
to Boyle's "Invisible College" ? 1
PART II:
From the Bog and Sand of Versailles
to the Tennis Court ? 237
PART III:
From Faust, Part I, to the
"Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2" ? 463
PART IV:
From "The Great Illusion"
to "Western Civ Has Got to Go" ? 681
Reference Notes ? 803
Index of Persons ? 829
Index of Subjects ? 853
IT TAKES ONLY a look at the numbers to see that the 20th century is coming
to an end. A wider and deeper scrutiny is needed to see that in the West the
culture of the last 500 years is ending at the same time. Believing this to be
true, I have thought it the right moment to review in sequence the great
achievements and the sorry failures of our half millennium.
This undertaking has also given me a chance to describe at first hand for
any interested posterity some aspects of present decadence that may have
escaped notice, and to show how they relate to others generally acknowledged.
But the lively and positive predominate: this book is for people who
like to read about art and thought, manners, morals, and religion, and the
social setting in which these activities have been and are taking place. I have
assumed that such readers prefer discourse to be selective and critical rather
than neutral and encyclopedic. And guessing further at their preference, I
have tried to write as I might speak, with only a touch of pedantry here and
there to show that I understand modern tastes.
Because the plan of the work is new, and thus unlike that of excellent histories
that might be named, special care has been given to the ordering of the
parts. Linking is particularly important in cultural history, because culture is a
web of many strands; none is spun by itself, nor is any cut off at a fixed date
like wars and regimes. Events that are commonly said to mark novelty in
thought or change of direction in culture are but emphatic signposts, not
boundary walls. I punctuate the course of my narrative with events of that
kind, but the divisions do not hang upon them. Rather, the chapter divisions
suggested themselves after rethinking the given past to find in it the clearest
patterns. They are framed by the four great revolutions—the religious,
monarchical, liberal, and social roughly a hundred years apart—whose aims
and passions still govern our minds and behavior.
During the writing of this book I was frequendy asked by friends and colleagues how long its preparation had taken. I could only answer: a lifetime. My studies of separate periods and figures, which began in the late 1920s, disclosed unexpected vistas and led to conclusions at variance with a number of accepted judgments. After further study and a review of what I had published, it seemed possible to shape my findings into a continuous tale. In it, as will appear, figures worth knowing emerge from obscurity and new features appear in others.
Familiar ideas are reassessed, particularly the notions in vogue today as to
where in the past our present merits and troubles come from.
I do not expect the reader to be steadily grateful. Nobody likes to hear a
rooted opinion challenged, and even less to see good reasons offered for a
principle or policy once in force and now universally condemned—for example,
the divine right of kings or religious persecution. Our age is so tolerant,
so broad-minded and disinclined to violence in its ideologies, that to find a
case made out for the temper of the 16th or 17th century is bound to affront
the righteous. Yet without exposure to this annoyance, one's understanding
of our modern thoughts and virtues is incomplete.
Not that I am in favor of royal masters or persecution or any other evil
supposedly outgrown. I cite these examples as a hint that I have not consulted
current prejudices. My own are enough to keep me busy as I aim at the historian's
detachment and sympathy. For if, as Ranke said, every period stands justified
in the sight of God, it deserves at least sympathy in the sight of Man.*
Claiming detachment need not raise the issue of objectivity. It is waste of
breath to point out that every observer is in some way biased. It does not follow
that bias cannot be guarded against, that all biases distort equally, or that
controlled bias remains as bad as propaganda. In dealing with the arts, for
example, it is being "objective" to detect one's blind spots—step one in detachment.
The second is to refrain from downgrading what one does not respond
to. One has then the duty to report the informed judgment of others.
Since some events and figures in our lengthy past strike me as different
from what they have seemed before, I must occasionally speak in my own
name and give reasons to justify the heresy. I can only hope that this accountability
will not tempt some reviewers to label the work "a very personal
book." I would ask them, What book worth reading is not? If Henry Adams
were the echo of Gibbon, we would not greatiy value the pastiche.
On this point of personality, William James concluded after reflection
that philosophers do not give us transcripts but visions of the world.
Similarly, historians give visions of the past. The good ones are not merely
plausible; they rest on a solid base of facts that nobody disputes. There is
nothing personal about facts, but there is about choosing and grouping them.
It is by the patterning and the meanings ascribed that the vision is conveyed.
And this, if anything, is what each historian adds to the general understanding.
Read more than one historian and the chances are good that you will
come closer and closer to the full complexity. Whoever wants an absolute
copy of what happened must gain access to the mind of God.
Speaking of meanings, I must say a word about the devices and symbols
used in the text; and first about the role of the quotations in the margins. They are meant to supply the "real self and voice" of the persons in the drama. In form, these extracts resemble the familiar "pull-outs" in magazines—sentences lifted out of the article to lure the reader. In this book they are not pull-outs but "add-ins." Their insertion without preamble helps to shorten the text by dispensing with the usual: "As Erasmus wrote to Henry VIII,..." "As Mark Twain said about Joan of Arc,..."; after which, more words are needed to sew up the cut. This small innovation also permits juxtaposition for contrast or emphasis. By the end, the reader may find that he has been treated to an anthology of choice morsels.









圖書封面



圖書標(biāo)簽Tags
無




評論、評分、閱讀與下載



還沒讀過(50)
勉強(qiáng)可看(366)
一般般(624)
內(nèi)容豐富(2589)
強(qiáng)力推薦(212)


 


    從黎明到衰頹（全三冊） PDF格式下載