HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS
By J. K. Rowling. Illustrated by Mary GrandPré.
759 pp. Arthur A. Levine Books/Scholastic. $34.99.
by Rob Gifford
NPR.org, August 23, 2007 · Since curry is now the British national dish, it seems only right that the resurrection of British cooking should be led by the son of Bangladeshi immigrants.
Iqbal Wahhib has dug deep into British culinary traditions and come up with Roast, a restaurant that celebrates the fact that British cuisine is no longer a contradiction in terms.
Roast is located in a cavernous, modern upstairs space above Borough Market, the ultimate farmers market for inner-city foodies just 100 yards south of the River Thames at London Bridge.
The indoor market, which dates back to 1756, is pleasantly off the pace of central London, but still within easy reach. Ask for a table in the upper section, with views across the river to St. Paul's Cathedral. You can watch the trains come into London Bridge station, too.
The food is served in a straightforward, shut-up-and-eat kind of way. For starters, choose from black pudding hash with spiced applesauce, lobster broth or cauliflower tart with Stilton and watercress.
Entrees include Gressingham duck, steak and ox kidney pudding cooked in Guinness, Cornish squid, roast pheasant with pearl barley and Craggenmore whisky, or parsnip cake with Wensleydale cheese for the veggie brigade.
Like the rest of London, the food at Roast doesn't come cheap, but the restaurant has a variety of eye-popping cocktails available and a good wine list to ease the pain. You can also enjoy a great weekend brunch at Roast, after wandering around the market stalls down below.
So no more jokes about British food, please. They may not do fusion in Yorkshire, but Roast is showing the way for a whole new generation of good, honest, unreconstructed British food, without the smoky pub setting and the warm English beer.
Roast — The Floral Hall, Stoney Street, London, SE1 1TL, England. Telephone: 44-20-7940-1300. Web site: http://www.roast-restaurant.com/.
F. A. Herbig的{費里尼自傳:夢是唯一的現實}(Ichi, Fellini, 1994)台北:遠流出版,1996。頁285-6 所說的"Lobb 鞋子"沒注釋:
John Lobb Bootmaker is a company which manufactures and retails a very exclusive luxury brand of shoes and boots mainly for men, but also for women. It is based near St James's Palace, London. Founded in 1849, Lobb is one of England's oldest makers of bench-made shoes, worn by clients such as King Edward VII, famous 20th century opera tenor Enrico Caruso or actor Daniel Day Lewis. At Lobb, special care is taken to select the fine leather skins - with crocodile skin shoes for about USD 8000 at the top of the range.
Hermès acquired John Lobb in 1976. It took over all operations except for the original John Lobb shoe shop in London. The original, family-owned Lobb still handmakes shoes one pair at a time, while Hermès broadened the reach of the John Lobb brandname through its ready-to-wear line. The production of each pair of John Lobb shoes is so time-consuming that only about 100 pairs of shoes are finished per day.
Hermès' John Lobb shoes are available in both ready-to-wear and made-to-measure. Its motto is "The Bare Maximum for a Man".
Hermès' John Lobb shoes are sold in its own boutiques or in luxury department stores such as Harrods, Selfridges, Neiman Marcus and Lane Crawford.
A pair of made-to-measure leather shoes costs over £2000.
报告说互联网用户某些年龄段的构成主体是女性。 |
英国电信标准制定和管制机构Ofcom最新公布的年度报告说,互联网、移动电话和mp3播放机正在改变英国人的生活,使其出现革命性的变化。
这份报告说,由于现代科技的发展日新月异,不少英国人已经抛弃了对传统的诸如电视、收音机和DVD机的喜爱。
多媒体生活
令人惊讶的是,这份报告还还显示,互联网用户某些年龄段的构成主体甚至是妇女,而即便是老年人,他们消磨在网上的时间也比任何一个年龄段的人群多。
对儿童来说,他们泡在网上或与朋友用移动电话聊天的时间越来越多,而玩电子游戏的时间却减少了。
长达330页的报告显示,随着各种多媒体、新奇玩意儿和高科技产品的不断推出,英国人正摒弃旧的玩物,追求含有高科技术的新玩意儿。
报告说,英国人现在平均每周有50小时花在打电话、上网、看电视或收听电台广播上。不过,从事这些活动的时间比例却大不相同,而在过去几年,这一比例出现了大幅度的变化。
就2002年来说,英国人每天的电话使用频率增长了58%,而在同一时期,上网时间增长了158%。
数码新时代
与此相比,英国人看电视、收听电台广播或用固定电话聊天的时间却大大减少了。
报告还发现,不同人群和不同年龄段人士的喜好各不相同,甚至有很大差异。
比如,年龄在25至24岁的英国人喜欢上网,而上网时间达55%的却是女性。
在65岁以上的年龄段中,16%的老年人每月的上网时间超过42小时。这比任何其它年龄段的人士都多。
儿童也是新媒体时代的受益者。报告显示,75%的11岁儿童拥有自己的电视、游戏机和移动电话。
不过,这份报告也说,尽管英国人使用多媒体和新技术的机率比以往频繁,但他们花在这上面的钱却更少了。
报告说,由于竞争激烈,再加上各种额外服务,英国家庭每月花在通讯方面的资金为92.65英镑。在2005年,这个数字是94.03英镑。LONDON, Aug. 22 — Susan Whittaker was desperate. Four years ago, she purchased her first apartment in the town of Rochester, less than two hours east of London. But then interest rates started to rise, and the income from the small shop she ran with her partner no longer covered their adjustable-rate mortgage.
Facing foreclosure, and determined to avoid moving in with her mother, Ms. Whittaker found a way out in an increasingly popular arrangement here known as a “sale and rent back.”
A private company bought her home, allowing her to avoid foreclosure; then the company rented the house back to Ms. Whittaker and her partner and they did not even have to move.
The catch is that the company paid the couple less than the value of their apartment.
Such deals are uncommon in the United States, and mortgage brokers say they discourage them because of the possibility of unscrupulous and dishonest lenders exploiting distressed homeowners.
But desperate times call for desperate measures. While Americans fear an epidemic of foreclosures, brought on by the subprime mortgage meltdown, Britain is already suffering one.
Foreclosures here are at an eight-year high; lenders have repossessed a record 14,000 properties in 2007, 30 percent more than at the same time last year, according to the Council of Mortgage Lenders. An additional 125,100 households are behind in their mortgage payments.
And personal bankruptcies are at an all-time record, caused largely by a crushing increase in mortgage debt. The situation has grown so dire — as has the threat of desperate homeowners being exploited — that the newly installed government of Prime Minister Gordon Brown is trying to change the fundamentals of the mortgage system.
Whether they can is an open question, especially given Britons’ attachment to home ownership, adjustable-rate mortgages and personal debt. British consumers are the most indebted citizens of any Group of 7 nation, and television shows devoted to real estate and debt advice are among the most popular programs in the country.
“We live in a society where we encourage people to take on debt, and there is lots of pressure to get your foot on the housing ladder, which has proven quite a fruitful investment for some,” said Frances Walker of the Consumer Credit Counseling Service, a debt adviser, in London.
Currently, only 5 percent of British home buyers take out fixed-rate mortgages. The norm here is a mortgage with a fixed rate for the first two years, and then a floating rate for the duration of the mortgage.
But the rate on adjustable mortgages has skyrocketed as the Bank of England ratcheted up interest rates — five times over the last 12 months to 5.75 percent, their highest level since 2001.
Add the rising costs of necessities, like food and utilities, and British homeowners find themselves increasingly squeezed. Real estate experts here say that is why more and more homeowners are turning to the practice of sale and rent back.
The mushrooming of the unregulated market has worried regulators and lawmakers concerned that homeowners were giving up their houses for as little as 75 percent of market value, with no guarantee they would be allowed to stay in their former property after six months, the minimum lease period here.
Lawmakers are now trying to figure out how to encourage more homeowners to take fixed-rate loans, but that will not help those already facing foreclosure, or prevent the threat of predatory lending.
If there is a silver lining in Britain, it is that, unlike in the United States, home prices are still rising, for now, after more than tripling since 1997. Recent interest rate increases have yet to reverse the trend. In fact, the National Housing Federation recently predicted prices would rise 40 percent in the next five years, elevating the average price of a home, which already costs about 11 times the average British salary, to £302,400, or $618,000.
As long as home prices rise, distressed property owners can still sell their home and receive enough money to repay their mortgage debt — in theory. In reality, selling a property here can take several months, and by the time many owners are facing foreclosure, they often do not have that kind of time.
Higher prices may push some prospective buyers out of the market, but others will simply take out larger mortgages. Owning a home is so entrenched in the British psyche that most consumers would rather take on additional debt than rent, even if they can’t afford it, say real estate experts.
Some debt advisers have warned that higher demand for borrowing could result in an increase in lax lending practices and plunge more people into personal bankruptcy, which in turn could hurt consumer spending and slow economic growth.
Recognizing that, Mr. Brown’s new government has come up with two initiatives intended to make sure Britain’s housing boom does not turn into a bust. The measures aim to build 240,000 homes a year by 2016 to provide more affordable housing, and to encourage lenders to sell more 25-year fixed-rate mortgages.
Mortgage experts estimate that about two million mortgages will adjust to a higher rate in the next 18 months as their short-term fixed rates expire.
Longer-term fixed-rate mortgages would limit the risk of such interest rate increases, but short-term thinking among British borrowers and the lack of an established covered-bond market in Britain has kept fixed-rate mortgages from ever taking off here.
The United States mortgage market is financed through capital markets — hence some of the problems currently buffeting the markets — but Britain has always been a retail-led mortgage market, financed through bank savings deposits.
Now Alistair Darling, chancellor of the Exchequer, is studying plans to create a legal framework to allow banks and other lenders to issue covered bonds, and to make them attractive to investors, in order to help lenders create capital pools that would finance longer fixed mortgages.
Yet that task could become markedly more difficult now given the current problems with the United States mortgage market. The liberalization of the British mortgage market in the 1980s under Margaret Thatcher’s government removed some credit controls, admitting new lenders who offered mortgages with ever more competitive short-term fixed rates. Longer-term fixed-rate mortgages became even more unpopular in the 1990s when interest rates peaked at 15 percent.
In March, Nationwide, Britain’s third-largest mortgage lender after HBOS and Abbey, became the first large lender to offer a 25-year fixed-rate mortgage after government lobbying and a positive development of the yield curve. “If this deal is ever going to be attractive, now is the time,” Stuart Bernau, Nationwide’s chief executive, said at the time.
Some analysts remain skeptical. “People don’t feel comfortable tying themselves in for that long, and they get turned off by the penalties” of paying off early, said James Cotton, a mortgage adviser at London & Country Mortgages. Early payment fees can reach as much as £300,000 in Britain.
But if the government cannot persuade Britons to change their borrowing habits, experts warn that the country may face its own subprime mortgage crisis, as consumers with tarnished credit find that only subprime lenders are willing to work with them.
“That’s where the real problems will start, and we could easily see what happened in the U.S. repeated over here, ” said Steve Grail, managing director at Grosvenor Trust & Savings, an independent financial adviser in London.
None of this matters to Susan Whittaker. The experience of having to sell her home and rent it back has made any type of loan out of the question. “We won’t get a mortgage again,” said Ms. Whittaker, speaking on the phone from her Rochester home. “The whole episode has put us off.”
“Well, Hall, expecting a pi-jaw, eh?”
'I don't know, Sir - Mr Abrahams's given me one with :Those Holy Fields".....'pi jaw' "To give moral advice to; admonish"; school and university slang from the I880s (Eric Partridge, A Dictionary of Slang and ...
'pi jaw' "To give moral advice to; admonish"; school and university slang from the I880s (Eric Partridge, A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English, 8th edn. [
Manning, Rev. Samuel. Those Holy Fields.
Source: Those Holy Fields, p. 49. | Bethlehem from the East |
Soon Bethlehem, comes into view—a white-walled village of about three thousand inhabitants, all professedly Christians. They are, however, a turbulent, quarrelsome set, ever fighting amongst themselves or with their neighbours. In the disturbances which take place so frequently at Jerusalem, it is said that the ringleaders are commonly found to be Bethlehemites. The women are remarkable for personal beauty. I saw more handsome faces here in a few hours than elsewhere in the East in many days. . . . The men are strong, lithe, well-built fellows, and I saw several young shepherds, who were models of manly vigour. Here, as elsewhere in the East, the pastoral pipe is in constant use. . . . Bethlehem stands on the crest of a ridge of Jurassic limestone. As it is surrounded by higher hills, however, the view from it is not very extensive. Jerusalem, though only six miles distant, is hidden by an intervening height; but through the valleys stretching away eastward to the Dead Sea, fine views are gained of the mountains of Moab, and from the flat roof of the Latin Convent part of the Dead Sea itself is visible. (Source: Those Holy Fields, pp. 42-43.) |
由於剪貼問題 中文文首置於後面--已修正
英国为何“先富起来”? | ||||
作者:英国《金融时报》克莱夫•克鲁克(Clive Crook) | ||||
2007年8月17日 星期五 | ||||
在《枪炮、病菌与钢铁》(Guns, Germs, and Steel)一 书中,贾德•戴蒙(Jared Diamond)对长期发展提出了一个令人惊诧却又可能立刻让人认同的论点。西方走向繁荣,而其它地区未能做到,原因在于地理环境。由于它们(得天独厚) 的地理位置,欧洲和它的美国分支拥有易于驯养和栽培的动植物、较轻的疾病负担以及有利于工业化的自然资源。工业革命发端于英国,随后蔓延到欧洲大陆和美 国,都是因为运气好。 将于下月出版的一本新书辩称,戴蒙完全搞错了。格雷戈里•克拉克 (Gregory Clark)的《告别施舍:世界经济简史》(Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World)与戴蒙那本非凡的畅销书一样,是一本引人入胜、令人难忘、文笔优美的好书,也同样应当赢得广泛的读者。 克 拉克辩称,造成差异的并非地理学和生物学方面的因素,或是像物权与民主等制度方面的因素,而是文化。富人变得更加富有,是因为他们推动了有利于经济现代化 的思想发展;穷人继续贫穷,也是因为他们没能做到这点。克拉克是加州大学戴维斯分校(University of California, Davis)一位经济历史学家,他搜集了众多精妙的论据和论点,来支持自己的论断,而且在做出一些骇人听闻的推论方面毫不退缩。 |
英國大學生在進大學之前可能有休學年(gap year)。他們愈來愈流行到發展中國家當義工。
《泰晤士報》作一相關的報導:引述慈善組織"海外義務工作"(VSO)說,一些公司向學生徵收高昂費用,安排他們到非洲、南美洲或亞洲的貧窮地區,參與的"義務服務計劃"對當地人沒有什麼益處。 VSO將編寫義務工作指引,提醒學生如何選擇義務服務計劃,如何避免受騙。
引述一名學生說,她付出三千英鎊到南美洲哥斯達尼加某地區教授英語。抵達目的地後,她的行李被偷取,但安排旅程的公司沒有理會她。她在當地安頓後開始教英語,卻沒有任何支援。
Read more on Gap Travel and voluntourism in our specialist travel section
One of Britain’s leading charities has warned students not to take part in gap-year aid projects overseas which cost thousands of pounds and do nothing to help developing countries.
Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO) said that gap-year volunteering, highlighted by Princes William and Harry, has spawned a new industry in which students pay thousands of pounds for prepackaged schemes to teach English or help to build wells in developing countries with little evidence that it benefits local communities.
It said that “voluntourism” was often badly planned and spurious projects were springing up across Africa, Asia and Latin America to satisfy the demands of the students rather than the needs of locals. Young people would be better off simply travelling the world and enjoying themselves, it added.
Judith Brodie, the director of VSO UK, said: “While there are many good gap-year providers, we are increasingly concerned about the number of badly planned and supported schemes that are spurious - ultimately benefiting no one apart from the travel companies that organise them.”
VSO is drawing up a code of good practice to help gapyear students to find genuine voluntary work abroad.
The charity cited the case of a volunteer teacher in Africa who was surprised to be shunned by her fellow teachers, then discovered that her placement had led to a colleague being made redundant.
In another case, a volunteer in Mexico who thought that she would be working on a rural conservation project spent six months behind a desk in an office inputting data onto spreadsheets.
Another volunteer was asked to survey endangered coral reef in the Indian Ocean and dicovered that it had been surveyed countless times before by previous volunteers.
Taking a gap year used to be the preserve of only the wealthiest students, but it is now big business. Up to 200,000 people do it every year, including 130,000 school-leavers. The average gapyear traveller spends £4,800, and numerous companies have sprung up to get a slice of the market by offering prepackaged trips to projects for just two weeks at a time.
Gapyear.com, one of the biggest players, is offering places on dozens of voluntary projects, including work on a South African horse safari for £2,400 or two months observing coral and marine life in Borneo for £1,895. Another firm, i-to-i, is offering work with orphans in Argentina for £1,095.
In most cases the price does not cover the flight, but in-country travel, accommodation and an orientation session on arrival is included.
Ms Brodie urged students to go backpacking instead. “Young people want to make a difference, but they would be better off travelling and experiencing different cultures, rather than wasting time on projects that have no impact and can leave a big hole in their wallet,” she said.
Prince William went to Chile with Raleigh International in 2000 to help to build schools. The charity said that his work had sparked “a lot more interest” in its projects. Prince Harry worked with orphans in Lesotho.
Tom Griffiths, founder of gapyear.com, defended his business. “Some companies raise the expectations of students to unrealistic levels and make them think they will change the world. When they get there they discover they are only small players in the project and feel disappointed,” he said.
A spokeswoman for i-to-i defended its short-term voluntary breaks and said it made sure that all the projects were sustainable. “Not everyone has a year or two years to go off and do voluntary work,” she said.
Raleigh International backed VSO’s call for caution. “Students should be very careful about the voluntary work they choose,” a spokeswoman said.
bbc《泰晤士報》披露,英國服務表現最差的鐵路公司企圖"捂住監督組織的嘴"。
報道說,對於向其提出批評的官方監督組織,鐵路公司揚言要控告它誹謗。
監管組織London TravelWatch去信主管鐵路事務的官員,質疑鐵路公司First Great Western未有履行協議,因為該公司泰晤士河谷地區的火車服務幾乎有三分之一遲到。
根據FGW的合約,該公司起碼應該有92%的火車準時,可是實際上只做到68.3%。
當FGW未有改善其服務後,London TravelWatch去信政府提出投訴。
但FGW竟然委托律師警告London TravelWatch,要求收回有關信函。
Britain’s worst-performing train company tried to silence the official passenger watchdog by threatening to sue it for libel for making a complaint about its poor performance.
London TravelWatch had written to Tom Harris, the railways minister, to ask whether First Great Western (FGW) was in breach of its franchise agreement because almost a third of its commuter trains in the Thames Valley were late.
FGW has a target in its contract of 92 per cent of trains on time but managed only 68.3 per cent on its peak services. Its long-distance services are also the least punctual in the industry, with only 75.6 per cent on time compared with a national average of 85.2 per cent.
The letter stated that the number of complaints from passengers received by the watchdog had more than doubled and that overcrowding was more than twice as bad as for the average operator in London and the South East.
Brian Cooke, chairman of London TravelWatch, held a series of meetings over several months with FGW to discuss its performance and had repeatedly urged it to take action to improve its service.
When the situation failed to improve, Mr Cooke wrote to the minister setting out the problems and telling him that the watchdog’s board had unanimously passed a resolution calling on the Department for Transport (DfT) to “consider terminating the franchise”.
Mr Cooke gave a copy of the letter to The Times and also sent one to Moir Lockhead, the chief executive of First Group, FGW’s parent company.
Mr Lockhead passed it to the company’s lawyers, Slaughter & May. They wrote to London TravelWatch demanding that it withdraw the letter, which they described as “defamatory”. They also ordered Mr Cooke to reveal the names of everyone who had received a copy.
When Mr Cooke refused to back down, Slaughter & May wrote again, saying: “Your continued failure to address and remedy the damage being caused by your defamatory remarks is plainly unacceptable . . . Our client feels compelled to reserve its position against you.”
The Government knew about First Great Western’s attempt to silence the watchdog, but took no action. Mr Harris has acknowledged Mr Cooke’s letter but has yet to answer any of the questions that it contains despite receiving it more than three weeks ago.
First Group, Britain’s biggest bus and train operator, has formed close links with senior Labour figures. It employs Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s former spokesman, to advise on “strategic communications” and has engaged David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, to chair a commission that is expected to give strong backing to the company’s yellow school buses. First Group has refused to say how much the two are paid.
The Government’s rail budget is highly dependent on First making almost £2 billion in payments over the next ten years for the right to operate two franchises, FGW and First Capital Connect. The DfT can take enforcement action against train companies that breach their franchise agreements by failing to deliver minimum service levels. But it is unclear exactly what would constitute a breach.
Mr Cooke’s letter said: “If a breach has occurred, appropriate sanctions should be applied, and this should be stated publicly. If it has not, then the travelling public at least deserves a clear explanation of how much worse things will be allowed to become before the operator feels any pain.”
Mr Cooke told The Times that London TravelWatch had a duty to alert the Government to potential franchise breaches. “It was outrageous to threaten to sue us in order to keep us silent when we were only performing our statutory duty in reporting these matters to the Secretary of State,” he said.
“We were surprised that the DfT did not attempt to dissuade First from bullying the public watchdog.”
Yesterday a First Group spokesman said: “We had made clear to London Travelwatch repeatedly that certain things they were saying had no basis. We are within our rights to defend our reputation.”
A DfT spokesman said: “FGW’s performance has not been satisfactory for the passenger. Joint action plans are in place between Network Rail and FGW to address this.”
Worst Group's performance is in fact much worse than they declare. To inflate performance figures trains aren't "cancelled" any more - they are "revised". So we see gems like Penzance - Paddington trains being "revised" to start from Exeter, Worcester - Paddington trains being "revised" to start from Oxford, even Paddington - Reading all sations stoppers being "revised" to omit all the stops!
George W, Reading, UK
Given a story with the elements of a rail franchisee close to this Labour government and one of the biggest law firms in London you could conclude, without reading it, that there would be no good news for passengers who are also the taxpayers who pay the subsidies. That this government would take no action when a passenger watchdog is threatened should not evoke surprise; that should be reserved for the phenomenon of their huge lead in the opinion polls - we get the politicians we deserve.
Graham McKean, Sevenoaks, UK
i am very pleased to see that the times has not been intimidatedby this ridiculous threat atwhich any competant lawyer would simply laugh
peter codner, devizes, england
Ah yes, the wonderful reputation of first great western...Friday before last my FGW train was so late I missed the equally FGW connection...the next FGW train broke down in the station and had to wait even longer for the next one, which likewise arrived late....the next train was a virgin one and although horribly crowded, actually got there on time..and in this way my perfectly simple 3 and a half hour journey took six hours.
again - what reputation?
Meg, Pembs,
"First" group are a collection of bus-operating spivs who have got hold of trains.
Their public relations go from bad to worse, and their treatment of passengers is disgraceful.
They should have all their franchises taken away from them.
Come to that, the government should stop trying to hide behind the TOC's, and start giving us a decent train service, similar to that in other European countries.
G. Tingey, London,
FGW excel in only 1 thing, apologising. A constant stream of apologies for late trains, cancelled trains, slow running, faulty toilets, suspended buffet service due to staff shortages, no trolley service to First Class, faulty air conditioning in windowless carriages, the list is endless, and the staff are clearly highly trained in delivering these endless apologies. It is a great shame they do not direct their efforts at eradicating these constant service failures, rather than becoming expert apologists
Mike S, Reading, Berks
Exactly what reputation are First Group seeking to defend?
Ken.H, Harrow,
The world famous bongs* of
The Great Westminster Clock overlooks the Palace of Westminster in London. Built by Edward Dent, the clock has been fully operational since 1859 and the clock tower is often mistakenly named Big Ben, which is in fact the name of the clock’s hour bell. |
工人們用繩索滑到大笨鐘前為期(sic 其) 洗澡 |
倫敦著名的大笨鐘周六(11日)開始"沉默"一個多月,以便進行例行維修工作。
大笨鐘每隔五年就需要進行一次大修。
星期六早上8點響鐘報時後,大笨鐘便"封嘴"六個星期。
早上9點左右,遊客和市民便見到工人從大笨鐘的南面滑下,開始給它"洗澡"。
工人們將清理大笨鐘的每一面(一共有四面),這次的維修還包括更換鐘的軸承。
這將是1990年以來大笨鐘沉默時間最長的一次。
不過在維修期間,一組電子裝置依然會確保大鐘繼續運作。
大笨鐘將在2009年慶祝150年周年,上述維修工作是慶祝籌備計劃的最後一部分。
其實過去幾年來,大笨鐘也試過意外"失聲"幾次,肇事者包括飛鳥、天氣、粗心的工人和破損。
坐落在泰晤士河畔的大笨鐘毗鄰議會大樓,是倫敦的地標。
建於1859年的大笨鐘的正式名稱是"大鐘"(Great Clock),但因其13.5噸的大鐘而得名大笨鐘(Big Ben)。
民視:世界知名的地標、英國倫敦大笨鐘,難得在今天完全停擺。不過它並沒有故障,只是為了後年的鐘塔一百五十週年慶,進行保養工作。預計四到六個星 期,就會完成。聳立在倫敦市中心的西敏寺鐘塔,已經服務超過一個世紀。不過在十一號這天,大笨鐘卻沒有在整點響起。很快的,時針和分針回到十二點,工程師 拋下繩索,在離地六十公尺的高空中降落現在直徑七公尺的鐘面上。原來,這是每五年就得進行一次的例行性保養工作。專家必須將三百一十二片玻璃擦拭乾淨,同 時更換老舊零件,確保機件運作順利。為了迎接大笨鐘落成一百五十週年,今年的維修工作比以往耗時更久,需要四到六個星期。換句話說,倫敦本地人和觀光客得 等到九月,才會再次聽見熟悉的大笨鐘。
The pendulum is 3.9m long, weighs 300kg and beats every two seconds. Balanced on it are a number of pre-decimal pennies which help it keep time. Adding one penny would cause the clock to gain two-fifths of a second in 24 hours. |
Big Ben is the name of the bell used to strike the hour and weighs 13.5 metric tons. The first blow indicates the correct time and is joined by four quarter bells that weigh between one and four tons. |
The hammer which strikes the bell weighs 200kg. The first bell was cast in 1856 but a crack soon appeared and a new one was cast. |
The four 7m-wide clock faces each contain 312 separate pieces of opal glass. |
In March 1940, in the “midnight of the century” that marked the depth of the Hitler-Stalin pact (or in other words, at a time when civilization was menaced by an alliance between two Voldemorts or “You-Know-Whos”), George Orwell took the time to examine the state of affairs in fantasy fiction for young people. And what he found (in an essay called “Boys’ Weeklies” 這篇是本文背景知識 所以我作此連結 下文說的 Greyfriars and St. Jim’s 似乎是1940年代"校園幻想小說"中的學院名稱) was an extraordinary level of addiction to the form of story that was set in English boarding schools. Every week, boys (and girls) from the poorer quarters of industrial towns and from the outer edges of the English-speaking Empire would invest some part of their pocket-money to keep up with the adventures of Billy Bunter, Harry Wharton, Bob Cherry, Jack Blake and the other blazer-wearing denizens of Greyfriars and St. Jim’s. As he wrote:
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS
By J. K. Rowling. Illustrated by Mary GrandPré.
759 pp. Arthur A. Levine Books/Scholastic. $34.99.
“It is quite clear that there are tens and scores of thousands of people to whom every detail of life at a ‘posh’ public school is wildly thrilling and romantic. They happen to be outside that mystic world of quadrangles and house-colors, but they can yearn after it, daydream about it, live mentally in it for hours at a stretch. The question is, Who are these people?”
St Cyprian's School was an expensive and exclusive preparatory school for boys, founded in 1899, which operated in the early 20th century in Eastbourne, East Sussex, England. Like similar preparatory schools, its purpose was to train pupils to do well enough in the examinations (usually taken around the age of 12) to gain admission to Eton, Harrow, and other leading "public schools" (as the most exclusive private secondary schools are known in
I wish that the morose veteran of Eton and St. Cyprian’s had been able to join me on the publication night of “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” when I went to a bookstore in Stanford, Calif., to collect my embargoed copy on behalf of the Book Review. Never mind the stall that said “Get Your House Colors Here” and was dealing with customers wise in the lore of Ravenclaw and Slytherin. On the floor of the shop, largely transformed into the Gryffindor common room for the occasion, sat dozens of small children listening raptly to a reading from a massively plausible Hagrid. Of the 2,000 or so people in the forecourt, perhaps one-third had taken the trouble to wear prefect gowns and other Hogwarts or quidditch impedimenta. Many wore a lightning-flash on their foreheads: Orwell would have recoiled at seeing the symbol of Sir Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists on otherwise unblemished brows, even if the emblem was tamed by its new white-magic associations. And this was a sideshow to the circus, all across the English-speaking and even non-English world, as the countdown to the witching hour began.
I would give a lot to understand this phenomenon better. Part of it must have to do with the extreme banality and conformity of school life as it is experienced today, with everything oriented toward safety on the one hand and correctness on the other. But this on its own would not explain my youngest daughter a few years ago, sitting for hours on end with her tiny elbow flattening the pages of a fat book, and occasionally laughing out loud at the appearance of Scabbers the rat. (One hears that not all children retain the affection for reading that the Harry Potter books have inculcated: this isn’t true in my house at least.)
Scabbers turns out to mutate into something a bit worse than a rat, and the ancient charm of metamorphosis is one that J. K. Rowling has exploited to the uttermost. Another well-tested appeal, that of the orphan hero, has also been given an intensive workout with the Copperfield-like privations of the eponymous hero. For Orwell, the English school story from Tom Brown to Kipling’s Stalky and Co. was intimately bound up with dreams of wealth and class and snobbery, yet Rowling has succeeded in unmooring it from these considerations and giving us a world of youthful democracy and diversity, in which the humble leading figure has a name that — though it was given to a Shakespearean martial hero and king — could as well belong to an English labor union official. Perhaps Anglophilia continues to play its part, but if I were one of the few surviving teachers of Anglo-Saxon I would rejoice at the way in which such terms as muggle and Wizengamot, and such names as Godric, Wulfric and Dumbledore, had become common currency. At this rate, the teaching of “Beowulf” could be revived. The many Latin incantations and imprecations could also help rekindle interest in the study of a “dead” language.
(Page 2 of 2)
In other respects, too, one recognizes the school story formula. If a French or German or other “foreign” character appears in the Harry Potter novels, it is always as a cliché: Fleur and Krum both speak as if to be from “the Continent” is a joke in itself. The ban on sexual matters is also observed fairly pedantically, though as time has elapsed Rowling has probably acquired male readers who find themselves having vaguely impure thoughts about Hermione Granger (if not, because the thing seems somehow impossible, about Ginny Weasley). Most interesting of all, perhaps, and as noted by Orwell, “religion is also taboo.” The schoolchildren appear to know nothing of Christianity; in this latest novel Harry and even Hermione are ignorant of two well-known biblical verses encountered in a churchyard. That the main characters nonetheless have a strong moral code and a solid ethical commitment will be a mystery to some — like his holiness the pope and other clerical authorities who have denounced the series — while seeming unexceptionable to many others. As Hermione phrases it, sounding convincingly Kantian or even Russellian about something called the Resurrection Stone:
“How can I possibly prove it doesn’t exist? Do you expect me to get hold of — of all the pebbles in the world and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything’s real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody’s proved it doesn’t exist.”
For all this apparently staunch secularism, it is ontology that ultimately slackens the tension that ought to have kept these tales vivid and alive. Theologians have never been able to answer the challenge that contrasts God’s claims to simultaneous omnipotence and benevolence: whence then cometh evil? The question is the same if inverted in a Manichean form: how can Voldemort and his wicked forces have such power and yet be unable to destroy a mild-mannered and rather disorganized schoolboy? In a short story this discrepancy might be handled and also swiftly resolved in favor of one outcome or another, but over the course of seven full-length books the mystery, at least for this reader, loses its ability to compel, and in this culminating episode the enterprise actually becomes tedious. Is there really no Death Eater or dementor who is able to grasp the simple advantage of surprise?
The repeated tactic of deus ex machina (without a deus) has a deplorable effect on both the plot and the dialogue. The need for Rowling to play catch-up with her many convolutions infects her characters as well. Here is Harry trying to straighten things out with a servile house-elf:
“ ‘I don’t understand you, Kreacher,’ he said finally. ‘Voldemort tried to kill you, Regulus died to bring Voldemort down, but you were still happy to betray Sirius to Voldemort? You were happy to go to Narcissa and Bellatrix, and pass information to Voldemort through them ...’ ”
Yes, well, one sees why he is confused. The exchange takes place during an abysmally long period during which the threesome of Harry, Hermione and Ron are flung together, with weeks of time to spend camping invisibly and only a few inexplicable escapes from death to alleviate the narrative. The grand context of Hogwarts School is removed, at least until the closing scenes, and Rowling also keeps forgetting that things are either magical or they are not: Hermione’s family surely can’t be any safer from the Dark Lord by moving to Australia, and Hagrid’s corporeal bulk cannot make any difference to his ability, or otherwise, to mount a broomstick. A boring subtext, about the wisdom or otherwise of actually uttering Voldemort’s name, meanwhile robs the apotropaic device of its force.
For some time now the novels have been attempting a kind of secular dramatization of the battle between good and evil. The Ministry of Magic (one of Rowling’s better inventions) has been seeking to impose a version of the Nuremberg Laws on England, classifying its subjects according to blood and maintaining its own Gestapo as well as its own Azkaban gulag. But again, over time and over many, many pages this scenario fails to chill: most of the “muggle” population goes about its ordinary existence, and every time the secret police close in, our heroes are able to “disapparate” — a term that always makes me think of an attempt at English by George W. Bush. The prejudice against bank-monopoly goblins is modeled more or less on anti-Semitism and the foul treatment of elves is meant to put us in mind of slavery, but the overall effect of this is somewhat thin and derivative, and subject to diminishing returns.
In this final volume there is a good deal of loose-end gathering to be done. Which side was Snape really on? Can Neville Longbottom rise above himself? Are the Malfoys as black as they have been painted? Unfortunately — and with the solid exception of Neville, whose gallantry is well evoked — these resolutions prove to possess all the excitement of an old-style Perry Mason-type summing-up, prompted by a stock character who says, “There’s just one thing I don’t understand. ...” Most of all this is true of Voldemort himself, who becomes more tiresome than an Ian Fleming villain, or the vicious but verbose Nicolae Carpathia in the Left Behind series, as he offers boastful explanations that are at once grandiose and vacuous. This bad and pedantic habit persists until the final duel, which at least sees us back in the old school precincts once again. “We must not let in daylight upon magic,” as Walter Bagehot remarked in another connection, and the wish to have everything clarified is eventually self-defeating in its own terms. In her correct determination to bring down the curtain decisively, Rowling has gone further than she should, and given us not so much a happy ending as an ending which suggests that evil has actually been defeated (you should forgive the expression) for good.
Greater authors — Arthur Conan Doyle most notably — have been in the same dilemma when seeking closure. And, like Conan Doyle, Rowling has won imperishable renown for giving us an identifiable hero and a fine caricature of a villain, and for making a fictional bit of King’s Cross station as luminous as a certain address on nearby Baker Street. It is given to few authors to create a world apart, and to populate it as well as illustrate it in the mind. As one who actually did once go to boarding school by steam train, at 8, I enjoyed reading aloud to children and coming across Diagon Alley and Grimmauld Place, and also shuddering at the memory of the sarcastic schoolmasters (and Privet Drives) I have known.
The distinctly slushy close of the story may seem to hold out the faint promise of a sequel, but I honestly think and sincerely hope that this will not occur. The toys have been put firmly back in the box, the wand has been folded up, and the conjuror is discreetly accepting payment while the children clamor for fresh entertainments. (I recommend that they graduate to Philip Pullman, whose daemon scheme is finer than any patronus.) It’s achievement enough that “19 years later,” as the last chapter-heading has it, and quite probably for many decades after that, there will still be millions of adults who recall their initiation to literature as a little touch of Harry in the night.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent book is “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.”