她的一生（国语版）

在资料馆观看了这部戈达尔的名片，当场座无虚席，我与朋友坐在最后一排，看人头翕动。随着电影发展，大家纷纷开始小声交头接耳，原因比较明显，看不太懂。

我居住的地方是一个影视园区，其中大多数人都是影视方面的创业者，会来光顾这家资料馆的想必也是同一批人。恰恰是这部分观影人群，更容易被本片误导，把握不到其中的核心意图——这里的对话要推进怎样的剧情、表达怎样的人物关系？这个镜头语言要表达导演怎样的含义？这个人物对核心表意有怎样作用……

在我看来，这部影片表达的是语言的失效。当人与人之间沟通的最重要手段——语言，变得不可靠时，一个美丽至极的女人将经历怎样的人生。

首先，影片百分之八十以上的时间都用在了对话上，而仔细分析后就会发现，这些人物间的对话大多数都是莫名其妙、言不达意的。答非所问，无法准确表达自己的感情，说到痛处，只能重复——影片中出现了两次非常不自然的重复。

“这关你什么事？这关你什么事？这关你什么事？这关你什么事？这关你什么事？这关你什么事？”

“别这样，娜娜。”

中间娜娜在餐厅中和那个萍水相逢的老人的谈话，直接点题地说出了这个主旨——语言的效果，关于谎言和言不达意。有趣的是，就连这一段表达中心思想的对话，两人大多数时候还在自说自话。语言在这里也是失效的。

其次，声音上。影片中出现了数次突然的消音，有时甚至是角色或旁白还在说话的时候。这时就会看到空有嘴唇翕动、字幕告诉我们她在说什么，但声音全无。失声和失语的类比。

最后，配乐是一段令人印象深刻的小段重复，这段忧伤的音乐片段不时出现。除了另外两个地方用了影片中场景内出现了的歌曲作为场景配乐，这个选段是本片唯一的配乐，从头到尾没有变化，没有渐进。这也暗示了娜娜的境遇从头到尾都没有变过，在这个语言失效的世界，她的结局从一开始便已注定。

本片的节奏非常稳定，将娜娜无奈又颓唐的生活娓娓道来。因为对话的段落非常之多，我们便欣赏到了戈达尔除了正反打外，对对话场景的各种有趣的处理方式，其中很对是有开创性的。

最令人印象深刻的还是娜娜站起身，用手量自己的身高，天真可爱简直要溢出荧幕。我将来也要给我喜欢的姑娘拍出这种感觉的电影。

戈达尔哲学 估计有不少人会对戈达尔剧中的哲学部分望而却步，但是电影并不是无聊的，只是观影体验比较差，至少第一遍时是这样。如果说昆汀的话唠像睡前的催眠音乐一样自然，那么戈达尔的哲学就像睡前播英语听力一样折磨。戈达尔和特吕弗都是我比较喜欢的导演，穷苦出身的特吕弗会很贴近现实，或者说直接取材于现实，而影片也是为观众服务的，特吕弗会将将一个哲学命题讲得浅显易懂。而富家子弟的戈达尔明显拍摄的花样更丰富，哲学讨论也更开放，这种开放和它主题并不明晰有关。特吕弗的生活气息，戈达尔对生活深层次思考，都令人着迷。 Porthors的悲剧 剧中讲了一个Porthors的悲剧，他在前20年的生活中都没有思考，在他引爆地窖的炸药时，却开始思考认识如何走路的，以致于他不会走路了而被炸毁的地窖砸死了。我想起另外一个也比较贴合的故事，民国一个作家写的，忘记是谁了。一个酒店的老板卖的黄酒都是兑过水的，然后一个工人时每次发钱都会来喝一碗，过年的时候酒店老板良心发现没有兑水，结果工人喝完一碗酒回家时直接闷在路上然后被车轧死了。而《随心所欲》也差不多讲了一个类似的悲剧，娜娜从售货员变成了妓女，在她遇到爱的人生活将要重回正轨的时候，她被杀了。有时候做了正确的决定，想要重回正确的道路时，因为命运还有走的路太弯了，反而起了反作用，这就是Porthors式的悲剧吧 存在主义妓女 “我举手，我有责任；我转头我有责任；我不高兴，我有责任；我抽烟，我有责任；我闭上眼睛，我有责任； 即使我忘了我有责任，可我仍有责任。”这全然是存在主义的主张，而当时正是萨特的思想最火热的时候，不怎么思考的娜娜也受了这样的风潮的影响，存在主义其实是一种生活方式，一种人生观，它并不解释世界是什么样，只指导你应当如何选择自己的人生。而信奉存在主义的人，必然是一个独一无二的人，而这也与娜娜与男友的争执相符，娜娜想被认为是与众不同的，而男友说他认为每个人都是一样的。不过与众不同的人确实是令人着迷的。 语言 “突然间我不知道要说些什么；我常常出现这种状况：我知道我想说什么了，我在想那是不是我所想的，但就当要说的时候，我就说不出来了。”这种痛苦不就是《挪威的森林》里直子的痛苦吗，像是隔着柱子追逐合适的语言。“话说的越多，话意味着越少”，这用后面的话解释，我们的表达是不准确的，并不能完全传递真实，而话语中的错误和说谎还是不一样的，而话说的越多，错误的累积甚至已经超过最初的一句话，所以说“话说的越多，话意味着越少。”而解决的办法则是借黑格尔和康德的话“让我们回归生命的本质，让我们明白只有认清了错误才可获知真相。” 其实我觉得语言是在进化中的，从最初的手势等肢体语言，再到后面的口语，再到后面的文字，语言在表达中的准确性是逐步提高的。而进化中也意味着还有再进化的可能，而进化的动力源于需求，就现在而言或许还没有特别大的需求，即使男女之间，团体之间常常因为语言传递带来的偏差而产生误会，但是还没有到达阻碍生产力发展的地步。不过我想在人们可以通过脑电波提取脑中语言的技术成熟之后，或许就能催生出新的需要更准确的形式。

在法师展观看这部影片时，有那么好几次，我暗暗感叹：娜娜一定会是卡比利亚的好姐妹。《卡比利亚之夜》和《随心所欲》像是费里尼和戈达尔的隔空击掌。

娜娜觉得沦落风尘是自己的选择，和他人无关。她是自由的，她有权选择，她随心所欲地生活，也为自己的随心所欲负责。她用朗诵般的语调耸着肩和朋友说着，我举手，我有责任；我转头，我有责任；我不高兴，我有责任；我闭上眼睛，我有责任；我忘了我有责任，我仍然有… 她不是悲戚的，她把自己借给他人，把自己留给自己。

卡比利亚也是如此，用悲惨形容她并不合适。虽然她的生活过得着实不易，她还是满足的。在大明星跟前也不露怯，你该看看她如何挑眉撇嘴：我甚至有一支温度计！那不是说她很物质，只是她更朴实，不会那么流畅地表达自己，也不像娜娜那么爱聊生命，她说想太多脑子会爆炸的，带着上下翻飞的意大利鸡爪手势。

随心所欲里讲到一个小孩写的关于一只鸡的故事，鸡有inside和outside。移除outside，你看到了inside。移除inside，你才能找到soul。

于我来说，卡比利亚流露最深处的soul是在舞台上，在催眠下戴上花环陷入幻想的那一刻。这么狗血神神叨叨的玛丽苏超现实幻想却被费里尼拍得那么动人。

而娜娜的灵魂时刻可能不是在咖啡馆和陌生人力所不逮地大聊哲学，而是直视着银幕上的圣女贞德，与她同呼吸地流下泪水。

也被投币点唱机音乐响起的那一刻折服。不如跳舞，娜娜跳得不算好看，男人们或是冷眼忽略或是嫌弃，那都不重要，她开心地转来绕去，音乐停止时她靠着柱子，有那么片刻的怅然。卡比利亚从幻想中惊醒感到的也是羞愧，无所适从。她也跳过一段，向《雨中曲》致敬的街头起舞，一下子变成了《大路》里的杰索米娜，跳得也不算好看，那也不重要，随性尽兴的生命之舞最重要。

我忍不住大胆而超主观地猜测，王家卫很有可能从这两部电影里摄取了几丝游魂，注入了《重庆森林》里的阿菲。

她们的结局。卡比利亚站在悬崖上，将要和他结婚的男人问，你会游泳吗？整个影厅恍然大悟：啊…这男的又又又是来谋财害命的…大家为她着急，也伴随着一些轻笑声：你怎么又又又被骗了...卡比利亚太后知后觉，所幸那男人还有仅存的善意，带走了她的钱，留下了她的命。她失魂落魄地走在黑夜的大路上，一帮善良的陌生人载歌载舞簇拥着她，她的笑脸上落下一滴黑色眼泪。神一般的光辉时刻，那不会是现实，只是费里尼不忍心。

好姐妹娜娜则是被拉皮条的男人拽去卖给别人，她抗拒，想逃，被决绝地给了一枪，扑倒在大街上，电影结束。戈达尔比费里尼狠心，也更写实，影厅传来很多轻声的哈？

一部电影的时间对她们来说意味着什么？卡比利亚竖着的眉毛慢慢低顺下来，费里尼电影里的风尘女总是朝天竖着眉毛，怒气冲冲的喜感大于其瘆人的程度。娜娜则是挂着越来越自如轻佻的神情，和她刚开始看到的街边女人一样漫不经心地裹了裹外套，四处张望，熟稔地转换鞋尖方向。

法国和意大利电影里的六十年代，为自己找出路的女性角色往往在站街，就像电影里民国时期的上海，穿着旗袍的独立女性不是小三就是间谍，或者…都是… 乱世无序无依，只能出卖自己，毕竟那是耳边会突然响起枪声的战后欧洲，生活本身就是失序而混沌的。当然堕落天使的特定身份也自带把身体给别人灵魂给自己的反差，娜娜和卡比利亚尤其如此，虚无和迷惘的内外壳里裹着高贵的自尊。她们没有完全垮掉。

去年的意大利大师展，映前播放了博洛尼亚电影资料馆馆长的导赏视频，颇为嫉妒地看着他背对着超大幅阿玛柯德海报说道：这次影展将透过意大利电影大师的目光，带领大家去看真实的意大利，进一步了解二十世纪的意大利，了解意大利的精髓。

很简单而有分量的几句话，那些绝非传统意义上的好看和靓丽光鲜的电影，甚至相反是关于拒绝工作的落魄乞丐，去偷自行车狼狈被抓的父亲，无能狂吠又惶惑痛哭的江湖艺人... 他说那些是意大利的精髓。当时听到大为感动。

Nana: Why are you reading?

Parain: It's my job.

Nana: It's odd. Suddenly I don't know what to say; it often happens to me. I know what I want to say. I think about whether it is what I mean. But when the moment comes to speak, I can't say it.

Parain: Yes, of course. You've read the Three Musketeers?

Nana: I saw the film, why?

Parain: Because in it, Porthos, this is really in Twenty Years Later, Porthos, all strong, a little stupid, he has never thought in his life. He has to place a bomb in the cellar to blow it up. He does it. He places the bomb, lights the fuse, then he runs away of course. But suddenly he begins to think. What about? How is it possible to put one foot before the other? You must have thought about that too. So he stops running. He can't go on. He can't move forward. The bomb explodes, the cellar fell on him. He holds it up with his shoulder. But after a day, or maybe two, he is crushed to death. The first time he thought, it killed him.

Nana: Why did you tell me that story?

Parain: No reason, just to talk.

Nana: Why must one always talk? Often one shouldn't talk, but live in silence. The more one talks, the less words mean.

Parain: Perhaps. But can one?

Nana: I don't know.

Parain: I've found that we can't live without talking.

Nana: I'd like to live without talking.

Parain: Yes, it would be nice, wouldn't it? Like loving one another more. But it isn't possible.

Nana: But why? Words should express just what one wants to say. Do they betray us?

Parain: But we betray them, too. One should be able to express oneself. It has been done in writing. Think: someone like Plato, can still be understood - he can. Yet he wrote in Greek, 2,500 years ago. No one really know the language, at least not exactly. Yet something get through, so we should be able to express ourselves. And we must.

Nana: Why must we? To understand each other?

Parain: We must think, and for thoughts, we need words. There's no other way to think. To communicate, one must talk, that is our life.

Nana: Yes, but it is very difficult. I think life should be easy. Your talk of the Three Musketeers may make a good story, but it's terrible.

Parain: Yes, but it's a pointer. I believe, one learns to talk well only when one has renounced life for a time. That's the price.

Nana: So, to speak is fatal?

Parain: Speaking is almost a resurrection in relation to life. Speech is another life from when one does not speak. So, to live in speech, one must pass through the death of life without speech. I may not be putting it clearly, but there's a kind of ascetic rule that stops one from taking well until one sees life with detachment.

Nana: But one can't live everyday life with... I don't know

Parain: With detachment. We balance, that's why we pass from silence to words. We swing between the two because it's the movement of life. From everyday life one rises to a life we call superior, the thinking life. But this life presupposes one has killed the everyday too elementary life.

Nana: Then thinking and talking are the same thing?

Parain: So I believe. Plato said so, it's an old idea. One cannot distinguish the thought from the words that express it. An instant of thought can only be grasped through words.

Nana: So one must talk and risk lying?

Parain: Lies too, are part of our quest. Errors and lies are very similar.

Nana: (Tries to interrupt)

Parain: I don't mean ordinary lies, like I promise to come tomorrow, but I don't, as I didn't want to. You see, those are ploys. But a subtle lie is a little different from an error. One searches and can't find the right word. That's why you didn't know what to say. You were afraid of not finding the right word, that's the explanation.

Nana: How can one be sure of having found the right word?

Parain: One must work. It needs an effort. One must speak in a way that is right, doesn't hurt, says what has to be said, does what has to be done, without hurting or bruising.

Nana: One must try to be in good faith. Someone told me: "There is truth in everything, even in error."

Parain: That's true. France didn't see it in the seventeenth century. They thought one could avoid error, and what's more, that one can live directly in the truth. It isn't possible. Hence Kant, Hegel, Germany philosophy: to bring us back to life, and makes us see that we must pass through error to arrive at the truth.

Nana: What do you think about love?

Parain: The body had to come into it. Leibnitz introduced the contingent. Contingent truths and necessary truths make up life. German philosophy showed us that in life, one thinks with the servitudes and errors of life. One must manage with that, that's true.

Nana: Shouldn't love be the only truth?

Parain: For that, love would always have to be true. Do you know anyone who knows at once what he loves? No. When you are twenty you don't know. All you know are bits and pieces, you make arbitrary choices. Your "I love" is an impure affair. But to completely at one with what you love you need maturity. That means searching, that is the truth of life. That's why love is a solution, on condition that it is true.

字幕来源: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUp_du3awI0

与Nana交谈的学者为法国哲学家 Brice Parain (Courcelles-sous-Jouarre, 10 March 1897 - 20 March 1971 ) //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brice_Parain