[影片/小说]强烈推荐：Shopgirl

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-19 21:32

一个年轻，美丽但不明艳的乡下女孩子，怀着艺术家的梦想来到落山矶，却只能在高档商店里卖自己买不起的手套。她寂寞，苦闷，没有前途。同她约会的男生，懵懵懂懂，情商不比初中生高一点，连请她看电影的钱都要问她借。这时一个中年百万富翁看中了她，约她到比佛利山最贵的法国餐馆吃饭，给她买贵重的礼物，帮她付清学生贷款。

哇，好俗套，这不是洋喜宝的故事?

去年Shopgirl出来时我看情节简介，当即的反射就是这样，所以没有兴趣看。后来在读书会上一个人向我推荐这部影片和原著中篇小说（原著和剧本都是Steve Martin写的，他并且在影片里演那个＂中发白＂）。＂不是你想象的那样。＂他说。我半信半疑，直到读了小说才明白，真的，从来没有见人这么写这样一个看似俗套无比的故事，完全不是你想象的那样。今天刚看了改编的电影，或许因为作者就在旁边看着，而且还是制作人的缘故，几乎是一丝不改地搬上银幕，但并不觉得重复读小说时的印象，因为Claire Danes演的Maribelle Buttersfield和Steve Martin自己演的Ray Porter，给纸上的人物添了一层新的解释。

这是一个对白不多，微妙的故事，没有人提高嗓门，没有人死，没有人闹，没有戏剧场面，没有尖锐冲突。它的全部精力都集中在对特定的两三个人的心理和他们之间的关系上面，它也很不讨好，因为每一个人物和每一步行走都不给观众／读者一点可以靠常规和俗套借力的余地，把同情支在一个角色身上轻松地评判其他人。Steve Martin的笔下是既同情又不姑息的客观而尖锐的观察，他的subtlety非常罕见。

富翁并不猥琐，他口味高尚，穿着讲究，坐着私人包机飞来飞去，给情人买阿曼尼晚礼服，体贴而尊重地追求年轻女孩。他们第一次亲密接触后，他对她说：＂我们先把话说在前头。我现在无意结婚或者进行exclusive relationship，我们就是约会，同时keep our options open.＂而女孩子一厢情愿地渐渐依恋起他来，虽然并不向他伸手要钱或要求被包起来，但是接受他的经济上的恩惠也并无不安或害怕自己失去自尊。

在文学创作里有这么一说：The more you keep characters specific, the more they are universal. 或许并不是彻底的可以推而广之的认同，而是丝丝入扣的真实感，这两个人物（第三个人物，Jason Swartzman演的邋塌小男生比较多一点夸张喜剧成份，但是可真典型！）的性格和心理有极端可信的内在逻辑，每个细节都极准，一不小心就忽略了。例如，Ray Porter的行业是logician，而Maribelle是Vermont出来的，不是生长在大城市，她父亲是退伍军人，话非常少。

再多我就不说了，否则破坏了你自己读小说和看电影的直接感受。有这么一类电影，野心非常地小：人物数目很少，情节也（在表面上）很平淡，没有任何亮晶晶的＂卖点＂，实际上它们是特地要减少flashy的成份，目的就是专注对特定人物在特定环境下的心理进行观察，好象生物学家观察昆虫那样无穷的fascination，把人类个体放在最平常最自然的生存环境里观察最基本的生存状态和互相之间的关系，例如，男女之间或者是家庭内部。我对此类影片有种特殊的偏爱，the mystery of the heart，日常司空见惯乃至视而不见的人性本质忽然被揭露出来，呵，原来这么神奇。这类的影片例如Junebug, You Me and Everyone We Know, Monster Ball （虽然里面有两个人死亡），都是让我念念不忘的。

最后，赞一下Steve Martin的写作，他能彻底地理解中发白倒也罢了，对年轻女人心理的洞察和微妙的，同情而不美化／理想化的描绘，看似平淡笨拙实际精确真实的写法，实在让我佩服之极。他过去写过剧本，但似乎没写过小说，这部中篇是第一次，很难得。有几处估计是忍不住加进些幽默小点缀，而且Jeremy这个人物就写得比较弱一点，虽然有他的典型之处。总体来说，气氛是melancholic，但并非低落悲观的。

(PS,里面一个配角是Pete Sampras的老婆Bridgette Wilson-Sampras演的。)

What is most imporant for me in these small and unambitious movies (which deep down is not small, for what can be more ambitious than revealing the truest inside of the human heart?), is an intimacy and a truth of the soul that affirms how DAZZLING the ordinary people really are.

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-20 9:08

你还是都说了把。我实在没兴趣看书或电影。

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-20 9:50

Then you don't need to know.

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-20 10:11

I do want to know what the "丝丝入扣的真实" is. Also, I am curious particularly because you, someone totally hates anything remotely resembles "money for honey" type of exchange, likes it so much. But as a slow reader, I have 4 books on my nightstand that I am dying to read but don't have enough time, so I really don't have the energy to read a May-Dec love story.
Another way to put it, I am not as curious about the book as about why you think so highly of it.

密斯张三 · Post by **密斯张三** » 2006-12-20 11:45

啊，他好像还写过别的长短小说，有发在扭腰客上。
当时看trailer的反应和Jun一样。现这么一说，倒好奇起来了――再说一点罢，我不怕spoiler的。

花差花差小将军 · Post by **花差花差小将军** » 2006-12-20 12:47

I rented the DVD months ago and could not bring myself to watch it till the end. I find it very slow-paced and full of self-sentiment (artsy type). So I just pulled it out and returned it.
I can't believe Jun, who likes Deadwood, would appreciate Shopgirl

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-20 12:59

小K给我出的这个难题，我举手投降，没法回答。小说很短，或者你干脆看电影好了。文字的力量是有限的，有些东西没法清楚地讲出来。例如我前天看的The Proposition，情节也是非常俗套的，讲出来你也肯定没兴趣看。但是我在里面得到的新鲜印象是不能用几行文字传达给别人的－－一半是我的文字功力不够，一半是因为那种直接的视觉和感性的印象。并且因为直接的感官印象是主观的，我现在把自己的感受形容给你，话一出口就变了味道，到你眼中更不知变得怎样面目全非。文字在某种程度上是对直觉的背叛。

It attests to the novella and movie's quality if I, "someone who hates money for honey exchange," is so enthusiastic about them. Keep in mind that the author does not take a moral position on either the young Mirabelle and the older Ray Porter. He neither promotes their relationship nor condemns it or either person. And that is key.

Roger Ebert's review:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... 28008/1023

The last sentence rings especially true:

You may think Ray is a rat, Mirabelle is a victim and Jeremy cleans up well. If that's what you think, go back and read the first paragraph again, and save yourself some trouble.

When it comes to social phenomena that do not please us, like money for honey, horny old rich men and their trophy young women, or promiscuity, one-night stands, self-destructive relationship tendencies, or other stuff, one could simply dismiss them or condemn them all as disgusting, etc., and sweep the involved people into one category of "losers." It is perceptive and sensitive (not sensitive as "soft" or "easy" but really sharply realistic) works like "Shopgirl" and other intimate small movies and writing that make me NOT to always hastily make moral judgments. I'm not saying I'm somehow a superior person because I try not to make definite, black-and-white judgments, but that only these works show that moral judgments are BORING. Penetrating and nonjudgmental observations are more fascinating.

Now this reminds me to rent "Woodsman", a movie starring Kevin Bacon about a pedophile.

老麦 · Post by 老麦 » 2006-12-20 14:15

去找来看，好久没冒头，不过跟着jun走已经很久了

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-20 14:30

小K比较疾恶如仇，不象我这个moral relativist。Steve Martin经常发表点短篇，不过没听说他出版过小说，除了这本。他编导演的那个Bowfinger很好看，据说里面讽刺的对象全是在好来乌确有其人的，观众可对号入座（提示：讽刺对象包括Anne Heche，曾经是他的女朋友）。

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-20 14:35

小K比较疾恶如仇

Zezezeze.....you are so much more 疾恶如仇 than me! I usually just sweep the involved people into one category of "losers" and don't bother to condemn them.

Ok I checked out the ebook. Maybe I will read it tonight.

笑嘻嘻 · Post by **笑嘻嘻** » 2006-12-20 19:32

I like Bowfinger very much.

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-20 21:27

我从图书馆借了电子版，看了倒数第三章的头，看了最后一章，觉得还行，等到家要从头看的时候发现adobe 不让看了。电子书不知道怎么搞的。
前面洋喜宝那套编排不看也就算了，就最后那一章我半猜半蒙一下吧。我觉得还是cliche.小妞穿了漂亮晚装陪他出席盛宴的段子，大家都觉得伊一片清新猜不出来历。我看了马上就心里一声冷笑。也太不把上层人物当人看了，做到这么高段谁是土鳖傻瓜。有什么猜不出来历，只要看年龄小一大截，坐在那里光插不上嘴的，人家就知道是什么角色。尤其是社交为目的的工业晚会，人人忙着跟有重要性的人物攀谈，谁浪费时间应酬附属地位的女性：美貌得体稍微带厌倦神色的公园大道妻子, 穿戴整齐随时紧紧挂在男伴胳膊上聚精会神聆听对话的花瓶女友，美艳性感靠朋友提携进来钓金龟目光不停全场游走的小模特小演员。只有劳动人民中产阶级觉得穿今年的prada 是大事儿，人家上层社会眼睛尖着哪，度假房子在那儿最近买什么艺术品在什么公司的broad 上平时跟谁吃午餐才能定义社会地位，没底子的美貌少女在老头子身边出现，马上“He pays her bill " 的标记，没人认真理睬她。
当然社会怎么想跟俩人之间怎么想是两回事。作者不用费力就可以说服我他们存在真挚的感情，老头给钱是纯粹是抱著帮助的态度。我们对我们喜欢的人和事，如果不费太多力气就可以使对方快乐，是很乐意施予的。只有对方要求的是我们做不到不肯做的事，才是刺刀见红份外丑陋的时刻。这并不表示我们前面的善意虚伪.
俩人感情写的挺好的,的确不是钱的问题。很多人成长中都会有类似的刻骨铭心的感情，主题总是一方比另一方成熟太多，有力太多，俩人间力量不平衡，弱的一方就会受伤害。但是其实过去之后，弱的一方从中得到的多，成长的也多，恢复的也快--如果这段感情没彻底摧毁弱方。常见的形式有师生恋，或着是艺术家之间的恋爱，弱的一方总是希望占有，强的一方总是希望保持“开放”的态度 -- 比如罗丹和克劳迪亚。一般的社会观念认为稳定是合理的要求，所以希望保持开放态度的强方会被责以自私，其实弱方也一样自私--但是人本来是自私的，尤其是在恋爱的时候。

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-20 21:36

It is not that simple, and it is not that typical, and it's not what you think -- it is, but no quite. You are right to a certain extent. It is about the younger person's journey of growing up and the older person's ... "using her," so to speak, but it's not quite exactly that. It is something to be savored, and fermented, and taken in as a whole, not as elements of a thesis or an argument. Cliches are cliches because the pattern is real and common, but the success in this particular case is how the cliched situation and social/sexual roles are treated as unique and ambiguous characters rather than symbols of an idea.

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-20 22:08

I will have to read the rest of the story then ...

豪情 · Post by 豪情 » 2006-12-20 22:16

俩人感情写的挺好的,的确不是钱的问题。很多人成长中都会有类似的刻骨铭心的感情，主题总是一方比另一方成熟太多，有力太多，俩人间力量不平衡，弱的一方就会受伤害。但是其实过去之后，弱的一方从中得到的多，成长的也多，恢复的也快--如果这段感情没彻底摧毁弱方。常见的形式有师生恋，或着是艺术家之间的恋爱，弱的一方总是希望占有，强的一方总是希望保持“开放”的态度 -- 比如罗丹和克劳迪亚。一般的社会观念认为稳定是合理的要求，所以希望保持开放态度的强方会被责以自私，其实弱方也一样自私--但是人本来是自私的，尤其是在恋爱的时候。

红尘有缘 · Post by **红尘有缘** » 2006-12-21 6:28

我觉得还是cliche.小妞穿了漂亮晚装陪他出席盛宴的段子，大家都觉得伊一片清新猜不出来历。我看了马上就心里一声冷笑。也太不把上层人物当人看了，做到这么高段谁是土鳖傻瓜。有什么猜不出来历，只要看年龄小一大截，坐在那里光插不上嘴的，人家就知道是什么角色。尤其是社交为目的的工业晚会，人人忙着跟有重要性的人物攀谈，谁浪费时间应酬附属地位的女性：美貌得体稍微带厌倦神色的公园大道妻子, 穿戴整齐随时紧紧挂在男伴胳膊上聚精会神聆听对话的花瓶女友，美艳性感靠朋友提携进来钓金龟目光不停全场游走的小模特小演员。只有劳动人民中产阶级觉得穿今年的prada 是大事儿，人家上层社会眼睛尖着哪，度假房子在那儿最近买什么艺术品在什么公司的broad 上平时跟谁吃午餐才能定义社会地位，没底子的美貌少女在老头子身边出现，马上“He pays her bill " 的标记，没人认真理睬她。

瓦,这段说的真精辟!

不过电影里是没什么人称赞那个小女生的

我觉得这个小女生和喜宝的区别大了,她有种心不在焉的艺术家的范儿,最后发现不能从"中发白"那里得到等值的爱以后,重新回到艺术的怀抱.

艺术是能让"中发百"刮目相看的吧,反正是让他惆怅了.

总之电影后半段明显太理想化了

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-21 7:21

我觉得这个小女生和喜宝的区别大了,她有种心不在焉的艺术家的范儿,最后发现不能从"中发白"那里得到等值的爱以后,重新回到艺术的怀抱.

艺术是能让"中发百"刮目相看的吧,反正是让他惆怅了.

当然这样理解也是可以的。我觉得有意思的地方就在于它既运作在俗套里面，又偏离了广大人民群众耳熟能详的轨道－－在写人物方面。

例如，你觉得那段宴会是在描写Mirabelle怎样美丽和与众不同，受人喜爱，可实际上整本书都在同时讲她的好和她的平凡，二者并重。不是一般的＂她是沙子里的珍珠＂被老头子发现打扮polish从石头变成大钻石，最后脱胎换骨超凡脱俗。她的平凡恰恰是她的个性和人性所在。这个地点／背景设置很重要，因为在LA这种地方到处都是削尖脑袋往上爬，只要能与众不同，恨不得长出两个脑袋的美女。Mirabelle在纽约最＂美＂，最＂得意＂，最＂受宠＂的时候，按普通此类＂灰姑娘＂故事的套路，应该是高潮，但其实这是她离幸福最远做人最失败的时刻。

Knowing · Post by **Knowing** » 2006-12-21 20:52

Ok I finished the book.
Ray's character was very well depicted, especially his clumsiness when it came to relationship. Jeremy was 26 but his mental age was 12. Ray, despite being more thoughtful and 50, had the mental age of 25. Also, being a logician his brain worksed in strict logical way even when judging feeling related matters. That was why he hurt Mirabelle unintentionally. In that he stopped being the stereotype sugar daddy playboy, and started being an real individual.
Mirabelle's character was relatively weak and kind of still stereotype to me. What annoyed me more was Steve Martin skipped the part where she struggled with herself before the NY trip, and after the NY trip, also how she could accept Ray's offer to pay off her student loan and replaced her truck. It was actually when the relationship was defiend as "exchange" instead of "dating". Because for sure, she started off believing it was dating. Also, paying the dinner was totally different from paying off student loan. Accepting a fancy dress was also completely different from accepting a car. I could not believe that did not make her feel a bit like a whore on some level, especially given her very WASP background. Steve Martin concentrated on the easy part of the relationship -- falling in love, he skipped the harder part -- coming to your senses. It was always painful to realize your love was human and greedy and selfish and did not have the best of your interest in mind.

Nevertheless it touched me how they grew on each other, and how they fell apart. But I was not as impressed as Jun had been.

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-22 7:56

I understand why xiaoK feel this way. I'm not trying to badger you into liking it as much as I do, I swear.

XiaoK is a New York City girl. Mirabelle is, fundamentally, a Vermont country girl. She is neither smart nor sophisticated, and she does not become particularly smart or sophisticated by the end of the story. Although she does grow up through the journey -- not into a sophisticated and morally higher and stronger woman, but just ... a grown-up woman who is still a Vermont girl at heart who takes her meds and tries to do the best she can.

At some point, I'm sure she realizes that he is buying her for his occasional use. And he is. And she is OK with it up to a certain point. She is not morally spotless. Despite her flaws, the author loves her with a gentle kindness and helps me love her too with a full view of her flaws, which further makes me see that neither am I so flawless, but can still be loved with tender kindness.

And Ray, despite his flaws, is not a villain, an evil old pervert who corrupts women. I understand and sympathize with him.

Anyway, these things are very specific. What touches me particularly doesn't touch you the same way. Besides I'm kind of a weirdo so take it with a grain of salt.

putaopi · Post by **putaopi** » 2006-12-22 8:44

Jun wrote:

Despite her flaws, the author loves her with a gentle kindness and helps me love her too with a full view of her flaws, which further makes me see that neither am I so flawless, but can still be loved with tender kindness.

I am sure that such a heroine wounld not be loved by all of the readers, but it actually makes her more interesting.

Jun wrote:

And Ray, despite his flaws, is not a villain, an evil old pervert who corrupts women. I understand and sympathize with him.

Are woman always the victims? I am mostly a feminist, still I have to admit that some woman might be ignorant but not innocent in terms of relationship that involes any type of exchange.

I will check out this book too.....

putaopi · Post by **putaopi** » 2006-12-31 9:43

这本书我也借了E-book来看完了。确实，跟我想象的不一样，是个挺普通的感情故事。也许它的特别之处就在于这个“普通”吧，Maribelle和Ray之间是普通男女的正常故事，基于physical attaction的男欢女爱，跟喜宝的传奇相差得太远。顺便说一句，那个瑁存姿把年轻漂亮的女孩子包下来，就为了偶尔看几眼的做法，实在是令人匪夷所思。

跟大家相比，我不得不承认自己的moral standard非常低。Ray后来在经济上帮助Maribelle, 我不觉得像Jun说的那样， “he is buying her for his occasional use“。他们的desire是双向的，当然女孩子这边的希冀的更多些，但Ray 不需要用金钱去买. 相反，这是Ray 关心她，爱她的表现，虽然这种爱离Maribelle所期待的爱有距离。金钱买不到爱，但是对男人来说，肯不肯在女人身上花钱，花多少钱，花在哪里，是跟他自己的爱情成正比的。Ray 替Maribelle付学生贷款，付Credit card debt，换了车子，这些都是颇费心思的选择。

Maribelle的financial situation，完全令人绝望。在她的境地，拒绝Ray的帮助固然令人赞叹，接受呢我也同情她。其实接受情人的帮助，跟接受未婚夫的帮助，在道德上为什么有这么大的区别呢？说真的，像Maribelle这样的艺术青年男女，我也见过不少，个个都毫无积蓄，收入微薄，甚至连医疗保险都没有，全靠着年青撑着呢。我恨不得他们都能搭上个Sugar Daddy Mommy。。。啊，不，希望他们都能认识有鉴赏力的Art Patrons。小说里Maribelle还是有商业上成功的潜力的，运气好的话，她送给Ray 的那幅自画像就会成为一个金矿。

有趣的是作者认为the art scene in San Francisco is more alive then LA, 也许是SF这种cozy的小村庄的感觉，让starving artists比较温暖吧。

Jun · Post by **Jun** » 2006-12-31 11:34

Ray Porter does love her, true, but he is also using her. He gives her money, because the amount is so small as to mean nothing to him, and because, later in the story after she leaves him, he has sort of a fatherly feeling for her. Ray is a miser toward Mirabelle, although he later enters a more ... "equal" relationship with another woman.

This is a story not entirely about romance. At its heart it is an exploration of drastic inequality in a relationship: the inequality in age, economy, class, and how one loves, ie, how much one gives oneself in a relationship. The author is cautioning against inequality, not blaming each character for their foolishness.

tuscany · Post by **tuscany** » 2007-01-03 12:52

Jun thanks for the recommendation. I finished the book last night and it was indeed a very good read.