April 29,2007 17:12

1967 Summer of Love‧ 夏季之愛 ‧ Barbarian野人咖啡室














Hi Everybody,
Anybody interested in a little walk down Memory Lane -- 1967 style?
Metzke will be in Taiwan this next week. Want to get together?

Take care
Lynn Miles 梅心怡

美國舊金山1967 Summer of Love大波之到台灣來,大概是當年秋天的事情。美國加州大學生來台灣留學時帶來的新音樂唱片,常拿到西門町「野人咖啡室」播放,回國時都沒拿回去。這樣,「野人咖啡屋」的唱片庫就存了很多在其他咖啡館聽不到的歌曲。
Bob Dylan, Jefferson Airplane, Mississippi John Hurt, Big Brother and the Holding Company, Joan Baez, Frank Zappa, Grateful Dead, Miles Davis 以及很多美軍廣播電台從來沒播放的音樂,在「野人咖啡室」經常可以欣賞。
「野人咖啡屋」是1967夏天主要三個人來企畫設計:洪騰勝、德國籍Klaus-Peter Metzke、我。Metzke氏這禮拜一訪台,五月五日(星期六)回國。希望跟Metzke氏會合之人士,請跟我聯絡:
Lynn Miles: 886-939-188828

有關「野人咖啡室」我在國際網路上找到一些報導、回憶給大家分享。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
林世煜註:
請往下捲動,閱讀Lynn的另一篇報導:
〈Barbarian Founder-Designer Coming to Taiwan 〉

梅心怡先生 Lynn Miles,是我國當代人權史上的傳奇人物之一
請參閱文末所附:
Lynn在「陳文成博士紀念基金會」主編的英文版《The Road to Freedom》
一書裡的自述:〈How Long the Road – 一路走來〉
以及他為即將出版的日文版《人權之路》寫的〈 Our Road〉
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

浓缩六O年代颓废脸孔的野人咖啡屋

六O年代的美国,一个摆汤在希望与幻灭、理想与此同时颓废之间的年代。甘逎迪遇刺、阿姆斯壮登陆月球、詹姆斯迪恩一夕成名从车祸去世……,报纸上日日翻新的头条新闻,拼贴出一第表情复杂的脸——迷惑、放纵,不知所措……。

嬉皮风吹到台湾,所有青春无聊、心灵无依的异种人类,都流浪到峨嵋街上的“野人咖啡馆”。城中最活生生的一面全在这里,你可以旁若无人的独舞,享受于人群贴近的感觉,也可以淹没、隐形在震耳欲聋的摇滚乐声中,保持一点疏离。画家席德进在这里帮人即兴画像,林怀民则在他唯一的部长篇小说《蝉》里,志记了这一段年代。

“陶之青步下野人”那几层又窄又陡的楼梯……小小的地下室,充溢着人声、汗臭、烟味。……桌灯的罩子,是一张薄薄的三合板卷成的圆筒,上面五六个用烟头烧出的窟窿,还有些字。钢笔的字迹、原子笔和蜡笔的涂鸦。荘士桓凑近了细看:不错,今天是七月十三日星期五,但这是我的生日,为我祝福吧!”……

一九七O年,披头四出版了“Yesterdqy”,宣告解散。同一年,报纸上登出了“野人”因毒品交换被警方封禁的消息。

许多人扔下吃了一半的油条,踩着脚踏车,心焦如焚的赶到“野人”深锁的门前,告别昨日,青春的页,被迫匆匆书上句点。
http://www.milegacoffee.com/wenhua4.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
台北咖啡 Taipei Cafe

台北咖啡館的歷史其實不長,從三○年代的喫茶店開始,也不過是八十年吧!但對這頗洋化的玩意兒,這城市中人一直頗為喜愛。

是日據時代的「維特」與「波麗路」,是戰後的「南美」、「蜂大」及「明星」咖啡館,是六、七○年代的「野人咖啡屋」及「彩色盤」,是九○年代的「2.31」及「阿諾瑪」……

我們的青春期,似乎就從一杯要加糖加奶精的曼特寧咖啡,一路喝到這奶泡綿密的卡布其諾;四處可見的「蜜蜂咖啡」日式虹吸,如今已讓位給「星巴克」等無所不在的義式咖啡機……

而在咖啡館下設攤的詩人,在咖啡館中閱讀寫作的導演、小說家,均已成為這城市中咖啡時光的景象。
http://shopping.pchome.com.tw/? mod=item&func=exhibit&SR_NO=&IT_NO=IAAA05-A09146350

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Premier issue (2003.6) (HK)
滾動的輪胎‧‧‧台灣大路上的狄倫與金斯堡
張釗維(台北)

60 年代的台灣,有著「失落的一代」、現代派文學以及熱門音樂,是否接受到這些基進訊息了呢?林懷民的小說「蟬」裡,「 The time they are a-changin'」在野人咖啡屋裡流洩著,Beatles 的歌以及亞弦的「如歌的行板」也成為背景音律;但是,小說中,看不到一種清晰決絕、理直氣壯如「各地的為人父母者 / 不要批評你們所不瞭解的 / 你們的兒女不再受你們管束 /已經過時了!你們的老路氶v(Bob Dylan 「 The times they are a-changin' 」,筆者自譯)的態度可以浮出這些背景聲音之上,也摸不到如「向日葵」那般,在荒蕪之中的耀眼生機。
http://www.smrc8a.org/8a/issue01/rock.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book review
雙唇的旅行:韓良露食藝文札
作者:韓良露/著,朱利安/繪
出版社:麥田
出版日期:2004 年 06 月 28 日
語言別:繁體中文
韓良露,豐富的韓良露
文/蔣 勳

很喜歡聽韓良露講話,也喜歡看她寫的文章。

那時,文藝青年都知道誰在明星咖啡屋寫劇本寫小說、誰在野人咖啡館寫現代詩。在那個已逝的年代,作家就算是某些人的偶像,但保持隱密的熱情卻是必須的美學。

我那時候很崇拜林懷民,他雖然後來沒有繼續再寫作,不過他寫「蟬」,那個世界不是我的世界,他寫的是一群人在野人咖啡很放蕩,那你想想看我是唸師大生物系,乖乖的永遠 ...
http://www.books.com.tw/exep/prod/booksfile.php?item=0010263518

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Roxy
ROXY的故事

70年代.年輕的消費群只有”冰果店”,咖啡店”,或是民歌餐廳,啤酒屋等選擇,搖滾青年的傳奇記憶中,僅有台大附近的”木棉花餐廳”,”滾石餐廳”以及西門町”新潮咖啡””野人咖啡”算是極為 少數的音樂據點.”PUB”則是個從未聽聞的名詞.這些年輕人重要的休閒場所大都只營業到夜裡一點.所以,那個年代幾乎沒有所謂的”夜生活”!
http://www.roxy.com.tw/about.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
莊佳村 年表
1966 台北 第 2 次個展 野人咖啡屋
http://www.oceantaiwan.com/land/galle ry/CT_Chuang/about.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reading Times 時報悅讀網 -- Book review
70年代懺情錄
書系:生活台灣
編號:CE0028
作者:楊澤主編
定價:350 元
初版日期:1994年12月10日
ISBN:9571314749
開本:20開/平裝/224頁
(excerpt)
▼ 書摘 2
七○──
.蔣勳

1970 年,結束軍隊的服役,從鳳山回到台北。坐很慢的慢車,彷彿一種無休無止的流浪。車廂內因為炎熱蒸發的汗酸,混合著嘔吐物的稠黏的氣味。放假的兵士們也肆無忌憚,脫去了草綠色的軍服,裡面仍是草綠色的圓領棉布內衣。在過嘉南平原的時候,熟透的金黃色的稻穗沉重地歪倒著。夏天似乎使氣味特別易於擴散。稻米飽熟的使人飢餓的香味,火車的煤煙味,兵士們男性腥臊的體嗅,食物在胃中逐漸糜爛打嗝而出的腐臭……。氣味罷,那是遲緩死去的六○年代的氣味。農業的氣味,手工業小鎮的氣味,性慾被禁錮的氣味,軍隊紀律的氣味,多澱粉質穀類而少肉食的氣味……,遲緩而沉重的流過。一列解甲兵士的列車,疲倦有一點沮喪的馳過許多鳳凰木的小鎮月台。無事在月台上瞌睡的老人,彷彿夢中的蟬嘶,一直一直叫著,尖銳高亢到了近於空白。

預官中許多是讀過卡繆的《異鄉人》的。在路過竹鎮的時候,相約一起去有名的相士處摸骨,卜算未來的命運,夜間並集體在一間兼營私娼的旅店中嫖妓。

「解甲兵士們的性是特別難以理解的。」

讀醫學的 C 惘然地望著看來一點也不像交媾的男子與女子赤裸彼此嬉戲調笑的身體這樣說。

C 是竹鎮著名的醫生世家的長子。發達起來的整建後的華宅是頗西化的建築,但仍保有前庭「穎水堂」的老式門楣的格局。

大部分時候是年輕的解役男子們掩著下體私處,躲閃來自潑悍女子們恣意的攻擊,咯咯笑著蜷縮在舖粉紅色床單的牆角。

其實是嬉戲到將近黎明,妓女們整裝散去,男子們才相互依靠著入睡了。

C 在昏黃的燈光中無意義地看著自己密織網紋的手掌。相士說他將在 10 年內迅速地富有起來,使士紳家庭出身而又耽讀哲學的 C 竟有被羞辱的感覺。「這傖俗的騙取錢財的相士──」他心中這樣不屑地輕蔑著,便從口袋中掏出規定的卜費交給盲相士俗艷打扮的小妾,頭也不回地走出相命館。

C 果然暴富了。完全違反他的意願,在一次無人知曉緣由的自殺未遂之後,變成了一個進口牙醫器械的商人,在台灣逐漸注意起兒童的牙齒矯正的七○年代初期,如神話一般地暴富並肥胖了起來。

相士卜算的或許並不是 C 個人的運命,而是台灣七○年代在岌岌可危中一夕富有起來的神話罷。

但是,我仍在六○年代的哀悼中。

下了火車站,兀自走到西門町,在封禁不久的「野人」咖啡屋前佇立了一會兒。我是在服役的南部看到「野人」被警方查封的消息。並公布查獲了毒品的交換,以及性的猥褻倒錯的實例,以「違反善良社會風俗」的理由查封了。

「看著罷,性和政治,都將如火燎原,在這島嶼上燃燒起來。」
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
小地方,台灣社區新聞網 (在小地方交換大事情)
驀然回首,那樓還在街角的地方
文/尾伯

我要在三十多年後,才逐漸在指導學生論文時,把一個小男生的台北跟一般大家的台北連接起來---原來他上高一時正是台北達到一百萬人口改制院轄市第二年; 原來他在台北那三年,正是白先勇寫作「台北人」那幾篇短篇小說的時候,也是莊喆、劉國松的「五月畫會」最活躍的時候,是周夢蝶在明星咖啡館擺攤、林懷民在野人咖啡館鬼混的時候; 那幾年蓋起了中山北路的嘉新大樓、頂好廣場邊的香檳大廈,還有忠烈祠、圓山大飯店、松山機場大廈; 那時,忠孝東路、敦化南北路和仁愛路、信義路、和平東路東段都正在拓寬闢建; 而他離開台北到台中念大學時,正是他大半高中生活所在---信義路、和平東路、羅斯福路還有牯嶺街的違章建築要被全部拆光前的時刻,也是台北第一批七層電梯公寓正興建的時候; 甚至他剛離開,他上下學騎自行車經過兩旁楊柳夾道的新生南路塯公圳就被加蓋掉了。
http://www.dfun.com.tw/specialcolumn_2.aspx?articale_id=575

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book review of Lin Huai-min's Locusts
林懷民的《蟬》和雲門舞集

那年夏天,二十三歲的林懷民筆下的年輕人,遊蕩再已經成為台北傳奇的明星和野人咖啡屋,進行燃燒青春的儀式,也惶然地找尋自己和彼此。

http://tw.shopping.yahoo.com/product_fullspec.html?pid=9789573014294&ld=S
Visited by Lin Huai-min
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
都市的時間地圖, para 2

都市是眾多生命的集結,也包含了諸多不同的生活形態,所以都市中其實也有很多層次的不同時間版圖。林懷民早年寫的小說「蟬」中有一段很深刻的時間意象的對比,他描述主角一夥少年,從煙霧濃厚聲音吵雜的野人咖啡屋走出來,走在車水馬龍的西門町街頭,突然聽到幾聲清亮的蟬聲。 在這裡,紛亂忙碌的步調與自然的生命節奏同時並存,形成強烈的對比。 王大閎譯寫的「杜連魁」描述故事主人翁在人前過著台北東區翩翩佳公子的優渥高雅的生活,半夜裡卻偷偷跑到萬華舊市區去與一位窮苦的癡心歌女假意糾纏,不為人知地穿梭在兩種截然不同的時間版圖中間。
http://arch.thu.edu.tw/html/intro/teache rdata/shiweilo/5-2/05.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
都市達人---誠品上身〈4〉
許正平  (20050307)
(from editor's introduction):

這裡不是周夢蝶在騎樓擺書攤、黃春明和陳映真埋首寫作的明星咖啡館,也不是服麻醉藥裝嬉皮搞存在的野人咖啡屋,更不是科幻片場景般冰冷剛硬的大東區。時間是二○○五年,地點是新世紀的台北,最老的六年級知識青年們大學畢業已經十年,七年級的頭兒上大學混走於城市街頭也走出了那麼些文化風騷。他們是消費時代和名牌主義裡的文藝新貧,他們怎麼玩,在那裡出沒,他們自己組裝了一套過日子的方式,他們是新的混世專家,我們稱之為「都市達人」。──編者
http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/Philology/Philology-Coffee/0,3406,4+1105130103+3+news,00.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCA story
中華商場的興衰
文 / 中央社林鍚銘攝

para 6: 作家白先勇在他的【孽子】一書中,也記錄了一段在中華商場內上演的青春故事--隱形之國的青春鳥,平日除了流連於新公園之外,那個時代,買時髦玩意兒得到今日公司,扭開電視有群星會,吃江浙菜要到聚寶盆,中華商場還沒拆掉,青春鳥聚會都往二樓的「吳抄手」跑,西門町「野人咖啡店」則是他們留字條聯絡行蹤之處。戀戀風塵的導演侯孝賢也追憶一段年輕的歲月說:「週末到中華商場買進口古典唱片,可說是高中記憶中最為難忘的美麗敘事。」
http://km.cca.gov.tw/myphoto/h_main.asp? categoryid=79

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
blog, reminisce
老鷹於2006/10/12 13:04 回應

早期的西門町 其實滿有文藝氣息的
武昌街的[文星書店]
武昌街的[精工表畫廊 ] 我第一次看到了柯錫杰的作品
驚訝照片中流動的情感與攝影的美
在[文藝沙龍]裡與朋友暢談存在主義的作家
在漢中街的[作家咖啡屋] 聽著一場又一場的詩人朗誦
在[野人咖啡屋] 品嚐著陶杯的咖啡
你的照片勾起一些記憶 真是謝謝你早期的作品
http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/welcommyblog-wen/article?mid=2473music543.com [ModernMusic]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
大破大立音樂板

荒蕪成就了溝通,甚至生命 ---- 像在工業廢棄物當中綻放著的向日葵: ---- 我們不是我們污髒的外表,我們不是自己可怕的荒涼而灰濛濛的沒有形象的機車頭,我們的內心是美麗金色的向日葵…. 我們的眼睛緊盯著這些在瘋狂機車頭河岸落日三藩市山錫罐黃昏靜坐幻想的陰影下。(摘自金斯堡「向日葵經」,中譯 / 李斯)

那麼,60 年代的台灣,有著「失落的一代」、現代派文學以及熱門音樂,是否接受到這些基進訊息了呢?林懷民的小說「蟬」裡,「 The time they are a-changin' 」在野人咖啡屋裡流洩著,Beatles 的歌以及亞弦的「如歌的行板」也成為背景音律;但是,小說中,看不到一種清晰決絕、理直氣壯如「各地的為人父母者 / 不要批評你們所不瞭解的 / 你們的兒女不再受你們管束 / 已經過時了!你們的老路…」(Bob Dylan 「 The times they are a-changin' 」,筆者自譯)的態度可以浮出這些背景聲音之上,也摸不到如「向日葵」那般,在荒蕪之中的耀眼生機。

小說中的某個人物談到 Beatles 的「 Revolution No.1 」唱出「當你談到破壞,你該知道我不和你站在一塊」(筆者自譯)時,覺得:大概是長大了,成熟了,還是錢賺夠了,闊了,擔心人家去革他們的命…… 這是否代表了彼時部份的文藝青年,對西方文化的某種眼界呢?或許這是由於政治高壓的因素吧。

到了 60 年代末、70 年代初,經由國內外政治生態的改變,鄉土民族主義抬頭,唾棄「失落的一代」、現代派及熱門音樂,而分從左右兩翼席捲了台灣的文藝界,讓文藝青年們尋得「自己的根」。在「鄉土」的光照底下,余光中的「江湖上」套用狄倫反戰歌曲「 Blowing in the wind 」的形式,來澆心中鄉土的塊壘,被楊弦譜成了曲。音樂雜誌上對狄倫的介紹,則充滿著浪漫的想像:
http://music543.com/phpBB2/viewlist.php? l=17733&sid=2840cd1ae2cbf976b6e6cb12c8ba1fae

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barbarian Founder-Designer Coming to Taiwan

Whether it's music, the arts, or counter-culture, today, quite a few cultural histories of Taiwan include The Barbarian when talking about developments of the late sixties and early seventies. Although several singles by Bob Dylan and the Jefferson Airplane were getting frequent play on the American military's Armed Services Radio, it was at The Barbarian that fans of folk, rock, blues and jazz could pick up on the latest sounds coming from California not too long after the Summer of Love was making waves nationally in the US.

The Barbarian was planned and designed during the summer of that year by Hong Tong-sheng (now owner of the Brother Hotel), Klaus-Peter Metzke (German researcher with the Goethe Institute and the National Palace Museum), and myself. Money, management and hiring of staff came from Mr. Hong, while Metzke supplied artistic direction covering everything from table design to just the right coffee cups. I provided help as needed, designed the lamps and walls, and introduced a lot of the music that was being carried to Taiwan by students from California.

The Barbarian was located in the heart of the night district of Ximending, on Womei Street, in cramped basement quarters barely able to accomodate 15 customers at one time. A "dive" in every respect, its clientele was made up of equal parts night crowd (evening movie-goers), students, punks, and the artist-intellectual crowd -- poets, writers and musicians. Shi De-jyiin (席德進) was a frequenter, as were a number of other painters, some of whom put on exhibitions there. Music trended to jazz, rock, folk and blues, and it was probably the music that made it a unique hangout for students and artists for the period. A "good coffee" (not by Peter's standards) and a quiet time huddled over a book with Mozart or Dvorak playing in the background could be had at a number of cafes in Taipei of that time, but if it the ambience decided by such as Bob Dylan, Jefferson Airplane, Mississippi John Hurt, Big Brother and the Holding Company, Joan Baez, The Grateful Dead, Frank Zappa, or Miles Davis that one was looking for, then the choices were greatly reduced to only one: The Barbarian.

Pai Hsien-yong (白先勇) wrote a story in which The Barbarian featured. Another pioneer of the Native Literature Movement, Lin Huai-min (林懷民), who made his name as novelist long before he founded Cloud Gate, was also an habitue. Li Ao (李敖)also ventured by on one of his rare excursions out of self-imposed seclusion.

As for the foreign clientele, aside from the foreign students, visitors might be so lucky (or not) to be regaled with stories of the darker side of politics (generally taboo in public, for martial law was very much in effect, and young hoodlums were as likely to get confronted by roving patrols of MPs as they were ordinary police), by the ever-cheerful Dutch priest from Wanhua, Peter Van den Berg. Two American visitors, Michael Morrow and Phil Obst, went on to make international reputations in Vietnam-related journalism.

Metzke and I were on hand to help with day-to-day management, until Peter left Taiwan in November 1967 to collect batiks and do wall rubbings in Cambodia, and I to the killing fields of Vietnam. We were not around to see The Barbarian's demise.

According to a number of contemporary newspaper reports, after several police raids determined to stamp out "juvenile delinquency" (which covered everything from underage smoking to long hair), the place was closed by the government in early 1970. In the eighties, while in Japan and the US, I often heard the report that it was a suicide on Barbarian premises (memorialized in a Native Literature story) that finally brought the curtain down. But Mr. Hong later told me that this was not the case, and that ultimately it was not the government that closed it. Rather, it was his decision entirely: The Barbarian had been overtaken by young ruffians who refused to leave at closing time, and when gentle coaxing from the management was rebuffed with insults and threats of violence in return, he would have to call the police and have them restore control of the place before he could dismiss his manager for the night. Too much of that, and he gave up.

Today you find The Barbarian mentioned everywhere from a history of coffee in Taiwan (by a coffee trading company in China), to an article on Taiwan's rock music history (by a Hong Kong magazine), to various reviews of 1960s and 70s trends in music, art, literature and culture. It is quite amazing that a basement dive measuring probably no more than seven or eight ping and capable of surviving only two-and-a-half years should have made such an impression. (There is even one artist who claims to have had his first individual showing -- at The Barbarian, a year before it opened.)

Metzke will be visiting Taiwan for what I believe will be his first visit here since the early 1970s. He arrives on April 30 and leaves on May 5. If you would like to meet with him, please give me a call: Lynn (0939)188828.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




















〈附錄一〉

一路走來
一個人權救援者的自述

梅心怡(Lynn Miles)/2004

我於1962年末到台灣學中文。在那個時候,無論是我的寄宿家庭、師大的老師,或是熟識的朋友們,全都是外省人,其中許多是軍眷、政治圈或情報單位的家庭(我的乾爸爸是前情報局頭目)。旅居台灣的前五年間,我所經驗到的一切,完全符合國民黨政府亟欲對外營造的形象,也就是「自由中國」。

1965年末和1966年初,發生了三件事,扭轉我之前的印象。首先,我台大的一個美國同學借我葛超智(George Kerr)寫的《被出賣的台灣》(Taiwan Betrayed)一書,我埋首閱讀,越讀越驚訝。書中的歷史敘述,和國民黨的官方版本截然不同。這是我第一次窺探到台灣政治黑暗、不為人知的一面。

第二個改變我生命的事件,是我把葛超智版的二二八事件,提出來問一個我台大班上的新同學,他是南部來的本省人,告訴我有關家族中叔伯輩半夜失蹤的事情。我聽了大為震驚,這類事件怎麼能被掩蓋地如此徹底,僅可透過秘密耳語來談論?葛超智的歷史撰述,以及同學告訴我的故事,讓我非常憤怒。我是來自自由世界第一強國的公民,而我的政府卻支持國民黨;對這些侵害人權的事情,我必須盡一些責任、做一點事。
 
第三件事就是我認識了李敖,這得歸功於一位來自密西西比州的學生借我看李敖的著作《傳統下的獨白》。我馬上就折服於李敖的勇氣,膽敢公開批評學術界和政府高層的腐敗。於是我寫了一封信給他,信中滿是對這位「現代中國的馬克.吐溫」的崇拜之情。李敖興沖沖的來找我這個「書迷」,很快的,我們變成了朋友,我每幾個月就登門拜訪,讓李敖傳授我那些學校中學不到的東西。我們的交往,讓我能即時認知到國民黨政府骯髒、未被記錄的歷史。

1971年初,李敖、謝聰敏、魏廷朝被逮捕。朋友危在旦夕,我一定要採取行動。他們被捕後不久,我就被台灣當局驅除出境,名列黑名單25年,直到1996年才解禁。我「流放」海外的前十年(1970年代)在大阪度過,我竭盡所能,把有關被監禁的政治犯的書面資料,交到記者以及國際特赦組織等人權團體手中。關心政治犯救援的圈子逐漸擴大,形成一個救援網路;幾年之內,大家都知道我是台灣地下聯絡網及海外協助網的中介。

我不記得曾經特別下決定要走這條路、或終生致力人權工作。會走上這條路,其實是由一連串看似微不足道的小事,在特定情況所產生的推力所促成;而每個行動背後,都有具體、實際的理由。我很少想到這些救援的過程,會改變我這麼大,也無法預見我們的工作,會影響台灣的社會、政治發展,促成其轉變。許多改變往往一下子就發生,但並不表示這些改變只是很簡單的變化,或得來容易。

救援良心犯最重要的,就是及時獲取正確的資訊,交到海外的記者或有正義感的人士手中,因為蔣氏政權最怕讓國際社會知道其醜惡的真面目。但是,多數媒體對於出版任何會讓美國或其附庸國丟臉的東西,都不感興趣。所謂「自由世界」的假象,乃是由細膩、精巧的謊言所構成,不惜任何代價都要維持。挑戰這種「自由世界」的謊言,異常艱鉅。

我特別記得1978年陳菊被捕的時候。我一聽到她突然被捕的消息,就開始救援行動,三天三夜沒睡。我馬上整理一套資料,跳上往東京的子彈快車,希望能引起某些記者的興趣,可以把最新的侵害人權事件發表出來。我大概接觸了12名記者,其中只有一位來自倫敦《Guardian》的Robert Whymant先生願意寫一篇報導。其他的記者都表示,就算他們願意寫,報社也不會刊載。這樣的情形實在令人失望,很難繼續維持信念:相信值得努力,最後一定會有收穫。前途似乎茫茫,黑暗籠罩,不見光明。

然而,到了1970年代末期,美國卡特行政當局把人權議題納入其外交政策,世界潮流也日益關切人權議題,使國民黨政府為自己辯解的壓力越來越大。1980年初美麗島大審時,國民黨政府營造其人權形象的各種努力,已被證明是徒勞無功;到了1980年代中期,終於崩潰決堤。自此之後,救援的活動就變得比較容易,特別是和孤立、充滿挫折及嚴酷考驗的1960年代相比。

回顧上個世紀台灣的人權紀錄,不論是野蠻的或壯烈的部分,皆屬我們全體所有。這些故事令人敬畏,因它道出了我們內心的善與惡,使我們心生驚懼,同時也深受鼓舞。我們共享進步的榮耀,也同為流下的鮮血與無價的犧牲,慚愧低頭。多少人斷送生命,痛失摯愛,夢想碎裂,而這一切,只為了少數人短視貪婪的權力私慾!

這一條路是沒有止盡的。那些心懷慈悲,關切這塊土地的命運的人們,曉得這條路會不斷地往未知處延伸而去。往路的兩旁望去,眼前的地平線同樣地看不到盡頭;為人權的奮鬥早已與全人類休戚相關,而營私政客只在一旁吆呼,各國皆然。
第二次世界大戰結束後,旋即通過世界人權宣言,人權標準的普世性於此獲得彰
顯。1942年初,聯合國(同盟國)宣布以《大西洋憲章》為目標,此即《世界人權宣言》的前身。世界人權宣言可以說是這場戰爭的「重要成就」;戰爭的代價是6000萬~8000萬人的性命。

到了1960年代,一般大眾愈來愈明白,數千萬人命的犧牲已成枉然;各地接連發生人權倒退的情況,嚴重程度較戰前猶有過之。各國政府,包括許多世界人權宣言的簽署國,違背了他們的承諾,良善的宣言淪為一張廢紙。這就是為什麼全球各地人權運動蓬勃發展的背景。人權團體紛紛興起,集結能量,各國政府難以視而不見。到了1970年代,全球共識可以說已然成形,人權議題在每天的媒體上出現。一些團體,像是國際特赦組織,其地位與影響力不斷成長,乃至獲得
諾貝爾和平獎的肯定。

在言論自由方面,台灣的進步令人印象深刻,這不僅是台灣人民之福,也是全人類之福。但在其他方面,仍有很多地方尚待努力。白色恐怖時期強加於蘭嶼達悟族人的核廢料問題,仍未解決。廢除死刑的目標,不斷地往未來推延。客工(外籍勞工)仍然沒有結社的權利。所以,我們沒有時間自得自滿;我們得要再次奮起,回到工作岡位上,並以歷史為師。


Human Rights Activists Speak
How Long the Road?
by Lynn Miles / 2004

I first came to Taiwan days before the harvest moon of 1962, with the cold war raging full bore on this, the eastern front. Close friends, my host family where I first stayed, my university teachers and staff – Mainlanders one and all. Many came from military or diplomatic families, each in their own way critical cogs in the political, military and intelligence apparatus described in these pages. For example, the “Dad” in my family had once, while still on the mainland, been a close aide of the dreaded Tai Li, and after coming to Taiwan was first at the helm of the newly established National Security Bureau. No wonder, then, that at first I did not doubt the image of Taiwan that the government was intent on presenting to the world: in my mind as in just about everyone else’s, “Formosa” had now become “Free China.”

Free China or Formosa betrayed?

All that changed with my second trip here, in 1965. A rude awakening came upon reading George Kerr’s Formosa Betrayed and William Lederer’s A Nation of Sheep, two seminal early-sixties exposés. Their revelations, which treated a history so modern as to be current, did not at all jibe with the official story. I was getting an inkling of the dark, unreported side of Taiwan politics and social life.

When I proceeded to test the veracity of these unflattering reports by questioning my closest friends (who were by this time not confined to Mainlanders), I gradually had them confirmed – always in whispered, surreptitious tones. One of my classmates, from the Tainan countryside, told of an uncle who disappeared one night and never came back. Private conversations only added detail to the bloody Kerr-Lederer accounts. I was afire with indignation, not only because the whispers suggested a national secret not to be shared with foreigners, but also because as an American I felt responsible for “my” government’s role as prop for the KMT, whose support was otherwise lacking..

One thing led to another. Soon I was reading Lee Ao’s Monologue Under Tradition, a hot item in the Taiwan of that day (before it was banned, in 1966). Taking an immediate fancy to the pluck with which he lambasted corruption in academia and high government places, I shot off a fan letter to this “Mark Twain of modern China.” We soon became friends, and I would visit his place every couple of months for a schooling of the kind that you cannot get in school. Our association brought me up to speed on the dirty, hidden, unwritten history of the KMT government, both before and after it took refuge on Taiwan.

With the arrest of Lee Ao, Hsieh Tsung-min and Wei Ting-chao in early 1971, my historical abstractions became present realities. For the crime of consorting with such out-of-favor friends, I was expelled from Taiwan, not to be de-blacklisted until 1996.

My first decade beyond the pale was spent in Osaka, where I worked to get materials about the political prisons and the people who filled them into the hands of journalists, church groups, Amnesty International and other such human rights organizations. With time, the circle of those interested in political prisoner rescue work grew, as our coterie of like-minded activists linked up with the underground network in Taiwan and its globe-girdling counterpart.

Commitment to this decades-long human rights campaign came neither all at once nor as part of a well-defined, rational train of thought. Rather, it was a series of small and seemingly inconsequential steps taken under the press of circumstances. You might say that by degrees I was just sucked into it. Little did I imagine that I would be so changed. This was partly the consequence of seeing those around me changing, and the world changing, in the direction of a heightened concern for shared universal values. People of heart, imagination, courage and generosity are treasures each and every one: thanks to them the work became all the more transformative. That is to say, commitment, while not coming all at once, certainly came easily.

Why was getting accurate and timely information into the hands of journalists and people of conscience abroad our first mission? Because, having silenced the opposition at home, what the Chiang regime feared most was censure in the court of international opinion – “bad press” in places where public opinion still factored in public policy-making. The whole “Free World” fabric was nothing but a subtle and intricate tissue of lies, prejudices and chauvinistic conceits that had to be maintained at any cost; the major media was little interested in publishing anything that might prove embarrassing to the United States or its client regimes. So, getting the Chiang family some “bad press” was not the easiest of assignments.

Dogged indifference meets the collective mind

Take the arrest of Chen Chu in 1978. For me, it meant hurriedly translatiing and copying background materials, then hopping on the Bullet Express to Tokyo, there to buttonhole whomever might be hanging out at the Japan Foreign Correspondents Club. Of the dozen or so reporters that I cornered, only one, Robert Whymant of the London Guardian, showed the slightest interest. The others begged off with the oft-heard excuse that any story they might write would not get past their editor back home. When we consider that at that time Chen Chu already had a reputation as a courageous fighter for press freedom, and yet her arrest was not worth international note in the eyes of these molders of public opinion, we begin to see the enormity of the problem. With such dogged indifference being the normal approach to “objective journalism,” it was hard to believe that someday, somehow, efforts to get the public spotlight squarely trained on human rights abuses would pay off. In fact, keeping faith was the hardest challenge of all.

Nonetheless, there was progress, however prosaic. By the end of the seventies, the U.S. administration under Jimmy Carter had begun applying a human rights yardstick to American foreign policy. Coming into office in January 1977, he wasted no time in putting one veteran civil rights activist in charge of the newly founded human rights office in the State Department, while choosing another as UN ambassador. Carter was unable to stay the course, however, and by the middle of his term was barely going through the motions, more often not even doing that much. But the idea had already caught hold globally that client regimes could no longer wantonly trample on their subjects’ rights without being brought to account. Amnesty International’s winning of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 was a reflection of this trend (and one that gave us immense encouragement). Other agencies weighed into the fray….

What was being called “the court of international opinion” was beginning to matter mightily to oppressor and oppressed alike, for the first battlefield in this protracted war was in the landscape of the mind – the collective mind.

Today Carter often gets credit for “leading” the movement to break the cozy ties between the U.S. and its repressive clients, of which there many. But I prefer to think that he came to power at a time when, unlike now, democracy in the U.S. was working after a fashion, and popular revulsion at U.S. spoon-feeding of dictators was actually registering in Washington. Carter was not so much leading the wave, as following it.

Today it is fashionable to say of Taiwan that human rights, freedom and democracy have been “achieved,” as if all that were needed to decide the question was for the electorate to send a democrat into the Presidential Office. Sorry to say, the matter is never resolved. Yes, we’ve come a long way from those dark decades when extra mileage had to be teased from a whispered remark or subtle play on words. And who can ignore the politicians, who play rambunctious ruffians in the legislature by day and TV talking heads by night? Aren’t they proof positive that anyone can make the most outlandish anti-government accusations without fear of a midnight visit from some black hand?

The answer is “yes” without a doubt. But many human rights problems still go begging for solution. First, all that nuclear waste foisted on a powerless minority on Pongso-no-Tao is still there, notwithstanding DPP promises to remove it. Second, not only is the death penalty still with us, the DPP has even tried to expand its coverage, saying that this is a “world trend” (no matter that Amnesty International says otherwise). Third, white slavery still flourishes, from the Taipei metropolis to the backwater township. Fourth, labor rights, especially for foreigners, rate little attention in a land mesmerized by the economic miracle. Fifth, secret-police activities like photographing of demonstrators followed up by visits to their employers, phone-tapping of dissidents, and more still reckon as important tools of intimidation, reading like a page out of some Martial Law-era training manual. So, while a retrospective look at the nightmare of the February 28 Incident and the White Terror give some indication of the ground we have covered, they hardly answer the question, How far yet to go?

In truth the question is unanswerable anyway. Even if Taiwanese have become masters of their own political system, there is still a very powerful international dynamic that continually impinges on domestic consciousness and freedom of action. Just as the postwar repression in Taiwan lasting well into the eighties worked as part of a larger transnational dynamic, likewise the opposition to it transcended state-imposed borders. The same holds true today. One’s destiny is not entirely in one’s own hands.

Martial law, then and now, at home and abroad

When Chen Shui-bian offers up hackneyed homilies about “freedom” and “democracy” in the U.S. (as he did recently to the UN-based reporters in New York), he disappoints those human rights activists who cannot ignore the arrests – within days of his speech – of many hundreds of people for peacefully demonstrating on the streets of that very city. Nor can they ignore the hundreds more who are still now, two years and more after their secret arrest, being denied legal representation, family visitation rights, the right to know the charges against them, and the right to face their accusers in open court. All of this enjoys the sanction of the Patriot Act, a latter-day clone of Taiwan’s draconian Martial Law measures of yesteryear. Hearing A-bian talk like this, who among civil libertarians does not grimace at the notion of calling Taiwan’s president an ally in the fight for human rights?

And finally, there is the problem of nationalism, whether it takes the form of questing for a United China or yearning for an Independent Taiwan. Proponents are forever attributing the most sinister of motives to their opposites on the other side of the ideological divide. Many in the pan-blue camp see the pan-greens as tools of the Americans pure and simple, while the pan-greens are just as certain that the pan-blues are in bed with the Chinese Communists. One views the other as bellicose bordering on insane, neither will credit the other with having arrived at their “national identity” legitimately. In this blue-vs-green, not-so-cold cold war, one is pressed to declare allegiances loud and clear. Failure to take sides means being sidelined altogether.

But if there’s nothing wrong with loving Taiwan with all of its faults, what’s the problem with loving China with all of its faults? Are respect for Taiwan, respect for America, and respect for China mutually exclusive? Does adoration for one parent negate that for the other? Does love for one child mean that the other must go without?

If we are truly willing to march confidently into the future to the beat of the idealist drummer, if we are unafraid to push the envelope on our evolving definition of “human rights,” let us quit hating altogether, and start treating our intellectual rivals as worthies and – far from fighting them – seek win-win solutions.

This road has no horizon. Today, sixty-odd years later and with over one hundred million lives lost in the meantime in chasing after the promises of the pre-Pearl Harbor Atlantic Charter, Taiwan beckons as the potential mother of all ground zeroes. Notwithstanding such negative signposts, and no matter how long the road and no matter how rocky, we must stay the course. Our children and their hopes and dreams depend on it. Nothing has changed. Now as then, only courage and faith will meet the challenge, no matter how long the road.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
〈附錄二〉
我們的路
─梅心怡/2007
─廖曉晶譯

台灣的人權紀錄,不論是野蠻抑或壯烈的部分,皆屬我們全體所有。這些故事令人敬畏,因它道出了我們內裏的善與惡,使我們心生驚懼,同時也深受鼓舞。我們共享進步的榮耀,也同為流下的鮮血與無價的犧牲,慚愧低頭。多少人斷送生命,痛失摯愛,夢想碎裂,而這一切,只為了少數人短視貪婪的權力私慾!

這一條路沒有止境。那些心懷慈悲,關切這塊土地命運的人們,曉得這條路會不斷地往未知處延伸而去。往路的兩端望去,眼前的地平線同樣地看不到盡頭;為人權的奮鬥早已與全人類休戚相關,而營私政客只在一旁吆呼,各國皆然。

第二次世界大戰結束後,旋即通過世界人權宣言,人權標準的普世性於此獲得彰顯。1942年初,聯合國(同盟國)宣布以大西洋憲章為目標,此即世界人權宣言的前身。世界人權宣言可以說是這場戰爭的「重要成就」;戰爭的代價是6000-8000萬人的性命。

到了1960年代,一般大眾愈來愈明白,數千萬人命的犧牲已成枉然,各地接連發生人權倒退的情況,其嚴重程度較戰前猶有過之。世界各國政府,包括許多世界人權宣言的簽署國,違背他們的承諾,良善的宣言淪為一張廢紙。

這就是為什麼全球各地人權運動蓬勃發展。人權團體紛紛興起,集結能量,各國政府難以視而不見。到了1970年代,全球共識可以說已然成形,人權議題在媒體上每天出現。一些團體,像是國際特赦組織,其地位與影響力不斷成長,乃至獲得諾貝爾和平獎的肯定。

在言論自由方面,台灣的進步令人印象深刻,這不僅是台灣人民之福,也是全人類之福。但在其他方面,仍有很多地方尚待努力。白色恐怖時期強加於蘭嶼達悟族人的核廢料問題,仍未解決。廢除死刑的目標,不斷地往未來推延。客工(外籍勞工)仍然沒有結社的權利。

所以,我們沒有時間自得自滿,我們得要再次奮起,回到工作岡位上,並以歷史為師。

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Road
by Lynn Miles / 2007

The human rights record in Taiwan, both the brutality and the heroism of it, belongs to all of us. We are awed -- horrified and inspired at the same time -- by these stories because they show what is good and bad in us. Let us share in the credit for the advances made, but also hang our heads in shame at immeasurable losses in blood and treasure. So many lives taken, loves lost, and dreams shattered, all because of a small minority's shortsighted and greedy lust for power!

The path taken knows no end. Those of a humanist bent concerned with the fate of the earth know that it stretches well beyond what the eye can see. And if we look to either side, we see that the horizon there too is limitless, as the struggle over the human rights agenda has come to concern all of humanity, with partisans hailing from every nationality.

The universality of human rights standards became explicit with the passage of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights shortly after World War Two. The UDHR could be considered the “great accomplishment” of that war, in which 60 to 80 million people died, for in early 1942 the United Nations ("the Allies") had declared the Atlantic Charter, precursor of the UDHR, as their mission.

By the 1960s it became ever more insistently apparent to the public that all those scores of millions had died in vain, for in localized outbreaks of the epidemic of repression the human rights agenda had become no less pressing than it had been before the war. With governments around the world, many of them signatories of the UDHR, reneging on their promises, the fine declaration was becoming a dead letter.

This explains the rise of a popular human rights movement of global dimensions. Organizations sprang up with a collective energy that national governments found difficult to ignore. By the 1970s there had developed what can only be called a global consciousness with a human rights agenda that was daily media fare. Some groups, like Amnesty International, grew in such stature and influence, that they were ultimately rewarded with the Nobel Peace prize.

In free-speech terms Taiwan has made impressive gains, not only to their own benefit but to all of humanity's. But in other areas much remains to be done. The Tao People of Orchid Island are still stuck with the nuclear waste dump foisted on them during the White Terror. Abolition of the death sentence continues to be deferred into the future. Guest workers are still denied the right to organize.

So let us not tarry with rites of self-congratulation, but rather get back to the job with enewed energy, and with history as our teacher.

  • linshihyu 發表於樂多回應(17)引用(0)活動訊息編輯本文
    樂多分類:文字創作切換閱讀版型 │昨日人次:2 │累計人次:5756

    引用URL

    http://cgi.blog.roodo.com/trackback/3092107

    回應文章
    1967我出生的那一年。
    那一年也是電影『畢業生』的殺青年,聽說當年是禁播的。是這樣嗎?
    跟兩位查證一下。
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 逸峰 at April 29,2007 23:46
    1967年我在美国的高等学校(Senior High School)「留学一年之間」(Long Beach, Calif.)。

    那時候、日本是「発展中」、美国是快要変成「老大国」的過程。
    這個「過鹹水e経験」是后来的「(一輩子)関与台湾之原因(遠因)」。

    1970年夏天、第一次訪問台湾。現在也常常想起来那時候的幾個経験(見聞)。回日本以後、看NHKテレビ(電視)学習「中国語」・・・已経35年以上・・・実在懐念(雖然辛苦的経験也多多有)。
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 三田裕次 (MITA_Yuji) at April 30,2007 00:44
    我的南一中學弟『凱劭大帝』又有新作,推薦給你們看:
    http://kaishao.idv.tw/blog/?p=681#more-681
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 逸峰 at April 30,2007 23:34
      
      

              會脫毛
      
      
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 葉雪淳 at May 1,2007 03:33
    >我的南一中學弟『凱劭大帝』又有新作,推薦給你們看:

    一寸覗いて見たが、中々良く出来ている感じ。
    看了一点児、看起来作地好的様子。

    送給他E-Mail介紹我的本頁等等。
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 三田裕次 (MITA_Yuji) at May 1,2007 04:36
    不知道梅心怡和野人也有關係
    一直希望做一個搖滾樂引進台灣的考察
    下次應該來訪問他
    呵呵
    | 檢舉 | Posted by iron at May 1,2007 21:54
    Dear Iron,
    他們剛離開
    幹掉兩瓶紅酒和半瓶高梁
    多希望你也在場
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 林世煜 at May 1,2007 22:48
    逸峰兄,
    請將三田先生的網站,在部落格的連結欄可以找到,轉給凱劭大帝
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 林世煜 at May 1,2007 22:51
    What a coincidence! I am born in 1967 as well. Ha. Will try my best to go. And hope my mom is doing ok this weekend. Do I have to register first?
    | 檢舉 | Posted by SS at May 2,2007 00:49
      
      

    這個要看——
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wEWiyNSesc
      
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 葉雪淳 at May 5,2007 09:54
      
      

    順便一幅
      
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 葉雪淳 at May 5,2007 10:45
    葉先生:

    我喜歡這一幅
    說不定,下次出書
    作者畫像就用這
    謝謝您
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 慧玲 at May 6,2007 00:37
    是啊,歐吉桑
    比哈瓦那街頭那位快筆畫家,你對我仁慈多了
    | 檢舉 | Posted by 林世煜 at May 6,2007 00:59
    昨天看到媒體報導.讓人很感慨, 有人用陳總統的肖像印製垃圾袋. 還洋洋得意自以為是得意的創作, 如此污辱國家元首的行為. 希望有關單位應依侵犯總統肖像權或其他法源來取締.

    陳總統是我們一票票選出來的中華民國總統. 不管有人不認同或不喜歡.都應尊重大多人的決定. 更不可有污辱我們總統的行為.

    陳總統個人可能有大量,不予計較.但這已不是個人的想法. 而是台灣人的尊嚴要如何維護?
    台灣很多人如今不知對人的尊敬. 這是教育問題. 但是否也是因執政黨沒做好應該做的事. 想息事郤無法寧人, 因姑息而養奸. 讓有些人"軟土深堀" 以為只要能羞辱總統就會出名. 包含地方人士及司法人員. 這是否是總統或執政黨縱容他們的後果?

    人民是要教育的. 好的要鼓勵. 做出壞的示範也要當頭棒喝. 不可讓人是非不分. 讓小人得志. 紅杉軍大鬧台北城應也是因此而發生.

    還有一年就要選舉了. 請導引台灣人民走正確的方向. 教育台灣人走對的路. 選舉是一時的. 但若是非不分明則台灣前途堪虞.
    | 檢舉 | Posted by Herman 吳 at July 11,2007 11:10
    Herman 吳 先生,您的回文我想轉貼到我的部落格,可乎?多謝。
    | 檢舉 | Posted by K. K. Liang at July 11,2007 12:40
    當然可以. 謝謝.
    | 檢舉 | Posted by Herman 吳 at July 12,2007 14:20
    私密回應
    Posted at August 6,2013 16:16
     
     


     
    -
    贊助商廣告