2014年8月7日 星期四

Fredrick W. Mote 牟復禮先生;Ch'en Hsiao-lan 陳效蘭

Fredrick W. Mote (June 2, 1922–February 10, 2005) was an American Sinologist and a professor of History at Princeton University for nearly 50 years. His research and teaching interests focused on China during the Ming Dynasty and the Yuan Dynasty. In collaboration with Professor Twitchett and Professor Fairbank he helped create The Cambridge History of China, a monumental (though still incomplete) history of China.


Mote was born in Plainview Nebraska, one of ten children. In 1943 (during World War II) he enlisted in the U.S. Army Air Force but was unable to go to flight school for medical reasons. Due to a college course he took in Chinese language the year before, the Air Force sent Mote to Harvard where he studied Chinese under John K. Fairbank for a year. In 1944, he joined the Office of Strategic Services (the war-time pre-cursor to the CIA) as a noncommissioned officer, serving in the China-Burma-India theater of operations till 1946.
After the war he enrolled in the University of Nanjing and graduated in 1948 with a degree in Chinese history. While the Chinese Communists took over Beijing in 1949, he was working as a language officer for the U.S. Embassy. Forced to leave China in 1950, he continued his studies in the United States, earning a PhD at the University of Washington in Seattle in 1954. He was hired by Princeton University two years later and remained there till just a few years before his death (he retired from active teaching in 1987). During the 1960s, Professor Mote was able to secure financial resources from the Rockefeller and Ford foundations so the Gest Library could obtain a valuable collection of Chinese documents. He was awarded Guggenheim Fellowships in two different years.
In 1980, Professor Twitchett came to teach at Princeton and the two men worked closely together for the next eight years, co-editing volumes 7 and 8 of The Cambridge History of China. Curiously, both men had been part of Intelligence agencies during World War II. In addition to his work as an editor, Professor Mote wrote 23 different chapters in the books of the series. Near the end of his life he published the massive book Imperial China 900-1800 (1999) which sums up (and in a few cases updates) Volumes 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 in The Cambridge History of China series.
Mote married Ch’en Hsiao-lan in China in 1950. She survived him after a marriage of 55 years. Both his students and friends called him "Fritz Mote".

Selected works[edit]

  • The Poet Kao Ch'i, 1335–1374 (1962). Princeton: Princeton University Press. 高啟。牟復禮先生讓他成為西方最知名的明代詩人。此書的摘要台灣有翻譯本。這段我記憶有誤(!),以為出在《中國歷史人物論集》 (Confucian Personalities)。現在可以找到吉川幸次郎的"關於高啟",以及孫康宜在《劍橋中國文學史》 中的簡介。不,我的原先記憶沒錯。《中國歷史人物論集˙一個十四世紀的詩人——高啟》 (Confucian Personalities),台北:中山學術+正中,1973,頁325-354。
  • Intellectual Foundations of China (1971). New York: Knopf.
  • (As translator): K. C. Hsiao, A History of Chinese Political Thought, Volume 1: From the Beginnings to the Sixth Century AD(1979). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • The Cambridge History of China, Volume 7 - The Ming Dynasty, 1368 - 1644, Part I (edited by Mote and Twitchett) (1988)
  • The Cambridge History of China, Volume 7 - The Ming Dynasty, 1368 - 1644, Part II (edited by Mote and Twitchett) (1988)
  • Imperial China: 900–1800 (1999). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

External links

Frederick Mote
Frederick Mote in 1983

photo: Robert Matthews 

Frederick Mote, key figure in advancing the study of China, dies at age 82

Professor Emeritus of East Asian Studies Frederick Mote, a leading scholar of Chinese history and culture, died Feb. 10 in Aurora, Colo., after a long illness. He was 82.

Mote, a Princeton faculty member from 1956 to 1987, was one of a small number of academic pioneers who were instrumental in transforming the study of China and East Asia in the United States into a mature field with high standards and a distinguished record of scholarly achievement. At Princeton, he played a major role in the development of the Department of East Asian Studies and is remembered by his colleagues and students for his broad knowledge and wise counsel.

"Professor Mote influenced and enriched the field by his erudition, his farsightedness and his constructive criticism. He influenced his students by his love, his humor and his thoughtful guidance. He is truly a scholar, a historian and a gentleman," said Hung-lam Chu, who received a Ph.D. from Princeton in 1984 and is now a professor of history at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Mote became a student of Chinese history and culture after enlisting in the U.S. Army Air Forces in 1943. He was sent to a military unit at Harvard University and trained under two prominent Sinologists. He went to China in 1944 as a noncommissioned officer in the Office of Strategic Services. After World War II ended, he returned there and became one of the first Westerners to enroll as an undergraduate at the University of Nanjing, where he earned his bachelor's degree in 1948 in Chinese history.

Mote continued his studies at the University of Washington-Seattle, and received his Ph.D. in Sinology in 1954. After spending the 1954-55 year as a postdoctoral researcher at National Taiwan University and the following year as a Fulbright Exchange Lecturer at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, he was appointed an assistant professor of Chinese history and civilization at Princeton in what was then the Department of Oriental Studies. He was promoted to associate professor in 1959 and to full professor in 1963. He twice received Guggenheim Fellowships.

Mote spent his early years at Princeton working with others to establish a rigorous Chinese language program and to improve the facilities and expand the holdings of the Gest Oriental Library. He and his colleague, Marius Jansen, a specialist in Japanese history, were key figures in the growth of East Asian studies at Princeton in the 1960s and 1970s. They secured financial support from the John D. Rockefeller and Ford foundations in 1961, the Carnegie Corporation in 1963 and the U.S. Department of Education in 1965.

That support enabled the University to acquire a wealth of new materials for the Gest Library, to establish a highly-regarded Chinese linguistics program -- which Mote directed from 1966 to 1974 -- and to add a number of new East Asian specialists to the faculty. The Department of East Asian Studies was established at Princeton in 1969.

Beyond Princeton, Mote was active in many organizations, including the Committee on Scholarly Communication with the People's Republic of China, of which he was a founding member; the Committee on Studies of Chinese Civilization of the American Council of Learned Societies, which he chaired from 1974 to 1978; the Smithsonian Council; and the Visiting Committee of the Freer Gallery of Art. From 1963 to 1965, he served as an adviser to Thailand's Ministry of Education.

Mote's scholarship focused on the political and social history of the later imperial era, with special reference to the Yuan and Ming dynasties. He wrote, edited and translated numerous books, scholarly articles and essays on subjects ranging from classical Chinese philosophy to military history and from studies of great Chinese cities to ways in which poetry, painting and other arts could be used to gain a fuller understanding of Chinese economic, social and cultural history.

He was involved in the planning and editing of the Cambridge History of China and wrote 23 entries on Ming history for the Cambridge Encyclopedia of China. His final book, "Imperial China 900-1800" (Harvard University Press, 1999), was based on a lifetime of reflection and provides a comprehensive survey of this period of Chinese history.

Hung-lam Chu, Mote's former student, also said of his adviser, "His accomplishment in integrating Chinese classical, historical, philosophical, literary, language and artistic learning for an in-depth understanding of traditional Chinese culture for a better understanding of the problems facing modern China is unique and unsurpassed. His use of poetry and literary collections for the study of the mind and sentiment of 14th- to 17th-century Chinese literati and the political and social milieu in which they lived has attained a level of achievement that his peers could only hope to have had. His last book, 'Imperial China 900-1800,' will stand as a classic of sustained learning, consummate scholarship and insightful commentary to inspire the student of Chinese history and culture for a better appreciation of China's past and a better understanding of China's present."

Students and colleagues alike spoke of Mote's generosity in sharing his broad knowledge of China. "Everything he wrote was grounded in the sources, all at his finger tips, recallable without reference to notes," said Norman Itzkowitz, professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies, who remembered first meeting Mote as a junior colleague -- although "he never made those age and academic hierarchy distinctions" -- and soon regarding him as a valued friend. He added, "Fritz will live forever in the hearts and minds of all those who had the great, good fortune to know him."

"As a principled intellect and a warm-hearted teacher, Fritz Mote helped broaden my vistas on Sinology and history and sharpen my methodological and research skills," said Hok-lam Chan, who earned a Ph.D, from Princeton in 1967 and is now a faculty member at the University of Washington and the Chinese University of Hong Kong. "For this and his professional guidance, I am deeply indebted to him. He left a durable legacy of scholarship remarkable for its critical assessment, but deep love and respect of Chinese civilization, and he will be sorely missed by his students, colleagues and friends."

Mote is survived by his wife, Ch'en Hsiao-lan of Granby, Colo., a sister and six brothers. Memorial services were held in Beijing on Feb. 15 and in Taipei on March 5. A memorial symposium in Princeton is being planned for the fall and will feature a series of panel discussions on issues in Chinese history and culture.

Memorial contributions may be made to: the Frederick W. Mote Memorial Fund for the East Asian Library, c/o Dr. Tai-loi Ma, 33 Frist Campus Center, Room 317, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544; or to the F.W. Mote Lecture Fund, c/o Director, East Asian Studies Program, 241 Frist Campus Center, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544. Checks for both funds should be made payable to the Trustees of Princeton University. 



原本平静地渡過舊曆年,因突然傳來牟復禮(Frederick Mote)先生去世的消息,感到無比地惆悵。牟先生於年初二(二月九日)的晚上去世,享年八十四歲。今天大陸年輕一輩的學人可能對牟先生一生的成就所知有 限,但任何熟悉過去半個多世紀以來北美漢學及中國史研究變遷的人是不會不知道牟先生的貢獻和地位。我在過去十幾年中所見到在西方的中國學專家亦可謂多不勝 數,但以人品,學問和見識三者等量齊觀的話,能超越牟先生境界的恐怕是沒有的。尤其是他的充滿創造力的學術生涯和普林斯頓大學東亞研究的建立與成長有非常 緊密的關係。

在今日北美的中國文史研究方面,普林斯頓應該說是最具有代表性的中心之一,科門齊全而且資源充分。但與哈佛和哥倫比亞等校相 比,普大東亞研究的不同于之處在于其發展歷史較短,成立迄今不過四十多年。五十年代中,牟先生初來普大教授中國史的時候還没有獨立的東亞研究系,更談不上 有全方位的中國文史研究,連牟先生自己都是隸屬於東方語言文學系(Department of Oriental Languages and Literature)的教授。該系以近東研究為主導。1968 年東亞系的建立,以他的推動為關鍵,所以稱其為普大東亞系之父並不過份。我們今天可能已很難想像當時在美國人文學界的格局之中東西方文化比重的懸殊。雖然 牟先生是一位不折不扣的史家,但他對中國傳統的了解向來是採取文史不分家的態度。也正由於此,他和當時強調?科學化的正統西洋史學取徑不同。比如 與牟先生同時在普大任教而執西洋史牛耳的大師史東(Laurence Stone)雖然對牟先生很尊敬,但對人提到牟先生時總稱他為 expert in Chinese literature, 而不稱其為 historian。因為在史東看來,像詩人高青丘這樣的課題僅屬於文學研究的範疇,算不得是真正嚴肅的史學題目。這種區分在當今西方人文界幾乎已不存在 了,但這一詞之差卻恰恰體現出在當時的環境下,牟先生為中國文史研究創出一片天地,需要何等的自信和從容不迫的態度。有趣的是牟先生對普大東亞系建立的貢 獻與史東造就普大歷史系的貢獻真可說是旗鼓相當。牟先生對普大中國史研究的具體貢獻主要有兩方面:一是確立以古代為中心的研究方向,二是對中文教學的尊 重。如果前者還是從當時西方漢學主流發展出來的話,後者則可以說是不同流俗的創舉。他反覆強?#123;中文的教學是一切研究的基礎,而且要古漢語和現代 漢語並重。這是一種從語言學而非從西洋漢学只重書面解讀的角度来主導的中文教學法。他以前的同窗學友陳大端教授當時正在普大主持中文教學,所以牟先生得以 和陳大端在這點上通力合作。以上兩點可以說是普大迄今為止都保持了的特色。但牟先生對普大東亞研究的影響並不止此。他對普大東亞研究資源的積累作出的貢獻 同樣地意義深遠。首先是他對普大葛斯德圖書館發展的關注。雖然葛斯德圖書館在牟先生來之前就已是收藏中國文史珍本善本最有名的中心之一,但整體的圖書收藏 尚遠不及哈佛燕京等其他老牌東亞圖書館。這種情況在牟先生任教期間就完全改觀了,葛斯德的中國文史方面書籍的收藏可以說是突飛猛進,到他榮退之時,藏書的 完整和豐富都已舉世公認了。同時他又創辦了《葛思德圖書館館刊》(Gest Library Journal),現已改名為《東亞圖書館館刊》(Journal of East Asian Library),內容以研究古籍為主,並涉及東亞文史哲各領域。其次是他對普大博物館東亞文物書畫收藏的擴充。在這方面他和創立普大中國藝術史研究傳統 的方聞先生以及已故收藏家 John Elliot 同樣地有長達數十年的密切合作。而牟先生個人對於中國書畫和版本印刷等的濃厚興趣和淵博知識的修養已融入他歷史研究的視野之中,比如他寫關於元代文人隱逸 (eremitism)的社會背景和文化象徵的經典文章就是迄今研究元代士大夫藝術必需參考的作品。當然從學術體制的角度來看,牟先生對普大東亞研究最重 要的貢獻是在七十年代與校方交涉成功,將原來由校方掌控用於支持東亞研究的大筆經費移到東亞中心(East Asian Program),由和東亞研究直接有關的教授支配,這樣不但確保了未來和東亞有關的學術活動經費無虞,並使其完全獨立於學校官僚系統之外。在過去幾十年 中,這一基金不斷括充,到今天可說已使普大東亞中心和哈佛費正清研究中心一樣,是世界上東亞研究方面資本最為雄厚的機構。這和一九六八年史東成功地將 Shelby Davis 捐助給普大的大筆款項成立了名聞遐爾的戴維斯歷史研究中心有異曲同工之妙。過去的十幾年中我在普大所遇到的東西方研究東亞方面的訪問學者,幾乎無一不是由 東亞中心資助。如果沒有這一層機制上的保障,則普大東亞研究的格局恐怕會是另一番光景。

在牟先生任教期間,普大的東亞系成立並發展為人材 濟濟的一方雄鎮。光就中國史而言,七十年代末和八十年代初,除了牟先生負責明清以外,隋唐方面有杜希德(Denis Twitchett,大陸多誤譯為崔瑞德)先生,宋史則有劉子健先生,所以一時間普大有中華帝國的稱譽。雖然於八十年代後期牟、劉二先生相繼退休,余英時先生的到來又使這一盛況保持了相當長的一段時間。一個重要的研究機構往往有其所謂的傳奇(legend)故事。我於九十年代初才來到普大,所以無資格細數 此間東亞研究創業期的人事掌故。但有一個和牟先生有關的小傳奇則是耳熟能詳的。牟先生的夫人極多才多藝,製得一手好陶瓷。當年牟先生為了讓東亞系的研究生 有一個討論研究心得的場合,特地創辦了一個每周一次的茶會。茶會的名字叫 Cracked Pot,字面的意思是「有裂縫的茶壺」。這當然是因為茶會所用的茶壺出於牟太太之手,上面的確有一道裂痕。但其名之所以起得很貼切是英文中 「cracked pot」 還有另一層意思,即是指癡狂之人。此名用來形容研究生初生之犢的無畏精神可謂妙語雙關,且富有禪意。這一茶會沿續至今,可惜這一代的研究生中僅有極少數知 其淵源了。

Corrections:謝謝孫教授的更正。她說她是22道菜單的書寫者,料理者是牟復禮(Frederick W. Mote,1922年-2005年)夫人陳效蘭女士。Hanching Chung. Thank you for posting a short note (小记) about me and Luo Wen-sen! I really appreciate it. But there is an error concerning the 金瓶梅大餐 in1975. The 22 courses for the dinner were prepared by Mrs.Mote (I.e., 陳效兰) although I was the calligrapher who wrote down the recipe .Kang-i Sun Chang 22 courses for the dinner were prepared by Mrs.Mote (I.e., 陳效兰) although I was the calligrapher who wrote down the recipe .

牟先生是我見過最熱愛中國傳統文化,也是中文說的最為標準典雅的西方人。這不僅是因為他本人有極高的語言天份,亦是由他特定的 學術背景所致。牟先生在二戰期間参加了由趙元任先生所主持的美軍漢語培訓班。楊聯陞和周一良兩位先生當時正擔任趙先生的助教。這一班為後代培養了許多極重 要的中國學家,而牟先生在班上是第一名。他在抗戰後期到中國,從成都到南京,再到北平,所接觸到的都是當時第一流的中國學者。他先後在金陵大學和燕京大學 學習,聽過包括向達、啟功等先生們的課,其中對他影響最大的學者是明史專家王崇武。據牟先生自己的回憶,當年他到中國求學,曾和顧頡剛先生等很多知名學者 圍在飯桌邊一起聊天。當時顧先生問各位在坐的先生們有誰願意來指導這位年輕的美國學生。在場的都是飽學之士,但可能都覺得這不是一件有多大意義的事情,所 以就一個推一個,直到最後王崇武先生因為喝得有些醉了,沒能推托成功,便接下了這個洋徒弟,也因此指導牟先生走上研究明史的道路。這當然是一則令人莞爾的 故事,讓人認識到歷史的偶然性在一個學者的身上所能發生的作用。但回顧牟先生的一生,我們可以想見他當年的可塑性之強。

我的印象中,牟先 生治學的特點是結和漢學的素養和史學的眼光。他的漢學素養之深,對古文獻的解讀能力之高決非西方大部份學者所能比擬。這是任何和他接觸過的人都能立刻感覺 到的。比如我第一次見到他時,我剛完成一篇長達百來頁的書評,將美國學者 John Knoblock 翻譯的《荀子》和他所構建的荀子的生平作了徹底的批評,證明其荒誕(註:Knoblock 的見解,後來被完全吸收入《劍橋中國上古史》的有關部份)。這是我在普大寫的第一篇學習報告,所以也就上呈牟先生,請他提意見。兩三天後,他將稿子交還給我。鼓勵之餘,他在稿子上密密麻麻寫滿了修正的意見,從諸子版本的引用到清儒的見解,真是令人嘆為觀止。我至今還保存著這份他修改過的文稿。牟先生是個對 學術水準要求非常高的人,他可以說是對文獻的一字一句都不放過。普大東亞系以往徵招中國文史方面的教員, 即便在牟先生退休之後,也常請他參與評鑒。我曾親見他在信中在肯定某位很有才氣的年輕學者的學術成績時,亦不忘提醒系裡同事其立言超出可證範圍的研究傾 向。但牟先生與舊時漢學家或所謂的東方學家不同的是,牟先生既不會去追求亦不會滿足於考訂史料史實的餖釘之學。

他所關注的和發表的作品都是中國歷史上的重 要課題。而且幾乎每一篇都在西方中國史的領域內有導夫先路的作用。他最重要的貢獻自然是對於元明史的開拓。這方面的成果現已蔚為大觀。他將蒙元和明連在一 起的觀察能力和眼光至今仍無西方學者能步其後塵。我猜想這和他在中國受到極好的訓練有關。他那一代的西方學者,研究中國史時多只注意其在日本和歐洲的進 展,而他卻一直強?#123;對中國學者所取得的成果的吸收。比如他在哈佛亞洲學報上發表評 John Dardess 明初政治專著的書評裡,就直言不諱的指出 Dardess 不該不參考保括蕭啟慶在內的臺灣及大陸學者的蒙元史研究成果。

牟先生的博士論文是對陶宗儀《輟耕錄》的研究,而出版的第一部專著則研究明初詩人高啟,將其放在明初的政治下分析。在這之後他幾乎在元明史的各個領域內都有重要的研究成 果。比如他寫的關於南京的論文,收在斯金
(William Skinner)所編有關中國晚期城市的論文集中,是區域城市史研究方面的典範。可喜的是這部書如今也有了中文譯本。牟先生在明史方面的工作以主持兩大本 《劍橋明代史》的編寫而達到高潮。我不治明史,且這部著作的影響已有公論,這裡就從略了。值得一提的是牟復禮先生著作中最廣為人知的一本書 —《中國思想之淵源》(Intellectual Foundations of China)。這是給本科生讀的先秦諸子思想介紹,在百來頁的短短篇幅中,對儒法名墨的特色和交互關係的闡述清楚而觀點獨到。其筆鋒帶著同情的幽默,真是 高手所為,到現在都是西方大學中國思想史課的基本讀物之一。

除了這一本小書之外,他對西方中國思想史研究的另一重大貢獻就是翻譯蕭公權先生的傑作《中國政治思想史》。這部書篇幅龐大,且微言大義,引用文獻無數,英譯者所面臨的挑戰自不言而喻。更何況以牟先生的學術標準,他是決不肯草率從事的。他當時的學術 地位已高,按理不必要作此種吃力又未必討好的事。但他出於對蕭公權先生的尊敬和對這部著作的價值的重視,間斷花了許多時間,並特地為此休假一年,到蕭先生執教的西雅圖華盛頓州立大學專心從事此書的翻譯。雖然最後僅完成並出版全書翻譯的一半,這已經是繼 Derk Bodde 翻譯馮友蘭的《中國哲學史》之後西方對中文學術著作介紹的里程碑。好像在牟先生之後西方學界就無人成就類似規模的工作了。譯文的質量如何,讀者只需比較一下原文就可判斷,這裡也不需我多說。

牟先生寫作的文筆一向練達而幽默,和他為人的風格很接近。不知為什麼,我總覺得在風格上它與顧頡剛先生的史學文字有相 似之處。同時牟先生的論著又很富有想像力,最有趣的當屬牟先生為一九九二年於華盛頓所舉辦的紀念哥倫布發現新大陸五百周年的超級展覽所著的章節。此展覽的 主題之一就是把哥倫布時代的歐州和明代中國作一橫向的比較,如表現在藝術方面就是丟勒 (Albrecht Dürer) 和沈周的對照。牟先生負責執筆配合展覽的專著《 Circa 1492》 中關於明代文化的這一部份。這當然是為美國知識大眾寫的,所以要深入淺出。牟先生把明代中葉的文明和社會放在世界史的背景下作了很全面的概括。其中有一小 節題為「哥倫布在中國」,他用假想的筆?#123;,寫如果哥倫布真的到達中國會有何種際遇,讀了讓人印象深刻。

牟先生一生最後一部大書是長達一千頁的《帝制中國:900-1800》(Imperial China: 900-1800),由哈佛大學出版社於2000年出版。這是他多年積累的學識和見解的綜合,也是我見到的有關這九百年中國史的西文通史性著作中最詳盡的 一部。此書的緣起是他和杜希德先生曾訂約合寫一部給大學生讀的中國通史,當年決定由杜先生寫從秦漢到唐的中華帝國史前半部,而他則負責寫下半部。可惜後來 杜先生因主持劍橋中國史工作的緣故不得不放棄前半部的寫作計劃,而牟先生所負責的部份則在他經歷了種種波折之後契而不捨地完成了。書的價值自然也不須我多 贊一詞,但我一直特別欣賞其中論及周邊民族政權和蒙元史的部份,並折服於他對歷朝和周邊關係的那種明晰而平允的討論。我曾在此書出版之後寫信給牟先生,表 示希望能有中譯本出版。牟先生很謙遜地回覆說,這書裡沒有什麼特別的高見,他同時亦表示出版中譯本的時機或許尚未成熟。但我總希望不久的將來他這部論著能有譯本與在中國的讀者見面。

我對牟先生的了解是從進普大開始的,而且是從讀他那本《中國思想之淵源》開始的。我第一次見到他是在一九九三 年,那是我作普大博士生的第二年。當時他已退休多年,且已移居到景色瑰麗,空氣清新的科羅拉多山中,但每年還是到普林斯頓來小住兩三個月以便查閱圖書和作 研究。他給我的第一個印象就是一個溫潤如玉的君子,而且說話很平和風趣,決看不出是個經常要和病症作抗爭的人。他當時正在和杜希德先生合編《劍橋中國史.明代史》的第二冊,所以當他知道我師從杜希德先生時,就和我談起了他的這項工作,并用中文說「我在山上隨時聽他指揮」,這個「他」當然指的是杜希德先生。 但他用標準的京片子來講,聽來好玩極了,讓我頓時覺得和他親近了許多。


復禮,多謝替我寫信吹噓。 《宗門武庫》年節之間應可標點寄還。附甲骨文詞一首,仿董彥老,釋文是:「風(借鳳字)片片,雨絲絲,一日相望十二時。奚事(借史字)春來人不至,花前又見燕歸遲」。字寫得不好,聊博一笑而已。即祝雙福 並賀新禧聯陞宛君 致候 一九七五雙十二

這封信寫作的年代離 今已整整三十個年頭,距離我最初讀到這些文字時也已十年了。於風片雨絲的春日光景將臨之際,留下的正是哲人不再的感慨和一個特有的人文時代之斑斑印跡。



2011-01-26 22:11:55