西蒙(站立,右起第五位)在ITV纪录片《70 Up》中被家人环绕。
Symon (standing, fifth from right) surrounded by family in ITV’s 70 Up documentary.
摄影:ITV/Nick Wall/Shutterstock 乔纳森·弗里德兰 这部史诗般的纪录片系列揭示了过去60年来社会态度的诸多变迁——更深刻地揭示了人类生命那静谧而神秘的本质。本周的一两个小时里,我一直与那些我几乎从生命之初便目睹其人生展开、直至近乎终点的人们相伴。除了一位例外,我从未与他们谋面。然而,数十年来,我始终与他们共享着胜利与失落。
Photograph: ITV/Nick Wall/Shutterstock Jonathan Freedland The epic documentary series reveals much about the shifting social attitudes of the last 60 years – and much more about the quiet mystery of human life or an hour or two this week, I’ve been in the company of people whose lives I’ve seen unfold, almost from the beginning, almost to the end. They are people whom, with one exception, I’ve never met. And yet I’ve shared in their triumphs and disappointments for decades.
他们是1964年那群人,当时他们七岁,最初是一部40分钟的ITV纪录片的拍摄对象,但这一作品最终绽放为一部堪称神奇之作。每七年回访这些男孩和女孩,看着他们先是变成害羞而笨拙的青少年,继而成为丈夫与妻子,再后来成为父母与祖父母,《7 Up》系列已成为我们时代的记录——但更是某种更宏大、更具启示性的存在。本周,该广播公司播出了其宣称的最后一章,那些七岁的孩子如今已年满70岁。
They are the group who, in 1964, when they were seven years old, were the subjects of what was initially a single, 40-minute ITV documentary, but which flowered into a work that is quite magical Returning to those same boys and girls every seven years, watching as they turned first into shy and awkward teenagers, then into husbands and wives, then into parents and grandparents, the 7 Up series has become a document of our times – but also something larger and far more revealing. This week the broadcaster aired what it says will be the final chapter the seven-year-olds are now 70.
该节目最初在《世界在行动》(World in Action)栏目下制作,其初衷具有社会学意义,且政治立场十分鲜明。它旨在揭露英国阶级制度的根深蒂固。因此,节目将一组在预备学校前就读的男孩用拉丁语吟唱诗句的画面,与仅相隔数英里、却仿佛身处另一个世界的东伦敦顽童进行对比。那组出身上流社会的男孩当时甚至能具体说出父母为他们选定的牛津或剑桥学院,而在儿童福利院长大的保罗却问道:“大学意味着什么?”事实证明,我们确实看到了那些出身富裕的人如何守住财富,而资源较少的人则愈发匮乏——尽管该节目忽略了一个庞大且不断扩大的中间群体。通过聚焦于猎狐贵族约翰或出租车司机托尼这两个极端,节目在很大程度上遗漏了这几十年的真正故事,即中产阶级的广泛扩张。英国独立电视台(ITV)纪录片《70 Up》的受访对象。
The original aim of the show, made under the World in Action banner, was sociological and transparently political. It wanted to expose the entrenched nature of the British class system. And so it watched a trio of pre-prep school boys singing verses in Latin, contrasting them with the cheeky East End kids living just a few miles and a world away. While the posh trio could name, even then, the specific Oxbridge colleges their parents had in mind for them, Paul, raised in a children’s home, asked: “What does university mean?” Sure enough, we have seen how those born into money keep it, while those with less have less – though what the programme missed was the huge and expanding group in between. By focusing either on foxhunting John at one end or cabbie Tony at the other, it largely left out what would turn out to be the story of these decades, namely the sprawling growth of the middle class. The subjects of ITV’s 70 Up documentary.
事实上,正是该节目早期的预设,往往最尖锐地揭示了社会发生了多大的变化。1964年,研究人员只想到纳入一名非白人儿童:西蒙。在后续的一集中,我们听到导演、已故的迈克尔·阿普特(Michael Apted)询问他关于“非婚生”的问题,直到西蒙温和地纠正了他:“我们生活在不同的时代。”阿普特也因性别歧视受到批评:杰基(Jackie)指出,为什么他总是询问女性关于结婚和安定的问题,却从不问男性?
Indeed, it’s the programme’s early assumptions that often turn out to illuminate most sharply how much society has changed. In 1964, the researchers only thought to include one child who wasn’t white: Symon. In a later episode, we hear the director, the late Michael Apted ask him about being “illegitimate”, until Symon gently sets him straight: “We’re living in different times.” Apted is also admonished for his sexism: why, says Jackie, does he always ask the women about marrying and settling down, but not the men?
我们得以一窥这些年间的政治风气。琳恩曾是一名尽职尽责的儿童图书管理员,直到一轮又一轮的预算削减将她大半生为之付出的服务削得支离破碎。我们听到托尼抱怨移民轻易就能享受福利,包括住房——不过这段影像来自20世纪70年代,这提醒我们,当前的争论绝非新鲜事。我们看到布鲁斯,这个在七岁时曾渴望去非洲做传教士以帮助最需要帮助的人的孩子,现在成了英国皇家救生艇协会(RNLI)的志愿救生员。鉴于最近对该组织的攻击,我们猜测他仍在做着上帝的工作。
We get glimpses of the politics of these years. Lynn was a devoted children’s librarian, until successive rounds of budget cuts hacked away at the service to which she had given much of her life. We hear Tony complain about immigrants enjoying easy access to benefits, including housing – except that footage is from the 1970s, a reminder that the current debates are anything but new. We see that Bruce, who as a seven-year-old aspired to be a missionary in Africa in order to help the neediest, is now a lifeboat volunteer for the RNLI. Aware of the recent assaults on that organisation, we suspect he’s still doing God’s work.
或许最引人注目的是对精神疾病看法的转变。当《28 Up》在1984年播出时,全国上下对尼尔的遭遇感到震惊——七岁时睁大眼睛梦想成为宇航员的他,如今却被发现孤身一人、流落街头、无家可归。片中含糊其辞地提到了一种“神经系统的毛病”,阿普特问他:“你能克服它吗?”,就好像只要咬紧牙关洗个冷水澡就能解决问题一样。如今,尼尔直言不讳地谈到他与抑郁症持续一生的抗争,并终于将其说出口。
Perhaps most striking is the shifting view of mental illness. When 28 Up aired in 1984, much of the nation was shocked by the fate of Neil, who as a wide-eyed seven-year-old had dreamed of being an astronaut, and who was now found lonely, wandering and homeless. There is vague talk of a “nervous complaint” and Apted asks him, “Can you lick it?”, as if a stiff upper lip and cold shower might do the trick. Now, Neil speaks directly of a lifelong battle with depression, naming it at last.
顺便说一句,说“全国上下”并不过分。《7 Up》诞生于地面电视和有限选择的时代,当时受众规模庞大,重磅节目是全民共同的体验。这种媒介具有分量和一种耐性,因此像这样历时六十年的项目至少是可以构想的。在YouTube短片和Instagram短视频的时代,将不会再有第二个这样的项目了。(不过,在我们过度美化旧日时光之前,《70 Up》进行自我批判地指出,孩子们当年给出的家长同意书,绝不符合我们今天所理解的知情同意标准。)该系列的参与者于1978年,时年21岁。照片:ITV然而,真正的魔力并不在于记录社会或广播领域的变迁。如果最初的雄心是审视现代英国的阶级问题,那么这部系列作品很快就超越了这一范畴,变得更为宏大,如同最伟大的艺术作品一般,既超越时代,又具有普世性。如今已从教坛退休的彼得说:“这是一部关于如何度过人生的电影。”我们看到了真实的人在真实处境中不得不做出的妥协。布鲁斯曾是“村里唯一的社会主义者”,他出于原则,在伦敦市中心的一所学校教数学,那里的孩子们从未拥有过他童年时享有的特权。49岁时,我们在一所公学里见到他,他身着硕士礼服,面对老友们指责他“背叛了初衷”。但我们意识到,生活并非政治理论。有时,它只是走上了另一条道路。有些事件是无法预料的,当然也包括健康的偶然性以及死亡那毫无征兆的侵袭。你知道它终将到来,但它依然会让你猝不及防:1964年那七个七岁的孩子中,已有两人离世。跳过新闻通讯推广 在新闻通讯推广之后那些幸存下来的人,对什么才是重要的有着非常清晰的认识。他们一个接一个地表示,如今他们明白了家庭的核心地位。70岁的安德鲁已是一名退休律师,当他反思自己是否本应放弃那些在当时看来至关重要的额外办公时间,转而去参加孩子们的学校戏剧表演或运动会时,他发出了一声古老的叹息。阿普特也忽略了这一维度,他常常询问受访者关于职业上的失望或成就看似平庸的问题,未能看到他们最终所认可的、由自己建立的家庭所蕴含的“力量”。
It’s not wrong to speak of “much of the nation”, by the way. 7 Up came of age in the era of terrestrial, limited-choice TV when the audiences were enormous and major programmes were collective experiences. The medium had weight and a kind of patience, so that a six-decades-long project like this one was at least conceivable. In the age of YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels, there won’t be another. (Though before we romanticise the olden days too much, 70 Up self-critically notes that the children’s parents never gave anything that we would recognise as consent.) The participants of the series in 1978, aged 21. Photograph: ITV Still, it’s not here – in the charting of shifts in society or broadcasting – that the magic lies. If the original ambition was to examine class in modern Britain, the series very soon transcended that to becomebigger, to become, like the best works of art, both timeless and universal. As Peter, now retired from teaching, says, “It’s a film about living a human life.” We see the compromises that real people in real situations have to make. Bruce was once “the only socialist in the village” who, on principle, taught maths at an inner London school to kids who had none of the privileges he had known as a boy. At 49, we found him in a master’s gown at a public school, facing accusations from old friends that he had sold out. But life, we realise, is not political theory. Sometimes it just takes a different course. There are events you cannot plan for, including, of course, the lottery of health and the random intrusions of mortality. You know it’s coming, but it stops you all the same: two of the seven-year-olds of 1964 are dead. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Those who remain are very clear on what matters. One after another, they say they now understand the centrality of family. At 70 and a retired lawyer, Andrew offers an age-old lament when he wonders if, perhaps, he should have forsaken those extra hours in the office that seemed so important at the time, and gone instead to his children’s school play or sports day. Apted overlooked this dimension, too, often asking his subjects about their career disappointments or the apparent modesty of their achievements, failing to see what he eventually recognised as the “power” of the families they had built.
我们几乎无需被告知,因为我们亲眼所见。我们一次又一次地看到,这些人是如何被塑造的——是的,受阶级影响,但也受他们出生时的家庭状况影响,尤其是受那些缺失之物的影响。他们中的许多人致力于避免重蹈父母的覆辙,确保自己的孩子拥有他们曾经缺乏的稳定生活。
We hardly need to be told that, because we see it for ourselves. We see again and again how these people were shaped, yes, by class but also by the family situations they were born into, and especially by what was missing. So many of them devoted themselves to avoiding the mistakes of their parents, to ensuring their own children enjoyed the stability they had lacked.
最生动的例子或许是西蒙。七岁时他就进入了寄养机构;如今年届七十,他从未见过父亲这件事至今仍让他心痛不已。在1964年的影片中,孩子们参观了一个冒险游乐场:西蒙和保罗,两人都在同一家儿童之家长大,立刻开始搬运木板和砖块。他们试图建造一座房子。在最新的影片中,我们得知西蒙和他的妻子成为了寄养父母,不是一次或两次,而是在数十年间,令人震惊地照顾了130个孩子。正如西蒙在28岁时谈到自己的孩子们所说:“他们拥有一切。他们有父亲。”每一部《人生七年》系列电影的核心前提都是那句古老的耶稣会格言:“给我七岁前的孩子,我还你一个男人。”事实证明,这句话蕴含着深刻的真理,远比电影制作人最初想要证明的政治观点更为深远。
Perhaps the most vivid example is Symon. At seven he was in care; now aged 70, it still gnaws at him that he never knew his father. In the 1964 film, the kids visited an adventure playground: Symon and Paul, both raised in the same children’s home, immediately set about moving planks and bricks. They were trying to build a house. In the latest film, we learn that Symon and his wife became foster parents, not just once or twice but, over the decades, to a staggering 130 children. As Symon said of his own children when he was 28, “They’ve got everything. They’ve got a father.” The animating premise of each of the Up films was the old Jesuit saying: “Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man.” There turns out to be great truth in that, a truth far more profound than the political point the film-makers first set out to prove.
正如尼克所说——这个梦想探索月球、后来成为核物理学家的男孩——当我们看到一朵花的延时摄影,看着它“绽放然后凋谢”时,我们会被深深打动。那么,看到完整的人类生命历程,甚至同时看到几个这样的生命,那种安静而平凡的奥秘,该是多么令人惊叹。多么令人惊叹,又多么美丽。
As Nick, a boy who dreamed of exploring the moon and went on to become a nuclear physicist, says, we are moved when we see time-lapse photography of a single flower, watching it “blossom and then fade away”. How breathtaking then to see the full span of a human life, several of them at once – the quiet, ordinary mystery of it. How breathtaking and how beautiful.
《人生七年70》现已在ITVX上线。乔纳森·弗里德兰是《卫报》专栏作家。你对本文提出的问题有何看法?如果你想通过电子邮件提交一篇不超过300字的回应,以考虑刊登在我们的读者来信版块,请点击此处。
70 Up is available on ITVX Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here