20年前 《傲慢與偏見》在美成爲一個現象

The biggest surprise in the opening episode of the final season of “Downton Abbey” wasn’t about “Downton” at all; it was — ohmygod, there’s Wickham! Wickham, you old scoundrel, is that really you? And has it really been 20 years?

《唐頓莊園》(Downton Abbey)最後一季第一集最大的驚喜完全與唐頓莊園無關，而是——天哪，那是威克姆(Wickham)！威克姆，你個老流氓，真的是你嗎？真的已經過了20年？

It was 20 years ago this month, as it happens, that the television costume drama genre hit its high-water mark (muddy hems and all) with the broadcast of “Pride and Prejudice,” a co-production of the BBC and A&E starring Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy and Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth Bennet. Adrian Lukis played the cad Wickham, and he showed up in last Sunday’s episode of “Downton Abbey” as a neighbor of the Crawleys forced to sell the ancestral pile.

正好就是20年前的這個月，隨着《傲慢與偏見》(Pride and Prejudice)播出，電視劇裏的古裝戲類型達到了新高度（沾滿泥巴的裙襬等等）。這部電視劇由BBC和A&E聯合制作，由科林·費斯(Colin Firth)飾演達西先生(Darcy)，詹妮弗·埃爾(Jennifer Ehle)飾演伊麗莎白·班內特(Elizabeth Bennet)。阿德里安·盧基斯(Adrian Lukis)飾演無賴威克姆。上週日（1月3日），他在《唐頓莊園》中亮相，飾演克勞利一家的一位被迫賣掉祖產的鄰居。

Enough about Downton. Let’s talk about Pemberley (Darcy’s Downton-like home). There are few universally acknowledged truths, but on this anniversary, Friday File revisits the show that gave birth to a Jane Austen cottage industry big enough to include faithful adaptations of the Austen oeuvre, sculptures of Mr. Firth and zombie Janes. The mystery novel “Death Comes to Pemberley,” a sequel by P. D. James, featured Matthew Goode as Wickham in the television adaptation. Mr. Goode, it is noted, will also feature in this “Downton” season. We know this because, like “Pride and Prejudice,” “Downton” went before British eyes first.

不說唐頓莊園了。咱們說說彭伯利莊園吧（Pemberley，達西的宅邸，與唐頓莊園相仿）。關於彭伯利莊園，幾乎沒有什麼公認的事實，但是在此周年紀念之際，Friday File欄目組重溫了那部電視劇。它衍生出一個龐大的簡·奧斯汀產業，包括對奧斯汀全部作品的忠誠改編，費思和殭屍簡的雕像。P·D·詹姆斯(P. D. James)續寫的懸疑小說《彭伯利謀殺案》(Death Comes to Pemberley)後來也改編成電視劇，劇中的威克姆由馬修·古德(Matthew Goode)飾演。據說，古德也將出現在這一季《唐頓莊園》中。我們知道他也會亮相是因爲，和《傲慢與偏見》一樣，《唐頓莊園》也是先在英國播出。

Writing in The New York Times on Jan. 13, 1996, the television critic John J. O’Connor, noting that “P&P” had set ratings records in England, called it “a splendid adaptation, with a remarkably faithful and sensitively nuanced script by Andrew Davies.”

1996年1月13日，電視評論家約翰·J·奧康納(John J. O’Connor)在《紐約時報》上指出，《傲慢與偏見》在英國創下收視率新高，稱它爲“精彩的改編”，說“安德魯·戴維斯(Andrew Davies)的劇本非常忠於原著，細膩而微妙”。

In the United States, it was broadcast over three nights on A&E, and Mr. O’Connor quibbled only about the pacing:

這部電視劇在美國的A&E頻道分三個晚上播出。奧康納對它的唯一不滿是節奏有點慢。

“Scattered portions of this handsome production might seem a bit slow for American viewers (British imports are often snipped and speeded up for consumption here),” he wrote. “There are perhaps too many languorous walks across the meadows, and one or two ornately choreographed dances seem to go on forever.”

他寫道：“對美國觀衆來說，這部製作精良的電視劇有點散亂，節奏有點慢（從英國引進的電視劇通常會進行剪輯，加快節奏，以適應美國觀衆的習慣）。在草地上悠閒漫步的畫面太多了，有一兩出編排華麗的舞蹈場景似乎沒完沒了。”

It turns out that American viewers not only didn’t mind the languor, but the old VCR also got a workout. “P&P” became a phenomenon. Peter M. Nichols, writing in The Times in 1997, said that the A&E mini-series “had viewers vying for quickly depleted supplies of videos after it played on television early last year.”

誰料想，美國觀衆完全不介意悠閒漫步，原版錄影帶都賣脫銷了。《傲慢與偏見》成爲一個現象。1997年，彼得·M·尼科爾斯(Peter M. Nichols)在《紐約時報》上寫道，“去年年初”，A&E的這部迷你劇“在電視上播出之後”，“觀衆們搶購錄影帶，很快脫銷”。

He concluded, “So powerful is the hold of the two-cassette ‘Pride and Prejudice,’ which has sold some 200,000 copies, that it is only half-jokingly reputed to have jeopardized jobs and strained personal relationships.”

最後他說：“兩盒裝的《傲慢與偏見》錄影帶非常搶手，共賣出約20萬套。半開玩笑地說，有些人因爲錄影帶丟了工作，搞僵了私人關係。”

Writing in The Times earlier that year, the book critic Christopher Lehmann-Haupt nearly placed the mini-series above the novel.

那年年初，書評家克里斯托弗·萊曼-豪普特(Christopher Lehmann-Haupt)在《紐約時報》上對這部迷你劇的評價幾乎高於這部小說。

“Plenty of bad movies have been made of good books, and a fair number of good movies have come from bad books. But a great movie of a great book?”

“有很多根據好書改編的爛電影，也有不少根據爛書改編的好電影。但是你見過根據一本很棒的書改編的很棒的電影嗎？”

He had missed the production on TV, “but when a friend lent me the tapes,” he wrote, “I did not get free until I had watched the entire five-hour production three or four times.”

他寫道，這部迷你劇在電視上播出時，他錯過了，“但是一位朋友把錄影帶借給我後，我把五小時長的電視劇全部看了三四遍才罷休”。

Then he experimented. “Best of all was the way the film spurred me to read the book again after 40 years and to re-experience as literature the wayward romances.”

然後他開始進行試驗，想看看書和電視劇哪個更棒。“最棒的是，那部電影激勵我在40年後重讀那本書，重新體驗文學的肆意浪漫。”

He was surprised to find that “the book proved somewhat disappointing at first. As the friend who lent me the tapes rightly put it when I asked him how the book compared with the film, ‘It makes you fear for literature.’

他意外地發現，“一開始，那本書有點令人失望。我的感覺跟借給我錄影帶的那位朋友一樣。借錄影帶時我問他小說和電影哪個更好，他回答說，‘它讓你開始擔心文學的前途。’”

“ ‘Oh! Shocking!’ as Miss Bingley would say. To admit that the literalness of film might surpass the stimulus to the imagination of Austen’s language. ’Abominable!’ ”

“如果承認電影的生動具體可能超越奧斯汀語言的想象力所帶來的興奮，那麼人們的反應可能會像賓利小姐(Miss Bingley)那樣：‘哦，太可怕了！真討厭！’”

But there was love for both. “By the end, I’m relieved to report the book’s richness overtakes the film’s,” he wrote.

不過，書和電影都有人愛。他寫道：“最後，我欣慰地發現，書的豐富性超越了電影。”

Still, “this reader will never again be able to open the pages of ‘Pride and Prejudice’ without picturing the actors in this unforgettable television production.”

不過，“作爲讀者，我一翻開《傲慢與偏見》，腦海中就會浮現出這部令人難忘的電視劇中的演員形象。”