金融時報:紙牌屋里陰謀多

紙牌屋里陰謀多

當紅美劇《紙牌屋》受到好評如潮。奧斯卡影帝凱文·史派西塑造了一個為爭奪權(quán)力無節(jié)操無底線的國會議員。FT影評作家Martin Hoyle認為，這部作品頗有莎士比亞四大悲劇的風骨。

測試中可能遇到的詞匯和知識：

impeccably[im'pek?bl?] 無瑕疵地

Richard III and his skeleton 2013年2月，在英國萊斯特市一停車場內(nèi)發(fā)現(xiàn)的遺骨被證實是著名的暴君理查三世。史派西扮演過理查三世。

machination [,mæ??'ne??n] 陰謀詭計

unscrupulous [?n'skru?pj?l?s] 寡廉鮮恥的

pliancy ['plai?nsi] 柔軟，適應(yīng)性

ramification [,ræm?f?'ke??(?)n] 衍生物；分枝；支流

tacit ['tæs?t] 緘默的，心照不宣的

elephant in the room 房間里的大象，指眾人心知肚明卻避而不談的問題

aside [?'sa?d] 旁白

Macbeth, Edmund, Iago 麥克白，《李爾王》中的埃德蒙，《奧瑟羅》中的埃古，都是莎士比亞悲劇中以陰謀詭計和為爭權(quán)奪利不擇手段著稱的經(jīng)典角色。

antecedent [,ænt?'si?d(?)nt] 經(jīng)歷；祖先；前身

plodding['pl?di?] 單調(diào)乏味的

Review: Netflix's House of Cards（636 words）

By Martin Hoyle

They may have found his skeleton in a Leicester car park but Richard III is alive and scheming in House of Cards – not the 1990 British thriller serial but the new American version streamed to subscribers on Netflix. The original authors, Andrew Davies and Michael Dobbs, are among the producers overseeing the transfer of the devious machinations of an unscrupulous chief whip from Westminster to Washington. All 13 episodes are available, to be gulped down in a marathon of conspiracy, betrayal and cynical amorality.

I experimented by watching the drama in three slabs. The first 3 episodes made a neutral impact: too much politicking of a sort we've seen on TV. A middle section of 6 episodes gradually took hold, but only the final 4 instalments really made me want to keep watching, thanks chiefly to Corey Stoll(as “US Congressman Peter Russo from Pennsylvania”)'s portrayal of self-destruction, a real tragedy, followed by growing tension in the plotting. Impeccably cast, professional at every level. If I hadn't been obliged to watch the whole thing, I think I might have left after three episodes.

The serial follows the rise to power of a Congressman of steely unstoppability and moral pliancy, and the tortuous ramifications involving his helpers and rivals. Tricks grow dirtier, strategies more unscrupulous; careers are ruined, families destroyed. A mutually helpful relationship between politics and media turns poisonous, exemplified by an ambitious young woman journalist (Zoe Barnes), emotionally involved and predictably hurt. Corruption and venality are common currency.

The American remake can be judged on its own terms, though, like the BBC original, it is overshadowed by a giant, manipulative presence. Both cultures take certain givens for granted – the tacit values and assumptions shaping attitudes even when not actively moving the plot. In Britain the elephant in the room is class. In Washington it is corporatism, and much more openness about money – although, as Congressional whip Francis Underwood assures us in one of his confidential asides to camera, “power, not money, is what counts.”

Underwood dominates the story, lying, bluffing, double-bluffing, ensnaring nature's weaklings and dupes as he aims for the ultimate prize. His tendency to Shakespearean asides, confiding, self-congratulatory or – rarely – angry, underlines the character's classical antecedents: Richard III, a dash of Macbeth, Edmund in Lear, Iago – “such smiling rogues” who prove that a man may smile and smile and be a villain.

Unfortunately Kevin Spacey goes easy on the smiles. He has none of Richard's glee or Edmund's fatalistic relish of his dark side. Having paid his classical theatre dues, Spacey can freeze into dead-eyed dislike to chilling effect.

He makes the most of the mocking self-deprecation with which Underwood undercuts his secrets. “I'm not going to lie. I despise children… There! I've said it.” Or “I will march forward even if I have to do so alone… See? I told ya!”

Spacey can elevate a guilty monologue to something near the real thing, as when remembering, in church, the man he has murdered: “Is that you, Peter? Stop hiding in my thoughts and come out. There is no solace above or below us, only small, solitary striving, battling one another… I pray to myself, for myself.” The actor's dark nihilism evokes Iago.

British viewers may find the US political manoeuvring plodding, even though the first episodes are directed by David Fincher (The Social Network). The serial really ignites when it turns into a detective thriller as Underwood's evil begins to unravel – the last four episodes. The large cast is without weakness, notably Robin Wright as Underwood's wife, here a much larger role than the English original. And Stoll, a revelation as a Congressman Peter Russo whose personal Calvary – drink, drugs, whores; redemption, temptation and fall – is both epic and intimately human. These characters have the advantage of changing in the course of the action, unlike Underwood.

請根據(jù)你所讀到的文章內(nèi)容，完成以下自測題目：

1.What do we know about House of Cards?

A.It is a thriller serial about Richard III.

B.There is an original BBC version.

C.It is directed by Kevin Spacey.

D.The “House” refers to the White House.

答案(1)

2.What is not true about Francis Underwood?

A.He serves as party whip in the House.

B.He dominates the story.

C.He has murdered someone.

D.He likes children.

答案(2)

3.What is(are) the difference(s) between UK and US politics, revealed by the two versions of House of Cards?

A.In US, class plays an important role.

B.Corporatism is more influential in Washington.

C.British viewers are more picky.

D.All of above.

答案(3)

4.“Drink, drugs, whores; redemption, temptation and fall – is both epic and intimately human.”

--Who is the writer talking about?

A.Francis Underwood, the protagonist.

B.Peter Russo, a Congressman.

C.Claire, Underwood's wife.

D.Zoe Barnes, an ambitious young woman journalist.

答案(4)

* * *

(1)答案：B.There is an original BBC version.

解釋：文章開頭提到理查三世顯然是說，莎翁戲劇中經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的那種權(quán)力斗爭和陰謀仍然活在美劇《紙牌屋》中。文中還說了，原作者Davies和Dobbs親自監(jiān)督了這部劇從1990年BBC版改編為Netflix版。不難看出，House指的是美國會眾議院House of Representatives，而非白宮，顯然這是個雙關(guān)用法?！渡缃痪W(wǎng)絡(luò)》的導(dǎo)演大衛(wèi)·芬奇指導(dǎo)了這部劇，他與主演史派西還有一個合作是《七宗罪》。

(2)答案：D.He likes children.

解釋：ABC都是正確的。安德伍德時常在自嘲中披露自己的秘密，比如討厭孩子。有次在教堂里，他想起了被自己謀殺的人，自言自語說“Is that you, Peter? Stop hiding in my thoughts and come out……”。

(3)答案：B.Corporatism is more influential in Washington.

解釋：作者說，階級和出身顯然在英國更加重要，而社團主義在美國影響巨大。（社團主義是指產(chǎn)業(yè)集團控制立法權(quán)的一種政經(jīng)體制，法西斯意大利和今天的東亞和拉美較為典型）

C并非兩國政治的區(qū)別。

(4)答案：B.Peter Russo, a Congressman.

解釋：作者兩次表達了對Stoll扮演的Peter Russo這個角色的喜愛。第一次是在第二段，說如果不是這個角色他就看不下去了。第二次是在最后一段說Russo的救贖、受誘惑和墮落既是史詩般的，也是有血有肉的。