1
本期思維導圖
Cece，消防人+經濟學人粉絲
2
精讀|翻譯|片語
Culture | Back Story
文化 | 幕後故事
英文部分選自經濟學人20250621期文化板塊
Culture | Back Story
文化| 幕後故事
Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the age of the genius
特朗普、馬斯克與天才崇拜時代
The perils of bowing to those anointed as special
躬身膜拜“天選之人”的隱憂
Elon Musk jumps on stage as he arrives to speak at a town hall event in support of Donald Trump at the Greater Philadelphia Expo Center in Oaks, Pennsylvania, United States on October 18th 2024
2024年10月18日，在賓夕法尼亞州奧克斯市大費城博覽中心為支援特朗普舉辦的市政廳活動中，埃隆·馬斯克以躍上講臺的方式登臺演講。
Books about geniuses tend to fall into predictable categories. There is hagiography, along the lines of “How Picasso revolutionised art”. There are takedowns (“Picasso was a monster”). And there are how-to manuals (“How you can become the new Picasso”). “The Genius Myth” by Helen Lewis is more original and painfully timely. This is the high age of the genius, readers may conclude—but not in a good way.
關於天才的書籍往往落入可預見的窠臼。既有如《畢加索如何革新藝術》這類頌揚傳記，也有像《畢加索是個怪物》這種批判性揭底，更有《怎樣才能成為下一位畢加索》這種成功學手冊。海倫·劉易斯（Helen Lewis）所著的《天才神話》（The Genius Myth）則更為獨到，切中時弊。本書的讀者或許會得出這樣的結論：如今是天才崇拜的鼎盛時期，可惜這並不是件好事。
If you have a brainwave in a forest, and no one to share it with, are you a genius? Not according to Ms Lewis, a British journalist, because genius is a social status. You are one because you are different from others—ascribed a place “somewhere between secular saint and superhero”—and because others say so. Genius is a story as much as an achievement, requiring canny reputation management. Selection criteria vary, so it has a political dimension, offering a way to elevate favoured groups.
倘若靈光乍現於林中卻無人分享，能算是天才嗎？英國記者劉易斯予以否認，因為天才是一種社會地位。因其異於常人而被賦予“介於世俗聖人和超級英雄之間”的地位，且經社會認可，方能被稱為“天才”。“天才”既是一種成就，也是一個故事，需要精妙的聲譽管理。因甄別標準各異，“天才”具有政治維度，常成為受優待群體抬高地位的手段。
For the Romantics, recounts Ms Lewis, genius was linked to passion, insanity and illness. Victorian researchers thought it could be analysed and quantified, an approach that persisted in the 20th-century interest in IQ. The corollary of this pseudoscientific genius-ology was a sense of the worthlessness of those at the bottom of the scale—and an enthusiasm for eugenics. The cranks who championed these ideas had a habit of discrediting them, and their own pretensions to genius, with bogus data.
劉易斯指出，對浪漫主義派而言，天才與激情、癲狂、疾病密不可分。維多利亞時代的研究人員認為可以透過量化分析來解讀天才，這種思路在20世紀對智商的研究興趣中得以延續。這種偽科學“天才學”的必然結果是，判定處於量表底端的人毫無價值，也催生了對優生學的狂熱。鼓吹這些觀點的偏執者慣用偽造資料，不僅讓這些理論體系崩塌，也讓他們自詡的“天才”光環隨之破滅。
Three uncomfortably familiar motifs crop up in this witty survey. One is “the deficit model of genius”, whereby “exceptional talent extorts a price.” Sometimes that is paid by the geniuses, in ostracism, alcoholism or depression. Often, through selfishness and worse, it is extracted from those around them, including put-upon spouses and uncredited collaborators. The genius label “becomes a licensing scheme for their eccentricities” and “a shield against questions”, Ms Lewis writes, name-checking Michael Jackson and Roman Polanski.
在犀利的審視下，本書提出了三種熟悉卻又令人不安的“天才幻象”。第一種是“天才缺陷論”，認為“非凡天賦必然要付出代價”。這些代價有時由天才本人承擔，表現為被排擠、酗酒或抑鬱。但更多時候，這些代價會透過自私甚至更惡劣的行徑轉嫁給身邊人，包括飽受委屈的配偶和寂寂無名的合作者。劉易斯寫道，“天才”這一標籤成了“怪癖的通行證”和“抵擋質疑的盾牌”，她特別提及邁克爾·傑克遜和羅曼·波蘭斯基作為例證。
A second archetype is the genius as rebel: dissidents who face down stale orthodoxies and are vindicated by history. Told something is impossible, they prove it isn’t. “He knew he was right,” Ms Lewis summarises, “and he was!” She mentions Galileo and the Impressionists, derided at their first exhibition in 1874. Making “a fetish of contrarianism”, this model of genius is dangerous because, after all, conventional wisdom is often wise.
第二種是“反叛型天才”：他們直面陳腐教條，最終被歷史正名。他們被告知某事絕無可能，卻向世界證明了沒有不可能。劉易斯總結道：“他知道自己是對的，事實也的確如此！”她提到伽利略和印象派畫家——後者在1874年的首展曾遭到冷嘲熱諷。然而，這種將“標新立異當信條”的天才觀很危險；畢竟，傳統智慧往往有其明智之處。
Third and equally perilous is the enduring delusion that genius is “a transferable skill”: ie, the assumption that accolades in one walk of life make someone an authority in others.This encourages the anointed to sound off on subjects far beyond their competence. In reality, “A self-image as a ‘clever person’ simply makes you more likely to hold your incorrect opinions extremely forcefully.” Genius, the author urges, should properly be imputed to works, like paintings or inventions, rather than people.
第三種同樣危險的錯覺是根深蒂固的謬見：認為天才是一種“可遷移的能力”。換句話說，就是想當然地覺得，一個人在某一領域榮譽滿滿，那他在其他領域也自然具備權威。這會讓那些“天選之人”在自己根本不懂的領域高談闊論。“自視為‘聰明人’，只會讓你更有可能固執地堅持錯誤的觀點。”作者主張，“天才”之名應當歸於作品，如畫作或發明，而非創作者個人。
A conviction that contrarianism is a mark of greatness. The belief that obnoxious behaviour is a price worth paying. Faith that a person distinguished in one field will be right about everything. Does all this remind you of anyone?“He’s one of our great geniuses,” Donald Trump once proclaimed of Elon Musk (pictured), “and we have to protect our genius.” Mr Musk, notes Ms Lewis, “performs the cultural role of genius”, sleeping under his desk and hoping to die on Mars. Lionised for his triumphs with electric cars and space travel, he has fallen into the genius trap, inferring “that he is therefore a special person”—qualified, for instance, to remake the federal government. She describes his botched takeover of Twitter, but went to press before his rift with Mr Trump.
一種“篤信特立獨行是偉大標誌”的觀念，一種“堅信惹人生厭為必要代價”的認知，一種對“某個領域的專家必然無所不通”的盲目信任，這些特質是否讓你想起某個人？“他是我們這個時代的偉大天才之一，”唐納德·特朗普曾如此盛讚埃隆·馬斯克（如圖），“我們必須保護我們的天才。”劉易斯指出，馬斯克透過睡在辦公桌下、渴望葬身火星等行為“刻意扮演著天才的文化角色”。這位因電動汽車和太空探索而封神的企業家，如今已墜入“天才陷阱”，自詡“天選之子”，甚至覺得有資格改組聯邦政府。她詳述了馬斯克對推特（現稱X）的拙劣收購，但本書出版時他尚未與特朗普決裂，故未提及此事。
Indeed, in her spiky, clarifying book, Ms Lewis refers to Mr Trump only fleetingly, possibly because she doubts he belongs alongside Albert Einstein, Vincent van Gogh and Thomas Edison. But plenty of his supporters consider him a genius, seeing his talent as excuse for his vulgarities. Mr Trump has called himself “a very stable genius”, posing as a crusader against the deep state and the mainstream media’s groupthink. His political success rests in part on the myth of transferable genius: supposedly a star in business, and on TV, he was bound to make a fine president.
事實上，在這本筆鋒犀利、洞見透徹的著作中，劉易斯對特朗普僅著墨寥寥，或許在她看來，這位總統先生無法與愛因斯坦、梵高、愛迪生比肩。但眾多支持者仍視其為天才，將其粗鄙言行美化為才華的註腳。特朗普自詡“非常穩定的天才”，標榜自己是對抗深層政府與主流媒體群體思維的鬥士。其政治成功部分建立在“擁有可遷移能力的天才”神話之上：既然曾是商界驕子、電視明星，入主白宮自然遊刃有餘。
To believe in transferable genius is to misunderstand human faculties. It also conflates disparate activities, mixing up business with government and politics with entertainment. It is a concept whose hour has come—and is therefore being tested, perhaps to destruction.
信奉“擁有可遷移能力的天才”是對人類才能的誤解。這種觀點更是將截然不同的領域強行糅合，把從商與從政、政務與娛樂混為一談。當下正是這套理論大行其道之時，它也正在接受檢驗，或許終將走向破滅。
翻譯組：
Yvette，拒絕標籤
Cassie，ECNU口譯小菜雞，體制內摸爬滾打教書匠
Nikolae，新手人民教師，聲優探索者，乃木坂47與AKB49
校對組：
Lucian，靈魂在傑作中冒險
Shulin，非上上智，無了了心
—END—
