中國網(wǎng)站品牌欄目（頻道）
|
A carnival atmosphere in the wake of a showbiz celebrity's hanky-panky coming to light speaks volumes about the popular culture of the day and, of course, the slowness of serious news. There is a joke going around town that Malaysia is being salvaged by a Chinese star whose extramarital affair has finally taken the heat off the airline mystery. Wen Zhang, a 30-year-old movie and television actor, rose to prominence on his public image as a man of responsibility. Barely two months after his second daughter was born, paparazzi caught him in compromising situations with Yao Di, a young actress who starred with him in a previous drama series. The real-life drama played out like an episodic Chinese soap opera. On March 28, the editor of Southern Entertainment Weekly tweeted on her weibo (micro blog) that the magazine was to drop a big bomb in showbiz the following Monday. Then there was gossip that representatives from the two leads in the affair were reaching out in a frantic attempt to hush up the revelation with big money dangled in exchange for the favor. But "No!" said the publisher, who suggested they were going to do the right thing and honor their reporters' hard work. Besides, it was too late to stop the press. Episode 1 of innuendo escalated during the weekend to Episode 2 of anticipation. The suspense was quickly broken as the nation's online journalists took whatever tips they could get hold of and jumped to digging. The gist was, Wen had been seeing Yao when his wife was pregnant with their second child. Yao even moved closer to be their neighbor. Blurry photos of their secret rendezvous in Hong Kong surfaced, hardly conclusive yet tantalizing nonetheless. All kinds of theories were floated. The biggest loser from this episode is the magazine that set the events in motion, not the dishonored celebrities. In this day of instant news and commentary, the print media can be easily trumped by their online competitors. Anything could have happened during the two days when Southern Entertainment Weekly was being printed and trucked to newsstands. For breakout news, print has proved such a laggard even when it claims to have a big scoop. Anyone in the print shop with a camera-ready mobile phone could have leaked everything in a few seconds. I believe print media still has a place in the future, mainly in in-depth reporting and analysis, the kind of thing people don't have much patience for when they surf the net. But tabloid news and gossip, no matter the length, is the information equivalent of fast food. People won't dress up or pay big money for it. They don't even care if it is properly vetted and verified. The important thing is whether the subjects in the story are known quantities in whom the reading public has invested time and emotion. Conspiracy theorists also had a field day arguing that it was a ploy by all the players in the melodrama to sell something. In China there is a special segment who would automatically suspect that people less well-known get involved with celebrities for the purpose of selling something, possibly to get a starring role in a commercial. I was accused of this sin when I got an exclusive interview with Zhang Ziyi in 2010. Did I want to sell something? Sure, I thought that story of mine would be good for promoting China Daily. Other than that, what could I possibly sell? Even the most important writer in China has never been given an endorsement deal. Sometimes, cynicism can be an excuse for stupidity, somewhat like the brain running wild and screeching with sparks of illogic before it totally breaks down. Early Monday morning came the denouement. I'd rather call it Episode 3 as who knows how it's going to end. Chinese couch potatoes are accustomed to 30-episode slow-moving tearjerkers, not a three-act dramatic arc. Wen issued a statement on his weibo, apologizing profusely for his sin and asking for forgiveness adding that it was unforgivable. He did not mention the girlfriend. His wife, Ma Yili, who is eight years his senior, echoed his apology by hinting that they have already moved on. This is so anticlimactic. Why isn't the first wife angry? Obviously she had long known about her husband's infidelity and they had reached some kind of reconciliation. That left moral purists in an awkward position. Who are they going to champion now that the victim has essentially sided with the sinner. The focus has shifted to the girlfriend who has not come out with a public stance yet. Is she now the victim due to his prompt repentance? (She had posted a cryptic sentence on March 23, saying "One should pursue but not force it because what one wins by pursuing is priceless while what one wins by forcing it is cheap.") Wen is rumored to be the highest-paid television actor in China, commanding three times the salary of the Korean heartthrob who has taken China by storm. He may not possess the best looks or the best acting chops, but he has built a solid career on a combination of good roles and a matching persona of a boy-man and the boy next door that is more endearing than enchanting. In other words, he is someone who can be trusted as a husband and father or a kid growing into one. Truth is, we don't know anything about what happened between the three of them. We just project from the roles they play and the public appearances they make that they are the kind of people we take them to be. That is at once the benefit and the disadvantage of an acting career. Their facade could be exactly who they are, or the opposite of who they are, or anything in between. All three of these people are adults and their private lives have nothing to do with the public. The fact that Wen has been acting as a kind of role model is partly the fault of the public or his fan base. Acting is not built on morality; it is one's ability to make believe he or she can be someone else once the need arises. It is simply foolish to equate a role with the one who temporarily embodies it. That said, actors who rely on the trick of deliberately blurring the line between actor and role should abide by his own rule. If you want the public to believe you're a paragon of morality, then stick to it or suffer the consequences. In a cultural context, the increasing failures of fairy tale marriages in the entertainment industry indeed have an impact on social attitudes and values. Whenever a celebrity union unravels, those who perceived it as the embodiment of conjugal perfection are dealt a blow, gradually morphing them into cynics. The oft-repeated catchphrase, "I won't believe in love anymore", is a self-deprecating wisecrack that has truth at its core. It's not a stretch to imagine that some will follow the lead of the erstwhile role models even in their foibles simply because they have revealed a vulnerability that makes them more human. There is also a palpable undertone of schadenfreude at the implosion of marquee names. If those perching atop pedestals cannot resist temptation and hold a marriage together, shouldn't we feel better about ourselves and our pedestrian lives? Either way, stars in the entertainment galaxy are used as benchmarks against which the huddling masses can measure their own existence and its worth. It has all the trappings of a modern religion with the only exception that these are mere mortals whose unpredictability can interfere with our projection and faith. That's why a real saint had better be dead. For one thing, dead people do not commit adultery and can be molded into whatever shape the manipulator wants. By Raymond Zhou ( China Daily) |
當今社會處在浮躁的大環(huán)境下，娛樂圈明星們的任何事跡都能馬上抓住公眾的眼球，成為熱點，而嚴肅類新聞卻恰恰相反。 網(wǎng)上流傳著一個笑話，“中國一位明星救了馬來西亞”，在文章婚外情事件爆出后，還有誰關心飛機找到?jīng)]呢？ 文章，著名電影電視演員，今年三十歲，以屏幕上的“好男人”著稱。在他的第二個女兒出生僅兩個月后，狗仔隊發(fā)現(xiàn)了他與著名女演員姚笛的婚外情事件，該女演員與文章此前在某電視劇中出演過對手戲。 現(xiàn)實版電視劇就像中國的肥皂劇一樣上演了。3月28日，《南方娛樂周刊》的編輯發(fā)布了一條微博，暗示周一有重磅新聞爆出。 接著就爆出該事件的兩名主角試圖掩蓋真相，該媒體高層和記者都遭遇了大波“說情”和“巨大的利益誘惑”，以求“平事兒"撤稿。但是，該編輯說：“當事人最清楚發(fā)生了什么。我也理解當事人此時的焦灼，但請相信此報道絕無任何陰謀論?！辈⑶遥敃r已來不及阻止輿論的導向了。 周末的時候上演了第一集，眾多網(wǎng)友表示對第二集“周一見”的期待。懸念很快被揭開，國內(nèi)記者爆出了所有挖出來的料。也就是，文章在妻子懷二胎期間出軌與姚笛相戀，姚笛甚至搬到了離文章更近的地方住。兩人密游香港的照片也被扒出，這也為兩人“在一起”的傳聞再添鐵證。 這次事件中最大的受害者不是不忠的明星，而是《南方娛樂周刊》這本雜志。在當天接連不斷的新聞和評論中，紙媒被線上媒體一舉擊潰。當《南方娛樂周刊》在印刷并送到各個報刊亭的這段時間里，能發(fā)生各種事情。對于這種爆炸性新聞，特別是獨家爆料，紙媒被證明確實是不可行的。任何一個在印刷店的人，只要拿著有攝像功能的手機就能夠在幾秒鐘之內(nèi)泄露所有事情。 我相信紙媒在未來仍會有一席之地，特別是深度報導和分析，對于這類事情人們在上網(wǎng)時是不會花時間去看的。但是對于爆炸性的新聞和八卦，無論長短，都是信息時代的快餐，人們不會為此花時間研究或是花大價錢，甚至不關心是否是通過審核的、已被證實的。重要的是這個主題是否已被公眾投入了時間和情感。 一些評論者也認為這是一個經(jīng)過策劃的炒作。在中國這一點很特殊，就是一旦那些知名度不太高的人和知名度高的人扯上關系，就會被自動得懷疑成炒作、宣傳。 我有過類似的經(jīng)歷，2010年，我做了一次章子怡的獨家專訪，就被懷疑炒作。我想賣什么東西嗎？當然，我覺得我寫的故事可能對《中國日報》的宣傳有好處，除此以外，我還能賣什么？ 即使中國最著名的作家也沒有誰有代言合同。有時，憤世嫉俗可以用來解釋愚蠢，像是在完全崩潰前思維混亂、屏幕亂閃的場景。 周一早上迎來的大結局。我姑且叫第三集吧，誰也不知道該如何收場。中國電視觀眾習慣看30集長的節(jié)奏緩慢的催淚戲，而不是只有三幕的戲劇。文章在微博上發(fā)表了聲明，“對不起，請能接受我發(fā)自深心的歉意和愧悔?！甭暶骼锼麤]有提到姚笛。比他大8歲的妻子馬伊琍，回應了他的道歉，“且行且珍惜”。 劇情驟變，為什么馬伊琍不生氣呢？很明顯，她早就知道了文章出軌，達成了調(diào)解。而道德純粹主義者讓他們都處在尷尬的位置。誰出來辯護誰就是罪人。公眾把重心轉(zhuǎn)移到了姚笛身上，而此次事件后姚笛再沒有在公眾前露面。因為文章及時的認罪讓姚笛變成了罪人了嗎？姚笛于3月23日發(fā)布了一條神秘的微博，“永遠要追求，但不強求，因為追求來的是無價的，而強求來的一定是廉價的！” 文章?lián)魇侵袊曜罡叩碾娨曆輪T，迷倒中國大江南北的“都教授”的片酬只有文章的三分之一。他也許不是最帥的或者是演技最好的，但是他樹立了堅實的“大男孩”和“鄰家男孩”的形象，更加具有魅力。換句話說，他是一個能被信任的好丈夫、好父親。 事實上，我們根本不知道他們?nèi)酥g到底發(fā)生了什么。我們只能從他們扮演的角色和塑造的“我們想要的”公眾形象中設想。這是演員的好處，也是演員的壞處。他們可以出演真實的自己，或是扮演完全和自己相反的角色，或是兩者之間。 三個人都是成年人，他們的私生活與公眾毫無關系。只是文章與他所樹立的“好男人”形象背道而馳。演戲不是樹立在道德之上的，只是演員的能力，讓他或她能滿足觀眾的需求。而僅僅用戲中的角色去判定一個演員是極其愚蠢的。 也就是說，依靠這種模糊演員本人和戲中角色界限的演員應該遵守自己的原則。如果你想讓公眾相信你塑造的道德典范，就堅守它，或是承擔相應的后果。 在這種文化背景下，娛樂圈不斷爆出“童話婚姻”的破滅確實會對社會態(tài)度和價值觀產(chǎn)生影響。當一對明星夫妻鬧崩時，會給那些視作完美結合的粉絲們沉重一擊，逐漸變得憤世嫉俗。網(wǎng)上常有人說“不再相信愛情了“，就是以自嘲的方式來體現(xiàn)了這一真理。 很難去想象那些會跟隨偶像所扮演的角色的人，甚至是他們的缺點，僅僅是因為他們也展現(xiàn)出了脆弱的一面而讓他們顯得更人性化。還有一個明顯又潛在的原因，就是人們看到這些人的名字暴露在大屏幕上的幸災樂禍。如果那些在娛樂圈的人不能夠忍受誘惑、維護婚姻，我們不應該對我們普通人的生活感覺更好嗎？ 無論怎么說，娛樂圈的明星們都可以被大眾用作測量自己的存在和價值的標尺。他們被現(xiàn)代宗教和道義包裹，在沒有被預知的情況下，影響我們自己的觀點和信念，這就是為什么真正的圣人最好是已經(jīng)去世了的。從某種意義上來說，已經(jīng)去世的人不能吃喝嫖賭，能夠被操縱者塑造成任何他們想要的樣子。 （中國日報周黎明 譯者 huayuting）
掃一掃，關注微博微信
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
