If you ask me1
If you ask me, real life is not all it's cracked up to be. Twelve years at school and three years at university, teachers banging on about opportunities in the big wide world beyond our sheltered life as students, and what do I find?
2 Try as I might to stay cheerful, all I ever get is hassle, sometimes with people (especially boys, god, when will they grow up?), but mostly with money. It's just so expensive out here! Everyone wants a slice off you. The Inland Revenue wants to deduct income tax, the bank manager wants repayments on my student loan, the landlord wants the rent, gas, water, electricity and my mobile bills keep coming in, and all that's before I've had anything to eat. And then some bright spark calls me out of the blue, asking if I'm interested in buying a pension. At this rate, I won't even last till the end of the year, let alone till I'm 60.
3 I didn't really want to go out to work just yet. I mean, I wasn't a dropout and I knew I'd have to some day. According to any number of people \such thing as a free lunch\to get my master's. Actually, I had my eye on the course at the London School of Economics (LSE) . Top school, very good for my CV. But I talked to my mum about it, and she said she couldn't afford to support me any more. I kind of understand it, and not just because my degree is in economics. She'd worked hard for 15 years to give me an education. My dad wasn't around most of the time, and when he was, he didn't have any money. He'd spent it gambling on the dogs or down the pub. So it came to the point when I just agreed with Mum, and bowed myself towards the inevitable.
4 If you ask me, and despite everything you hear, fortunately there are some really nice people out there. Take Mike, for example. When I left university, what I thought was that my mum would feel obliged to look after me if I returned home. So I packed up my belongings and went to London to get a job. I wanted something in finance and investments, because you know, maybe with a job like that, I could use my degree. But by that time, there were no jobs left, and I didn't really want to end up in some boring office, doing photocopies and making the tea.
5 Go anywhere you like in London and there's usually a good pub. The day I realized no one in the city was going to offer me a job, I went into The Salisbury on Leadenhall Street for a drink and something to eat. Mike the landlord was at the bar, pouring pints with one hand, making sandwiches with the other, and washing the glasses all at the same time—it's true, he really did seem to have three hands. He also seemed to know everyone, and greeted the regulars by name, getting their drinks ready with the question, \serving thirsty clients, and no one did it better. So I went up to him and asked him whether there was a job for me.
6 Well, to cut a long story short, I started work in the pub one Friday lunch time. It was quite demanding work, but I liked it. People seemed to find me amusing and it made me feel better too. There was one middle-aged regular in a suit who always had a half of bitter and a ham and pickle sandwich, with the crusts cut off. When I saw Tony coming, I tried to have his lunch ready for him even before he asked. He was another one of those really nice people.
7 If you ask me, spending money when you don't have any is dead easy. I began to think about how I'd spend my first month's wages. The flat where I was staying was expensive, and I just about had enough to cover the first month's substantial bills. But I calculated that there'd be just enough money over to treat myself to something. Why not get a CD or maybe a plant to cheer up the flat? I thought.
8 It was my birthday on pay day. Apart from Mike and Tony, I didn't have any friends in London. Seeing that I didn't have a boyfriend either, you can understand why I began to feel sorry for myself. So I ordered myself some flowers, and asked them to be sent with a little card, saying \all my love Anon.\The highlight of my birthday would be the confused look on the florist's eyes when he delivered them.
9 Later that week, Tony came in as usual and sat down at the bar. \with you? Where's that smile gone today?\everything, money, the master's, my birthday, the lot. He sympathized with me.
10 Tony got up from his stool, and went over to talk to some of the others. Remember: The Salisbury is right in the heart of the city, so all the customers were in banking or insurance or the stock market. Next day he turned up with cheques to the value of ￡20,000. \or you to set up your business. The only collateral you have is my trust in you that one day, you'll pay us back—if you can. And if you can't, too bad, that's the finance business for you. But I think you will.\
11 I didn't say anything for fear that I was going to cry. What were the odds on anyone being so nice?
12 And the flowers? I redirected them to my mum, and they arrived for her on my
birthday. She deserved them, don't you think?
13 If you ask me, looking back after all these years, you only need one or two breaks in your life to succeed. The fact that the rest is hard work doesn't matter, it's still worth it. 14 After a year working at The Salisbury, I got a place at the LSE, did my master's and found a job in an investment bank. I invested the ￡20,000, and sold out before the 2008 crash. I paid back Tony and the other investors, with ten per cent annual interest, and set up my own firm. It exceeded all my expectations and is still a thriving business.
15 Tony wrote me a thank-you note. He'd been in a car accident, and couldn't walk. The money I paid back would allow him to adapt his house so he could move around it in his wheelchair. This is what he wrote:
16 \to you. You've repaid the money with interest, and my trust in you and your honesty 100-fold. If you ask me, investing in people gives the best return you can ever hope for.\ 17 If you ask me, he's right. What do you think?
依我看
依我看，现实生活并没有人们想象的那么好。 我们上了12年的中、小学，又上了3年的大学，这期间老师们一直在没完没了地谈论在备受呵护的学生生活之外的那个广阔天地里的各种机会，可我遇到的又是什么呢？
无论我怎么想保持心情愉快，可麻烦事总是接踵而来：有时是和人发生矛盾（尤其是跟男孩子，天哪！他们什么时候才能长大？），但通常是为钱发愁。 这个地方什么东西都很贵！人人都想从我身上赚点钱： 税务局要收个人所得税，银行经理要我偿清学生贷款，房东催我交房租、燃气费、水费、电费，手机账单也不断地寄来。所有这些还没算上吃饭的
钱。 更可气的是，不知从哪里冒出一个自作聪明的家伙给我打电话，问我要不要买养老金。 照这样下去，我甚至都支撑不到年底，更别提活到60岁领养老金了。
我那时还不想出去工作。 我的意思是，我并不是个逃避现实社会的人，但我知道自己未来某一天可能不得不逃避现实。 许多人认为“生活不是野餐”，“没有免费的午餐”。 但既然我拿到了优等生文凭，我想我应该继续攻读硕士学位。 实际上，我已经看中了伦敦政治经济学院的课程。 这是一所顶尖的学校，能给我的履历表增添一段光彩的经历。 但当我跟妈妈谈起这件事时，她说她没法继续供我上学了。 我大概能理解她的心情，但并不仅仅是因为我学的是经济学。 15年来，为了能让我上学，她含辛茹苦。 这些年来，父亲大部分时间都不在家。就算在家，他也没钱。 他把钱都拿去赌狗、喝酒了。 所以我听了妈妈的话，向命运低下了头。
依我看，不管人们说什么，幸运的是世上还有很多好心人。 迈克就是其中的一个。 大学毕业时，我想如果我回家，妈妈就会觉得她有责任照顾我。 所以，我就收拾行李去伦敦找工作。 我想找金融和投资方面的职位，因为你知道这样我就可以用上我的专业知识。 可是那时候已经没有这样的工作了，但我又不愿意做复印文件、端茶倒水之类的乏味的办公室工作。
在伦敦，无论走到什么地方，你都能找到一个好酒吧。 有一天，我意识到这个城市没有人会雇我，于是我走进位于利德贺街的索尔兹伯里酒吧去喝酒，顺便吃点东西。 店主迈克正在店里，他一只手倒酒，一只手做三明治，同时还洗酒杯。他真的好像有三只手。 他好像也认识所有的客人，叫得出常客的名字。他跟他们打招呼，帮他们调好酒，并问一句：“今天还喝这个，是吧？” 我觉得他看起来蛮酷的，他在做着他最擅长的事情：为那些口渴的顾客服务，没人能比得上他。 所以我就走上前去问他要不要雇人。
好吧，长话短说，某个周五的午餐时间我开始在那个酒吧打工。 这份工作要求很高，
但我喜欢。 顾客好像觉得我很有趣，这也让我感觉好一些。 有位穿西服的中年常客总要半杯苦啤酒和一份火腿泡菜三明治，面包皮要削掉。他叫托尼。 我一看见他进来，尽量不等他开口就准备好他的午餐。 他也是一个好心人。
依我看，一个人没钱的时候花钱最容易。 我开始琢磨怎么花第一个月的薪水了。 我住的公寓房租很贵，我挣的钱刚够支付第一个月的大笔账单，但是我估计还能剩点钱好好犒劳一下自己。 我想，何不买张CD或买盆花草装点一下房间？
发工资的那天正好是我的生日，除了迈克和托尼，我在伦敦就没有别的朋友了。 如果你知道我那时还没有男朋友，你就会理解我为什么觉得对不起自己了。 我给自己定了些鲜花，让卖花的人附上一张卡片，上面写道：“给你我所有的爱。无名氏”。 我生日那天最精彩的瞬间将会是送花人送我花时大惑不解的眼神。
那周晚些时候，托尼像往常一样来了，在酒吧里坐下。 “你怎么了？今天怎么不见你笑啦？” 我跟他聊天……嗯，差不多什么都跟他说了：钱、硕士学位、生日、命运。 他很同情我。
托尼离开搁脚凳、走过去和另外几个人说话。 别忘了：索尔兹伯里酒吧位于市中心，所以这里所有的顾客都从事银行、保险或证券工作。 第二天，他拿着价值两万英镑的几张支票来到酒吧，对我说：“这是给你的创业贷款，你唯一的贷款担保就是我对你的信任，相信有一天你赚了钱会把钱还给我们。 如果你还不了钱，那就太糟了，不过对你来说，也算是做过金融生意了。 但是，我相信你还得了。”
我没说话，我怕我自己要哭了。 世上怎么会有这么好的人？
那些花怎么处理？ 我叫花店改送到妈妈那里去了，我生日那天鲜花正好送到。 她应该得到这些鲜花，不是吗？
依我看，回顾这些年的经历，我发现人一辈子只需要一两次的机缘就能成功。 就算吃苦受累也不要紧，那还是值得的。
在索尔兹伯里酒吧干了一年之后，我去了伦敦政治经济学院深造。拿到硕士学位之后，我在一家投资银行找到了一份工作。 我把那两万英镑投进了证券市场，在2008年金融崩盘之前卖掉了所有的股票。 我把托尼和其他投资者的钱还了，付给他们10%的年息，并成立了自己的公司。 公司的生意好得出乎意料，至今还红红火火。
托尼给我写了一封感谢信。 他出了车祸，现在不能走路了。 我还给他的钱正好可以用来改造房子。房子改造后他就可以坐着轮椅在家里自由活动了。 下面是他信里写的话： “我从事银行业35年来最好的投资就是给你的这笔贷款，你连本带利地偿还了贷款，我对你的信任和你的诚实都获得了百倍的回报。 依我看，在人身上投资能带来你所期望的最好的回报。”
依我看，他说得对。 你说呢？
They were alive and they spoke to me1
I sit in a little room, one wall of which is now completely lined with books. It is the first time I have had the leisure of working with anything like a collection of books. There are probably no more than 500 in all, but for the most part they represent my own choice. It is the first time, since I began my writing career, that I am surrounded with a goodly number of the books I have always longed to possess. The fact, however, that in the past I did most of my work without the aid of a library I look upon as an advantage rather than a disadvantage.
One of the first things I associate with the reading of books is the struggle I waged to
obtain them. Not to own them, mind you, but to lay hands on them. From the moment the passion took hold of me I encountered nothing but obstacles. The books I wanted, at the public library, were always out. And of course I never had the money to buy them. To get permission from the library in my neighborhood—I was 18 or 19 years of age—to borrow such a \work as The Confession of a Fool, by Strindberg, was just impossible. In those days the books which young people were prohibited from reading were decorated with stars—one, two or three—according to the degree of immorality attributed to them. I suspect this procedure still obtains. I hope so, for I know of nothing better calculated to whet one's appetite than this stupid sort of classification and prohibition.
3 What makes a book live? How often this question arises! The answer, in my opinion, is simple. A book lives through the passionate recommendation of one reader to another. Nothing can throttle this basic impulse in the human being. Despite the views of cynics and misanthropes, it is my belief that men will always strive to share their deepest experiences.
4 Books are one of the few things men cherish deeply. And the better the man the more easily will he part with his most cherished possessions. A book lying idle on a shelf is wasted ammunition. Like money, books must be kept in constant circulation. Lend and borrow to the maximum—of both books and money! But especially books, for books represent infinitely more than money. A book is not only a friend, it makes friends for you. When you have possessed a book with mind and spirit, you are enriched. But when you pass it on you are enriched threefold.
5 Here an irrepressible impulse seizes me to offer a piece of gratuitous advice. It is this: Read as little as possible, not as much as possible! Oh, do not doubt that I have envied those who have drowned in books. I, too, would secretly like to wade through all those books I have so long toyed with in my mind. But I know it is not important. I know now that I did not need to read even a tenth of what I have read. The most difficult thing in life is to learn to do only what is strictly advantageous to one's welfare, strictly vital. 6 There is an excellent way to test this precious bit of advice I have not given rashly. When you stumble upon a book you would like to read, or think you ought to read, leave it alone for a few days. But think about it as intensely as you can. Let the title and the author's name revolve in your mind. Think what you yourself might have written had the opportunity been yours. Ask yourself earnestly if it be absolutely necessary to add this work to your store of knowledge or your fund of enjoyment. Try to imagine what it would mean to forego this extra pleasure or enlightenment. Then, if you find you must read the book, observe with what extraordinary acumen you tackle it. Observe, too, that however stimulating it may be, very little of the book is really new to you. If you are honest with yourself you will discover that your stature has increased from the mere effort of resisting your impulses.
7 Indubitably the vast majority of books overlap one another. Few indeed are those which give the impression of originality, either in style or in content. Rare are the unique books—less than 50, perhaps, out of the whole storehouse of literature. In one of his recent autobiographical novels, Blaise Cendrars points out that Rémy de Gourmont, because of his knowledge and awareness of this repetitive quality in books, was able to
select and read all that is worthwhile in the entire realm of literature. Cendrars himself—who would suspect it?—is a prodigious reader. He reads most authors in their original tongue. Not only that , but when he likes an author he reads every last book the man has written, as well as his letters and all the books that have been written about him. In our day his case is almost unparalleled, I imagine. For, not only has he read widely and deeply, but he has himself written a great many books. All on the side, as it were. For, if he is anything, Cendrars, he is a man of action, an adventurer and explorer, a man who has known how to \
它们是活生生的，而且它们在跟我说话
我坐在一间小屋子里，屋子的一面墙边排满了书。 这是我头一次有闲功夫和一堆书这样的东西打交道。 所有的书加起来最多不超过500本，但大多数是我自己挑的。 自打我开始写作生涯以来，我第一次得到我一直渴望拥有的这么多书。 事实上，我过去的大多数工作都不依靠图书馆，我把这看成是优势，而不是劣势。
我想到的与读书相关的头一件事就是夺书大战。 请注意，不是拥有它们，而是要把它们搞到手。 从我对书着迷开始，我就面对着重重困难。 公共图书馆里我要借的书总是被借出去了，当然，我又没钱买书。 我那时只有十八九岁，要想得到社区图书馆的批准借阅类似斯特林堡写的《痴人的忏悔》这样“不道德”的书是不可能的。 在那个年代，年轻人禁读的书都根据其违背道德的程度被标记了星星——一颗星、两颗星、三颗星。 我猜想，这种做法至今依然存在。 我也希望如此，因为我知道，没有任何别的方法比这种愚蠢的分类和禁止更能吊起读者的胃口。
我经常思考一个问题，那就是是什么让一本书有了生命力？ 我觉得答案很简单：一本书之所以有生命力，是因为读者满怀激情地推荐它。 这是人的基本冲动，什么都阻挡不
了。 不管愤世嫉俗者和遁世者持何种观点，我相信人们总是会尽力分享自己感触最深的经验。
书是人类最为珍爱的几样东西之一。 人越好，就越愿意与他人分享自己的珍藏。 搁置在书架上、无人翻阅的书就像是废弃的弹药。 书和钱一样要流通起来，要最大限度地流通起来！ 尤其是书，因为书所代表的东西比钱要多得多。 书不仅是朋友，它还可以帮你结交朋友。 当你在精神上、心灵上拥有一本书的时候，你的人生就变得丰富多彩。 而当你把书转给别人的时候，你的人生就更加丰富。
说到这里，有一种抑制不住的冲动让我向大家提出一条无端的忠告。 那就是：读书尽量少而精，而不是越多越好！唉，不要怀疑我嫉妒那些在书堆里埋头读书的人。 我私下里也确实想尽力读完所有一直想读的书。 但是，我知道这并不重要，我现在知道我读过的书中只有不到十分之一是我需要读的。 人生中最难办到的事情莫过于学会只做对自己有益的事情，这是至关重要的。
我是经过慎重考虑才提出这条宝贵的忠告的，有一个高招可以检验它是否有效。 当你碰到一本你想读或觉得该读的书的时候，先把书搁下，放几天再说。 但你要多琢磨这本书，仔细琢磨书名和作者的名字。 想想如果让你来写这本书，你会写些什么。 认真地问问自己是否有必要把这本书纳入自己的知识库或娱乐储备。 尽力想象一下，放弃这份额外的乐趣或启迪对你将意味着什么？ 之后，如果你觉得你必须读这本书，那么观察一下你在“啃”这本书的时候是否表现出非凡的洞察力。 同时你也观察一下：即使这本书很诱人，它也许并没有给你带来什么新的东西。 只要坦诚对己，你就会发现：只要抑制住自己的冲动，你的境界就提高了。
不容置疑的是，大多数书都互相重复，在文体或内容上让人感到具有独创性的书实在是少之又少。 在整个文学库藏中，只有极少数作品——或许不到50本——是独具一格
的。 在最近出版的一部自传体小说中，布莱斯 ? 桑德拉尔指出，古尔蒙之所以能够选择并通读文学领域中一切值得读的书籍，就是因为他知识渊博，并且了解书的这种重复性。 桑德拉尔本人就是一个博览群书的人，没有人会怀疑这一点。 他阅读了大部分作家的原作。 不仅如此，一旦他喜欢上一个作家，他就会阅读这个作家写的每一本书，包括他的书信以及所有有关他的书籍。 我猜想，在当今世界上，几乎没有人能像他一样，不仅读得广、读得精，而且还著述颇丰。 可以说这一切都是在业余时间完成的。 因为桑德拉尔是一个十足的行动家，一个四处跋涉的冒险家和探险家，一个懂得如何“肆意浪费”时间的人。 从某种意义上说，他是文学界的凯撒大帝。
The Key to Wedded Bliss? Money Matters1
If you ask married people why their marriage works, they are probably not going to say it's because they found their financial soulmate.
2 But if they are lucky, they have. Marrying a person who shares your attitudes about money might just be the smartest financial decision you will ever make. In fact, when it comes to finances, your marriage is likely to be your most valuable asset—or your largest liability.
3 Marrying for love is a relatively recent phenomenon. For centuries, marriages were arranged affairs, aligning families for economic or political purposes or simply pooling the resources of those scraping by.
4 Today, while most of us marry for romantic reasons, marriage at its core is still a financial union. So much of what we want—or don't want—out of life boils down to dollars and cents, whether it's how hard we choose to work, how much we consume or how much
we save. For some people, it's working 80-hour weeks to finance a third home and country club membership; for others, it means cutting back on office hours to spend more time with the family.
5 \our lives,\University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, who researches the economics of marriage and divorce. \spend our money.\
6 Making those choices as a team is one of the most important ways to preserve your marital assets, and your union, experts say. But it's that much easier when you already share similar outlooks on money matters—or when you can, at the very least, find some middle ground.
7 The economies achieved by pairing up are fairly obvious. However, the costs of divorce can be financially devastating, especially when children are involved. And, not surprisingly, money manages to force a wide wedge between many couples.
8 \people think people break up over sex issues and children issues—and those are issues—but money is a huge factor in breaking up marriages,\said Susan Reach Winters, a divorce lawyer in Short Hills, N. J.
9 Not everyone is married to a financial twin, and that's not necessarily a problem. There are several ways that you and your significant other can become more compatible, and ultimately more prosperous, when it comes to money.
10 These guidelines are compiled from the successfully married and from experts on
psychology, divorce and finance:
11 TALK AND SHARE GOALS Before walking down the aisle, couples should have a talk about their financial health and goals. They should ask each other tough questions: Do we want children? When? Who will care for them? Will they go to public or private school? What kind of life do we want? When will we retire?
12 \my ideal plan for couples, they would have a meeting every week on their finances,\Company, with her husband, Lewis. \ 13 Set those goals together. Jerry Ballard, 58, a former insurance executive in Houston, said that he and his wife of 36 years, Susan, also 58, managed to avoid money clashes because they share a savings philosophy. \interrupt our savings,\salaries each year. As long as they did that, they were less likely to disagree about spending.
14 Eric Gundlach, 53, of Owings Mills, Md., who has been married for 29 years, said he and his wife, Ann-Michele, \their son to private school and having big experiences, like traveling, in lieu of purchasing things.
15 RUN A HOME LIKE A BUSINESS Make a budget and keep track of earnings, expenses and debts. And structure your business as a partnership; when it comes to making big financial decisions and setting goals, do it together. \the decisions together, they really have ownership of those decisions and any results of
those decisions,\said Mary Ann Sisco, national wealth advisor at JP Morgan's private wealth management division. \storm better.\advisors recommend rotating tasks. One person should handle investments for a certain period, while the other pays the bills; rotate and repeat.
16 BE SUPPORTIVE OF CAREERS Having a supportive partner helps you professionally, which should trickle down to your mutual bottom line. \person helps you succeed in your career through encouragement and support, the only kind of support that comes through a supportive, intimate relationship,\whose wife backed his decision to start a management consulting practice after 22 years as a human resources executive.
17 ENJOY, BUT WITHIN REASON Create a cash cushion, and live a lifestyle you can sustain. Many people who were working at hedge funds that went bust or financial firms like Bear Stearns are learning these lessons now. Ms. Sisco, of JP Morgan, said that because her younger clients haven't experienced a downturn, they assumed the money would keep pouring in.
18 She said she is working with one couple in their early 30s who have two young children. Right before the husband lost his job on Wall Street, the couple had ordered $35,000 drapes. They had to move to a smaller apartment in Manhattan and had to sell their vacation home.
19 USE A MEDIATOR Perhaps both of you have strong yet divergent opinions about how to invest. Or maybe you are a saver while your spouse prefers to hand over a big
piece of earnings to Bavarian Motor Works. An independent third party, whether a financial planner or a therapist, can help you find a middle ground.
20 Marc B. Schindler, a financial planner at Pivot Point Advisors in Bellaire, Tex., recently did this for a client who complained that his wife spent a thousand dollars a month on her wardrobe. Mr. Schindler then contacted the wife, who said her husband spent just as much on dinner with his buddies. So the husband asked Mr. Schindler to show how much they would save if they invested the $12,000 she spent each year. Mr. Schindler—careful to title the report \—ran an analysis and found that the couple would have $1.6 million after 28 years, assuming a 9 per cent rate of return. \
21 MAINTAIN SOME INDEPENDENCE Pooling resources is important, but so is maintaining a degree of financial independence. Carve out some money for both partners to spend on things that make them happy. And when paring back, it's essential that each person make sacrifices.
22 INVEST IN YOUR MARRIAGE Spend it—time and money—together. Go on dates. \that does is enliven the marital foundation,\said Gary S. Shunk, a Chicago therapist who specializes in wealth issues. \of the relationship.\
23 Think of it as dollar-cost averaging your marriage, where you make small investments over time. If you wait until retirement, it could be too late.
婚姻幸福的奥秘是什么？金钱才是关键
假如你询问已婚人士婚姻成功的奥秘在哪里，他们可能不会说那是因为找到了持相同金钱
观的知己。
但如果他们幸运的话，他们一定是找到了这样的知己。 和金钱观相同的人结婚很可能就是一辈子最聪明的财务决策。 事实上，就财务而言，婚姻可能是你最有价值的资产——或者最大的一笔债务。
近年来，人们为爱而结婚。 但在此前的几个世纪，婚姻都是包办的，家庭联姻或出于经济或政治目的，或仅仅是为了使家境不好的家庭集中两家的财力，以维持生计。 如今，尽管我们大多数人是因相爱而结婚，婚姻从根本上讲仍然是金钱上的结合。 不管是工作的努力程度，还是决定消费多少或储蓄多少，我们生活中想要得到的——或不想得到的——许多东西归根结底都跟钱有关。 对有些人来说，他们想要的就是一周工作80 小时来支付第三套房的房款和乡村俱乐部的会员费；而对另一些人来说，他们想缩短上班时间，花更多的时间陪伴家人。
“关于钱的许多争论是提示我们想如何生活的密码，而生活方式的许多选择则与如何花钱密切相关。”宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院的商业及公共政策助理教授贝齐 ? 史蒂文森如是说，他研究婚姻和离婚经济学。
专家们说，夫妻共同做出这些选择是维护婚姻资产及婚姻关系的最重要的方法之一。 当然，如果夫妻双方一开始就在钱的问题上看法相似，或者至少能够在钱的问题上相互妥协，那么事情就好办多了。
联姻的经济效益很可观，但离婚的代价却是毁灭性的，尤其是有了孩子之后。 毫不奇怪，金钱也造成了许多夫妻间的不和。
新泽西州秀特山市的离婚律师苏珊 ? 里奇 ? 温特斯说：“大多数人认为婚姻破裂是因为性或孩子的问题。这些的确是问题，但金钱也是导致婚姻破裂的一个重要因素。” 并非每个人都能找到金钱观一致的伴侣，当然找不到也不一定就成为问题。 在金钱
的问题上，有几种方法能让你和你的另一半更加融洽，更加富有。
下面这些指导原则是由婚姻成功人士以及心理学、离婚和理财专家共同制定的： 互相交流，确定共同目标 步入婚姻殿堂之前，男女双方要聊聊各自的财务状况及目标。 他们要互相问对方一些棘手的问题：我们要不要孩子？ 什么时候要孩子？ 谁来照看孩子？ 要送他们上公立学校还是私立学校？ 我们想过怎样的生活？ 我们什么时候退休？ 理财规划人卡伦 ? 阿尔特费斯特与她的丈夫刘易斯在纽约经营L. J.阿尔特费斯特财务管理公司，她说：“在我为夫妻设计的理想方案中，夫妻双方每周都要讨论家庭的财务问题。 这样，他们才能保持目标一致。”
一起制订目标。 杰里 ? 巴拉德今年58岁，曾在休斯敦担任过保险总监。他说他和结婚36年的同龄妻子苏珊之所以能够避免理财方面的矛盾是因为他们都坚守了存款信条。 他说：“我们的基本原则是绝不中断存款。”他补充说，他们每年把10％到20％的工资存起来。 只要持之以恒，他们在花销方面就不太会产生分歧。
马里兰州奥因斯米尔斯市的埃里克 ? 冈拉克今年53岁，已结婚29年。他说他和妻子安 ? 米歇尔“开诚布公地披露各自的期望。” 这些期望包括：送儿子去私立学校读书；有重大的人生体验，如外出旅游，而不是购物。
像经营企业一样经营家庭 制定收支预算，记录收入、支出及债务。 夫妻双方应该像合伙人一样管理家庭财务，做重大财务决定和制定目标时，双方要互相协商。 摩根大通集团私人财富管理部的国家理财顾问玛丽 ? 安 ? 西斯科说：“夫妇双方一起参与决策时，他们都是决策的制订者，要共同承担决策的结果。 即使结果是负面的，他们也能更好地共度难关。” 双方也应该分担责任。 虽然通常是夫妻中的一方负责理财，婚姻顾问还是建议他们轮流负责。 在一段时间内，一方可以负责投资，另一方则负责付账；过一段时间之后两人可以互换角色，如此重复更替。
支持对方的事业 一位支持你的伴侣可以帮助你在事业上取得成功，这也会一点一滴地增加你们的银行存款。 冈拉克先生说：“和合适的人结婚能鼓励你、支持你，有助于你在事业上取得成功。这种支持来自夫妻间互相扶持的亲密关系。”他的妻子在他做了22 年的人力资源经理之后支持他改行自己创业，做管理咨询。
在合理的范围内享受 要有一定的现金储备。生活中适度消费，并维持这种生活方式。 在已经破产的对冲基金或像贝尔斯登这样的金融公司工作过的许多人现在正在接受这方面的教训。 摩根大通集团的西斯科女士说：一些年轻客户由于从来没有经历过经济衰退，他们以为钱会源源不断地涌进来。
她说她正在给一对30出头、育有两个孩子的夫妇提供咨询服务。 就在丈夫失去华尔街的工作之前，他们刚刚订购了价值3.5万美元的窗帘。 之后，他们不得不搬到曼哈顿的一套较小的公寓里居住，连度假屋也卖掉了。
借助调停人化解矛盾 也许你们双方在投资问题上意见不一致，而且都很强硬。 或者说也许你希望多储蓄，而你的配偶宁可花一大笔钱去买德国宝马汽车的股票。 一个独立的第三方，无论是理财师还是心理治疗师，都可以帮你们找到双方都可以接受的方案。 得克萨斯州贝莱尔市轴心点咨询公司的理财规划师马克 ? B.辛德勒最近就为一位抱怨妻子每月花1,000美元买衣服的顾客解决了难题。 辛德勒先生联系到他的妻子，而她则抱怨丈夫每月花同样多的钱跟朋友吃饭。 那位丈夫要辛德勒先生计算一下，如果他们把她一年花在衣服上的1.2万美元用来投资，他们能攒多少钱。 辛德勒先生写了一份题为“衣服、吃饭，还是投资？”的报告，他在报告的题目上颇费了一番心思。经过分析，他得出了结论：假设回报率为9%的话，这对夫妻在28年后将得到160万美元的收入。 他说：“他们会尽量互相让步。”
保持一定的独立性 共享资源固然重要，但保持一定程度的财务独立性也很重要。 要
留出一些钱来满足夫妻双方各自的需求。 当需要缩减消费时，双方都要做出牺牲，这一点很重要。
为婚姻投资 夫妻双方要互相陪伴，一起消费。 他们应继续约会，“这样做能使婚姻的基础更加牢固，是对夫妻关系的情感投资。”一位专攻理财问题的芝加哥心理治疗师加里 ? S.尚克这样说。
你可以把这个看作是对婚姻的定投，你只需坚持长期进行小额投资就行了。 如果你等到退休才做这件事，也许就来不及了。
Marked: Women in the workplace1
The term \base meaning of a word by adding something—a little linguistic addition that has no meaning on its own. The unmarked form of a word carries the meaning that goes without saying, what you think of when you're not thinking anything special.
2 The unmarked tense of verbs in English is the present—for example, visit. To indicate past, you have to mark the verb for \you add a word: will visit. Nouns are presumed to be singular until marked for plural. To convey the idea of more than one, we typically add something, usually s or es. More than one visit becomes visits, and one dish becomes two dishes, thanks to the plural marking. 3 The unmarked forms of most English words also convey %unmarked case. We have endings, such as ess and ette, to mark words as female. Unfortunately, marking words for female also, by association, tends to mark them for frivolousness. Would you feel safe entrusting your life to a doctorette? This is why many
poets and actors who happen to be female object to the marked forms poetess and actress. Alfre Woodard, an Oscar nominee for Best Supporting Actress, says she identifies herself as an actor because \women who are actors worry about the characters we are playing\pick up extra meaning beyond what the marking is intended to denote. The extra meanings carried by gender markers reflect the traditional associations with the female gender: not quite serious, often sexual.
4 I was able to identify the styles and types of the women at the conference because each of us had to make decisions about hair, clothing, make-up and accessories, and each of those decisions carried meaning. Every style available to us was marked. Of course, the men in our group had to make decisions too, but their choices carried far less meaning. The men could have chosen styles that were marked, but they didn't have to, and in this group, none did. Unlike the women, they had the option of being unmarked. 5 I took account of the men's clothes. There could have been a cowboy shirt with string tie or a three-piece suit or a necklaced hippie in jeans. But there wasn't. All eight men wore brown or blue slacks and standard-style shirts of light colors.
6 No man wore sandals or boots; their shoes were dark, closed, comfortable, and flat. In short, unmarked.
7 Although no man wore make-up, you couldn't say the men didn't wear make-up in the sense that you could say a woman didn't wear make-up. For men, no make-up is unmarked.
8 I asked myself what style we women could have adopted that would have been
unmarked, like the men's. The answer was: none. There is no unmarked woman. 9 There is no woman's hairstyle that could be called \about her. The range of women's hairstyles is staggering, but if a woman's hair has no particular style, this in itself is taken as a statement that she doesn't care how she looks—an eloquent message that can disqualify a woman for many positions.
10 Women have to choose between shoes that are comfortable and shoes that are deemed attractive. When our group had to make an unexpected trek, the woman who wore flat laced shoes arrived first. The last to arrive was the woman with spike heels, her shoes in her hand and a handful of men around her.
11 If a woman's clothes are tight or revealing (in other words, sexy), it sends a message—an intended one of wanting to be attractive but also a possibly unintended one of availability. But if her clothes are not sexy, that too sends a message, lent meaning by the knowledge that they could have been. In her book Women Lawyers, Mona Harrington quotes a woman who, despite being a partner in her firm, found herself slipping into this fault line when she got an unexpected call to go to court right away. As she headed out the door, a young (male) associate said to her, \She was caught completely off guard. \blouse wasn't buttoned unusually low,\the woman told Harrington. \button was necessary for court.\was being undermined by one button.\
12 A woman wearing bright colors calls attention to herself, but if she avoids bright colors, she has (as my choice of verb in this sentence suggests) avoided something.
Heavy make-up calls attention to the wearer as someone who wants to be attractive. Light make-up tries to be attractive without being alluring. There are thousands of products from which make-up must be chosen and myriad ways of applying them. Yet no make-up at all is anything but unmarked. Some men even see it as a hostile refusal to please them. Women who ordinarily do not wear make-up can be surprised by the transforming effect of putting it on. In a book titled Face Value, my colleague Robin Lakoff noted the increased attention she got from men when she went forth from a television station still professionally made-up.
13 Women can't even fill out a form without telling stories about themselves. Most application forms now give four choices for titles. Men have one to choose—\—so their choice carries no meaning other than to say they are male. But women must choose among three, each of them marked. A woman who checks the box for \communicates not only whether she has been married but also that she has conservative tastes in forms of address, and probably other conservative values as well. Checking \asked), but it also marks the woman who checks it on her form as either liberated or rebellious, depending on the attitudes and assumptions of the one making the judgment. 14 I sometimes try to duck these variously marked choices by giving my title as \—and thereby risk marking myself as either uppity (hence sarcastic responses like \for you!\
15 All married women's surnames are marked. If a woman takes her husband's name,
she announces to the world that she is married and also that she is traditional in her values, according to some observers. To others it will indicate that she is less herself, more identified by her husband's identity. If she does not take her husband's name, this too is marked, seen as worthy of comment: She has done something; she has \own name\—and usually does—he is never said to have \given it up. For him, but not for her, using his own name is unmarked.
16 A married woman who wants to have her cake and eat it too may use her surname plus his. But this too announces that she is or has been married and often results in a tongue-tying string that makes life miserable for anyone who needs to alphabetize it. In a list (Harvey O'Donovan, Jonathon Feldman, Stephanie Woodbury McGillicutty), the woman's multiple name stands out. It is marked.
带标记的职业女性
“有标记的”这个术语是语言学理论的一个主要概念，它是指通过添加一个成分来改变词的基本含义的一种方式。 而这种语言学上小小的添加成分本身并没有独立的语义。 无标记的词，其语义是不言自明的，就是你没有任何特殊所指时的语义。
英语中无标记的动词时态是现在时，如visit。 要表达过去的动作和行为，你必须在动词后面加上ed，这样就转化成visit这个词的过去式visited；要表达将来的动作和行为，你要加一个词：will visit。 名词的原形是单数的，有标记的名词则变成复数名词。 为了表达“多于一个”的概念，我们通常要加s或es，visit（一次访问）的复数形式变成了visits（多次访问），dish（一道菜）加上复数标记就变成了dishes（多道菜）。
大多数英语词的无标记形式也可以表达“男性”的含义，男性代表无标记的情形。 英
语有些后缀，如ess和ette，是用来标示女性的。 令人遗憾的是，被标示成女性的词往往会让人联想到“无足轻重”的含义。 你如果把自己的生命交到一位doctorette（女见习医生）的手上会有安全感吗？ 这就是为什么许多碰巧是女性的诗人和演员反对被称为poetess（女诗人） 和 actress（女演员）的原因。 一位被提名奥斯卡最佳女配角奖的演员阿尔弗雷 ? 沃达德认为自己是一位actor（演员），因为“actress（女演员）关注自己的睫毛和身上的赘肉，而作为actors的女人则只关注自己所扮演的角色”。 任何标记的形式都会衍生出该标记含义以外的额外含义。 性别标记所表达的额外含义反映了对女性的传统联想：即不太严肃，而且通常与性有关。
我能够分辨出参加会议的女性的着装风格和类型，因为我们中的每个人都要选择发型、衣服、化妆品和饰品，而每一个选择都有含义，每一种可供我们选择的着装风格都是有标记的。 当然，参加会议的男人也要做出此类的选择，但他们的选择所附带的含义要少得多。 男人可以选择标记性的着装，但是他们还有别的选择。事实上，我们这群人中没有一个男人选择标记性的着装。 和女人不同，男人有选择无标记着装的自由。
我注意到与会的男人的着装。 他们可以穿带蝶形领结的牛仔衬衫、三件套的西装或带项链、穿牛仔裤的嬉皮士装，但与座的8位男士都选择了棕色或蓝色的休闲裤及标准的浅色衬衫。
没有一个男人穿拖鞋或皮靴，他们的皮鞋都是黑色、满帮、舒适、平跟的。 总之，都是非标记性的。
虽然男人不化妆，但男人不化妆的含义和女人不化妆的含义却大不相同。 对男人而言，不化妆是非标记性的。
我曾经问过自己，我们女人是否能像男人那样选择无标记的着装风格呢？ 回答是：不可能。 不存在无标记的女人。
女人的发型没有一种能被称为是“标准”的，没有哪一种发型不透露一个女人的心思。 女人的发型有相当多的式样，但是如果一个女人的头发没什么特别的式样，这本身就说明她不在乎自己的形象——这就足以使她失去许多职务的就任机会。
女人选择鞋子时必须在舒适和吸引人这两种类型中做出抉择。 有一次，我们这群人出乎意料地走了一段长路，穿平跟系带鞋的女人最先到达了目的地，最后到的是一位穿细高跟鞋的女人，她手里提着鞋，身边簇拥着好几个男人。
如果一个女人穿着紧身衣服或者坦胸露背（也就是说很“性感”），那么她有意传达的信息就是她想让自己看起来更吸引人，但与此同时，她也在无意间表露了自己是单身、想找男友的意思。 如果她的衣服不性感，那也传达了另一种信息：即让人知道她本来可以穿得更性感的。 莫娜 ? 哈林顿在《女律师》一书中提到一位在律师事务所工作的女士。有一次，她突然接到电话，要求她马上出庭。虽然她是该事务所的合伙人，但她发现自己无意间犯了一个错误。 她正准备出门时，一位年轻的（男）同事对她说：“你是不是该扣上衬衣的纽扣啊？” 这使她措手不及。 她告诉哈林顿：“我衬衣的领口并不低啊，而且他也不是一个特别守旧的人，但他觉得上法庭必须再扣上一个纽扣。” 问题是：“我开始琢磨是不是少扣一个纽扣就会让我失去权威。”
着装艳丽的女人引人注意，但如果她避免穿鲜艳的衣服，她就有意（像我在这个句子中选用的动词一样）回避了某些东西。 如果有人想让自己更有魅力，她就会浓妆艳抹以吸引别人的眼球。 而淡妆使人既俏丽又不妖媚。 化妆品成千上万，我们必须加以取舍，并且化妆手法也不胜枚举。 但不施粉黛绝不意味着不带标记，甚至有些男人会把这当成敌意，即不肯取悦他们。 平时不施粉黛的女士会对自己化妆后容貌的改变感到吃惊。 在《面貌的价值》一书中，我的同事罗宾 ? 洛克夫说，当她没卸妆从电视台出来时，她吸引了更多男人的注意。
女人一填表就会暴露自己的个人经历。 现在大多数的申请表会给出四种称谓选择。 男人只有一种选择，即“先生”（Mr.），这除了表明他们是男性之外没有其他任何含义。 女人则必须从三种称谓中选一个，而任何一种都是标记性的。 如果一位女士勾选了“太太”（Mrs.）或者“小姐”（Miss）的称谓，那么她不仅暴露了自己的婚姻状况，而且还表明她在称谓方面很保守，或许在其他价值观念方面也很保守。 如果她选择“女士”（Ms.）这一称谓，那么说明她拒绝透露自己的婚姻状况（而男士选“先生”这个称谓时则没有故意隐瞒任何事情，因为本来就没有要求他透露婚姻信息）。另外，在表格中勾选“女士”这一称谓的人会被标记为思想解放的人或叛逆者，这就要看评判她的人持什么样的态度和看法了。
我有时会选择“博士”头衔，以避开这几种带标记的称谓选项。但这么做又会给自己带来风险，标明自己要么骄傲自大（于是乎招来讥讽的反应，比如“对不起，我不知道你是博士！”），要么是一个成功欲过强的人（那么对方的反应就是祝贺式的惊奇，比如“你真行！”）。 所有已婚妇女的姓都是带标记的。 如果一个女人采用了丈夫的姓，那么她就向全世界宣布她已经结婚了，而且，对某些旁观者来说她的价值观很传统。 对另一些人来说，这表明她自我意识较弱，更愿意以丈夫的身份来标明自己的身份。 如果她不采用丈夫的姓，这也是标记性的，会被认为是一件值得议论的事：她做了件不同寻常的事情；她“保留了自己的姓”。 虽然男人可以做完全相同的事——而且他们通常都是这样做——但他永远都不会被认为“保留了自己的姓”，因为一开始就没有人觉得他会放弃自己的姓。 对男人而言——而不是对女人——使用自己的姓是非标记性的。
一个希望两全其美的已婚女士可能会用自己的姓加上丈夫的姓，但这也同样表明她已经结婚，而且还常常会导致一串长得叫人说不清的名字，而当必须按字母顺序排列姓名时，也会让人倍感无奈。 在一串名字中（如Harvey O'Donovan, Jonathon Feldman, Stephanie Woodbury McGillicutty），女性的复合姓会很显眼，因为复合姓是标记性的。
The historian and his facts1
What is a historical fact? This is a crucial question into which we must look a little more closely. According to the common-sense view, there are certain basic facts which are the same for all historians and which form, so to speak, the backbone of history—the fact, for example, that the Battle of Hastings was fought in 1066. But this view calls for two observations. In the first place, it is not with facts like these that the historian is primarily concerned. It is no doubt important to know that the great battle was fought in 1066 and not in 1065 or 1067, and that it was fought at Hastings and not at Eastbourne or Brighton. The historian must not get these things wrong. But when points of this kind are raised, I am reminded of Housman's remark that \duty, not a virtue\To praise a historian for his accuracy is like praising an architect for using well-seasoned timber or properly mixed concrete in his building. It is a necessary condition of his work, but not his essential function. It is precisely for matters of this kind that the historian is entitled to rely on what have been called the \sciences\of history—archaeology, epigraphy, numismatics, chronology, and so forth. The historian is not required to have the special skills which enable the expert to determine the origin and period of a fragment of pottery or marble, to decipher an obscure inscription, or to make the elaborate astronomical calculations necessary to establish a precise date. These so-called basic facts which are the same for all historians commonly belong to the category of the raw materials of the historian rather than of history itself. The second observation is that the necessity to
establish these basic facts rests not on any quality in the facts themselves, but on an a priori decision of the historian. In spite of C. P. Scott's motto, every journalist knows today that the most effective way to influence opinion is by the selection and arrangement of the appropriate facts. It used to be said that facts speak for themselves. This is, of course, untrue. The facts speak only when the historian calls on them: It is he who decides to which facts to give the floor, and in what order or context. It was, I think, one of Pirandello's characters who said that a fact is like a sack—it won't stand up till you've put something in it. The only reason why we are interested to know that the battle was fought at Hastings in 1066 is that historians regard it as a major historical event. It is the historian who has decided for his own reasons that Caesar's crossing of that petty stream, the Rubicon, is a fact of history, whereas the crossing of the Rubicon by millions of other people before or since interests nobody at all. The fact that you arrived in this building half an hour ago on foot, or on a bicycle, or in a car, is just as much a fact about the past as the fact that Caesar crossed the Rubicon. But it will probably be ignored by historians. Professor Talcott Parsons once called science \selective system of cognitive orientations to reality\other things, that. The historian is necessarily selective. The belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which it is very hard to eradicate.
2 Let us take a look at the process by which a mere fact about the past is transformed into a fact of history. At Stalybridge Wakes in 1850, a vendor of gingerbread, as the result of some petty dispute, was deliberately kicked to death by an angry mob. Is
this a fact of history? A year ago I should unhesitatingly have said \an eyewitness in some little-known memoirs; but I had never seen it judged worthy of mention by any historian. A year ago Dr. Kitson Clark cited it in his Ford lectures in Oxford. Does this make it into a historical fact? Not, I think, yet. Its present status, I suggest, is that it has been proposed for membership of the select club of historical facts. It now awaits a seconder and sponsors. It may be that in the course of the next few years we shall see this fact appearing first in footnotes, then in the text, of articles and books about 19th-century England, and that in 20 or 30 years' time it may be a well-established historical fact. Alternatively, nobody may take it up, in which case it will relapse into the limbo of unhistorical facts about the past from which Dr. Kitson Clark has gallantly attempted to rescue it. What will decide which of these two things will happen? It will depend, I think, on whether the thesis or interpretation in support of which Dr. Kitson Clark cited this incident is accepted by other historians as valid and significant. Its status as a historical fact will turn on a question of interpretation. This element of interpretation enters into every fact of history. 、
历史学家与史实
什么是史实？ 我们必须进一步深入地审视这个关键的问题。 按照一般的常识判断，确定的基本事实对所有历史学家都是一样的，可以说，这些事实构成了历史的基石——比如黑斯廷斯战役发生在1066年。 但是有必要针对这一观点提出两点评论意见。 首先，历史学家首先关注的并不是这样的事实。 当然，了解这样一个事实毫无疑问是很重要的，即那场伟大的战役发生在1066年，而不是1065年或1067年，发生在黑斯廷斯而不是在伊斯特本或是布赖顿。 历史学家在这样的事实上不能出错。 但是当人们提出这样的看法时，我想起
了豪斯曼说过的话“准确是本分，而并非美德”。 赞扬一位历史学家所采用的史料准确，就像称赞建筑师盖房子时用的木材干燥、混凝土调配得当一样。 准确是他工作的必要条件，但不是他的基本职能。 正是在这类事情上，历史学家可以依靠像考古学、铭文学、钱币学、年代学等等这些被称为历史“辅助科学”的学科。 历史学家不需要掌握特殊的技能去确定陶瓷或大理石残片的起源与断代、去解读一段意义隐晦的铭文的含义、或是为确定一个准确的日期而进行繁复的天文计算。 这些所谓的基本事实对所有的历史学家来说都是一样的，它们是历史学家可用的原始素材，而非历史本身。 我要说的第二点是，是否需要确定这些基本的事实并不取决于这些事实本身，而是取决于历史学家事先做出的判断。 尽管C. P. 斯科特的那句箴言深入人心（译者注：斯科特的箴言Comment is free, but facts are sacred. “事实不可歪曲，评述大可自由”），但是现在每一名新闻记者都知道要影响大众舆论，最有效的方式就是对特定的事实进行选择和剪接。 人们以前常说事实不言自明。 这种说法显然是错误的，历史事实只是在历史学家用到时才会不言自明。哪些事实可以现身说法，以及这些事实以什么样的顺序或是在什么样的情景中出现，都是由历史学家来决定的。 我记得皮兰德娄笔下的一个人物曾经说过：事实就像一个麻袋——不塞点东西进去就立不起来。 我们之所以对1066年发生在黑斯廷斯的战役感兴趣，其唯一的原因就是历史学家把这一战役看作是一个重大的历史事件。 历史学家依照自己的推断，认为凯撒穿越那条小河——卢比孔河——是一个史实，但没有人对在他之前或是之后几百万其他人穿过这条河的举动感兴趣。 你半个小时之前或徒步、或骑车或开车来到这座大楼，这件事和当年凯撒渡过卢比孔河一样都是一个关于过去的客观事实。 但是历史学家不太可能会去注意你到达这座大楼这件事。 塔尔科特 ? 帕森斯教授曾经把科学称为“对现实认知取向的一种选择性体系”。 这一点或许可以用更简单的话来表述。 但是历史的一个重要特点就是它的选择性。 历史学家必然要选择史实。 有人坚信史实是确实存在的，是客观的，不为历史家的阐释而左右。这种见解非常
荒谬，但却难以根除。
现在让我们来看一下一个关于过去的事实是怎样变成史实的。 1850年，在斯泰利布里奇的守护神节那天，一个卖姜饼的小贩因为一点小事儿与人发生口角，最后被一群愤怒的暴民故意活活踢死。 这是一个史实吗？要是在一年前，我肯定会毫不犹豫地说“不是”。 这件事被一个目击者记载在了一本鲜为人知的回忆录中，但是我从来没有听到哪位历史学家提及此事。 但是一年前，基特森 ? 克拉克博士在牛津大学的福特系列讲座上提到了这件事。 这样它就变成史实了吗？ 我想还没有。 我认为，在这个对入会标准有严格规定的史实俱乐部里，这个事件现在的地位相当于候选会员。 它现在正在等待附议者和担保人。 也许在接下来的几年中，我们会看到这个事实首先出现在关于19世纪英国的文章和书籍的脚注当中，然后可能会出现在正文中。再过二三十年，它也许就是一个确定无疑的史实了。 另外还有一种可能，那就是再也没人提起这件事。这样它就会重新被湮没在关于过去的那些非历史的事实堆中而被人遗忘，而基特森 ? 克拉克博士拯救它的英勇努力也就付之东流了。 这两种可能性哪一种会发生呢？又取决于什么呢？ 我想这取决于其他历史学家是否认为基特森 ? 克拉克博士引用这个事件来证明的论点或者阐释言之有据，并且具有重大意义。 这个事件作为史实的地位取决于历史学家的阐释。 而任何一个史实都包含阐释的成分。