巴爾扎克與“惡魔精神”

By Harold Bloom

Baudelaire2 observed， famously， that “every one of Balzacs characters， even the janitors， has some sort of genius.” Balzac， rather like Victor Hugo， outrageously was possessed by a genius， a daemonic will that drove him through the ninety novels and novellas that constitute The Human Comedy， deliberate rival to Dantes Divine Comedy.3 Reading the admirable Graham Robbs4 Balzac： A Biography， one comes away with the startled impression that Balzac cannot always be distinguished from his daemon. Since genius is my sole subject in this book，5 I will feel free to mix observations on Balzac himself with my account of his extraordinary character-of-characters， the master criminal Vautrin， also known as Jacques Collin and as the Abbé Carlos Herrera. Vautrin is crucial in Père Goriot （1834—35）， Lost Illusions （1937—43）， dominant in A Harlot High and Low （1838—47）， and was the herovillain of the playVautrin （1840）， banned after one performance by the Ministry of the Interior， to no great aesthetic loss.

Henry James， a superb literary critic except when he felt himself menaced （as by Hawthorne， Dickens， George Eliot）， was at his best on Balzac， who for James possessed “a kind of inscrutable perfection.”6 This appeared to James the prime lesson that Balzac taught other novelists：

The lesson of Balzac， under this comparison， is extremely various， and I should prepare myself much too large a task were I to attempt a list of the separate truths he brings home7. I have to choose among them， and I choose the most important； the three or four that more or less include the others. In reading him over， in opening him almost anywhere today， what immediately strikes us is the part assigned by him， in any picture， to the conditions of the creatures with whom he is concerned. Contrasted with him other prose painters of life scarce seem to see the conditions at all. He clearly held pretended portrayal as nothing， as less than nothing， as a most vain thing， unless it should be， in spirit and intention， the art of complete representation.“Complete” is of course a great word， and there is no art at all， we are often reminded， that is not on too many sides an abject8 compromise. The element of compromise is always there； it is of the essence； we live with it， and it may serve to keep us humble. The formula of the whole matter is sufficiently expressed perhaps in a reply I found myself once making to an inspired but discouraged friend， a fellow-craftsman who had declared in his despair that there was no use trying， that it was a form， the novel， absolutely too difficult. “Too difficult indeed； yet there is one way to master it-which is to pretend consistently that it isnt.” We are all of us， all the while， pretending-as consistently as we can-that it isnt， and Balzacs great glory is that he pretended hardest. He never had to pretend so hard as when he addressed himself to that evocation of the medium， that distillation of the natural and social air， of which I speak， the things that most require on the part of the painter preliminary possession-so definitely require it that， terrified at the requisition when conscious of it， many a painter prefers to beg the whole question.9 He was thus， this ingenious person， to invent some other way of making his characters interesting-some other way， that is， than the arduous way， demanding so much consideration， of presenting them to us. They are interesting， in fact， as subjects of fate， the figures round whom a situation closes， in proportion as， sharing their existence， we feel where fate comes in and just how it gets at them. In the void they are not interesting-and Balzac， like Nature herself， abhorred a vacuum. Their situation takes hold of us because it is theirs， not because it is somebodys， any ones， that of creatures unidentified. Therefore it is not superfluous that their identity shall first be established for us， and their adventures， in that measure， have a relation to it， and therewith an appreciability.10 There is no such thing in the world as an adventure pure and simple； there is only mine and yours， and his and hers-it being the greatest adventure of all， I verily11 think， just to be you or I， just to be he or she. To Balzacs imagination that was indeed in itself an immense adventure-and nothing appealed to him more than to show how we all are， and how we are placed and built-in for being so. What befalls us is but another name for the way our circumstances press upon us-so that an account of what befalls us is an account of our circumstances.

The lesson of Balzac， under this comparison， is extremely various， and I should prepare myself much too large a task were I to attempt a list of the separate truths he brings home7. I have to choose among them， and I choose the most important； the three or four that more or less include the others. In reading him over， in opening him almost anywhere today， what immediately strikes us is the part assigned by him， in any picture， to the conditions of the creatures with whom he is concerned. Contrasted with him other prose painters of life scarce seem to see the conditions at all. He clearly held pretended portrayal as nothing， as less than nothing， as a most vain thing， unless it should be， in spirit and intention， the art of complete representation.“Complete” is of course a great word， and there is no art at all， we are often reminded， that is not on too many sides an abject8 compromise. The element of compromise is always there； it is of the essence； we live with it， and it may serve to keep us humble. The formula of the whole matter is sufficiently expressed perhaps in a reply I found myself once making to an inspired but discouraged friend， a fellow-craftsman who had declared in his despair that there was no use trying， that it was a form， the novel， absolutely too difficult. “Too difficult indeed； yet there is one way to master it-which is to pretend consistently that it isnt.” We are all of us， all the while， pretending-as consistently as we can-that it isnt， and Balzacs great glory is that he pretended hardest. He never had to pretend so hard as when he addressed himself to that evocation of the medium， that distillation of the natural and social air， of which I speak， the things that most require on the part of the painter preliminary possession-so definitely require it that， terrified at the requisition when conscious of it， many a painter prefers to beg the whole question.9 He was thus， this ingenious person， to invent some other way of making his characters interesting-some other way， that is， than the arduous way， demanding so much consideration， of presenting them to us. They are interesting， in fact， as subjects of fate， the figures round whom a situation closes， in proportion as， sharing their existence， we feel where fate comes in and just how it gets at them. In the void they are not interesting-and Balzac， like Nature

An exquisite account of Balzacs other characters， does this work for the master criminal Vautrin， Balzacs alter ego，12 perhaps his daemon？ Rastignac， Lucien de Rubempré， Cousin Pons， Old Goriot， Eugénie Grandet， Baron Hulot，13 and all the other grand protagonists are indebted to Balzac for his showing how they are， and how they are placed. Vautrin is larger， as Balzac himself is， Graham Robb writes， “Balzac is both the embodiment of his age and its most revealing exception.” I transpose14 that to： Vautrin is both the embodiment of The Human Comedy and its most revealing exception. The outcast Vautrin， Satan of the criminal life of Paris， ends as head of the S？reté15. Balzac， the hack writer from Tours， received the final tribute at his funeral from the inevitable Victor Hugo， his only literary rival in sublime madness and unbelievable fecundity.16

Like Dickens， Balzac worked himself to death， though not as a public performer of his own works. Always apocalyptically17 in debt， he wrote in a frenzy， sometimes sleeping just two hours a night while drowning himself in coffee. Subject to hallucinations both auditory and visual， Balzac received in himself the ancient association of genius with madness. Though as grand a monomaniac as Victor Hugo， and as much a force of nature and an occult energy， Balzac was wholly a novelist， and therefore seems saner than Hugo， who wrote enormous novels， yet who was the poet proper，18 the poet of his language， however unfashionable in our tasteless era.

When we first encounter Vautrin in Père Goriot， we are not precisely aware of what titanism he conceals， but we are told this tough forty-year-old has “appalling depths within.”19 Vautrins literary lineage is more High Romantic than gothic：he is Byronic hero-villain， but a survivor.20 No one in Byron ever reaches forty， and one of Vautrins nicknames in the criminal cosmos is “Death-Dodger21.” Vautrin is not a quester22， and he is at war with a society he despises， but then he would be subversive of any nation， anywhere， anytime. He is pragmatically an anarchist， but this is pure paradox， since he has totally organized and imperiously rules over the entire criminal world.23 Since he is Parisian， not Sicilian24， his Satanic pride is individual rather than familial. His drive is homoerotic， but it remains ambiguous whether his desire for handsome young disciples is primarily sexual or a displaced paternalism，25 as Balzacs perhaps was. Vautrin is free of sexual jealousy， so long as his young men fell in love and form liaisons only with women.

Vautrins criminal genius is dramaturgical26： he wants to mold Balzacs characters， Rastignac and the poet Lucien， into something grander， and he is a superb scene-setter. Trapped in a police ambush， in part 3 of Père Goriot， he dodges death by an extraordinary art of command over his own fury：

“In the Name of the law， and the name of the king，”announced one of the officers， though there was such a loud murmur of astonishment that no one could hear him.

But silence quickly descended once again， as the lodgers moved aside， making room for three of the men， who came forward， their hands in their pockets， and loaded pistols in their hands. Two uniformed policemen stepped into the doorway theyd left and two others appeared in the other doorway， near the stairs. Soldersfootsteps， and the readying of their rifles， echoes from the pavement outside， in front of the house. Death-Dodger had no hope of escape； everyone stared at him irresistibly drawn. Vidocq went directly to where he stood， and swiftly punched Collin in the head with such force that his wig flew off， revealing the stark horror of his skull. Brick-red， short-clipped hair gave him a look at once sly and powerful， and both head and face， blending perfectly， now， with his brutish chest， glowed with the fierce， burning light of a hellish mind. It was suddenly obvious to them all just who Vautrin was， what hed done， what hed been doing， what he would go on to do； they suddenly understood at a glance his implacable ideas， his religion of self-indulgence， exactly the sort of royal sensibility which tinted all his thoughts with cynicism， as well as all his actions， and supported both by the strength of an organization prepared for anything. The blood rose into his face， his eyes gleamed like some savage cats. He seemed to explode into a gesture of such wild energy， and he roared with such ferocity that， one and all， the lodgers cried out in terror. His fierce， feral movement， and the general clamor hed created， made the policemen draw their weapons. But seeing the gleam of cocked pistols， Collin immediately understood his peril， and instantly proved himself possessor of the highest of all human powers. It was a terrible， majestic spectacle！ His face could only be compared to some steaming apparatus27， full of billowing smoke capable of moving mountains， but dissolved in the twinkling of an eye by a single drop of cold water. The drop that doused28 his rage flickered as rapidly as a flash of light. Then he slowly smiled， and turned to look down at his wig. “This isnt one of your polite days， it is， old boy？” he said to Vidocq. And then he held out his hands to the policemen， beckoning them with a movement of his head.“Gentlemen， officers， Im ready for your handcuffs or your chains， as you please. I ask those present to take due note of the fact that I offer no resistance.

（translated by Burton Raffel）

“The highest of all human powers” here is the art of the great dramatist， Shakespeare or Molière， in representing sudden change in great characters， an Iago or a Tartuffe，29 or a Vautrin. Balzacs apotheosis in this art comes with “The Last Incarnation of Vautrin，”30 the final section of A Harlot High and Low. Vautrin， bereft of Lucien through the poets suicide， is transformed， phase after phase， from the Satan of the underworld to the God of the Parisian police establishment. Balzac dazzles the reader throughout the shock of this transformation， but he leaves me very uncertain what has happened to Vautrins Rousseau31 -inspired lifelong battle against society. Vautrin goes over to Balzacs side， thus becoming a legitimist， a royalist， and a prime preserver of the oligarchy.32 Though Vautrin has been all but33 traumatized by Luciens suicide， his conversation to the established order does not seem a reaction to this loss. Perhaps the explanation is the Balzacian energetic of power. Vautrin is now older， and even his diabolic energy may be on the verge of waning， while presumably the power of enforcement requires less strain than the power of subversion. Or again， perhaps the act of usurpation is the supreme accolade for Vautrin， Balzacs prime surrogate.34

One of Balzacs great inventions is the intricate dance of recruitment that is performed by Granville， the dignified and honorable attorney-general， and the endlessly metamorphic35 Vautrin， who in a sense is seduced by Granvilles authentic moral grandeur. The greatness of Vautrin recognizes， and is raised to a state of exaltation by， the rival greatness of Granville. As a reader， I sorrow at losing Vautrin to the state； it is rather as though Satan repented fully in Paradise Lost36， and rejoined the angelic orders. But Balzac was guiding his genius to safe harbor； he lived only three years beyond Vautrins metamorphosis from Death-Dodger to societys ultimate weapon against disorder. He needed Vautrin to be an allegory of his own posthumous destiny： to become a guardian of the human comedy he had so exuberantly imagined.37

波德萊爾有一句著名的評論：“巴爾扎克筆下的每一個人物，哪怕是門房，都具備某種天才?！卑蜖栐撕芟窬S克多·雨果，不可思議地受到天賦異稟的支配，那是一種惡魔附體般的意志力，驅(qū)使他接連創(chuàng)作出總稱為《人間喜劇》的90部中、長篇小說，刻意與但丁的《神曲》（《神圣喜劇》）媲美。格雷厄姆·羅布那本精彩的《巴爾扎克傳》給讀者留下了駭人的印象：巴爾扎克常常與他的“惡魔精神”渾融一體，無分彼此。鑒于“天才”是拙著唯一的主題，我將在評論巴爾扎克本人的同時，自由穿插對于伏脫冷的分析。這位又名雅克·柯蘭或者卡洛斯·埃雷拉神甫的犯罪大師是巴爾扎克人物塑造的神來之筆。伏脫冷是《高老頭》（1834—35）和《幻滅》（1837—43）的關(guān)鍵人物，《交際花盛衰記》（1838—47）的頭號主角，還是戲劇《伏脫冷》（1840）里的“英雄惡棍”（這個戲才上演了一次就被內(nèi)政部給禁掉了，不過這在藝術(shù)上也算不得多大的損失）。

亨利·詹姆斯是一流的文學批評家，除非是感到自己的文學成就受到了威脅（比如來自霍桑、狄更斯和喬治·艾略特的威脅），他批評其他作家都很精當，論巴爾扎克則至為精彩。詹姆斯認為，巴爾扎克擁有“一種神秘莫測的完美”。對于詹姆斯來說，這是巴爾扎克教給其他小說家的最重要的創(chuàng)作經(jīng)驗：

相形之下，巴爾扎克的創(chuàng)作經(jīng)驗包羅萬象，他所昭示的真諦舉不勝舉。筆者只能擇其要者而論，好在我選擇的三點或四點也多多少少涵蓋了其他方面。在今天，細讀巴爾扎克，隨便翻開他作品里的幾乎每一頁，一下子就打動我們的，是他展現(xiàn)的每一幅畫卷都特別講究將他所關(guān)注的人物放置在特定環(huán)境當中。和他相比，其他描繪生活場景的小說家對特定環(huán)境的觀察還很不到家。巴爾扎克旗幟鮮明地提出，虛有其表的描繪，倘若究其旨趣不是為了創(chuàng)造出“完滿表現(xiàn)的藝術(shù)”，就只能是空言、敗筆和矯飾?！巴隄M”當然是一種崇高的境界。經(jīng)常有人提醒我們，沒有哪件藝術(shù)品不是在萬不得已的情況下多方妥協(xié)的產(chǎn)物。妥協(xié)的成分從來都存在；這就是創(chuàng)作的本質(zhì)；我們無可奈何地忍受這個，由此常懷謙卑之心。關(guān)于此規(guī)律，我曾經(jīng)在給一位朋友的回信中予以充分表述。他也是作家，富于靈感卻倍感挫折，曾絕望地聲稱：再怎么嘗試也不管用，長篇小說這種體裁確實是太難了?！罢f實在的，太難了；要掌握它只有一個辦法——就是始終自欺欺人：寫這個并不難?！蔽覀兠恳粋€作家在創(chuàng)作的每一刻都在竭力假裝寫長篇小說并不難，而巴爾扎克之所以偉大，正是因為他假裝得最賣力。當他致力于以文字的魔咒召喚人物的生活環(huán)境，對自然狀況和社會風習進行藝術(shù)提煉的時候，他這種假裝委實是賣力到了無以復(fù)加的程度。要做到我所說的召喚環(huán)境、提煉風習，描繪生活場景的作家必須從一開始就著魔似地不遺余力。真正做到這一點談何容易，許多描繪生活場景的作家都知難而退，故意回避了整個問題的關(guān)鍵所在。巴爾扎克卻靈思巧構(gòu)，獨辟蹊徑，塑造出眾多引人入勝的人物形象——所謂獨辟蹊徑，就是不憑死力氣，不求面面俱到，也能將人物鮮活地呈現(xiàn)給讀者。事實上，巴爾扎克的人物之所以引人入勝，是因為他們受命運撥弄。隨著某種情勢向這些人物步步逼近，我們能夠感同身受地認識到命運在何處介入以及如何支配他們。離開了特定環(huán)境，這些人物就變得索然寡味——猶如大自然本身，巴爾扎克厭惡真空。人物所處的情勢牢牢吸引了我們，不是因為這種情勢屬于隨便某個人，屬于所有人，或者屬于身份曖昧不明的人，而是因為每個人自有其特殊的情勢，絕不雷同。故此，人物甫一出場就要交代清楚身份的寫法并非贅筆，他們的探險奇遇無不與之密切相關(guān)，不預(yù)作交代就要影響讀者的理解。這個世界不存在簡單劃一的奇遇，只有你我他她各不相同的奇遇。我堅信，任何一種奇遇，只要是充分個性化的，就是最了不起的。巴爾扎克的想象力本身，就是一場規(guī)模宏大的探險奇遇。他最大的樂趣，就是展現(xiàn)眾生百態(tài)，還有人物所置身和嵌入的環(huán)境對此起到的決定作用。個人遭際無非是環(huán)境如何壓迫個人的代名詞，故此，描寫個人遭際也就是描寫特定環(huán)境。

以上論述能夠精妙地詮釋巴爾扎克筆下的其他人物，可是用于解讀犯罪大師伏脫冷依然奏效嗎？伏脫冷是巴爾扎克的第二自我，或許就是他的惡魔精神的化身。通過展現(xiàn)眾生百態(tài)，揭示他們?nèi)绾问墉h(huán)境擺布，巴爾扎克塑造出拉斯蒂涅、呂西安·德·呂邦潑雷、邦斯舅舅、高老頭、歐也妮·葛朗臺、于勒男爵等一系列栩栩如生的主要人物。但伏脫冷比他們都要偉大，正如巴爾扎克本人比其同輩小說家都要偉大。格雷厄姆·羅布寫道：“巴爾扎克既是時代精神的化身，又是其最發(fā)人深省的例外。”我將這句話改為：“伏脫冷既是《人間喜劇》的化身，又是其最發(fā)人深省的例外?！狈摾涫巧鐣w制的棄民、巴黎黑社會的撒旦，最后卻當上了巴黎秘密警察的頭目。巴爾扎克來自圖爾城，以賣文為生，維克多·雨果卻一定要在他的葬禮上敬獻悼詞的禮贊。論起對詩性崇高的癡狂和令人難以置信的多產(chǎn)，也只有雨果足以和他媲美。

巴爾扎克和狄更斯一樣，一直寫作到生命的最后一息，不過他不曾像狄更斯那樣時常在公眾面前朗誦表演自己的作品。巴爾扎克總是負債累累，擔憂末日將至，不得不瘋狂寫稿，有時一晚上只睡兩個小時，靠拼命喝咖啡硬撐著。他經(jīng)常處于一種聽覺和視覺的迷幻狀態(tài)當中，令人聯(lián)想到那句老話：天才距離瘋子僅一步之遙。巴爾扎克和雨果一樣，都是不可一世的偏執(zhí)狂，都具備自然的偉力和神秘主義的創(chuàng)作能量。不過，巴爾扎克是純粹的小說家，所以看似比雨果要理智一些（雨果寫過幾部長篇小說巨著，但嚴格說來，他原本是詩人，法語世界里最偉大的詩人，雖說這么描述他在我們這個缺乏品位的時代顯得非常不合時宜）。

當我們在《高老頭》里初次遭遇伏脫冷的時候，并沒有很準確地意識到在他韜光隱跡的外表下隱藏著怎樣的泰坦精神，可是小說告訴我們，這個40歲的狠角色“不時流露的性格頗有些可怕的深度”。如果追溯伏脫冷的文學譜系，浪漫主義高峰期的色彩要勝過哥特體小說的色彩：他是拜倫式的英雄惡棍，只不過屢次死里逃生。在拜倫筆下沒有任何一個人物可以活到40歲，而伏脫冷在黑道上的諢名之一就是“鬼上當”。伏脫冷不是探險立功的騎士，他在和一個他所蔑視的社會作戰(zhàn)，但另一方面，無論何時、何地、對于哪個國家政權(quán)，他都是顛覆性力量。在實踐上他是一個無政府主義者，可是這當中充滿了自相矛盾，因為他一手締造了整個黑社會并實行獨裁統(tǒng)治。由于他是巴黎人，而不是西西里人，他那種撒旦式的桀驁不馴與其說是來自家族的影響，不如說是個性使然。他喜歡年輕貌美的男弟子，表現(xiàn)出同性戀的本能欲望，可是這種欲望究竟是基于性欲呢，還是一種父愛的移情，小說對此交代得很曖昧。巴爾扎克本人的性傾向或許也是如此。伏脫冷從不爭風吃醋，只要他的小伙子們愛上并與之發(fā)生浪漫關(guān)系的是女人。

伏脫冷的犯罪天才是契合戲劇表現(xiàn)藝術(shù)的：他想要把巴爾扎克筆下的人物拉斯蒂涅和詩人呂西安改造成上流社會精英，又出色地搭建了舞臺。在《高老頭》第三章里，伏脫冷中了警察的埋伏，他抑制住了自身的狂怒，憑此非凡技藝死里逃生：

“茲以法律與國王陛下之名……”一個警務(wù)人員這么念著，以下的話被眾人一片驚訝的聲音蓋住了。

不久，飯廳內(nèi)寂靜無聲，房客閃開身子，讓三個人走進屋內(nèi)。他們的手都插在衣袋里，抓著上好子彈的手槍。跟在后面的兩個憲兵把守客廳的門；另外兩個在通往樓梯道的門口出現(xiàn)。好幾個士兵的腳步聲和槍柄聲在前面石子道上響起來。鬼上當完全沒有逃走的希望了，所有的目光都不由自主地盯著他一個人。特務(wù)長筆直地走過去，對準他的腦袋用力打了一巴掌，把假頭發(fā)打落了。柯蘭丑惡的面貌馬上顯了出來。土紅色的短頭發(fā)表示他的強悍和狡猾，配著跟上半身氣息一貫的腦袋和臉龐，意義非常清楚，仿佛被地獄的火焰照亮了。整個的伏脫冷，他的過去，現(xiàn)在，將來，倔強的主張，享樂的人生觀，以及玩世不恭的思想，行動，和一切都能擔當?shù)捏w格給他的氣魄，大家全明白了。全身的血涌上他的臉，眼睛像野貓一般發(fā)亮。他使出曠野一般的力抖擻一下，大吼一聲，把所有的房客嚇得大叫。一看這個獅子般的動作，暗探們借著眾人叫喊的威勢，一齊掏出手槍?？绿m一見槍上亮晶晶的火門，知道處境危險，便突然一變，表現(xiàn)出人類的最高的精神力量。那種場面真是又丑惡又莊嚴！他臉上的表情只有一個譬喻可以形容，仿佛一口鍋爐貯滿了足以翻江倒海的水汽，一眨眼之間被一滴冷水化得無影無蹤。消滅他一腔怒火的那滴冷水，不過是一個快得像閃電般的念頭。他微微一笑，瞧著自己的假發(fā)，對特務(wù)長說：

“老伙計，你今天不客氣??！”

他向那些憲兵點點頭，把兩只手伸了出來。

“來吧，憲兵，拿手銬來吧。請在場的人作證，我沒有抵抗?！?/p>

（根據(jù)傅雷譯《高老頭》，略有改動）

在這里，“人類的最高的精神力量”指的是偉大的戲劇家如何表現(xiàn)偉大的人物突然轉(zhuǎn)變的藝術(shù)，像莎士比亞筆下的伊阿古，莫里哀筆下的達爾杜弗，或者巴爾扎克筆下的伏脫冷。在《交際花盛衰記》的最后一部《伏脫冷最后的脫胎換骨》里，巴爾扎克對這種藝術(shù)的運用臻于化境。詩人呂西安的自殺使伏脫冷受到了巨大打擊，他一步一步由黑社會的撒旦蛻變?yōu)榘屠璞０簿斓氖刈o神。巴爾扎克筆下這一驚人的蛻變令讀者為之目眩，卻讓我感到茫然：伏脫冷，那個受盧梭感召、畢生與主流社會作戰(zhàn)的斗士，他身上究竟發(fā)生了什么事兒？伏脫冷皈依到了巴爾扎克的立場上，由是成為正統(tǒng)王朝派、?；庶h、寡頭政治的主要擁護者。盡管呂西安的自殺差不多給伏脫冷帶來了難以平復(fù)的心理創(chuàng)傷，看來他并不是因為這個損失才歸順既有秩序。或許巴爾扎克式精力觀能解釋這一突變。伏脫冷已經(jīng)不再年輕，他那惡魔般的精力正在逐漸衰竭，而維護社會所需的能量大概總是比顛覆社會所需的能量要少。也可能，篡奪主流社會的權(quán)力正是對于伏脫冷—— 巴爾扎克的主要替身—— 的最高獎賞。

巴爾扎克的天才創(chuàng)造力，在德高望重的總檢察長格朗維爾招撫不斷改頭換面的伏脫冷這段高難度舞蹈里，得到了淋漓盡致的表現(xiàn)。在某種意義上，伏脫冷歸順官府，是為格朗維爾真正的道德崇高所感召。英雄慧眼識英雄，格朗維爾的杰出烘云托月般彰顯出伏脫冷的杰出。作為讀者，我深深惋惜伏脫冷殺人放火受招安的結(jié)局，就好像《失樂園》里的撒旦徹底懺悔，加入了天使的行列。不過，巴爾扎克將他筆下的天才人物帶入安全的避難所。在伏脫冷從“鬼上當”蛻變?yōu)橹髁魃鐣驌舴缸锏臍⑹诛抵笕?，巴爾扎克就與世長辭。他需要伏脫冷作為自己身后命運的象征：成為那傾注了他豐沛想象力的人間喜劇的守護人。

1. daemon（形容詞為daemonic）： 本指希臘神話中半人半神的精靈，后用于形容天才型藝術(shù)家，具備非凡的力量、精力和智慧。

2. Baudelaire： 波德萊爾（1821—1867），法國詩人、散文家和藝術(shù)批評家，詩集《惡之花》對后來的象征主義和現(xiàn)代主義產(chǎn)生巨大影響。

3. Victor Hugo： 維克多·雨果（1802—1885），法國浪漫主義運動的代表詩人、小說家和戲劇家；outrageously：駭人地；The Human Comedy ：《人間喜劇》，巴爾扎克以畢生心血創(chuàng)作的，由九十多部獨立而又有所聯(lián)系的長篇小說和故事組成的作品總集；Dante： 但丁（約1265—1321），中世紀晚期意大利文藝復(fù)興運動最偉大的詩人；Divine Comedy ： 但丁創(chuàng)作的長詩，國內(nèi)通譯為《神曲》，而意大利語Divina Commedia 原義為《神圣喜劇》。

4. Graham Robb： 格雷厄姆·羅布（1958— ），研究法國文學和歷史的英國作家，他為法國三大文豪巴爾扎克、雨果和蘭波撰寫的傳記均受批評界好評。

5. 本文選譯自哈羅德·布魯姆的作家評論專著Genius： A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds （2003），所以作者說“‘天才是拙著唯一的主題”。

6. Henry James： 亨利·詹姆斯（1843—1916），長期僑居歐洲的美國小說家和文學評論家，從現(xiàn)實主義文學向現(xiàn)代主義文學過渡的關(guān)鍵人物之一；menace： 威脅；Hawthorne： 霍桑（1804—1864），美國19世紀最偉大的浪漫主義小說家；Dickens（1812—1870）， George Eliot（1819—1880）： 狄更斯和喬治·艾略特，英國維多利亞時代的兩位長篇小說巨匠；inscrutable： 不可思議的，難以捉摸的。

7. bring home...： 使……清晰易懂。

8. abject： 凄慘的，糟透的。

9. address oneself to...： 致力于……，專心從事……；evocation： 喚起；medium： 周圍環(huán)境；distillation： 蒸餾，提煉；possession：鬼魂附體，著魔；requisition： require的名詞形式；beg the question：（習語）避重就輕，回避問題的實質(zhì)。

10. superfluous： 多余的；therewith： （古語， =with that/this/ it）于是；appreciability： 由appreciable（可以理解的，可以欣賞的）衍生的名詞。

11. verily： （古語，=truly）確實。

12. exquisite： 精美的，優(yōu)雅的；alter ego： 另一個自我，個性的另一面。

13. Rastignac， Lucien de Rubempré， Cousin Pons， Old Goriot， Eugénie Grandet， Baron Hulot： 拉斯蒂涅（《高老頭》）、呂西安·德·呂邦潑雷（《幻滅》、《交際花盛衰記》）、邦斯舅舅（《邦斯舅舅》）、高老頭（《高老頭》）、歐也妮·葛朗臺（《歐也妮·葛朗臺》）、于勒男爵（《貝姨》），均為《人間喜劇》里的主要人物。

14. transpose： 使移位，（音樂）使變調(diào)。

15. S？reté：（法語）巴黎秘密警察。

16. hack writer： 受雇寫粗制濫造文章的職業(yè)文人；Tours： 圖爾，法國中西部城市；sublime：“詩性崇高”，布魯姆文學批評的關(guān)鍵詞之一；fecundity： 多產(chǎn)。

17. apocalyptically： 由名詞apocalypse（世界末日）衍生的副詞。

18. monomaniac： 偏執(zhí)狂，狂熱于一事的人；occult： 神秘學的，超自然的；proper：（用于名詞后）真正的，嚴格意義上的。

19. titanism： 泰坦精神，（對社會習俗、權(quán)威等的）反叛精神（泰坦：希臘神話中的古老神族，曾統(tǒng)治世界，但被宙斯神族推翻并取代）；appalling： 可怕的。

20. High Romantic：（文學）浪漫主義高峰期的；gothic：（小說）哥特體的（描寫怪誕、神秘的恐怖故事，多發(fā)生在墳?zāi)购凸疟ぃ?；Byron： 拜倫（1788—1824），英國浪漫主義文學的代表詩人。Byronic意為“拜倫式的”。

21. Death-Dodger： 躲過死神的人，dodge意為“躲開，避開”。

22. quester： 由quest（中世紀傳奇里騎士的探險奇遇）衍生的名詞。

23. anarchist： 無政府主義者；paradox： 悖論，自相矛盾的事物；imperiously：專橫地。

24. Sicilian： 西西里為意大利黑手黨發(fā)源地。

25. drive： 強烈欲望，本能需求；homoerotic：同性戀的；paternalism： 父親般的關(guān)懷。

26. dramaturgical： 由dramaturgy（劇作法，戲劇表現(xiàn)藝術(shù)）衍生的形容詞。

27. apparatus： 儀器，裝置。

28. douse： 澆滅（火）。

29. Iago： 伊阿古，英國戲劇家莎士比亞（1564—1616）悲劇《奧賽羅》里的主要反角；Tartuffe： 達爾杜弗，法國戲劇家莫里哀（1622—1673）同名喜?。ㄓ置秱尉印罚├锏闹饕唇?。

30. apotheosis：（事業(yè)或人生的）頂峰；incarnation： 化身。

31. Rousseau： 盧梭（1712—1778），法國哲學家、啟蒙思想家。

32. legitimist： 正統(tǒng)王朝擁護者； royalist：保皇黨；oligarchy： 寡頭政治。

33. all but：（=almost）幾乎，差不多。

34. usurpation： 篡權(quán)；accolade： 嘉獎；surrogate： 替身。

35. metamorphic： 變形的，名詞形式為metamorphosis。

36. Paradise Lost： 英國詩人彌爾頓（1608—1674）創(chuàng)作的史詩《失樂園》（1667），取材自《圣經(jīng)·舊約·創(chuàng)世記》，講述撒旦對上帝的不屈反叛和天國戰(zhàn)爭。

37. allegory： 象征，寓言；exuberantly： 豐富地，充沛地。