如何挑選學校畢業典禮演講嘉賓
There must be a better way to choose commencement speakers.
一定有更好的辦法來挑選畢業典禮演講人。The latest contretemps involves International Monetary Fund managing director Christine Lagarde, who was scheduled to give the graduation address at Smith College. She announced on Monday that she wouldn't be making the trip to Northampton, Mass., because 477 students and faculty had signed a petition objecting to her speaking. Nine days earlier, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made the same decision, for essentially the same reason, about her planned speech at Rutgers University in New Jersey.
最近，國際貨幣基金組織（IMF）總裁克里斯蒂娜o拉加德遇到了尷尬。拉加德原計劃前往馬薩諸塞州北安普頓並在史密斯學院（Smith College）的畢業典禮上發表演說。但她在隨後的週一宣佈取消這個行程，原因是該校477名師生聯名發表請願書，反對拉加德前來演講。九天前，美國前國務卿康多莉扎·賴斯也決定取消前往新澤西州羅格斯大學（Rutgers University）發表畢業典禮演說的計劃，原因和拉加德基本相同。The reason there must be a better way to choose these speakers is not that Lagarde or Rice were poor choices. To the contrary, I believe they were both outstanding choices. The problem is that both speakers were right to withdraw, which they did by the same sound logic. Lagarde said she did so "to preserve the celebratory spirit of commencement day." Rice said, "Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration," which she didn't want to spoil by showing up and making a lot of people mad.
一定有更好的辦法來挑選畢業典禮演講人，我這麼說不是因爲選擇拉加德或者賴斯不夠理想。正相反，我認爲她們倆都是出色的候選人。問題在於她們取消行程是正確的做法，而且出於同樣合理的邏輯。拉加德表示，她這樣做是爲了“畢業典禮那天能夠保持喜慶的氣氛”。賴斯也說：“畢業典禮應該是個歡樂喜慶的時刻”，她不想因爲自己的出現讓很多人感到不滿，從而破壞了這樣的氛圍。
So the administrators of both schools ended up embarrassed, offending an invited guest, and having to rustle up a replacement on short notice, who will step to the podium knowing the audience regards him or her as a make-do choice whose primary qualification was availability.
最終，陷入尷尬境地的是兩所高校的管理方——他們冒犯了自己邀請的嘉賓，還得再去物色、倉促通知替代的人選；後者在登臺時還會想到，臺下的師生會把自己當成“臨時湊數的（演講嘉賓）”，能夠有資格發表演說的主要原因是“有空”。Of course students have been protesting campus speakers forever. Just last fall, then-New York City police chief Ray Kelly was heckled out of the room at Brown University during a much lower-profile appearance, in clear violation of the university's code that prohibits such behavior. To state the obvious, a university needs to remain a safe haven for every point of view, which lives or dies in reasoned debate.
當然，學生永遠都會對到自己學校發表演說的人提出異議。去年秋天，時任紐約市警察局長的雷o凱利曾到訪布朗大學（Brown University），而且他的這次露面要比拉加德和賴斯低調得多，但他還是在學生的起鬨聲中離去——學生的這種行爲顯然有悖於布朗大學的規定。高校需要繼續成爲讓人們安然表達任何觀點的地方，無論這些觀點能否經受住理性辯論的考驗，這一點顯而易見。But commencement is different. A commencement speaker is not just someone with an interesting perspective for members of the academic community to hear and discuss. That person is being honored. And, as Lagarde and Rice noted, the occasion is a happy one. That's why the band plays "GaudeamusIgitur" ("Let Us Rejoice").
但畢業典禮與衆不同。畢業典禮上的演講者不光要提出吸引人的觀點，以便學術界人士聆聽和討論。它對這位演講者來說還是一項榮譽。而且，正如拉加德和賴斯所言，畢業典禮是個歡快的場合。正因爲如此，樂隊纔會在畢業典禮上演奏《GaudeamusIgitur》（拉丁語，意爲“讓我們歡慶”）。The protesting students and faculty of Smith and Rutgers may be utterly, sadly misguided in objecting to Lagarde and Rice, as I believe they are -- but who cares what I think? If the choice of a particular speaker is going to whip some significant portion of the community into a fury, then it's best that that person not appear -- and not be invited in the first place.
史密斯學院和羅格斯大學反對拉加德和賴斯在畢業典禮上演講的師生可能完全是受到了誤導，這是件很遺憾的事情——我相信情況就是這樣。但誰會在乎我怎麼想呢？如果校方挑選的演講人會讓很大一部分師生感到不滿，這個人最好就不要出現。當然，校方從一開始就不應該向他發出邀請。So here's my solution: Hold a vote. Everyone on campus can participate, and everyone will know that the winner has majority support. I don't actually think this solution will produce electrifying commencement speakers. I suspect it will produce platitude-spouting mediocrities. After a few years of those, who knows -- the community might begin to wonder if maybe brilliant, accomplished people whose views one doesn't entirely share could be worth listening to anyway.
我想到的辦法是讓大家投票。學校裏的任何人都可以參加投票，而且所有人都會看到，勝出的人得到了多數人的支持。其實，我覺得用這樣的辦法不會選出讓人倍感激動的畢業典禮演講人。我甚至懷疑投票選出的演講者將是個只會老生常談的平庸之輩。也許，經過幾次這樣的投票後，高校師生可能會開始猜測，雖然他們並不完全贊同那些傑出成功人士的觀點，但無論如何後者的演講都有可能值得一聽。
