又去伦敦签了一次美国.

除了签证的过程很顺利以外其他的都很不顺利.半夜到London跑到青旅洗洗就睡,居然火灾了.不过不到这种时候真是不太容易在陌生人面前显摆自己如何冷静敏捷.总之第一个一边冲出去一边提醒彷徨的东欧人着火了.

穿着个短裤穿着个拖鞋在街上一边抖一边抽烟( 白天巨热晚上还挺冷),就碰见两帮人火拼.只好打电话给朋友.谢天谢地他还没睡.

出了地铁看到有个人很像朋友,就大咧咧走过去说我好傻啊,冷死了.那个迷惘的男生说,sorry?我只好讲说我认错人了.他还问我need不need help,我说你不要把我认错人的事情讲出去就很hlepful.

第二天一大早又杀回青旅穿裤子穿鞋然后杀去embassy.存了手机深怕显不出自己,又多嘴跟前面的mm讲说以前有地方给你存啊,现在embassy肯定为了赚钱$%^#,讲得还不小声,结果端枪的security转过来意味深长的对我一笑,吓的我赶紧闭嘴了.

签证没有等很久.跳了几十号就叫到我了.跟上次一样还以为要再等五十个号,结果突然就叫我了.

签证的时候遇见怪伯伯.说很热说了五分钟,还讲了个他早晨很热的故事.然后就给签证了.

 

在火车上面无聊开始看个小说,clean out.很好看喔!真的很好看喔!

推荐给大家.

 

 

这个H1N1，美国不报了，对中国的隔离措施大报特报。居然看到有人说中国政府矫枉过正大惊小怪，明明是死了人的还告诉大家不用大惊小怪。学校发的手册是说，你呢，要是有感冒的症状，哪里都表去，打电话给医生，或者叫朋友去帮你开药，等于是死在家里好了。中国政府呢，被西方媒体说成大惊小怪的，由卫生部一个头头出来告诉留学生，你们想回来的还是回来，祖国保护你们。太感人了也。眼泪哗哗的。

 

不过最逗的还是吸了几天洋气的中国人，也指手画脚说中国政府矫枉过正，真是不死到你头上是学不会说人话的。

 

 

转的抄的不标我的reference的死全家。

 

The analysis on nation in Western social sciences

In his book Contemporary Debates on Nationalism, Umut Özkirimli (2005) reviewed two basic camps in debates over how to define the nation: one focuses primarily on ‘objective’ markers of the nation, i.e. those that are accessible to an external observer; while the other puts emphasis on subjective elements, i.e. those that become evident only once we take into account the thoughts and feelings of people that constitute a nation. The most representative definition of nation that focuses exclusively on ‘objective’ elements or markers can be found in the work of Joseph Stalin, who defined nation as ‘a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture’ (1994: 20). However, this highly inclusive definition, which aims to encompass all the ‘objective’ elements of a human group, does not manage to cover all nations in the world (see Renan, 1882).

 

As Bauman argued, the attempts at defining the nation in an objective way are ‘de-problematizing the very elusiveness and contingency of the nation’s precarious existence’ (Bauman, 1992: 677). Bauman further argued that the ‘objective definition … obliquely legitimizes nationalistic claims’ (ibid). The fact that nations can seemingly be defined in the objective way is ‘an artefact of boundary-drawing activity’. In short, these attempts are aiming to create a synthetic nation rather than exposing pre-existing, ‘objective’ factors (ibid).

 

Given these criticisms, it is easy to understand why there are hardly any scholars today who are aiming to define the nation in a purely objective way; instead, subjective elements become necessary in defining a nation. The scholars analyzed the subjective factors in various ways, taking into account factors such solidarity (Renan, 1990 [1882]: 19, Hechter, 2000:11), self-awareness (Connor, 1994: 212), loyalty (Weber, 1994 [1948]: 25) and collective memory (James E. Young, 1993).

 

The so-called ‘modernist’ camp (Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm and etc.), whose members share the conviction that nations and nationalisms are recent inventions and were formed as a consequence of in the development of modern industrial societies. They argue that the nation does not exist since time immemorial, but is rather an artificial myth. Anderson Benedict’s (1983) explanation of nation, which became one of the most commonly quoted definitions in this research field: ‘an imagined political community [that is] imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign’ (5). This study echoed Edward Said’s concept of imagined geographies (1978, Orientalism), which emphasis the viewpoint of a process of social construction.

 

However, subjective consciousness does not grow up on its own; it relies on objective markers, which are necessary to generate the feeling of commonality that gives birth to or sustains the nation. Therefore, although he agrees that nation is the product of modernity, however, it is not impossible to find some ethnic clues survived before and still in modern (Smith, 1987). In other words, in the process of their formation process, it is necessary to seek for references (ostensibly objective features) validating their existence. Thus, nation is a modern phenomenon, however, owns the pre-modern origin. Smith’s argument involves another question “when is the nation”. He claims, an ethnic group becomes nation only when it is ‘a named population sharing an historic territory, common myths and historical memories, a mass public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for its members’ (5). Simultaneously, he defined “ethnie” as ‘a named population sharing a collective proper name, a presumed common ancestry, shared historical memories, one or more differencing elements of common culture, an association with a specific ‘homeland’ and a sense of solidarity for significant sectors of the population’ (5). Smith, in this way, combines both the subjective and objective factors in defining a nation.

 

Although the debates on defining the nation continue, several authors are coming to the conclusion that it is impossible to define the nation in a universally applicable way. ‘No attempt to fashion a general theory applicable to all cases, or to resolve the antinomies of each issue in a coherent and systematic manner’ (Smith, 1998: 10). Thus, the best way of analyzing the competing definitions and theories of nation and nationalism might be to regard them as competing representations of, or discourses about, identity. As a consequence, it is obvious that it would be imprudent to simply take the terms ‘nation’ and ‘nationalism’, and the various definitions of these terms developed in the Western world and apply them directly in an examination of the Chinese society. Instead, we should first look for Chinese terms and definitions that refer to similar phenomena, and examine how they are used.

 

 

 

最近太猛了，不乱搞不乱玩。

每天起床抽根烟然后洗澡，吃饭抽根烟然后去学校，写报告抽根烟，听seminar上课，然后抽根烟去打工，然后抽根烟去gym，然后抽跟烟回家家定机票定hostel填表格，然后抽根烟跟gg讲话，然后抽根烟睡觉。

 

三好生就是这个样子。

 

 

 

2003年，洛可可病，没死，继续上大学。她是一个坚硬并且静默的女子。与人和事保持距离，不倾诉，不抱怨，有时写作，与任何人适当谈情，不与任何人做情人。凛冽而慈悲。爱到尽苦，有回甘。

 

这个很显然是03年的我在装B，很显然装的是raku的路数。

 

那日，我与念在政府开例会，那人讲得这样好，我下意识握紧念的手，手心激动得逼出汗来，却丝毫没有觉得。

枪声便是在此时响起。

有一瞬间，会场死一样静，然后尖叫声四起，枪声紧迫逼。我错愕站在原地，尚沉浸在乌托邦的遐想中，无法言语，不名所以。念抓起我的手，几乎贴在地面拽我疾行。从来我上顶天，仿似那一刹起，方才开始下点地：生原是这样谦卑——什么意识，什么革命，将人的尊严磨得薄如金纸。我们改变不了任何，甚至眼前的生死。而这些，是我从来不得知。

我脑里没有意志、理智，以及一切自以为杵的品质。突的手心一紧，我是看见，念捂着左肩，脚却不停，地上兀自氧开一条细细的血路。她是此时回头看我，那一眼，便教我觉得恒远了。“解意，我们要出去的。”她这样说。一向的轻，一向的不容侵犯。

 

这是那时候写的顺流逆流。应该是永远的夭折了。

 

 

 

 

你还会不会在我的身边.