君子协定

Gentleman’s Agreement is a movie that tells a story about a journalist’s experience of pretending to be a Jew to write an article about anti-Semitism.

What is problematic?
Anti-Semitism was thriving at that time. Jewish people could not even have a job because of their racial identity. Dominant white Christian culture did not tolerant Jewish culture. Therefore, Jewish people were suffering from discrimination in every aspect of their lives. For instance, Jewish people had to conceal their Jewish identity in order to get a job. In the movie, the Jewish secretary Wales had to change her name in order to get the job. And when Tommy’s classmates knew that Tommy was a Jew, they teased him and isolated him because of his Jewish identity. The dominant White Christian culture took control of the society at that time. The social environment at that time was full of discrimination and attacks to Jewish people. The ignorance to other culture made there was no room for other cultures. The dominant position of white Christian culture over Jewish culture resulted in the misunderstanding and lacking of knowledge about minor culture in the society. The Jewish people could not speak out their voices because they were suppressed by the dominant white culture, which led to the miscommunication between Christian people and Jewish people even though they had no intention to do so. For instance, Kathy as a typical “nice” Christian, thought that being silent and feeling guilty when someone told a joke depreciating Jews was an action to against anti-Semitism. She did not know that this was not enough, actions to against those anti-Semitism in her group was the most effective way to alleviate the situation of Jews.
Also, the journalist Philip also experienced ups and downs in his relationship with his fiancée Kathy because of Philip’s experiment of pretending to be a Jew. Philip tried to act and think like a Jew and experienced what a Jew might suffer at that time in person. While Kathy’s acts did not meet his criteria for a soul mate who can take the right side towards anti-Semitism. However, Kathy thought that she was against anti-Semitism and was on the same side as Philip. The way they perceive anti-Semitism is different because they have different personalities. Therefore, this miscommunication caused conflicts between them.

What are the power relations?
Dominant white culture was absolutely over the Jewish culture at that time. Dave is a real Jew and he grew up with Philip. Although Philip is not a Jew, he has strong empathy to what Jewish people feel because his relationship with Dave. However, Philip still had social power identity over Dave. However, Philip’s acts to call for rights for Jews were embedded in his dominant cultural identity. White Christians have totally right of speech at that time. They determined the social realities. No one would like to listen to a Jew’s opinion. Dominant culture would not treat them seriously. However, white Christian guy Philip’s experience and opinions about anti-Semitism became a hot topic at that time because it made people started to rethink the Jewish culture.
What I also noticed was that the masculinity was also over feminity . In their relationship, Philip’s masculinity is obvious. Kathy did not express what she really felt straightforwardly. She haven’t spoken her heart until when Philip criticized her that she has an inherent superiority feeling towards Jewish people and their relationship almost broke down. At that very moment, Kathy cried and argued to Philip that, “You are what you are for the on life you have”. She explained that she has no choice to choose born as a Christian. For Kathy, she thought she was no wrong because she born with her Christian identity. She insisted that she was in the “nice people” group. However, for Philip, Kathy’s inactive action towards anti-Semitism also supported anti-Semitism in some way. Besides, people have different expectation towards Kathy and Philip. In the ending part of the movie, Anne invited Philip for dinner and persuaded Philip that it was not Kathy’s duty to fight for the Jewish people. Kathy was not supposed to do that because of her gender.

How do you see people negotiating?
We can tell the difference between how women and men faces conflicts in a relationship in this movie. When facing conflict, different gender has different negotiation method towards it. When Philip and Kathy had conflict, Philip told Kathy directly how he felt and argued with Kathy angrily. While for Kathy, she tended to hide her feelings and find the third party for help. We can tell that Philip was using low context to deal with the conflict, while Kathy responded to it in relatively high context. In the ending of the movie, when Philip was angry about Kathy because he thought she has superiority over Jews and she did nothing about it. Kathy found the third party, Philip and Kathy’s common friend Dave, to help analyzing the relationship. Therefore, Kathy has very interdependent personality while Philip is very independent. Philip told Kathy how he feels directly while Kathy hadn’t spoken out her idea until she thought they were going to break up. And then, Kathy turned to the third party for help to mend this relationship. That is very interdependent characteristic. In the society, women usually are expected to be submissive and supportive to their partner, even though they may not agree to them. However, a man is encouraged to act direct and controlling in a relationship, especially in a romantic relationship. Especially, Kathy is a divorced woman, so she acted even more careful and doubtful in the relationship.
Also, in the movie, the real Jew Dave and Ms. Wales seemed to be inactive in the anti-Semitism cause. They got used to hide their identity to blend in the society that controlled by the dominant culture. They tended to be silent. They had to rely on their dominant friends to speak out their needs for equality and rights. In contrast, Philip as a white Christian man who was educated and encouraged to speak, acted agitatedly when he was treated unfairly in the hotel and the post office because of his fake Jewish identity. Philip was sensitive and expressed all of his feelings of being sick of anti-Semitism when he pretended to be a Jew. This interesting contrast indicates that how social environment can affect people’s way to negotiate when facing with conflicts.

P.S. Kathy argued with Phil: "You are what you are for the one life you have, you can't help being born Christian instead of Jewish, it doesn't mean you glad you were, but I am glad, There, I said it, I'd be terrible, I'm glad I'm not. I could never make you understand that, You could never understand that it is a fact like being glad you are good-looking instead of ugly, rich instead of poor, young instead of old, healthy instead of sick. You could never understand that. It's just a practical fact,not judgement that I'm superior, but I could never make you see that. You twisted something into horrible, a conniving, an aiding and abetting a thing that I loathe as much as you do. "

When Kathy told Dave that a man said a joke about disgrace on Jewish, Kathy said that she hated it and wanted to tell everyone that this was not good, however, what she actually did was just sat there and felt ashamed.
"If you don't stop that joke, where do you stop?"

美国波士顿犹太人屠杀纪念碑上，刻着一个名叫马丁·尼莫拉的德国新教神甫留下的一段话：起初他们追杀共产主义者，我不是共产主义者，我不说话；接着他们追杀犹太人，我不是犹太人，我不说话；此后他们追杀天主教徒，我不是天主教徒，我不说话；最后他们奔我而来，再也没人站起来为我说话了。

 看过一部好莱坞的老片子《君子协定》，因一种特别的感触而记忆至今。其中葛里高利·派克扮演的一个极为成功的社会新闻记者，受命采访当代美国社会中犹太人遭歧视的现状。他欣然从命，此后却一筹莫展——因为这是一个老掉牙的题目，更因为纳粹暴行而善恶昭然、径渭分明。任何一个文明人都耻于流露自己对犹太人的偏见，更不必说歧视。反犹——几乎可以构成文明社群的丑闻。作为一个新闻记者还有什么可说的呢？为此，派克造访了他二战时出生入死的战友——一个成功的犹太商人。后者对此极为慎重，几乎不置一词。对派克的追问，他的回答是：除非你生而为犹太人，否则你永远不会明白。

 
此言倒使派克顿开茅塞：作为一个成功的记者，他的报道一向靠体验，比如报道矿工，就下井作业；报道无家可归者，就露宿街头。而这一次简单得多，派克在他“古老的德国姓氏”上加了几个元音，一变为“古老的犹太姓氏”，用括号附在他的门牌上，于是，他成了犹太人。变化立刻出现了，门房的态度变得暧昧微妙；女秘书的笑容多了同类间的亲呢，少了等级间的敬畏；完美周到的社会消费服务系统会不时的在他这里出现失误，“漏掉”了派克一家。他的孩子报名夏令营被拒绝，理由是名额已满，而事实上名额尚多。绝对秘而不宣的规定是此夏令营不接纳犹太人。直到孩子在街上被其他下流社会的孩子唾骂追打：因为他是“犹太猪”。一向自持、宽厚、富于人道情怀的派克陷入狂怒，他愤怒地前往质问，遇到的是家长们故作愤怒的敷衍，孩子们刻毒、得意的鬼脸暴露了他们真实的态度。当派克再次造访他的犹太朋友时，后者开口了：现在你知道了。做犹太人意味着日复一日芒刺在背的生活，看不见的毒刺每天刺伤你，可你不能叫喊、抗议，因为你拿不到证据——一切太偶然、太琐屑；在屈尊的倾听、真实或造作的震惊面前，你显得神经过敏、小题大作，甚至是不知感恩，不懂天高地厚。

 

已不知自己在多大程度上忠实地复述故事，多大程度上添加了自己的感受和体验。记住了这部好莱坞老片，不是因为煽情、细腻的叙事，不是为了其中正义与良知：因为在影片中派克能以发表他成功的报道：“我做了九十天犹太人”，而中止他的犹太生涯，并且作为非犹太的、正义的美国公民而成就一番拯救犹太人的伟业。 但如果你真的生而为犹太人呢？看此片时我尚年轻。其时的感受是，只需将“犹太人”三个字转换为“女人”二字，便可尽现生为女人、生为不甘遵从男性规范的女人在妇女解放的社会中所独自咀嚼的辛酸，一份不为外人知、亦不足为外人道的、琐琐屑屑的辛酸“文明社群中的犹太人”似乎是新女性现实境遇的一个恰当的比喻。此后我发现了更恰当的说法，那是“解放的妇女，犹如占领区的平民，解放了的黑奴”。也许后者更为准确，因为女人远不及犹太人“幸运”：犹太人或许可以去掉那几个元音而隐藏起自己的犹太身份，但女人无法藏起自己的性别，就像黑人无法洗去自己的肤色（否则迈克·杰克逊逐渐“变白”就不会成为社会新闻）。犹太人遭受迫害的千年历史可以不断讲述，振聋发聩，但女人的历史却仍是幽冥和空白。生为女人，似乎是上苍的安排，但上苍安排了的， 绝不仅是一个性别，而且是一个角色，一种命运。关于女人有太多的说法，太多的规定，你的一切行为都太容易地得到归类和解释， 尽管权威的阐释者自身对“女人”亦一无所知——一如弗洛伊德的哀叹：天哪！谁能告诉我女人是怎么回事？

 
生为女人，是一个不容片刻逃离的事实，尽管置身于“男女都一样”的社会场景之中。一切的一切——男人的目光、女人间的反馈、路人肆无忌惮的评论，堂而皇之的对女人生活的监督和窥视，无时无刻不在提醒着你的“身份”。大学时代，与初识的欧洲女孩在一起闲聊，说起如果有来生，所有的中国女人一律选做男人；大多半欧洲女孩则毫不犹豫地愿做女人。其中一位陈述理由是：做女人何其快活——有人开门、接大衣，承受怜香惜玉的卫护，周末人人相邀，且不付分文。彼时彼地，在座的中国女人（包括我）一式一律地羡慕起文明的西方。及至中国已经开化的今日，我亦将及不惑之年，方知如果你接受并成功地扮演一个女性角色，那么，日子确实好过得多，只是其间甘苦自知。问题是如果浩如烟海的女人规范与表述在你处均告失效时，那你便成了一个怪物，一个可憎可疑的次品中的次品。做了混迹斯文间的女人，且身高越界（彼时尚未有时装模特这一光彩照人的职业，更未有以高瘦为美的时尚），更加单身而立之年，对此间的种种辛酸颇有体验。婚后丈夫提醒说，你的词汇中出现率最高的便是“受伤害”，才恍然明白，果然如此。太易受伤害，太易感觉伤害，便成了一种病态，至少是一种过敏。但此前无人问及亦无可验证的，是那些无形的毒刺是否存在，那伤害的事实是否为真，是否大人大量便可忽略不计。至少对我说来，确未遭公然歧视或“迫害”。但芒刺无所不在，多种多样 同是大学时，形同手足的男同学谆谆教诲：你的确出色，但你要先学会做一个女人，然后才是一个完整的人。日后类似的忠告在同性、异性间时时可闻。渐入困惑迷惘：学会——做女人？难道我不是一个女人吗？为什么是学会？那是一种技巧或技能吗？我何处不“像”女人？究竟何为“女人”？何谓“女人”？这显然不是一个生理性别的概念。否则我自知自己是一个健全的、多少有些早熟的女人。渐次明白 需学会的是一种演技，做女人意味惰性的扮演。女人，是一个明确界说，大同小异的角色：弱者、地母、贞女、荡妇或女巫。何其丰富的选择。剩下的是：“男性化”，如果不说变态。

 

思考可以开始，芒刺并不因此消失。小有所成时听到评价：一个女人，不易了！独身久后便成了饭后茶余的话题：刻毒如“没人要”——附言曰：谁敢要啊？！阴险如“同性恋”——如是避女友惟恐不及；深谙女性心理者阐释，做了可耻的第三者，因此秘而不宣——自己守身如玉；自然悲愤异常。兴之所至淡施粉脂，配一胸饰时，男同事大悦，顿生亲昵云：这多好！平素你那三分男人气，吓得全体男同胞进入掩体。如此等等，不一而足。我之幸运，在于我尚未前往人才市场，所有的“人才”需求上注明：男性。如果说，文明社会耻于承认对犹太人的歧视，那么愈加文明的中国社会却越来越不掩饰他们的性别偏见与歧视。从“解放得过头了！你们还想要什么？‘到’妇女解放代价惨痛。女人回到家里去，重建正常社会秩序”，尽管这无疑是昔潘光旦的古老哀叹：妇女解放，弄得“男人无业，女人无家”，但社会变革，女工果然最先下岗。

 

女人，可以是烙上的红字，可以是荣耀的徽章一旦世妇会召开，一旦三八节来临，女人可谓风光之极．日后仍是不明不白一个二等国民。妇女解放也成了老掉牙的官家滥套。困惑日久，创痛日久，终于宣称自己是一个女性主义者。夫妻间调侃：“男女平权可矣，何必女权？”相视而笑只可惜全社会的现实、文化心理平权之地尚远。是的，女性，而非女权。笔者更关注的是男权社会的性别文化构造，女人和男人在这依旧森严的性别秩序中的诸多扭曲。在文化的意义上，在社会性别中，本无天生的男人与女人，后天的构造、修剪使之然。女性主义，或许别种不甚堂皇的理想主义，知其不能为而为之吧。

君子协定 Gentleman's Agreement (1947)—第20届奥斯卡最佳影片
 
        宗教、种族歧视一直存在于时代中，还有我们更加熟悉的性别歧视。平等与包容也是很多作品中永恒的主题。追求没有歧视，相对平等的文明是一条漫漫长路。
        影片剧情比较枯燥，没有太大的高低起伏，会让观众处于昏昏欲睡的状态。字幕翻译得惨不忍睹，中间有好几段没有翻译，非常影响观影感受。这类题材的电影，这部只能说一般。