論畫鯨之荒謬

I shall ere long paint to you as well as one can without canvas, something like the true form of the whale... It is time to set the world right in this matter, by proving such pictures of the whale all wrong.

不久我將盡我所能（雖無畫布）為你們畫出鯨的真貌——當鯨以其絕對的肉身被繫在捕鯨船旁、人可以踏上去時，捕鯨人眼中所見的牠。因此，在此之前，值得先提一提那些至今仍大膽挑戰陸地人輕信的、關於牠的奇怪臆想畫像。是時候在這件事上把世界導正了——藉著證明那些鯨的圖畫全都是錯的。

It may be that the primal source of all those pictorial delusions will be found among the oldest Hindoo, Egyptian, and Grecian sculptures. ... ever since then has something of the same sort of license prevailed, not only in most popular pictures of the whale, but in many scientific presentations of him.

這一切圖像謬誤的最初源頭，或許可在最古老的印度、埃及、希臘雕刻中找到。因為自那「富於創意卻不嚴謹」的時代起——在神廟的大理石嵌板、雕像的基座、以及盾牌、徽章、杯盞、錢幣上，海豚被畫成像薩拉丁那樣的鎖子甲鱗片、配上像聖喬治那樣的盔頭——自那以後，同一類的「（藝術）放縱」便一直盛行，不僅見於最通俗的鯨畫，也見於許多對牠的「科學」呈現中。

Now, by all odds, the most ancient extant portrait anyways purporting to be the whale’s, is to be found in the famous cavern-pagoda of Elephanta, in India. ... The Hindoo whale referred to... depicting the incarnation of Vishnu in the form of leviathan, learnedly known as the Matse Avatar. But though this sculpture is half man and half whale... yet that small section of him is all wrong. It looks more like the tapering tail of an anaconda, than the broad palms of the true whale’s majestic flukes.

如今，無論怎麼算，現存最古老、聲稱是鯨之像的，要數印度那著名的象島（Elephanta）石窟廟。婆羅門堅稱：在那座亙古石窟廟那幾乎無窮的雕刻裡，人類一切行業、一切營生，早在它們實際出現之前數代就被預先描繪了。那麼也難怪，我們捕鯨這高貴的行當，在某種意義上也在那兒被預示了。所說的那印度鯨，出現在牆面一個獨立的部分，描繪毗濕奴化身為利維坦之形——學名「魚化身（Matse Avatar）」。可這雕刻雖是半人半鯨、只給出了鯨的尾，那一小段卻全錯了。它看起來更像蟒蛇那漸細的尾，而非真鯨那雄偉尾鰭的寬闊「手掌」。

But go to the old Galleries, and look now at a great Christian painter’s portrait of this fish... It is Guido’s picture of Perseus rescuing Andromeda from the sea-monster or whale. Where did Guido get the model of such a strange creature as that? Nor does Hogarth... make out one whit better. ... Then, there are the Prodromus whales of old Scotch Sibbald, and Jonah’s whale, as depicted in the prints of old Bibles... that is a very picturesque but purely fabulous creature... dolphins were popularly supposed to be a species of the Leviathan.

但到那些古老的畫廊去，看看一位偉大的基督教畫家筆下這魚的畫像吧；他畫得並不比那洪水前的印度人高明。那是圭多（Guido）的《珀爾修斯從海怪（或鯨）口中救出安朵美達》。圭多從哪兒得來那麼一隻怪生物的模型？霍加斯（Hogarth）在他自己的《珀爾修斯下降》裡畫同一場景，也好不了分毫。那霍加斯式怪物龐大的肥軀在水面起伏，吃水竟不到一吋；背上有種「象轎」，那張裂開、長著獠牙、波浪正往裡灌的嘴，簡直可當成從泰晤士河經水路通往倫敦塔的「叛徒門」。再有，老蘇格蘭人席巴爾德的《前驅》鯨；以及古聖經版畫、古啟蒙讀本插圖裡的約拿之鯨。至於那「裝訂工之鯨」——像葡萄藤莖般纏繞著一隻下降的錨柄、燙金印在許多新舊書脊與扉頁上——那是個極如畫卻純屬虛構的造物，我看是仿自古瓶上類似的圖形。它雖被普遍稱作海豚，我卻管這「裝訂工之魚」叫一次「畫鯨的嘗試」；因為這圖案最初被引入時就是這麼打算的——它是 15 世紀某個義大利出版商在「學問復興（文藝復興）」時期引入的；那年代乃至相當晚近，海豚都被普遍認為是利維坦的一種。

In the vignettes and other embellishments of some ancient books you will at times meet with very curious touches at the whale, where all manner of spouts, jets d’eau, hot springs and cold, Saratoga and Baden-Baden, come bubbling up from his unexhausted brain. ...

在某些古書的飾頭小畫（vignette）與其他裝飾裡，你有時會碰到對鯨非常古怪的描繪——各式各樣的噴水、噴泉、冷熱溫泉（薩拉托加、巴登-巴登的那種），都從牠那「用之不竭的腦袋」裡汩汩冒出。在《學問之增進》初版的扉頁上，你就會找到一些古怪的鯨。

But quitting all these unprofessional attempts, let us glance at those pictures of leviathan purporting to be sober, scientific delineations... In another plate, the prodigious blunder is made of representing the whale with perpendicular flukes. ... let me say that it has an eye which... would make the eye of that whale a bow-window some five feet long. Ah, my gallant captain, why did ye not give us Jonah looking out of that eye!

但撇開這些「外行的嘗試」，讓我們看看那些聲稱是冷靜、科學的描繪、出自「內行人」之手的巨獸圖。老哈里斯的航海集裡，有些鯨的版畫摘自 1671 年一本荷蘭航海書（《乘「約拿在鯨腹」號赴斯匹茲卑爾根的捕鯨航行，弗里斯蘭的彼得·彼得森船長》）。其中一幅版畫裡，鯨像大圓木筏般躺在冰島之間，白熊在牠們活生生的背上跑。另一幅犯了個天大的錯——把鯨畫成了「垂直的尾鰭」。再者，有一本氣派的四開本，英國海軍上校科爾尼特所著（《繞合恩角入南海、為拓展抹香鯨漁業之航行》）。書裡有一幅輪廓圖，聲稱是「按比例所繪的抹香鯨（Physeter）像，取自 1793 年 8 月在墨西哥海岸捕獲、吊上甲板的一頭」。我毫不懷疑這船長是為他的海軍陸戰隊員的福祉、才畫了這幅「如實」的圖。只說它一點吧：它有一隻眼，按所附的比例尺套到一頭成年抹香鯨身上，會使那鯨的眼成為一扇約五呎長的「凸窗」。啊，我勇敢的船長，你怎麼不順便給我們畫個約拿從那隻眼裡往外瞧呢！

Nor are the most conscientious compilations of Natural History... free from the same heinousness of mistake. Look at that popular work “Goldsmith’s Animated Nature.” ... this unsightly whale looks much like an amputated sow; and, as for the narwhale, one glimpse at it is enough to amaze one, that in this nineteenth century such a hippogriff could be palmed for genuine upon any intelligent public of schoolboys.

連那些為了「教化少年」而最盡責編纂的自然史，也免不了同樣可惡的錯誤。看看那本流行的《哥德史密斯動物誌》吧。在 1807 年的倫敦節縮版裡，有所謂「鯨」與「獨角鯨」的版畫。我不想顯得失禮，可這難看的「鯨」活像一頭被截了肢的母豬；至於那「獨角鯨」，看一眼就夠叫人驚詫——在這十九世紀，竟有這麼一隻「駿鷹（hippogriff，神話中半鷹半馬的怪獸）」被當作真貨，矇騙任何一群聰明的學童公眾。

Then, again, in 1825, Bernard Germain, Count de Lacépède, a great naturalist, published a scientific systemized whale book... All these are not only incorrect, but the picture of the Mysticetus or Greenland whale... even Scoresby... declares not to have its counterpart in nature.

再者，1825 年，偉大的博物學家、拉塞佩德伯爵貝爾納·熱爾曼，出版了一部科學系統化的鯨書，其中有幾幅不同鯨種的圖。這些不僅全不正確，而且那「大鬚鯨（Mysticetus）即格陵蘭鯨（露脊鯨）」的圖——連對那鯨種閱歷甚深的 Scoresby 都宣稱，它在現實中「找不到對應」。

But the placing of the cap-sheaf to all this blundering business was reserved for the scientific Frederick Cuvier... In a word, Frederick Cuvier’s Sperm Whale is not a Sperm Whale, but a squash. ... Perhaps he got it as his scientific predecessor... got one of his authentic abortions; that is, from a Chinese drawing.

但給這一切「胡畫之業」封頂的，留給了那位科學的弗雷德里克·居維葉（名男爵之弟）。1836 年，他出版了一部《鯨之自然史》，裡頭給出了他所謂的「抹香鯨」圖。把那圖拿給任何南塔克特人看之前，你最好先安排好自己從南塔克特「迅速撤退」的後路。一句話，弗雷德里克·居維葉的「抹香鯨」根本不是抹香鯨，而是一個南瓜。他當然從沒享受過捕鯨航行的好處（這種人很少有），可他那圖從哪兒來，誰說得清？也許他得來的方式，跟他這領域的科學前輩德馬雷得到他一個「如假包換的畸形怪胎」一樣——即，得自一幅中國畫。而那些中國人拿起畫筆是何等「活潑的小子」，許多古怪的杯盤碗碟已告訴了我們。

As for the sign-painters’ whales seen in the streets hanging over the shops of oil-dealers, what shall be said of them? They are generally Richard III. whales, with dromedary humps, and very savage; breakfasting on three or four sailor tarts, that is whaleboats full of mariners: their deformities floundering in seas of blood and blue paint.

至於街頭那些招牌畫匠的鯨——掛在油商店鋪上方的——又能說什麼呢？它們一般是「理查三世式的鯨」，駝著單峰駝般的峰、極其兇殘；早餐吃著三四個「水手餡餅」（即載滿水手的捕鯨小艇）：牠們那一身畸形，在血與藍漆的海裡撲騰。

But these manifold mistakes in depicting the whale are not so very surprising after all. ... the living Leviathan has never yet fairly floated himself for his portrait. The living whale, in his full majesty and significance, is only to be seen at sea in unfathomable waters... such is then the outlandish, eel-like, limbered, varying shape of him, that his precise expression the devil himself could not catch.

但畫鯨這些五花八門的錯誤，說到底也並不那麼令人驚訝。想想看！多數「科學」素描都取自擱淺的死鯨；這些大概就跟「照一艘斷了脊的失事船去畫那艘高貴船隻在船身桅桁完好時的全部驕傲」一樣「準確」。大象固然可以為自己的全身像站定，可活生生的巨獸卻從未好好地「浮出來」讓人畫像。活鯨，以其全部的威儀與意義，只能在深不可測的海上見到；而漂浮著的牠那龐大身軀大半沒在水下（像一艘剛下水的戰列艦）；要把牠整個吊離那元素、提到空中、好保留牠所有雄渾的起伏與波動，對凡人而言永遠不可能。更別提幼鯨與成年「柏拉圖式巨獸」在輪廓上極可能的差異了；即便一頭被吊上甲板的幼鯨，那時牠那古怪、鰻魚般、軟塌多變的形狀，連魔鬼本人也捕捉不住牠確切的神態。

But it may be fancied, that from the naked skeleton of the stranded whale, accurate hints may be derived touching his true form. Not at all. ... as the great Hunter says, the mere skeleton of the whale bears the same relation to the fully invested and padded animal as the insect does to the chrysalis that so roundingly envelopes it. ... This fin has four regular bone-fingers, the index, middle, ring, and little finger. ... “However recklessly the whale may sometimes serve us,” said humorous Stubb one day, “he can never be truly said to handle us without mittens.”

但也許有人會以為，從擱淺鯨那赤裸的骨架，可推出關於牠真形的準確線索。完全不能。因為這巨獸有一樁更奇的事：牠的骨架對其整體形狀提供的概念極少。傑里米·邊沁的骨架——掛在他一位遺囑執行人的圖書館裡當燭台架——固然準確傳達出「一位寬眉的功利主義老紳士」連同邊沁其他主要個人特徵的概念；可從任何巨獸接合的骨頭上，卻推不出這類東西。事實上，如偉大的亨特所言：鯨的純骨架之於那「裹滿肉、墊得圓滾滾的完整動物」，正如昆蟲之於那把牠圓圓包住的蛹。這特點在頭部最為顯著（本書某處會順帶說明）；在側鰭上也展現得極奇——側鰭的骨頭，幾乎完全對應人手的骨頭，只少了拇指。這鰭有四根規規矩矩的「骨指」：食指、中指、無名指、小指。但這些全都永久地嵌在牠肉的覆蓋裡，如人的手指嵌在一層人造的覆蓋（手套）裡。「鯨儘管有時待我們魯莽（reckless），」幽默的斯塔布有天說，「卻絕不能說牠『不戴手套』就對我們動手（handle us）。」

For all these reasons, then, any way you may look at it, you must needs conclude that the great Leviathan is that one creature in the world which must remain unpainted to the last. ... the only mode in which you can derive even a tolerable idea of his living contour, is by going a whaling yourself; but by so doing, you run no small risk of being eternally stove and sunk by him. Wherefore, it seems to me you had best not be too fastidious in your curiosity touching this Leviathan.

那麼，基於這一切理由，無論你怎麼看，你都不得不斷定：偉大的巨獸，是這世上唯一一個注定「至死都畫不出」的造物。誠然，一幅畫像或許比另一幅更接近標靶，可沒有一幅能命中得有任何相當的精確度。所以，世上沒有任何辦法能查明鯨到底長什麼樣。而你能對牠活生生的輪廓得到哪怕差強人意的概念的唯一方式，就是自己去捕鯨；可這麼做，你便冒著「被牠永遠撞碎、撞沉」的不小的險。因此，在我看來，你對這巨獸的好奇，最好別太挑剔（fastidious）。