悲劇的誕生The Birth Of Tragedy 第67期:群眾的輿論不可忽視
When I said earlier that Euripides had brought the spectator on the stage in order to enable him to judge the play,
I may have created the impression that the older drama had all along stood in a false relation to the spectator;
這種說法，會使人誤解，以為以前悲劇藝術對觀眾的關係，是不正確的，and one might then be tempted to praise Euripides' radical tendency to establish a proper relationship between art work and audience as an advance upon Sophocles.
也會使人貿貿然讚揚歐裡庇德斯這一急進的傾向，認為他建立了藝術作品對觀眾的正確關係，比索福克勒斯向前邁進一步。
But, after all, audience is but a word, not a constant unchanging value.
然而，所謂“觀眾”畢竟是一個名詞罷了；它並不是一個同次常數。Why should an author feel obliged to accommodate himself to a power whose strength is merely in numbers?
藝術家有甚麼義務要迎合這種僅僅以數量見勝的群眾力量呢？If he considers himself superior in his talent and intentions to every single spectator, why should he show respect for the collective expression of all those mediocre capacities rather than for the few members of the audience who seem relatively the most gifted?
如果他覺得自己在才能和志向上都比每個觀眾高明，那末他為甚麼要尊重那些才能較低的群眾的輿論，甚於尊重最有才能的個別觀眾呢？The truth of the matter is that no Greek artist ever treated his audience with greater audacity and self sufficiency than Euripides;
其實，再沒有一個希臘藝術家，象歐裡庇德斯那樣，以孤傲和自負來對待他的觀眾了；who at a time when the multitude lay prostrate before him disavowed in noble defiance and publicly his own tendencies--those very tendencies by which he had previously conquered the masses.
當群眾拜倒在他腳下時，他自己竟然以崇高的倔強精神，公開抨擊他自己的傾向，而這種傾向正是他所藉以獲得人心的。Had this genius had the slightest reverence for that band of Bedlamites called the public, he would have been struck down long before the mid point of his career by the bludgeon blows of his unsuccess.
如果這位天才，對於輿論的地獄，稍存敬畏之心，他也許在失敗的打擊之下，早在他事業的中途，一蹶不振了。We come to realize now that our statement, "Euripides brought the spectator on the stage"--implying that the spectator would be able henceforth to exercise competent judgment --was merely provisional and that we must look for a sounder explanation of his intentions.
由此觀之，我們說歐裡庇德斯把觀眾帶上舞臺，是為了使觀眾確實能有批判能力，——這種說法，不過是一個暫時的假說而已；所以，我們必須進一步探索，以便了解他的傾向。It is also generally recognized that Aeschylus and Sophocles enjoyed all through their lives and longer the full benefit of popular favor,
反之，如所周知，埃斯庫羅斯和索福克勒斯，終其一生，甚至死後很久，都甚孚眾望；and that for this reason it would be absurd to speak in either case of a disproportion between art work and public reception.
由此可見，就歐裡庇德斯的前輩而論，斷不能說，他們的作品對觀眾的關係是不正確的。
