主题：【文摘】诸葛亮的政治表演术 -- 梦里依稀

第一，兄弟要是没读过两遍，也不敢顶老程的帖。

I believe you. The point is that many one with same opinions as you on Zhu Ge didn't do that.

They made their comment according to their impressions, not thinking after reading.

第二，诸葛亮的正面形象是史学界长期以来确立的观点，这方面有所涉猎，也不需要通读《三国志》再发言了，反其道而行之呢？

You meaning is that because:

诸葛亮的正面形象是史学界长期以来确立的观点,

therefore if anyone want to praise zhu ge, he didn't need to read 《三国志》?!

要知道这是要推翻历代历史大家的一个艰巨工程哦，不多准备些炮弹就上阵不成了义和团么？

Not so serious.

Everyone has his own opinions. For instance, about mao and zhou, many person didn't have a deep study on them, but still make comments on bbs, don't you disagree with them?

So, if someone dislikes zhu ge, and wants to make his own comment on zhu ge,

based on some material that he learned, I cannot see why you should oppose them.

If you think there's something wrong in his article, just say your opinions la.

I want to emphasize that it is NOT such a great project as 推翻.

Take it easy, Sa Su.

偏巧有的朋友理解正好相反，认为翻案文章好写，呵呵，也许也有他的道理。

My opinions on zhu ge---

First, there's not enough materials left about that period of history.

The main material is from chen shou, who is not so objective as Si Ma Qian.

Second, that period of history is not very important in the whole history of China. So I don't think it's necessary to read san guo zhi twice from beginning to the end.

I will only pick up some parts of that book for reading. You should not ask everyone to be an expert if he wants to say something which is different from tradition or what we learned in our childhood.

How many person on bbs ever read one of 24 Shi?

Very well written.

One of the problems of the traditional Chinese records, like The Three Kingdoms, is that they are edited, and sometimes even conceived from the outset, in a way that confirms with the Confucian ideal. Inconvenient facts that tend to undermine that ideal are often ignored or altered, or at least misinterpretted. Modern politicians could learn quite a bit from these spinsters.

One of the consequences of such an approach is that historical figures are molded into a few stereotypes. With their reasoning, their private judgements, and their passion hidden from view, they appear inaccessible and surreal.

It is up to us and future generations to deconstruct these figures, return them to their full humanity, with their desires and cravings, their passions and misgivings, their vanity and deceptions.

Any attempt to pull down their veil of infallible sainthood and reveal their true human nature, like this one, is sorely missed, and urgently needed.

A culture can not live on falsehood forever.

Take care.

先是读过林思云的文章，觉得写的很有问题，然后去找资料，找到了《汪精卫集》。读过《革命之决心》那篇文章，大受感动，以前从来读革命历史小说等等东西从来都没有从自己的角度去考虑过，从没有把那些人与自己当成一类的人，我这辈子从来没有读过这么感人的文章，要是早生100年我也会参加革命。（那时候我还没有见过汪精卫的照片）读完《汪精卫集》第一卷（都是辛亥革命以前的政论文章），那些文章的条理都很清楚，很理智的。汪精卫本是日本法政大学留学生中学习最好的学生，又是“革命最坚决的”。（见孙穗芳著《我的祖父孙中山》一书238页 人民出版社1996年9月第一版）当时的青年知识分子参加革命都是奔着真理去的，是在学习了西方的先进政治思想后才参加革命的。恰好那时候我刚刚读完《社会契约论》，特别容易理解辛亥革命。我不能早生100年，却也开始思考中国之自由平等。

还有就是，一些资料读过之后，觉得流传很广的传记、文章等等，引用资料的时候都有断章取义之嫌，所以有时候把那些最原始的资料贴出来一下。至于争议最大的那部分，主要是感情上，大家都觉得义愤的事情，我更多的觉得是悲哀与怜悯。中国的命运为什么这么难啊！革命尚未成功！