论文部分内容阅读
Despite the current strident culture of positive reinforcement—compliment often！—people can have a natural skepticism towards those who offer praise too freely.1 They might be searching for some linguistic way to oil the wheels of social interaction， but remain wary of those who overdo it.
It’s easy to see why. Streams of compliments can betray either insincerity or ulterior motives.2 Reactions to praise can be telling， too. Mark Twain， in a chapter epigraph from Pudd’nhead Wilson’s New Calendar （1894） observes that “a dozen direct censures are easier to bear than one morganatic compliment”.3 The use of “morganatic”， or lopsided4， here is interesting—while usually used to talk about marriages between a member of a high-born family and someone of an inferior rank， Twain draws attention to a sense of social inequality and anxiety that seems wrapped up in accepting a compliment.
Those who find themselves on the receiving end5 of compliments can be particularly bad at accepting them. There are a few well-practised strategies for deflecting6 positive feedback. Perhaps the most odious7 is the counter-compliment： when “Nice jacket！” immediately gives rise to “I like your dress！” This can then be closely followed by the ever-modest： “This old thing？ It looks like I picked it out of a trash can！”
But why do people struggle so much when receiving compliments？
One simple explanation might be that they are left at an impasse8： to take a compliment is to violate the norm of modesty， yet to deflect or disagree with the compliment is to undermine its social function.
All this is perhaps partially true but it doesn’t explain why the person complimented chooses not to respond with a neutral “thank you”. In fact， to say thank you and thus， to accept the compliment， is essentially to go into debt. As any student of market exchange can explain， you can’t simply take a compliment without offering something in return.
Most of the time， people are well aware of the circumstances of exchange： they swap9 this for that. But in the rare circumstances when they’re not prepared with a counter-gift， they can be beset with feelings of guilt. Receiving a gift， Jacques Derrida10 thought， could make one feel like a debtor trapped in a cycle of economic exchange. People don’t like the feeling of being under obligation， and try to discharge11 the perceived inequality as quickly as possible.
Private gift-giving， as the Frankfurt school theorist Theodor Adorno12 worried， has become an empty ritual. There’s no denying that in at least some cases， people give gifts reluctantly. This has less to do with gift-giving itself， and more to do with the choosing of gifts. Gift-giving looks like an obligation， and a fairly widespread one at that. Sure， there is giving gifts to lovers， friends and family. But then there is also the world of white-elephant exchanges and Secret Santas，13 practices that keep gift-giving routines going well beyond the circles of people we know well enough to make choosing presents enjoyable. For these forced occasions， for， say， the coworker we’ve never spoken to， there are pre-printed cards and commercial guides. Even when the receiver is well-known， people want to minimise14 the effort needed for gifting. A relative once sent me a gift basket of dried fruit， nuts and cured15 meats； both the offending party and I are vegetarians.
If gift-giving has become more transactional， with the give-and-take an end unto itself， so has complimenting.
This forced choice—fulfill your obligation to return the praise or resign yourself16 to guilt—comes from belonging to a society structured around commodities and their exchange. The trouble is， if compliments are transactions， feeling that we’re beholden17 is a natural state of affairs. To imagine that we could completely overcome our ways of thinking about compliments， however， requires rethinking our social and economic forms of life. While a tall order18， this could be the true gift Adorno and Derrida were hoping for.
尽管当下的“正强化”文化甚嚣尘上——多多恭维！——人们还是会对那些溢美之辞张口就来的人保持自然的怀疑态度。他们也许在寻找某种语言的方式来润滑社交的轮子，但仍然对那些做得过了头的人保持警惕。
原因很简单：如滔滔江水连绵不绝的恭维话是表里不一、心怀鬼胎的表现。对溢美之词的反应也很能说明问题。马克·吐温在其《傻瓜威尔逊的新日历》（1894）中某章的警句写道：“一阵劈头盖脸的责骂比一句地位悬殊的人说出的恭维话更好忍受”。有趣的是，马克·吐温用了“morganatic”一词（该词通常用来指代贵贱联姻）或者说“悬殊”一词，让人们注意到他们在接受恭维时似乎难免会感到社会不平等且焦虑不安。
那些不得不接受恭维的人可能特别不善逢迎。人们转移这种积极称赞有一些常用的策略。也许其中最令人厌恶的就是这种回应：当面对“夹克真漂亮！”的夸赞时你马上回了一句“我喜欢你的裙子！”而对方便会以最谦虚的方式紧紧跟上：“这件旧东西？看上去像是我从垃圾桶里捡来的！”
但为何人们在受到恭维时如此纠结？
一种简单的解释认为可能是因为他们陷入了僵局：接受恭维会违反谦虚的规范，而转移或者否定恭维则会损害其社会功能。
或许这种说法从一定程度上来讲是正确的，但并没有解释为何被恭维的人不选择淡淡地答一句“谢谢”。事实上，道谢然后接受恭维本质是欠债。任何学习市场交易的人都可以解释，你不能只是接受恭维却毫无回报。
大多数时候人们都能很清楚地意识到存在交易的情况：他们用这个交换那个。但在少数情况下由于没准备回礼，他们会感到内疚。在雅克·德里达看来，接受礼物会让人感觉像是欠债一般，被困在经济交换的循环中无法抽身。人们不喜欢欠别人人情的感觉，会试图尽快摆脱这种可以感受到的不平等。
私人之间的赠送礼物，正如法兰克福学派理论家西奥多·阿多诺所担心的那样，已经变成了一种空洞的仪式。不可否认的是，至少在某些情况下，人们是不愿意送礼的。这与赠送礼物本身无关，更多是关于礼物的挑选。赠送礼物看上去像是一种义务，而且是种非常普遍的义务。当然，有一类“送礼”是向爱人、朋友和家人赠送礼物。但还有一类是像“白象礼物交换”和“秘密圣诞老人”的送礼游戏，这些做法让送礼的圈子不断扩大，大到那些我们足够熟知从而享受为其挑选礼物的圈子之外。
在这些无奈的情况下，比如说要给我们从没说过话的同事送礼，有提前印好的卡片和商品指南来帮我们应付。即使收礼方是自己所熟知的，人们仍希望尽可能少地在送礼上花工夫。一个亲戚曾送给我一个装着果干、坚果和腌肉的礼篮；而他（惹恼别人的一方）和我一样都是素食主义者。
如果送礼已经变得更像交易，赠与和收受本身成了目的，那么恭维也是一样。
要么履行义务老老实实回口称赞 ，要么任自己心生愧疚：我们之所以被迫做出这样的选择，是因为我们身处一个围绕商品及其交易所构建的社会。问题是，如果恭维是一种交易，那么产生负债感是很自然的事儿。然而，倘若想要彻底克服这种对待恭维的思维方式，我们必须反思生活的社会和经济形式。尽管难如登天，但这或许是阿多诺和德里达真正一直期待的礼物。
1. strident： 刺耳的；positive reinfor- cement： 正强化，在心理学中，正强化的定义是：任何导致我们以后进行该行为的可能性增加的结果；skepticism： 怀疑态度。
2. betray： 显露，表现出；ulterior： 藏在背后的，居心叵测的。
3. epigraph： 引语；censure： 责备； morganatic： 指王室、贵族成员与庶民通婚的。
4. lopsided： 严重不平衡的。
5. receiving end： 文中指处在接受恭维一方的人。
6. deflect： 转移。
7. odious： 令人厌恶的。
8. impasse： 僵局。
9. swap： 交换。
10. Jacques Derrida： 雅克·德里达（1930—2004），是20世纪下半叶最重要的法国思想家之一，西方解构主义的代表人物。
11. discharge： 清偿（债务）。
12. Theodor Adorno： 西奥多·阿多诺（1903—1969），德国哲学家、社会学家，法兰克福学派第一代的主要代表人物，社会批判理论的奠基者。
13. white-elephant exchanges： 白象礼物交换，是一种礼物交换游戏。白象礼物指的是被人们认为非常珍贵但是对于收礼人来说并无实用价值的“礼物”。这个游戏的意义在于，给每个人一个机会摆脱不喜欢的礼物，并能不断地获得新的礼物；Secret Santa： 秘密圣诞老人，是一种庆祝圣诞节的礼物交换游戏，指某团体成员随机送另一成员圣诞礼物。
14. minimise： 降到最低。
15. cured： 用干燥、熏、腌等方法加工贮藏的。
16. resign yourself to： 使自己听任，使自己顺从。
17. be beholden to： 欠……人情的。
18. tall order： 离谱的要求。
It’s easy to see why. Streams of compliments can betray either insincerity or ulterior motives.2 Reactions to praise can be telling， too. Mark Twain， in a chapter epigraph from Pudd’nhead Wilson’s New Calendar （1894） observes that “a dozen direct censures are easier to bear than one morganatic compliment”.3 The use of “morganatic”， or lopsided4， here is interesting—while usually used to talk about marriages between a member of a high-born family and someone of an inferior rank， Twain draws attention to a sense of social inequality and anxiety that seems wrapped up in accepting a compliment.
Those who find themselves on the receiving end5 of compliments can be particularly bad at accepting them. There are a few well-practised strategies for deflecting6 positive feedback. Perhaps the most odious7 is the counter-compliment： when “Nice jacket！” immediately gives rise to “I like your dress！” This can then be closely followed by the ever-modest： “This old thing？ It looks like I picked it out of a trash can！”
But why do people struggle so much when receiving compliments？
One simple explanation might be that they are left at an impasse8： to take a compliment is to violate the norm of modesty， yet to deflect or disagree with the compliment is to undermine its social function.
All this is perhaps partially true but it doesn’t explain why the person complimented chooses not to respond with a neutral “thank you”. In fact， to say thank you and thus， to accept the compliment， is essentially to go into debt. As any student of market exchange can explain， you can’t simply take a compliment without offering something in return.
Most of the time， people are well aware of the circumstances of exchange： they swap9 this for that. But in the rare circumstances when they’re not prepared with a counter-gift， they can be beset with feelings of guilt. Receiving a gift， Jacques Derrida10 thought， could make one feel like a debtor trapped in a cycle of economic exchange. People don’t like the feeling of being under obligation， and try to discharge11 the perceived inequality as quickly as possible.
Private gift-giving， as the Frankfurt school theorist Theodor Adorno12 worried， has become an empty ritual. There’s no denying that in at least some cases， people give gifts reluctantly. This has less to do with gift-giving itself， and more to do with the choosing of gifts. Gift-giving looks like an obligation， and a fairly widespread one at that. Sure， there is giving gifts to lovers， friends and family. But then there is also the world of white-elephant exchanges and Secret Santas，13 practices that keep gift-giving routines going well beyond the circles of people we know well enough to make choosing presents enjoyable. For these forced occasions， for， say， the coworker we’ve never spoken to， there are pre-printed cards and commercial guides. Even when the receiver is well-known， people want to minimise14 the effort needed for gifting. A relative once sent me a gift basket of dried fruit， nuts and cured15 meats； both the offending party and I are vegetarians.
If gift-giving has become more transactional， with the give-and-take an end unto itself， so has complimenting.
This forced choice—fulfill your obligation to return the praise or resign yourself16 to guilt—comes from belonging to a society structured around commodities and their exchange. The trouble is， if compliments are transactions， feeling that we’re beholden17 is a natural state of affairs. To imagine that we could completely overcome our ways of thinking about compliments， however， requires rethinking our social and economic forms of life. While a tall order18， this could be the true gift Adorno and Derrida were hoping for.
尽管当下的“正强化”文化甚嚣尘上——多多恭维！——人们还是会对那些溢美之辞张口就来的人保持自然的怀疑态度。他们也许在寻找某种语言的方式来润滑社交的轮子，但仍然对那些做得过了头的人保持警惕。
原因很简单：如滔滔江水连绵不绝的恭维话是表里不一、心怀鬼胎的表现。对溢美之词的反应也很能说明问题。马克·吐温在其《傻瓜威尔逊的新日历》（1894）中某章的警句写道：“一阵劈头盖脸的责骂比一句地位悬殊的人说出的恭维话更好忍受”。有趣的是，马克·吐温用了“morganatic”一词（该词通常用来指代贵贱联姻）或者说“悬殊”一词，让人们注意到他们在接受恭维时似乎难免会感到社会不平等且焦虑不安。
那些不得不接受恭维的人可能特别不善逢迎。人们转移这种积极称赞有一些常用的策略。也许其中最令人厌恶的就是这种回应：当面对“夹克真漂亮！”的夸赞时你马上回了一句“我喜欢你的裙子！”而对方便会以最谦虚的方式紧紧跟上：“这件旧东西？看上去像是我从垃圾桶里捡来的！”
但为何人们在受到恭维时如此纠结？
一种简单的解释认为可能是因为他们陷入了僵局：接受恭维会违反谦虚的规范，而转移或者否定恭维则会损害其社会功能。
或许这种说法从一定程度上来讲是正确的，但并没有解释为何被恭维的人不选择淡淡地答一句“谢谢”。事实上，道谢然后接受恭维本质是欠债。任何学习市场交易的人都可以解释，你不能只是接受恭维却毫无回报。
大多数时候人们都能很清楚地意识到存在交易的情况：他们用这个交换那个。但在少数情况下由于没准备回礼，他们会感到内疚。在雅克·德里达看来，接受礼物会让人感觉像是欠债一般，被困在经济交换的循环中无法抽身。人们不喜欢欠别人人情的感觉，会试图尽快摆脱这种可以感受到的不平等。
私人之间的赠送礼物，正如法兰克福学派理论家西奥多·阿多诺所担心的那样，已经变成了一种空洞的仪式。不可否认的是，至少在某些情况下，人们是不愿意送礼的。这与赠送礼物本身无关，更多是关于礼物的挑选。赠送礼物看上去像是一种义务，而且是种非常普遍的义务。当然，有一类“送礼”是向爱人、朋友和家人赠送礼物。但还有一类是像“白象礼物交换”和“秘密圣诞老人”的送礼游戏，这些做法让送礼的圈子不断扩大，大到那些我们足够熟知从而享受为其挑选礼物的圈子之外。
在这些无奈的情况下，比如说要给我们从没说过话的同事送礼，有提前印好的卡片和商品指南来帮我们应付。即使收礼方是自己所熟知的，人们仍希望尽可能少地在送礼上花工夫。一个亲戚曾送给我一个装着果干、坚果和腌肉的礼篮；而他（惹恼别人的一方）和我一样都是素食主义者。
如果送礼已经变得更像交易，赠与和收受本身成了目的，那么恭维也是一样。
要么履行义务老老实实回口称赞 ，要么任自己心生愧疚：我们之所以被迫做出这样的选择，是因为我们身处一个围绕商品及其交易所构建的社会。问题是，如果恭维是一种交易，那么产生负债感是很自然的事儿。然而，倘若想要彻底克服这种对待恭维的思维方式，我们必须反思生活的社会和经济形式。尽管难如登天，但这或许是阿多诺和德里达真正一直期待的礼物。
1. strident： 刺耳的；positive reinfor- cement： 正强化，在心理学中，正强化的定义是：任何导致我们以后进行该行为的可能性增加的结果；skepticism： 怀疑态度。
2. betray： 显露，表现出；ulterior： 藏在背后的，居心叵测的。
3. epigraph： 引语；censure： 责备； morganatic： 指王室、贵族成员与庶民通婚的。
4. lopsided： 严重不平衡的。
5. receiving end： 文中指处在接受恭维一方的人。
6. deflect： 转移。
7. odious： 令人厌恶的。
8. impasse： 僵局。
9. swap： 交换。
10. Jacques Derrida： 雅克·德里达（1930—2004），是20世纪下半叶最重要的法国思想家之一，西方解构主义的代表人物。
11. discharge： 清偿（债务）。
12. Theodor Adorno： 西奥多·阿多诺（1903—1969），德国哲学家、社会学家，法兰克福学派第一代的主要代表人物，社会批判理论的奠基者。
13. white-elephant exchanges： 白象礼物交换，是一种礼物交换游戏。白象礼物指的是被人们认为非常珍贵但是对于收礼人来说并无实用价值的“礼物”。这个游戏的意义在于，给每个人一个机会摆脱不喜欢的礼物，并能不断地获得新的礼物；Secret Santa： 秘密圣诞老人，是一种庆祝圣诞节的礼物交换游戏，指某团体成员随机送另一成员圣诞礼物。
14. minimise： 降到最低。
15. cured： 用干燥、熏、腌等方法加工贮藏的。
16. resign yourself to： 使自己听任，使自己顺从。
17. be beholden to： 欠……人情的。
18. tall order： 离谱的要求。