君子有怒，發(fā)之有道

We have lost the art of the unsent angry letter, says a recent New York Times column.

“寫(xiě)一封不會(huì)寄出的‘憤怒信’已經(jīng)成為了一項(xiàng)失傳的藝術(shù)。”《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》最近的專(zhuān)欄文章如是寫(xiě)到。

The writer, Maria Konnikova, says many famous people had the habit of writing letters expressing their frustrations toward their receivers and then destroying the missives. Whenever former US President Abraham Lincoln felt the urge to tell someone off, he would compose what he called a “hot letter”. He would vent all of his anger into a note, put it aside until his emotions cooled down, and then he would write on the letter: “Never sent. Never signed.”

該文章的作者瑪麗亞•科尼科娃寫(xiě)到：很多名人在憤怒時(shí)都會(huì)給惹怒他的人寫(xiě)信表達(dá)憤怒，然后再撕掉這封信。曾經(jīng)的美國(guó)總統(tǒng)亞伯拉罕•林肯就是其中之一，他每次想要責(zé)罵別人時(shí)就會(huì)寫(xiě)一封他所謂的 “怒火之信”，把所有的憤怒都寫(xiě)進(jìn)信中，然后將其放在一邊直到自己平靜下來(lái)，再在信上寫(xiě)上“永不署名、永不寄出”。

Konnikova says the unsent angry letter used to be a tradition among public figures who needed to think twice about their choice of words. Former US president Harry S. Truman, former UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill and American author Mark Twain all wrote unsent angry letters.

科尼科娃說(shuō)，作為名人間的一項(xiàng)傳統(tǒng)，永不寄出的憤怒信曾讓他們?nèi)甲约旱那苍~造句。同樣出任過(guò)美國(guó)總統(tǒng)的哈里•杜魯門(mén)、曾經(jīng)的英國(guó)首相溫斯頓•丘吉爾以及美國(guó)作家馬克•吐溫都曾寫(xiě)過(guò)這樣的憤怒信。

There are two benefits of unsent letter, says Konnikova: “It serves as a type of emotional catharsis, a way to let it all out without the repercussions of true engagement. And it acts as a strategic catharsis, an exercise in saying what you really think.”

科尼科娃認(rèn)為這種做法有兩方面好處，一是“作為感性宣泄感情的方式，在不會(huì)產(chǎn)生實(shí)際影響的情況下把感情全部發(fā)泄出來(lái)。”二是“作為感情宣泄的訓(xùn)練，讓你能表達(dá)出自己的真實(shí)想法。”

Place to vent

宣泄之道

In the social media age, we have more channels to express immediate displeasure than ever before. Venting our negative feelings is easy. But it also means we forego our chance to think twice and act differently.

在這個(gè)社交媒體流行的年代，我們有了更多即刻發(fā)泄不滿(mǎn)的途徑。宣泄負(fù)面情緒變得更容易。但是，這也意味著我們正在放棄三思而后行的選項(xiàng)。

When Lincoln wanted to write his “hot letter”, he had to find a pen and a piece of paper. That process alone provided an opportunity to curb impulse, and time to determine if his anger should be voiced or be kept quiet. Now we need only click a button to send our complaints and hurtful words on their way. In the heat of the moment, says Konnikova: “We find the line between an appropriate response and one that needs a cooling-off period blurring.” We have lost a buffer zone to determine what needs to be said and what needs to only to be felt. It’s especially true when we see similarly angry commentary coming from others, says Konnikova. Our own anger begins to feel more socially appropriate and justified.

林肯想要寫(xiě)“怒火之信”時(shí)，尋找紙筆的過(guò)程能讓他冷靜下來(lái)，讓他有時(shí)間決定到底是要為自己的憤怒發(fā)聲，還是要將憤怒留在心底。而現(xiàn)在，我們只需點(diǎn)一下鼠標(biāo)，自己的牢騷之語(yǔ)、傷人之言就能迅速發(fā)送出去?？颇峥仆拚f(shuō)，現(xiàn)在的人在怒發(fā)沖冠時(shí)，“不再需要冷靜期就能做出所謂恰當(dāng)?shù)幕貞?yīng)”。(現(xiàn)代社交媒體讓)我們失去了緩沖，沒(méi)有時(shí)間三思哪些話(huà)應(yīng)該說(shuō)，哪些情緒需要宣泄。這一點(diǎn)也尤其適用于我們看到別人同樣怒氣沖沖的評(píng)論之時(shí)?？颇峥仆拚J(rèn)為，我們因此更會(huì)覺(jué)得我們的憤怒符合社會(huì)規(guī)范的天經(jīng)地義的。

Perhaps that’s why we see so much anger and hatred online, so many anonymous, bitter comments, so many imprudent tweets and messy posts, says Konnikova. Because creating them is so easy, you feel it less a satisfying experience to vent out your feelings, so you feel the need to do it more often. When your emotions never quite cool, they keep coming out in other ways.

在科尼科娃看來(lái)，這也許就是為什么現(xiàn)在網(wǎng)上出現(xiàn)了如此多憤恨之言、匿名的尖酸之語(yǔ)、粗魯?shù)耐铺貭顟B(tài)、以及滿(mǎn)是臟話(huà)的回復(fù)。因?yàn)榘l(fā)布這一切太過(guò)容易，甚至讓你覺(jué)得發(fā)一條已經(jīng)不能滿(mǎn)足自己宣泄的欲望，需要發(fā)更多來(lái)才能痛快。只要你的情緒尚未平靜，你就會(huì)另尋他法將其宣泄。