Posted by: righteyeworld | March 29, 2011

亲亲宝贝

这几天上海天气好,春暖花开
昨天爷爷带他出去滑滑梯,
小家伙很凶的,比她大的小朋友要玩她都不让
还去推别人
搞不懂怎么这样子的!天哪!!!像谁啊???
负负得正还是基因突变?
这小东西属牛的,脾气也很犟
乖起来很乖,皮起来超级皮

昨晚妞妞很困了,就耍赖皮不想洗脸洗PP,
骗她说不洗PP就是臭宝宝了,臭宝宝好不好? 她说“好!” 
后来骗她毛毛虫会来咬臭PP的,她就妥协了
没办法啊
你真不知道这小坏蛋多厉害呢
哭闹起来那真是惊天动地
而且,但凡她不愿意的事情,怎么说她都是不肯就范的
我们得出结论恐怕是有点基因突变的

Posted by: righteyeworld | March 3, 2011

Remarks of Bill Gates, Harvard Commencement 2007

President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:

I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”

I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.

I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.

But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.

Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.

One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.

I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.

What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.

I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.

I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.

It took me decades to find out.

You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.

We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.

If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”

So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”

The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

But you and I have both.

We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world.
This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.”
I completely disagree.

I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.

The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.

Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”

The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.

If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior.

Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.

The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.

You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.

But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.

I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.

What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?

You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.

Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.

The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”

Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.

The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.

The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion — smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.

We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.

Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.

What for?

There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?

Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:

Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?

Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the prevalence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?

Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?

These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.

My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: “From those to whom much is given, much is expected.”

When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.

In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.

Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.

You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort.
You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.

Knowing what you know, how could you not?

And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.

Good luck.

Posted by: righteyeworld | March 3, 2011

‘You’ve got to find what you love,’ Jobs says

This is the text of the Commencement address by Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer and of Pixar Animation Studios, delivered on June 12, 2005.

I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I’ve ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That’s it. No big deal. Just three stories.

The first story is about connecting the dots.

I dropped out of Reed College after the first 6 months, but then stayed around as a drop-in for another 18 months or so before I really quit. So why did I drop out?

It started before I was born. My biological mother was a young, unwed college graduate student, and she decided to put me up for adoption. She felt very strongly that I should be adopted by college graduates, so everything was all set for me to be adopted at birth by a lawyer and his wife. Except that when I popped out they decided at the last minute that they really wanted a girl. So my parents, who were on a waiting list, got a call in the middle of the night asking: “We have an unexpected baby boy; do you want him?” They said: “Of course.” My biological mother later found out that my mother had never graduated from college and that my father had never graduated from high school. She refused to sign the final adoption papers. She only relented a few months later when my parents promised that I would someday go to college.

And 17 years later I did go to college. But I naively chose a college that was almost as expensive as Stanford, and all of my working-class parents’ savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn’t see the value in it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out. And here I was spending all of the money my parents had saved their entire life. So I decided to drop out and trust that it would all work out OK. It was pretty scary at the time, but looking back it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The minute I dropped out I could stop taking the required classes that didn’t interest me, and begin dropping in on the ones that looked interesting.

It wasn’t all romantic. I didn’t have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends’ rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5¢ deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on. Let me give you one example:

Reed College at that time offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully hand calligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn’t have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can’t capture, and I found it fascinating.

None of this had even a hope of any practical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the first Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It was the first computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, it’s likely that no personal computer would have them. If I had never dropped out, I would have never dropped in on this calligraphy class, and personal computers might not have the wonderful typography that they do. Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.

Again, you can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.

My second story is about love and loss.

I was lucky — I found what I loved to do early in life. Woz and I started Apple in my parents garage when I was 20. We worked hard, and in 10 years Apple had grown from just the two of us in a garage into a $2 billion company with over 4000 employees. We had just released our finest creation — the Macintosh — a year earlier, and I had just turned 30. And then I got fired. How can you get fired from a company you started? Well, as Apple grew we hired someone who I thought was very talented to run the company with me, and for the first year or so things went well. But then our visions of the future began to diverge and eventually we had a falling out. When we did, our Board of Directors sided with him. So at 30 I was out. And very publicly out. What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating.

I really didn’t know what to do for a few months. I felt that I had let the previous generation of entrepreneurs down – that I had dropped the baton as it was being passed to me. I met with David Packard and Bob Noyce and tried to apologize for screwing up so badly. I was a very public failure, and I even thought about running away from the valley. But something slowly began to dawn on me — I still loved what I did. The turn of events at Apple had not changed that one bit. I had been rejected, but I was still in love. And so I decided to start over.

I didn’t see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life.

During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife. Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple’s current renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.

I’m pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn’t been fired from Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it. Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don’t lose faith. I’m convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You’ve got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don’t settle.

My third story is about death.

When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: “If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you’ll most certainly be right.” It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: “If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?” And whenever the answer has been “No” for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.

Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure – these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.

About a year ago I was diagnosed with cancer. I had a scan at 7:30 in the morning, and it clearly showed a tumor on my pancreas. I didn’t even know what a pancreas was. The doctors told me this was almost certainly a type of cancer that is incurable, and that I should expect to live no longer than three to six months. My doctor advised me to go home and get my affairs in order, which is doctor’s code for prepare to die. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you’d have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means to make sure everything is buttoned up so that it will be as easy as possible for your family. It means to say your goodbyes.

I lived with that diagnosis all day. Later that evening I had a biopsy, where they stuck an endoscope down my throat, through my stomach and into my intestines, put a needle into my pancreas and got a few cells from the tumor. I was sedated, but my wife, who was there, told me that when they viewed the cells under a microscope the doctors started crying because it turned out to be a very rare form of pancreatic cancer that is curable with surgery. I had the surgery and thankfully I’m fine now.

This was the closest I’ve been to facing death, and I hope it’s the closest I get for a few more decades. Having lived through it, I can now say this to you with a bit more certainty than when death was a useful but purely intellectual concept:

No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don’t want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.

Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.

When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960’s, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.

Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: “Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.” It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.

Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.

Thank you all very much.

Posted by: righteyeworld | January 24, 2011

What a life

Posted by: righteyeworld | October 14, 2010

From Pocket Science

http://www.youtube.com/georgezaidan#p/u/23/HLvk7qg8_UI

Posted by: righteyeworld | October 12, 2010

Dear Baby

she is a GREAT destroyer now !
destroy everything on her hands
国庆节去镇江外婆家,在她阿姨和外婆新装修不久的家里,床上,沙发上都留下了她画的“地图”
所有她的哥哥、姐姐玩过留给她的玩具都好好的,到了她手上基本都被搞坏了
很多种玩具了
能扯的她就扯断
我家电饭锅盖子被她摔坏
我们现在叫她“小魔头”了

Posted by: righteyeworld | September 16, 2010

Dear baby

she can walk independently now
she can say simple words like 爸爸、妈妈、鱼 (her pet)、鸭鸭 (鸭鸭 is in her cartoon mtv)…
now she is the master of “一阳指”
指哪儿我们就要看哪儿,然后就“嗯、嗯、嗯”叫我们拿给她
拿错了她就很快速的往地上一扔
又好气又好笑
现在问她“小坏蛋呢?”有时候她会指指自己

Posted by: righteyeworld | September 6, 2010

读书笔记 from 左眼

柳如是整个一个红楼女子的集合体,最开始她是晴雯,被老爸插了个草标在自由市场上卖了,也许柳如是女大十八变,越长越漂亮,于是她像狗狗的股票似的,价格在短短的几年内翻了好几倍,她也被辗转卖了好几道,最后她的父母姓甚名谁,已经淹没而不可考,小柳的简历上最早的work experience是在盛泽名妓徐佛家做瘦马。

这个瘦马不是在徐佛家拉磨搬货,而是前段日子里聊到过的”大同的婆娘,扬州的瘦马“里的”瘦马“。。。

话说柳如是在徐佛家做internship,还没来得及正是持照上岗,被一个人看上了。这个人不是个男人,而是个老太太。这个老太太不是一般老太太,她是周道登他妈。

周道登他妈咋就不一般了呢。因为周道登曾任礼部尚书,那是副总理级别的干部,周老太太等于是副总理他妈。后来周道登被罢官回到老家吴江,老家人叫他”吴江故相“,就是曾经的总理(中国人的习惯,一般都把”副“隐去不提。)

还要八一下的是,这个周道登是宋代者名哲学家周敦颐的玄孙,周敦颐是宋代理学的开山鼻祖,我们在中学都学过他的《爱莲说》。周敦颐懂”可远观而不可亵玩焉“的道理,他的玄孙可不懂,于是有了后面的故事。。。

后面的故事就是红楼里鸳鸯的故事,贾老太太。。哦不,周老太太对小柳是相当地喜欢,不知道是这喜欢感染了周道登呢,还是周道登早就心怀鬼胎,反正周道登打算向贾赦学习,立志要娶小柳为妾。。。(从时间上看,好像应该是贾赦向周道登学习。。。不管了)

小柳当初也是着意抗争了一番,但也许是因为被卖的次数多了,不像鸳鸯是家养的奴才,小柳的抗争比之鸳鸯的刚烈要柔和了许多。又也许是前有金莲,后有鸳鸯,拒嫁老男人最后的结局都相当悲惨,小柳在一番柔和的抗争无果后,从了。然后的故事又和《大红灯笼高高挂》有些类似了。。。

皇帝重长子,百姓疼幺儿,中国的老男人个个都是萝莉控。所以想必小柳同学刚过门时,是很得老周的宠爱的。而且中国古代老男人还有一个毛病:爱教姨太太读书写字。小柳同学就是在这个时候打下了坚实的文化基础。。。

也不知道别的太太和姨太太们是羡慕嫉妒恨小柳门前挂灯笼的次数多,还是小刘的学习成绩好,总之,以前打得不可开交的太太姨太太们空前合作起来,要抓小柳同学的短。没让她们等太久,这个短就被她们抓着了。。。

这个短就是小柳同学和周府的劈柴火的小厮搞上了,就是查泰来夫人的情人的中国版。

这个短是怎么被抓的已经久不可考,但是肯定不是捉奸在床。因为小柳同学简称自己无意落花,是小厮自己有情流水。。。后代小柳粉丝也坚称小柳同学是被冤枉的,是太太姨太太们嫉妒恨而陷害小柳同学。

客观地分析一下,太太姨太太们的“捉奸”即使是捕风捉影,但未必就是空穴来风。因为地位的差别,小柳如果没有些许暗示,小厮有意也没胆动情。。。

虽然老周宠爱小柳同学,但是明朝理学正是极盛之时,小妾旁逸斜出那是大大挑战了那时的“道德”底线,所以老周也保不了小柳同学。正当大家伙讨论怎么把小柳同学“做特”的具体方式时,是沉井还是装猪笼沉江呢?周老太太出来说话了。。。

周老太太一直是相当喜欢小柳同学的,具体怎么喜欢法大家可以参考贾母夸鸳鸯的字句。周老太太出面说情:看在以前小柳同学的表现的份上,沉井沉江就算了,把她逐出家门吧。。。

不要以为逐出家门是解脱,是重归自由,那个时候被休,被逐出家门都是相当丢脸相当难堪的事情,要不金钏儿因为王夫人要把她逐出贾府就跳了井呢。所以说,这个逐出家门和沉井其实是差不多的惩罚,也是因为这个原因,周老太太的提议才得到了太太姨太太们的认可。

小柳没有娘家,被逐后再茫茫天地里飘荡,那个时候深圳还是个小渔村,不招外来妹,饭馆里的服务员都是男性店小二,饭店门口也不兴戳俩穿着高开气儿旗袍的迎宾女郎,小柳mm几乎就走投无路了。。。

不知道是谁说过一句话:女人学会了一件本事,就不舍得不拿出来用。小柳mm想起自己毕竟自己是在名企做过internship的,于是崇祯四年,小柳正式堕入风尘,挂牌营业。

不知道小柳MM幕后是不是有推手,还是小柳本人就深谙炒作之道,小柳挂的牌是:”故相下堂妾”,翻译成现代白话就是:我曾是国家前总理的小老婆。。。

一有在名校(徐佛家)打下的专业基础,二有在周道登家打下的文化基础,三有这个“故相下堂妾”的卖点,再加上年轻,执照营业时才十四出头,小柳MM想不红都难。很快在小柳的门前就聚集了无穷粉丝。

客大欺店,店大欺客。小柳粉丝多了,自然对有资格亲近芳泽的粉丝挑选就严格了起来,一当然还是要看家底厚不厚,二要看有没有文才,简单地讲就是:小柳大门朝南开,有钱无才莫进来。

据陈大师考证,因有钱无才被拒绝的就有富四代徐老三。徐老三是明朝首辅徐阶的曾孙。徐老三仰慕小柳MM的艳名与才名,携了许多银子去见小柳MM。小柳MM说:银子你留下吧,不过来我这里的都是风雅之士,你也没啥文化,在旁边呆着也无趣得很,要不你先回去补补文化课再来。

别看富四代徐老三是个纨绔子弟,但却是个老实人,对小柳MM说:我每月中和月末来送银子,等我文化水平提高了再见你,说着就回去读书学习上晚自习去了。。。

过了三个月,徐老三回来说:我已有高小毕业文化水平,求见柳姑娘。小柳因为毕竟每月两次收人家银子,不好回绝,只得硬着头皮答应一见。徐老三见到小柳,不知道是因为紧张还是因为别的,憋了半天,来了句:久慕芳姿,幸得一见。

说实话,在我看来这句话还是蛮得体的,不过可能因为徐老三貌似薛蟠,冒出这么一句文绉绉的话实在是不协调,反正当时把小柳MM的一口茶都笑喷了出去,幸好不时网聊,否则小柳MM的显示器就毁了。

再说徐老三看见小柳MM笑得花枝乱颤,以为自己的文采博得美人欢心,高兴地要命,更加要着意卖弄一番,于是紧跟着一句:一笑倾人城。小柳又是一扑哧,徐老三更高兴了,又继续说道:再笑倾人国。。。

没想到这下小柳MM不笑了,转身走了。过了会儿老鸨出来,拿了一缕头发,对徐老三说:柳姑娘身体不适,这是她的一缕青丝,留作纪念吧,你以后也不要来了。。。

徐老三就这样花了大笔银子,还被臊眉搭眼地哄出了门。这件事为小柳MM的后来买下了一个祸根。。。

这个祸根稍后再讲,先说小柳等啊等,终于在从业两年的时候,也就是崇祯六年,盼来了一个体健貌端家世好,热爱文学且自己水平也相当不错的富二代公子宋辕文。这时小柳MM正是二八十六的好年华,青豆初开,所以虽然已经离异,但小柳MM这才迎来她的初恋。

前几天谁说的来着,越是年轻的女子越是能作。十六岁的小柳MM就相当地作。头天晚上和小宋约好了第二天一早泛舟湖上春游,等第二天小宋来找她时,她还在睡懒觉不肯起床。她不肯起床也就罢了,她还让侍女传话给小宋公子:你到湖中等我,BTW·,不是在船上等哦,要到湖水里等。。。

早春三月啊,春寒料峭,在湖边走走都有些凉得想打哆嗦,幸好小宋也正当贱在弦上不得不犯的年纪,二话不说,就跳进了湖里。。。

历史经验无数次证明,犯贱犯得再猛,也不代表感情就有多么深,尤其是男人的犯贱,与其说是出于对对方的深情,不如说是缘于自身的躁动的多血质。所以在寒潭试真情,小柳MM以身相许后不久,小柳和小宋的恋情迎来了第一个挑战,小宋的老妈粉墨登场了。。。

///////////////////////////////////////////
纯子要看小柳的才情啊?恩,这里有一篇

男洛神赋 有序

友人感神沧溟,役思妍丽,称以辨服群智,约术芳鉴,非止过于所为,盖虑求其至者也。偶来寒溆,苍茫微堕,出水窈然,殆将惑其流逸,会其妙散。因思古人征端于虚无空洞者,未必有若斯之真也。引属其事。渝失者或非矣。况重其请,遂为之赋。

格日景之轶绎,荡回风之濙远。縡漴然而变匿,意纷讹而鳞衡。望便娟以熠耀,粲黝绮于琉陈。横上下而仄隐,寔澹流之感纯。配清姓之所处,俾上客其逶轮。水集集而高衍,舟冥冥以伏深。虽藻纨之可思,竟隆杰而飞文。骋孝绰之早辩,服阳夏之妍声。于是徴合神契,典泽婉引。揽愉乐之韬映,撷凝蛽而难捐。四寂漻以不返,惟玄旨之系搴。听坠危之落叶,既萍浮而无涯。临汜藏之萌濭,多漎裔于肆掩。况乎浩觞之猗摩,初无伤于吾道。羊吾之吟咏,更奚病其曼连。善憀栗之近心,吹寒帷之过降。乃瞻星汉,溯河梁。云馺嵃而不敷,波窲杂以并烺。凄思内旷,槭理妙观。消矆崒于戾疾,承辉嫮之微芳。伊苍傃之莫记,惟隽朗之忽忘。惊淑美之轻堕,怅肃川之混茫。因四顾之速援,始嫚嫚之近旁。何熿耀之绝殊,更妙鄢之去俗。匪榆曵之嬛柔,具灵矫之烂眇。水气酷而上芳,严威沆以窈窕。尚结风之栖冶,刻丹楹之纤笑。纵鸿削而难加,纷琬琰其无睹。凫雁感而上腾。潾灦回而争就。方的砾而齐弛,遵襳瞹以私纵。尔乃色愉神授,和体饰芬。启奋迅之逸姿,信婉嘉之特立。群妩媚而悉举,无幽丽而勿臻。椩乎缈兮,斯因不得而夷者也。至其浑摅自然之涂,恋怀俯仰之内,景容与以不息,质寄焕以相依。庶纷郁之可登,建艳蔤之非易。愧翠羽之炫宣,乏琅玕而迭委。即瀖妙之相进,亦速流之诡词。欲乘时以极泓,聿鼓琴面意垂。播江皋之灵润。何瑰异之可欺。协玄响于湘娥,匹匏瓜于织女。斯盘桓以丧忧,雕疏而取志。微扬蛾之为諐,案长眉之瞴色。非彷佛者之所尽,岂漠通者之可测。自鲜缭绕之才,足以穷此烂漾之熊矣。

金明池·咏寒柳
有怅寒潮,无情残照,正是萧萧南浦。更吹起,霜条孤影,还记得,旧时飞絮。况晚来,烟浪斜阳,见行客,特地瘦腰如舞。总一种凄凉,十分憔悴,尚有燕台佳句。
春日酿成秋日雨。念畴昔风流,暗伤如许。纵饶有,绕堤画舸,冷落尽,水云犹故。忆从前,一点东风,几隔着重帘,眉儿愁苦。待约个梅魂,黄昏月淡,与伊深怜低语。

江城子·忆梦
梦中本是伤心路。芙蓉泪,樱桃语。满帘花片,都受人心误。
遮莫今宵风雨话,要他来,来得么。
安排无限销魂事。砑红笺,青绫被。留他无计,去便随他去。
算来还有许多时,人近也,愁回处。

南乡子·落花
拂断垂垂雨,伤心荡尽春风语。况是樱桃薇院也,堪悲。又有个人儿似你。
莫道无归处,点点香魂清梦里。做杀多情留不得,飞去。愿他少识相思路。

杨白花
杨花飞去泪沾臆,杨花飞来意还息。
可怜杨柳花,忍思入南家。
杨花去时心不难,南家结子何时还?
杨白花还恨,飞去入闺闼,
但恨杨花初拾时,不抱杨花凤巢里。
却爱含情多结子,愿得有力知春风。
杨花朝去暮复离

杨花
轻风淡丽绣帘垂,婀娜帘开花亦随。
春草先笼红芍药,雕栏多分白棠梨。
黄鹂梦化原无晓,杜宇声消不上枝。
杨柳杨花皆可恨,相思无奈雨丝丝。

杨柳·其一
不见长条见短枝,止缘幽恨减芳时。
年来几度丝千尺,引得丝长易别离。
杨柳·其二
玉阶鸾镜总春吹,绣影旎迷香影迟。
忆得临风大垂手,销魂原是管相思。
///////////////////////////////////////
“要看传世名句,有哪几句?”

这个要求太高了,传世名句不光在于才情,还要取决于其社会地位。一个妓女的诗文再好,也难选进中小学课本,自然也就不会有人耳熟能详的名句了。出生妓门,能以诗文字画见长的,除了个薛涛和柳如是,找不出第三个人了。。。
///////////////////////////////////////

宋老太太出场后的发言很简单:有她无我,有我无她!

中国古代女子地位不高,但是中国古代老太太在子女的婚姻关系中的所起的作用是至关重要的。子女也不是没有反抗的,但最终结果往往是忠孝不能两全,先有焦仲卿自挂了东南枝,后有陆放翁在那儿空叹“错错错”,小宋也不能例外,虽然没有正式和小柳解除男女朋友关系,但是约会的频率是越来越稀疏了,这也就离小宋跳到湖水里犯贱才几个月时间。

后来真正导致小宋小柳一刀两断的原因却是由于前面提到的得罪徐老三买下的祸根引发的。这徐老三他爹是当地的郡守,今天的官职相当于市长。虽然市长未必稀罕让个烟花女子做儿媳妇,但是烟花女子居然没看上自己的儿子,这也太侮辱银了!于是市长决定搞个扫黄打非,查抄了大明朝的“天上人间”,也就是小柳的凤楼。并以没有户口,也没有暂住证为由,要把小柳驱逐出境。

小柳着急把小宋找来,让小宋帮想个办法。小柳并没有要求小宋赶紧娶了自己以便办结婚绿卡,不过是想让小宋家里出个面说个情。结果小宋这个怂人来了句:要不,你就先躲出去避避风头?

小柳那个暴脾气哪受得了这个,一杯热茶就泼到了小宋脸上,然后把面前的七弦琴的七根琴弦生生拉断,告诉小宋说:咱们的关系如同此弦,从此一刀两断!别看小柳是个女子,其性格比很多男子还要刚猛,后来要求老钱跳湖殉国的时候也是这样,这些容后再八。

再说小宋这个多血质的贱人,还真是命中就是不断犯贱的,小柳和他断绝关系了,他反而放不下了,又回来求小柳要求和好,但是小柳一直没接他的茬儿。小宋后来写了无穷的诗文怀念小柳,直到小柳和老钱都同居了,他还在给小柳写情书骚扰。唉,这深情和犯贱之间的界限确实难以划分。。。

再说小柳到底有没有被扫黄办公室遣送回原籍呢?答案是:木有。在小柳走投无路之时,一个人跳出来抚慰小柳那颗受伤的心了,这人还是小宋的一个老哥们儿。。。

Posted by: righteyeworld | August 17, 2010

Dear baby

小家伙很臭美的
问她“漂亮衫衫呢?”,就会拍自己肚皮
问她“好宝宝呢?” 也会拍拍自己
问她“妞妞呢?”她拍自己肚皮
问她“吴雨涵呢?”她是用手指点自己鼻子 (不清楚她这两个动作的心态,呵呵)
问她“小坏蛋呢?”她就把手掌摊开,表示“没有” (不晓得她怎么懂得褒义词和贬义词的)
有时候睡觉也会自己笑起来的
早上她如果睡到自然醒,就会看着你笑,笑眯眯的很开心
如果是被吵醒的就不行

Posted by: righteyeworld | May 27, 2010

《心愿》 词: 王泽 曲: 王泽

湖水是你的眼神 梦想满天星辰
心情是一个传说 亘古不变地等候
成长是一扇树叶的门 童年有一群亲爱的人
春天是一段路程 沧海桑田的拥有
那些我爱的人 那些离逝的风
那些永远的誓言一遍一遍 那些爱我的人
那些沉淀的泪 那些永远的誓言一遍一遍
我们都曾有过一张天真而忧伤的脸
手握阳光我们望着遥远 轻轻的一天天一年又一年
长大间我们是否还会再唱起 心愿
长大间我们是否还会再唱起 心愿

Older Posts »

Categories