一次英國游顛覆傳統思維

“冬天滿天陰霾，夏天霧氣彌漫，不如法國陽光明媚”，以《普羅旺斯的一年》名揚天下的英國人彼得·梅爾，談到為什么要住到普羅旺斯去的原因，是因為英國天氣如此讓人感到郁悶。我們是在9月金秋時節來到英國的，感受到的英國卻不是這副模樣，秋天的倫敦秋高氣爽，風和日麗。

2006年9月10日下午4時從上海起飛，花了11個小時抵達倫敦。馬克·吐溫寫過《傻子浪游記》，他把自己比作傻子，大概是覺得以自己的智商，對浪游中的所見所聞無法解說，然而這次出游我更是一個大傻子，因為這次出游的見聞，把我幾十年的讀書學習形成的觀念全盤顛覆了。

高樓大廈哪里去了？

過去，曾經翻閱過清朝政府駐英國的首任大使郭松燾、二任大使曾紀澤的筆記，他們都對英國的高樓大廈之多感到吃驚，認為英國人講求實際，比中國更有效地利用土地，希望中國什么時候也能出現高樓大廈。因此在我的腦海里，英國的城市是高樓密布的令人生畏的大都市。

抵達倫敦希思羅機場，遠眺一望無際，如果沒有導游領著我們坐上電車，我們都不知道如何轉出去。

坐上面包車駛向倫敦市區天已經黑了，一路上路燈沒有想象中的那么亮堂，路兩邊也見不到什么高樓大廈。我們中就有人開始嘀咕：這么一個世界名城，為什么房屋建筑還比不上杭州？從杭州的機場到市中心，一路上高樓大廈摩肩接踵。不少同行者開心地說：“到底是中國發展得快，上海的高樓大廈之多肯定是世界第一。”

入住的旅店位于倫敦市中心，這是一幢4層樓的老式洋房，里面的陳設好像是電影里經常見到的私家公寓，看看周邊，也都是低矮房子。后來問路時了解到我們住的旅店在維多利亞車站旁邊，這里是地鐵、公交車的交通樞紐，是市中心的中心。市中心？難道倫敦就是這么一個房屋低矮陳舊的老城？那么100年前曾紀澤看到的高樓大廈，大概就是這樣的四五層樓洋房吧？100多年過去了，我們的許多城市高樓大廈已經比英國的城市多，英國人為什么不像我們一樣拆除老房子建造更高的大樓？后來聽一位英國朋友解釋他為什么不喜歡高樓大廈而喜歡住在郊外的平房里，原因是大樓空氣不好，而且浪費能源，電梯費電，自來水要水泵抽，生活成本提高，而且也脫離大地，再說離市中心較遠的地方房價也比較便宜。

郊外一棟單門獨戶的房子價格多少？回答是20萬英鎊，相當于人民幣300萬元，這比我們這里買一棟別墅便宜。但是倫敦市中心的房子價格更貴，需要60萬英鎊以上。英國普通員工的年收入在3萬英鎊左右，7年的收入就可以在郊外買一棟房子，那就不如住在郊外了。

英國人“守舊”守住了自然，守住了實惠。

劍橋大學好像是“小學”

第二天，我們登上泰晤士河倫敦塔橋，放眼倫敦市區，只見一片低矮的房屋夾雜在綠樹叢中，沒有幾幢高樓。漫步在倫敦的街道，滿眼是歷史建筑，即便是著名的警察局“蘇格蘭場”、“軍情五處”也仍然隱沒在陳舊的房屋中，還比不上我們的一些普通的鄉政府大樓。身處倫敦，時光仿佛倒流了幾百年，好像是進入了一座巨大的博物館。隨后的幾天到了約克郡、愛丁堡、利茲等地方，見到的房屋也都是幾百年前的老建筑。英國的GDP過去一直高于我國，現在和我們差不多，他們的人口只有我們的1/20，那么他們那么多的錢用到哪里去了？為什么不用來造房子呢？特別是走進舉世聞名的劍橋大學，我以為到了一個鄉村小鎮，這里都是低矮的平房，沒有高大雄偉的校門，它真的與我們的大學不好比，好像是我們的小學。走上聞名遐邇的康橋，也不過是普普通通的木橋。

在這樣一個有幾萬師生的大學里，沒有現代化的大型超市，只有舊式小店和小攤；沒有人聲鼎沸的大型餐館，只有悄無聲息的路邊小店，近40所學院就分布在這些陳舊的老屋中，更令人難以想象的是，這么陳舊的地方怎么會誕生牛頓這樣的科學家、羅素這樣的思想家？怎么會孕育出那么多諾貝爾獎獲得者？并且現在還吸引了我們八十高齡的金庸大俠來學中國歷史？以至于我們的學生以考入劍橋大學為光宗耀祖的大喜事。

聽人介紹，進入劍橋大學這樣的名校并不需要統考，學校會參考你在中學的成績，然后進行面試。面試的題目據說稀奇古怪，往往是說脫離書本、超越常規的一些問題，靠死記硬背是沒有用的。聽說克林頓是在牛津大學畢業的，后來訪問母校，母校的師生并不因為他當了美國總統就佩服得五體投地，一位看門的老師傅還和克林頓開玩笑：“聽說你當了一個小國國王，累不累？”

白金漢宮怎么像是寫字樓

到倫敦的第二天，導游要9點鐘才來，于是我一大早迫不及待地去馬路上轉一圈。

當天是星期六，馬路上基本上見不到人，只有成群的鴿子飛來飛去在馬路上大搖大擺地覓食。這里的街道有點像上海的衡山路，都是陳舊樸素的小洋房，只是一些教堂比較漂亮，還有一些咖啡館裝飾了鮮花。

拐了個彎發現一個院子里有幢四四方方的樓房，灰白色的，也就四五層樓的高度，沒有尖頂，我以為是一般的寫字樓，但小小的院子圍墻上安置了鐵絲圍，還有兩個警察在忙碌著。這是什么地方？是不是政府的某個部門？因為門口沒有像我們國家許多機關一樣懸掛牌子，我再仔細看，發現院子一個角落里有一塊一米見方的石碑，上面寫著英文“白金漢宮”，啊，這就是皇宮？皇宮應該金碧輝煌嘛，怎么一點規模、氣派都沒有？這和我們故宮有天壤之別呢！看來英國的君主和我們的皇帝根本沒法比。既然這里是皇宮，也許等會有衛隊換班儀式吧，但等了半天沒有見到任何表演，讓我大失所望。

第三天開車半個小時，我們到了倫敦郊外英國皇家的行宮溫莎堡，發現這里依然是一個小家子氣的城堡。它建在一個小山坡上，周圍是一片牧場，只有我們頤和園的一個角落那么大。當年大英帝國統治的殖民地是自己國土的150倍，有幾千萬平方公里，是大清帝國的三四倍，但當時的當權者為什么不適應“日不落國”的國情來建設洋“阿房宮”、“未央宮”呢？那議會大廈幾百年來還保持原貌，更是那唐寧街10號首相府，它就和普通的居民院落一模一樣，這讓人感到英國政府是不能亂花納稅人的錢的。

在馬路上見到英國人開的汽車，也完全沒有我們中國人的氣派，多數是兩廂車，還有只坐兩個人的一廂車。在倫敦，車子比我們少多了，空氣也好多了，他們的車子到哪里去了？一位當地居民告訴我，他們多數居住在鬧市區外面，車子開進城要交進城費，停車費又很高，一小時20英鎊，相當于人民幣300元，節儉的英國人當然不愿意花這個冤枉錢，所以車子就停在城郊，再坐公交車、地鐵進城。

在白金漢宮旁邊見到一個很大的公園，綠樹成蔭，給人一個森林的感覺。這個公園沒有氣勢恢弘的大門，也沒有門衛，很少游人和晨練的人，這么好的一個公園空蕩蕩地擺在這里不是浪費資源嗎？如果在國內這里晨練的人肯定人山人海呢！幾天后我發覺這樣的森林、綠地，在倫敦到處都是，又因為擠住在城里的人遠沒有我們想象的多，人們沒必要都擠到公園里去鍛煉，所以我們見到的英國城市不少地方像是鄉村一樣。

這個市場經濟國家怎么啦？

“英國是老牌資本主義國家！”這個觀點從小就伴隨著我們。沒來英國前總以為這里燈紅酒綠，市場喧囂，至少比上海和香港要熱鬧幾分。尤其是看了散文集《倫敦的叫賣聲》，不僅對大笨鐘、威斯敏斯特大教堂、國會大廈感興趣，而且打算來聽一聽繁華的老牌資本主義國家街上各種各樣的叫賣聲。

然而我們在倫敦，卻沒有聽到叫賣聲。在所有的商店，我們沒有聽到促銷的人聲、喇叭聲，在馬路上見不到游動的小販，所以無從聽到叫賣聲，即便是在繁華的牛津街，也給人一種安靜的感覺，不是想象中瘋狂的“繁榮景象”。

路牌廣告也銷聲匿跡，我們乘車進入倫敦市區，一路上就沒有見到路牌廣告，這就讓我犯疑了，在我們那里，高速公路兩旁巨大的廣告牌遮天蓋地，怎么這里一塊也沒有呢？在城市街道上更難得見到路牌廣告，就連單位的招牌也基本上見不到。英國就連許多城市的公交車上也很難發現有廣告，偶然見到一兩個廣告那是宣傳旅游的。

在英國買東西不能討價還價，標價多少就賣多少，我們發現無論大店小店，景區、市區、農村，很多商品的價格都是一樣的，這些商品是可比性比較強，比如飲料、手表、照相機等等。在英國降價商品也還是有的，不過都是由店家自說自話定的，其說法和我們的“打折”相反，比如我們說“打7折”，他們說是“去掉30%”。導游還帶我們去了倫敦郊外一個聞名世界的降價名牌服裝市場，規模很大，里面的商品也是明碼標價，不允許討價還價。

在劍橋大學我問一位路人是不是教授，他說不是，是普通工作人員。我問：教授和普通工人的收入差距大不大？他說：不大，教授年薪4萬英鎊左右，普通工人甚至保姆2.4萬，所以人際關系比較和諧。在與其他英國人的交流中，他們不在乎什么資本主義和社會主義，就像是我們改革開放以來不再提倡辯論一樣。

My Subversive Tour in Britain

By Lu Yinxian

My trip to Britain started at four on the afternoon of September 10， 2006. The flight from Shanghai to London took about 11 hours. The arrival at Heathrow marked the very beginning of amazing revelations. What I had known and imagined about the remote empire began changing rapidly and impressively. The experience made me aware that I need to reexamine my ideas about the country.

“Where Are the High Buildings??From the travelogues by the two Chinese ambassadors to the UK of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) I had read before， I was no stranger to the surprises they felt when they first saw range upon range of high buildings in Britain. The diplomats commented in their notes that the pragmatic Britons utilized land more sufficiently than the Chinese did and they hoped that similar high buildings would mushroom in China. Somehow， their notes had planted the idea in my mind that Britain was a land of high buildings.

We would have got lost at the vast Heathrow Airport if we had not had a guide help us. Dusk descended as our van reached the downtown London. The scenes I saw were not as bright as I had imagined. Streets were not lined with high buildings. Some of us began to wonder why the city seemingly looked inferior to our hometown Hangzhou in terms of magnificent buildings. They commented that Shanghai， a metropolis near Hangzhou， must have the biggest number of high-rises in the world.

We checked into a four-storied hotel. Furnishings there looked like things we had seen in black-white films. After some short quick outings to the neighborhood， we were surprised to find that the high buildings described by the two Chinese ambassadors were exactly these four-or-five-storied houses. We later learned that nowadays most residents of London live in suburbs. A suburban house costs about 200，000 pounds， less expensive than in China， but a downtown house would cost about 600，000 pounds. According to our computation， an ordinary white-collar worker might be able to buy a suburban house after seven years of employment. Not bad. It seems that the conservative Britons enjoy such tangible benefits and really knows how to keep their environment intact.

“Cambridge Looks Like a Primary School!?

Our sightseeing began the next day. A panoramic view from the Tower of London revealed the urban legend to us. However， most buildings I saw from there were low and flanked by trees here and there. A walk among streets also confirmed my impression. I felt as if the time had flown backward a few hundred years. The city was like a huge museum. The next few days brought me to York， Edinburgh and Leeds. I saw similar old houses in these cities. I wondered where the rich British pounds had gone， given its GDP numbers in modern times than those of China for a long while and its tiny population compared to the gigantic population of ours. I wondered why they did not spend money on new houses.

Cambridge looked like a rural town with a lot of bungalows. Unlike grand and showy colleges we see back home in China， Cambridge University did not boast an impressively grand gate to show off its world fame. Even that wooden bridge on the Cambridge River， made romantic and famous in China by a poem written by Xu Zhimo in the early 20th century， looked quite ordinary. The university， where tens of thousands of people study in nearly 40 colleges， did not have a supermarket. What I saw were old-fashioned small shops and street vendors. And there was no noisy restaurant. How， I wondered， such an old-fashioned place had produced so many brilliant thinkers， scholars and Nobel-prize winners? Even our legendary kongfu novelist Louis Cha in his 80s is now studying in Cambridge for a doctorate degree. Back home in China， enrolment into Cambridge is regarded as a great homage to one’s ancestors.

“Buckingham Palace Looks like an Office Building!?

In the early morning on the second day in London， I decided to take a quick tour of the neighborhood before the guide’s arrival at 9. It was a Saturday. Streets were deserted. Flocks of pigeons patrolled the streets. What I saw reminded me of Henshan Avenue in Shanghai: age-old unpretentious houses， some nice-looking churches， and caf?houses decorated modestly with fresh flowers.

After a turning， I saw a courtyard within which stood a square house， about 4 or 5 stories high. It did not have a spire. I thought it was a small office building. Then I noticed some wire and two police officers. Was it a government office? But it did not have a big signboard announcing itself as our grand government offices do back home. Then in a corner， I ran into a modest stone tablet about one square meter large and it said “Buckingham Palace? Imagine my astonishment at the silent announcement. The palace was nothing in comparison with our glorious Forbidden City in Beijing. I waited for a while in the hope of seeing the ceremonious change of guards. Nothing seemed to be happening. I was disappointed.

On the third day， we saw the Windsor Palace in the suburban London. Again， it looked insignificant. Situated on a small hill and surrounded by something like a meadow， it looked quite small， probably no more than a corner of our Summer Palace. In its most glorious days， the British Empire ruled the world and its territory was much larger than the land governed by the Qing Dynasty. But the British rulers did not lavish money on palaces as the rulers of China did. Even the parliament building kept its appearance for hundreds of years and Number Ten Downing Street looked like an ordinary house. One thing became crystal to me: the British government could not willfully use taxpayers?money.

My impression of the parks in London was that all were deserted.I thought it was a big waste of valuable resources. Most parks in Chins are crowded. On this tour， I saw many British cities looked quite rural as residents lived in suburbs.

“What has happened to the dominating market economy??I grew up with the concept that UK was a country with a full-grown capitalist system. Before my arrival in London， I had somehow allowed myself to imagine that the country was full of neon lights and bars where people hustled and bustled， that noisy markets were full of hectic hawking vendors， and that highways were flanked by huge advertising boards. I had imagined that it would be noisier than Shanghai or Hong Kong. I had been prepared to enjoy the maddening noises of the oldest capitalist country. What I found disappointingly contradicted previous images I had created. Shops were quiet. So were streets and city squares. Even the famous Oxford Street emitted an aura of quietness. The ranges of advertising boards that overwhelm our highways back home were nowhere to be seen in Britain. And the same goods were sold at the same prices wherever I went.

In Cambridge， I asked a passerby if he was a professor. He was just an ordinary staff member. I asked if there was a huge gap between what a professor earned and what an ordinary staffer earned. He said that there was no huge disparity. I learned that a professor would earn about 40，000 pounds a year and a house cleaner would make about 24，000 pounds. That is probably why life there looked more harmonious. I learned by chatting with people there that the British people did not seem to care very much about capitalism or socialism. This is something we have in common. Since the reform and opening up to the outside world， the Chinese people have refrained from debating uselessly about socialism and capitalism.

(Translated by David)