聊聊《經濟學人》的 Letters 板塊

01-24

本文寫於2017年2月8日，最初發佈於微信公眾號「孟慶偉英文寫作」（微信ID: justintheeconomist）。

Letters is as readable and refreshing as the newspaper"s other sections, if not more so

"Don"t judge a book by its cover," admonishes an old saying. Yet it is safe to judge a magazine or newspaper by the quality of mail from its readers. The Economist is a good case in point. The diversity, contentiousness, humor, erudition and nicety of published letters say as much about the caliber of readers as this 173-year-old British publication.

Deciding which letters to publish and which not is itself a matter of attitude. The Economist editors review mountains of mail before picking the ones that go to press. As Letters occupies only one page per issue, editorial judgement is the key. Its selection of letters is compatible with overall editorial philosophy, as The Economist proudly declares, "to take part in "a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress.""

To say the least, Letters serves a dual purpose: to engage and to influence readers. Letters usually contradict or complement the articles in previous issues, provide surprising and novel perspectives (often only known to a few), shed light on neglected but important or interesting facts and details, and share unique relevant experiences. While engaging readers, this section can easily influence them as well, exposing them to a more complicated world, challenging them to be critical thinkers, and making them loyal readers who are more likely to renew subscription or refer to friends.

The most rigorously contended almost always concerns politics. As The Economist covers much local politics and economics news and is relentlessly critical, it attracts objection, not unwanted though, particularly from spokespeople for foreign ministries and embassies. Such responses (see below) suggest that foreign governments are careful readers of The Economist. This is welcoming for at least three reasons. First, The Economist takes these ripostes as an opportunity to foster its values: respecting opposing views, displaying intellectual probity, and embracing diversity. In so doing, its position as a leading global newspaper will undoubtedly be strengthened. Second, allowing differing opinions implies trust in readers: they are free to think on thier own and make more informed and sound judgements. Third, diversity of the readers is a boost to its already distinctive and strong branding. Done right, difference can be a boon.

Although The Economist is known and celebrated for its clarity of analysis and writing, some readers find they can do a better job making hard topics more accessible. A physics professor (see below), for example, thinks his knowledge and diction can help readers get the effects of methane with more ease and fun, so he set out to pen a couple of didactic and soothing paragraphs. The Economist gracefully ackowledges his offering (and in a way, admits its own imperfections) by putting Mr. Pierrehumbert"s words to print.

Yet one doesn"t have to be an Oxford don to make one"s voice heard. Letters is teeming with inspiring, well-written, witty, warm-hearted words from ordinary men and women of many lands and faiths. I remember musing for a long time after reading the letter (see below) by a Parisian who just experienced the atrocious Paris terrorist attack in November of 2015. As a victim, he is able to empathize and sympathize with people in perpetually unstable and dangerous foreign lands. Further, he is able to think cool-headedly about the consequences of being self-centered and not caring. And he makes his point so simply yet convincingly that the message "Paris is only part of the perpetual pain" still rings in my ears to this day. I suppose the editor must have felt the same way as I did when he or she read the letter, hence its publication.

Another memorable reading is a rare tale told by a Londoner. He wrote to share the amazing story of a friend and lifelong reader of The Economist. The relationship between The Economist and this reader must come as a reassurance to the entire The Economist team that their cause is worth the effort in the face of rising populism and protectionism across the West. Liberalism shall prevail. And decades-long subscribers must be able to relate to the story.

What The Economist is particularly pleased with seem to be snappy and witty remarks and quotes, which mark the ending of Letters. They can be original or secondhand. They grace Letters because they convey the message in a delightfully effective way and can help raise a laugh as readers finish Letters and move onto other sections.

The name "Letters" may be commonplace and unassuming, but when it comes to defending the bastion of liberalism and advocating universal values that touch and win the hearts and minds hungrily in pursuit of freedom, liberty and egalitarianism, it is a section meriting attention. Read it and enjoy!