生命不能承受之轻英文评论

导读：　生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇一《生命不能承受之轻英文书评》 ...

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇一
《生命不能承受之轻英文书评》

Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera - review

People usually complain about there is too much pressure in life which they can hardly bear. However, Milan Kundera, a Czech and French writer with profound thoughts, showed us that "lightness", which means irresponsibility, was the most unbearable thing in our life in Unbearable Lightness of Being. In this novel, he made an effort to discuss some deeply philosophical problems, including the difference between sex and love, the attitudes toward life and so on.

Milan Kundera explored the artistic and intellectual life of Czech society from the Prague Spring to the Soviet Union’s invasion in 1968 in this book. At the beginning of novel, Milan Kundera showed his own thinking toward being by explaining Nietzsche' saying "Eternal return is the heaviest burden." With the discussion of “lightness and heaviness” in life, the book mainly told us the love story between Thomas and Teresa during wartime.

Because of the true love for Thomas, the responsibility to family and country, Teresa couldn’t put up with Thomas’s illegal love affairs and finally chose to leave Thomas. After that, Thomas, a playboy, still had to deal with his mistresses, trying to get out of the loss of Teresa. However, this “relaxing” life, which can be regarded as a kind of lightness of being, couldn’t make Thomas feel well. Story tries to tell us the

meaning of being is responsibility by the comparison and contrast of main characters’ attitudes toward life, and makes us consider some deeply philosophical problems. This is a profound book with a prefect fusion of romanticism and realism. The social

and living conditions after Prague Spring can be obtained and people’s thoughts toward life after invasion were truly expressed. As the greatest work in literature in 20th century, Unbearable Lightness of Beinghas beenwidely appreciated nowadays, and its literary and philosophical contribution won’t be ignored.

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇二
《读《生命不能承受之轻》有感》

读《生命不能承受之轻》有感

生命像蛋壳一样脆弱,死神的手指轻轻一碰,便会破碎。可是，即便如此脆弱，我们也不得不去承受生命赐予我们的一切责任。这些责任或轻或重，只是这些“轻”与 “重”，究竟应该如何衡量，又该如何选择呢？这简直就像一个困扰多年的谜团，深藏我心中。我翻开米兰·昆德拉的《生命不能承受之轻》，试图从中找到解开谜团的钥匙。

初读书名，便深感作者的独特。“生命不能承受之轻”，顾名思义，就是生命中那些看似轻如鸿毛，却让人难以承受的事。一般来说，人们常常感叹的是不能承受的生命之重，都会认为“重”让人无法承受，压得人喘不过气来。可到了昆德拉这里，我忽然听到“轻”也让人无法承受。生命中的事物若不能承受，又为何形容成“轻”？这着实让人费解不已。

其实，小说的情节并不复杂，书中描写了托马斯与特丽莎、萨丽娜之间的感情生活。但是，它绝不是一个男人和两个女人的三角性爱故事。它是一部哲理小说，小说从“永恒轮回”的讨论开始，把我们带入了对一系列问题的思考中，比如，轻与重，比如，灵与肉。它带领着我们思考——什么才是人类不能承受的生命之轻？

昆德拉在书中提出了：“轻”与“重”，他说：“最沉重的负担压得我们崩溃了，沉没了，将我们钉在地上。负担越沉，我们的生活就越贴近大地，越趋近真切和实在。相反，完全没有负担，人变的比大气还轻，会高高的飞起，离开大地即离开生活，变的似真非真。“

主人公托马斯大夫是一不愿意被任何事物束缚的人，当他感到家庭的重担和责任让他快要窒息的时候，他离开了他的妻子。当他以为自己重新找到了自由的天堂的时候，却又感到空虚和无聊，原来，他仍然需要家庭责任的那份沉重，看似自由的“轻”让他更加抑郁，更加纠结，让他不能承受，一生都处在矛盾当中。

读到这里，我忽然读懂了昆德拉对人生命运与价值的思考，“轻”，就是生命在最原始的时候带给我们的可以享受的一切，比如：自由、爱情，友情等；“重”，就是人身在社会当中所产生的、必须面对的责任、欲望、困难、灾难等等。无论我们多么犹豫不决，多么举棋不定，也必须在两者之间做出选择，这个选择便显得尤为重要。

从托马斯大夫的经历来看，我们还是要勇敢面对生命之“重”。 生命的价值和意义在于过程，在追求的过程中有了幸福感和满足感，也许，这已经足够了， 不必要再去抱怨你的人生被什么所累，只需要朝着自己认定的方向，坚定信念的走下去，享受生命的过程，也许当你突然回首时，就会发现，那些原本以为沉重无比的东西，其实已经被我们在不知

不觉中扛了起来。“轻”与“重”不再成为阻碍，也不会出现“生命中不能承受之轻”的悲哀。

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇三
《生命不可承受之轻》

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇四
《生命不能承受之轻》

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇五
《生命不能承受之轻》

小说中，最让人费解的难题是，“轻”到底指的是什么？习惯上，经验上，想象中，我们都会认为“重”让人无法承受，压得人喘不过气来。到了昆德拉这里，我们忽然听到“轻”让人无法承受，这如何不引起人们的怀疑和费解呢？如果，你因为急于要找到问题的答案而加快阅读的速度，那么，你就永远也别指望得到答案。这也算是我阅读该书的一点点经验吧。据说珍珠对于人的身体有很多功效，但吞珠的一个前提是：把它研成粉末。对该书的解读，也必须如此。 　　在追问关于“轻”让人不能承受的问题时，我忽然想起一个故事。故事大意如此：国王让他手下的大臣们比赛，看谁是大力士。比赛的办法居然是让大臣们把一根鸡毛扔过高墙。几乎所有的大臣们都失败了。只有一位大臣很聪明，他抓住身边的一只鸡，一把扔过高墙，然后对国王说：我能把整只鸡都扔过高墙，何况一根鸡毛？他赢了。依靠他的智慧。 　　轻便，轻捷，轻柔，轻盈，轻巧，轻快等等，当然会让人感觉到愉快。但如果是轻薄，轻浮，轻狂，轻蔑，轻率，轻佻等等，又当如何？科学揭示，保持宇宙平衡的一个重要因素就是万有引力，于此，我们所能够感受到的最直接的经验就是地球带给我们的重力，它使我们不至于脱离开地球而进入可怕的游离状态。宇航员所面临的最大的难题就是失重。 　　“轻”之让人不能承受，答案居然如此简单。看来，我以前的迷惑完全来源于对常识的漠视，以及对“轻”和“重”根深蒂固的偏见。有时，轻，真的让人无法承受。像一只鸡毛，你很难凭借力气将它扔过高墙。 　　这个故事帮我们揭示出“轻”的一层含义，即个体的游离，游离于它所依附的整体之外。这种游离导致归属感的缺失，让人无法承受。P61有一段关于特丽莎的心理描写：“在一个陌生的国家里生活就意味着在离地面很高的空中踩钢丝，没有他自己国土之网来支撑他：家庭，朋友，同事。还有从小就熟悉的语言可帮助他轻易地说他想说的话。”正是这种游离于母体之外的不安定感（生命像一根鸡毛那样轻飘飘），使特丽莎坚决地离开瑞士，与她深爱的托马斯不辞而别，回到她正处于灾难中的祖国。在布拉格，只有在某种心理需要时，她才依靠托马斯。而在瑞士，由于失根，她事事都得依靠托马斯，那她就不得不一辈子重复深夜里的恶梦。 　　或许，我刚才的论述仅仅是打了一个擦边球，它绝不是昆德拉要与我们讨论的“轻”的重要含义。它只是我解读该小说时所收获的一个副产品。让我们回到小说的开头。 　　“好可怕哟。”渡边淳一以这样一句话作为《

失乐园》的开头，以吸引读者介入小说的核心部分。而昆德拉呢？“尼采常常与哲学家们纠缠一个神秘的‘永劫回归’观。”他一上来就要与读者探讨让人头痛的哲学问题。存心要给人一个下马威吗？不怕把他的读者们吓跑吗？没有比这更好的开头吗？没有。这样的开头必是经过昆德拉深思熟虑的。读者们要跑那是没有领会昆德拉的匠心。昆德拉苦心孤诣地要一下子就把读者引入到小说的核心部分，即引入到“轻与重”的讨论当中。在这里，他要为我们撬开一个解读该小说的缝隙，透过一丝微光，让我们看到昆德拉受难的灵魂。 　　昆德拉从“永劫回归”的话题，谈到十四世纪非洲部落之间的战争，谈到法国大革命，谈到人们对希特勒的仇恨的消解，谈到断头台。其中最核心的一句话是：“曾经一次性消失了的生活，像影子一样没有分量，也就永远消失不复回归了。无论它是否恐怖，是否美丽，是否崇高，它的恐怖、崇高以及美丽都预先已经死去，没有任何意义。”（P1）这里，给我们揭示出 “轻”的第一层含义：就是个体生命的被轻视，个体意志的被忽略不计。诚如木心先生所说，政治教条的首功是：强定善恶，立即使两者绝对化，抹掉中间层次。在极权主义政治的旗帜下，厉虐性无处不在。个体的生命和个体的意志，都没有存在的理由与空间。“它象十四世纪非洲部落之间的某次战争，某次未能改变世界命运的战争，哪怕有十万黑人在残酷的磨难中灭绝，我们也无须对此过分在意。”对生命，属于每个人只有一次的生命，如此漠视，这样的“轻（视）”谁能承受？ 　　所以，小说体现的不止于昆德拉对祖国命运的担忧，更是对人类历史上饱尝磨难的个人的同情。对，在小说的第一章，反复萦绕于托马斯脑际的就是这个词：同情。他不断地想象特丽莎是一个“被放在树脂涂覆的草篮里顺水漂来的孩子”，就是一种发自于内心的最深切的同情。“同情”这个词，让有些读者误以为，托马斯对特丽莎的情感不是爱情，而是对可怜人的一种恩赐。仔细读一读P15-16关于同情一词的解释，就会明白，同情是“一种最强烈的感情想象力和心灵感应力，在感情的等级上，它至高无上”。 　　轻的又一个含义是“遗忘”。 　　请注意昆德拉在谈到法国大革命时说的这句话：“正因为他们涉及的那些事不复回归，于是革命那血的年代只不过变成了文字、理论和研讨而已，变得比鸿毛还轻，吓不了谁。”（P1）这是作者在小说的开头第一次直接提到“轻”这个字眼儿。随后，谈到“对希特勒的仇恨终于淡薄消解，这暴露了一个世界道德上深刻的堕

落……在这个世界里，一切都预先被原谅了，一切都可笑地被允许了。”（P2）这部分文字，提示我们“轻”的又一个含义是“遗忘”。有一句话，“忘记历史就意味着背叛”。具有着“遗忘（背叛）”意味的“轻”，当然让生命无法承受。“人们只能凭借回想的依稀微光来辨识一切，包括断头台。”“多少年来，我一直想着托马斯，似乎只有凭借回想的折光，我才能看清他这个人。”昆德拉不仅自己回想，而且，还要带着他的读者们一起回想，让人们记住，记住历史，记住历史上的人们曾经怎样孜孜吃吃（矻矻）苟且营生地活过。 　　托马斯在面临“轻与重”的选择时茫然无措，“因为人的生命只有一次，我们既不能把它同以前的生活相比较，也无法使其完美之后再来度过。”昆德拉让人们和他一起回想并记住托马斯，其目的在于，让后来的人们在面临“轻与重”、“灵与肉”的选择时，不再像托马斯那样茫然无措，犹豫不决，以至他经历过的一个个美妙的瞬间由此而丧失全部意义－－历史的重要性之一就在于向人们提供经验。 　　“只发生一次的事，就是压根儿没有发生过的事(因为遗忘)。捷克人的历史不会重演了，欧洲的历史也不会重演了。捷克人和欧洲的历史的两张草图，来自命中注定无法有经验的人类的笔下。历史和个人的生命一样，轻得不能承受，轻若鸿毛，轻如尘埃，卷入太空，它是明天不复。 　　昆德拉揭示了人类生命中不能承受的轻，但他和我们一样，无力解决这个问题。因为“永劫回归”是不可能的。民族历史、个人生命都只有一次性，没有初排，没有草稿，选择也就变得毫无意义。我们不选择媚俗，又能选择什么呢？安知抗击媚俗的决心和勇气不是另一种更大的媚俗？一个生活在地球上的人怎么可能避免媚俗呢？如果媚俗不可避免，那么所有“沉重而艰难的决心”不都是轻若鸿毛吗？ 　　这又是一种生命中不能承受之轻。昆德拉由此对生命的终极意义表示了怀疑，而那是我们的前人认为理所当然而又坚信不疑的。我们无可选择又必须选择，我们反对媚俗又时时刻刻都在媚俗。

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇六
《生命不能承受之轻》

不能承受的生命之轻

我以前一直以为，当你真正喜欢一样东西时，你就会发现语言是多么脆弱和无力，文字和感觉永远有隔阂。对于内心的情感我们永远难以用最生动的语言描绘出来，只会为自己的词汇感到乏力。

在这种情况下，我无意中走进了米兰.昆德拉的世界。你也许会想起他的“人类一思考，上帝就发笑”的睿智和幽默；你也许会想起他的“生活在别处”“为了告别的聚会”……深思和忧伤；而我独独喜欢他那份对生命和死亡的思考的“不能承受的生命之轻”。

我喜欢在夏日午后阳光肆虐时，安安静静找一处清凉的地方，用指端轻抚过那一行行文字，磨砂那一个个跳动的音符，感受思考生命的那个过程。“轻与重”,“灵与肉”,“黑暗与光明”我们和作者一样执着与这样尖锐的矛盾对立中，并从这种争锋相对中回归统一。轻与重缠绕我们一生，在这个天平上，你永远也放不上两个同量的筹码，有的只是我们摇摆不定的灵魂。在生活中，看似平静的表面上，总是暗潮汹涌起伏。也许在黑暗中体会到光明，也许光明中隐藏黑暗，也许正如昆德拉所说，永远不要让我们可以逃避，我们每一天都决定着最后的结局，我们的脚正走向自己选定的终点。

人生是辆单行车，生活没有回头路。在一个阳光下的午后，我们放下书时，也许会思考，什么才是人类不能承受的生命之轻。

听到雅克和他的主人一边走一边哼唱…..

你是树

你是苔藓

你是微风下的一棵菠菜

你是一个欣长的孩子

默岩

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇七
《生命不能承受之轻》

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇八
《生命中不能承受之轻英文》

MILAN KUNDERA

The Unbearable Lightness of Being

Translated from the Czech by Michael Henry Heim

PART ONE

Lightness and Weight

1

The idea of eternal return is a mysterious one, and Nietzsche has often perplexed other philosophers with it: to think that everything recurs as we once experienced it, and that the recurrence itself recurs ad infinitum! What does this mad myth signify?

Putting it negatively, the myth of eternal return states that a life which disappears once and for all, which does not return, is like a shadow, without weight, dead in advance, and whether it was horrible, beautiful, or sublime, its horror, sublimity, and beauty mean nothing. We need take no more note of it than of a war between two African kingdoms in the fourteenth century, a war that altered nothing in the destiny of the world, even if a hundred thousand blacks perished in excruciating torment.

Will the war between two African kingdoms in the fourteenth century itself be altered if it recurs again and again, in eternal return?

It will: it will become a solid mass, permanently protuberant, its inanity irreparable.

If the French Revolution were to recur eternally, French historians would be less proud of Robespierre. But because they deal with something that will not return, the bloody years of the Revolution have turned into mere words, theories, and discussions, have become lighter than feathers, frightening no one. There is an infinite difference between a Robespierre who occurs only once in history and a Robespierre who eternally returns, chopping off French heads.

Let us therefore agree that the idea of eternal return implies a perspective from which things appear other than as we know them: they appear without the mitigating circumstance of their transitory nature. This mitigating circumstance prevents us from coming to a verdict. For how can we condemn something that is ephemeral, in transit? In the sunset of dissolution, everything is illuminated by the aura of nostalgia, even the guillotine.

Not long ago, I caught myself experiencing a most incredible sensation. Leafing through a book on Hitler, I was touched by some of his portraits: they reminded me of my childhood. I grew up during the war; several members of my family perished in Hitler's concentration camps; but what were their deaths compared with the memories of a lost period in my life, a period that would never return?

This reconciliation with Hitler reveals the profound moral perversity of a world that rests essentially on the nonexistence of return, for in this world everything is pardoned in advance and therefore everything cynically permitted.

2

If every second of our lives recurs an infinite number of times, we are nailed to eternity as Jesus Christ was nailed to the cross. It is a terrifying prospect. In the world of eternal return the weight of unbearable responsibility lies heavy on every move we make. That is why Nietzsche called the idea of eternal return the heaviest of burdens (das schwerste Gewicht).

If eternal return is the heaviest of burdens, then our lives can stand out against it in all their splendid lightness.

But is heaviness truly deplorable and lightness splendid?

The heaviest of burdens crushes us, we sink beneath it, it pins us to the ground. But in the love poetry of every age, the woman longs to be weighed down by the man's body. The heaviest of burdens is therefore simultaneously an image of life's most intense fulfillment. The heavier the burden, the closer our lives come to the earth, the more real and truthful they become.

Conversely, the absolute absence of a burden causes man to be lighter than air, to soar into the heights, take leave of the earth and his earthly being, and become only half real, his movements as free as they are insignificant.

What then shall we choose? Weight or lightness?

Parmenides posed this very question in the sixth century before Christ. He saw the world divided into pairs of opposites:

light/darkness, fineness/coarseness, warmth/cold, being/non-being. One half of the opposition he called positive (light, fineness, warmth, being), the other negative. We might find this division into positive and negative poles childishly simple except for one difficulty: which one is positive, weight or lightness?

Parmenides responded: lightness is positive, weight negative.

Was he correct or not? That is the question. The only certainty is: the lightness/weight opposition is the most mysterious, most ambiguous of all.

3

I have been thinking about Tomas for many years. But only in the light of these reflections did I see him clearly. I saw him standing at the window of his flat and looking across the courtyard at the opposite walls, not knowing what to do.

He had first met Tereza about three weeks earlier in a small Czech town. They had spent scarcely an hour together. She had accompanied him to the station and waited with him until he boarded the train. Ten days later she paid him a visit. They made love the day she arrived. That night she came down with a fever and stayed a whole week in his flat with the flu.

He had come to feel an inexplicable love for this all but complete stranger; she seemed a child to him, a child someone had put in a bulrush basket daubed with pitch and sent downstream for Tomas to fetch at the riverbank of his bed.

She stayed with him a week, until she was well again, then went back to her town, some hundred and twenty-five miles from Prague. And then came the time I have just spoken of and see as the key to his life: Standing by the window, he looked out over the courtyard at the walls opposite him and deliberated.

Should he call her back to Prague for good? He feared the responsibility. If he invited her to come, then come she would, and offer him up her life.

Or should he refrain from approaching her? Then she would remain a waitress in a hotel restaurant of a provincial town and he would never see her again.

Did he want her to come or did he not?

He looked out over the courtyard at the opposite walls, seeking an answer.

He kept recalling her lying on his bed; she reminded him of no one in his former life. She was neither mistress nor wife. She was a child whom he had taken from a bulrush basket that had been daubed with pitch and sent to the riverbank of his bed. She fell asleep. He knelt down next to her. Her feverous breath quickened and she gave out a weak moan. He pressed his face to hers and whispered calming words into her sleep. After a while he felt her breath return to normal and her face rise unconsciously to meet his. He smelled the delicate aroma of her fever and breathed it in, as if trying to glut himself with the intimacy of her body. And all at once he fancied she had been with him for many years and was dying. He had a sudden clear feeling that he would not survive her death. He would lie down beside her and want to die with her. He pressed his face into the pillow beside her head and kept it there for a long time.

Now he was standing at the window trying to call that moment to account. What could it have been if not love declaring itself to him?

But was it love? The feeling of wanting to die beside her was clearly exaggerated: he had seen her only once before in his life! Was it simply the hysteria of a man who, aware deep down of his inaptitude for love, felt the self-deluding need to simulate it? His unconscious was so cowardly that the best partner it could choose for its little comedy was this miserable provincial waitress with practically no chance at all to enter his life!

Looking out over the courtyard at the dirty walls, he realized he had no idea whether it was hysteria or love.

And he was distressed that in a situation where a real man would instantly have known how to act, he was vacillating and therefore depriving the most beautiful moments he had ever experienced (kneeling at her bed and thinking he would not survive her death) of their meaning.

He remained annoyed with himself until he realized that not knowing what he wanted was actually quite natural.

We can never know what to want, because, living only one life, we can neither compare it with our previous lives nor perfect it in our lives to come.

Was it better to be with Tereza or to remain alone?

There is no means of testing which decision is better, because there is no basis for comparison. We live everything as it comes, without warning, like an actor going on cold. And what can life be worth if the first rehearsal for life is life itself? That is why life is always like a sketch. No, sketch is not quite the word, because a sketch is an outline of something, the groundwork for a picture, whereas the sketch that is our life is a sketch for nothing, an outline with no picture.

Einmal ist keinmal, says Tomas to himself. What happens but once, says the German adage, might as well not have happened at all. If we have only one life to live,we might as well not have lived at all.

4

But then one day at the hospital, during a break between operations, a nurse called him to the

telephone. He heard Tereza's voice coming from the receiver. She had phoned him from the railway station. He was overjoyed. Unfortunately, he had something on that evening and could not invite her to his place until the next day. The moment he hung up, he reproached himself for not telling her to go straight there. He had time enough to cancel his plans, after all! He tried to imagine what Tereza would do in Prague during the thirty-six long hours before they were to meet, and had half a mind to jump into his car and drive through the streets looking for her.

She arrived the next evening, a handbag dangling from her shoulder, looking more elegant than before. She had a thick book under her arm. It was Anna Karenina. She seemed in a good mood, even a little boisterous, and tried to make him think she had just happened to drop in, things had just worked out that way: she was in Prague on business, perhaps (at this point she became rather vague) to find a job.

Later, as they lay naked and spent side by side on the bed, he asked her where she was staying. It was night by then, and he offered to drive her there. Embarrassed, she answered that she still had to find a hotel and had left her suitcase at the station.

Only two days ago, he had feared that if he invited her to Prague she would offer him up her life. When she told him her suitcase was at the station, he immediately realized that the suitcase contained her life and that she had left it at the station only until she could offer it up to him.

The two of them got into his car, which was parked in front of the house, and drove to the station. There he claimed the suitcase (it was large and enormously heavy) and took it and her home.

How had he come to make such a sudden decision when for nearly a fortnight he had wavered so much that he could not even bring himself to send a postcard asking her how she was?

He himself was surprised. He had acted against his principles. Ten years earlier, when he had divorced his wife, he celebrated the event the way others celebrate a marriage. He understood he was not born to live side by side with any woman and could be fully himself only as a bachelor. He tried to design his life in such a way that no woman could move in with a suitcase. That was why his flat had only the one bed. Even though it was wide enough, Tomas would tell his mistresses that he was unable to fall asleep with anyone next to him, and drive them home after midnight. And so it was not the flu that kept him from sleeping with Tereza on her first visit. The first night he had slept in his large armchair, and the rest of that week he drove each night to the hospital, where he had a cot in his office.

But this time he fell asleep by her side. When he woke up the next morning, he found Tereza, who was still asleep, holding his hand. Could they have been hand in hand all night? It was hard to believe.

And while she breathed the deep breath of sleep and held his hand (firmly: he was unable to disengage it from her grip), the enormously heavy suitcase stood by the bed.

He refrained from loosening his hand from her grip for fear of waking her, and turned carefully on his side to observe her better.

Again it occurred to him that Tereza was a child put in a pitch-daubed bulrush basket and sent downstream. He couldn't very well let a basket with a child in it float down a stormy river! If the Pharaoh's daughter hadn't snatched the basket carrying little Moses from the waves, there would have been no Old Testament, no civilization as we now know it! How many ancient myths begin with the rescue of an abandoned child! If Polybus hadn't taken in the young Oedipus, Sophocles wouldn't have written his most beautiful tragedy!

Tomas did not realize at the time that metaphors are dangerous. Metaphors are not to be trifled with. A single metaphor can give birth to love.

5

He lived a scant two years with his wife, and they had a son. At the divorce proceedings, the judge awarded the infant to its mother and ordered Tomas to pay a third of his salary for its support. He also granted him the right to visit the boy every other week.

But each time Tomas was supposed to see him, the boy's mother found an excuse to keep him away. He soon realized that bringing them expensive gifts would make things a good deal easier, that he was expected to bribe the mother for the son's love. He saw a future of quixotic attempts to inculcate his views in the boy, views opposed in every way to the mother's. The very thought of it exhausted him. When, one Sunday, the boy's mother again canceled a scheduled visit, Tomas decided on the spur of the moment never to see him again.

Why should he feel more for that child, to whom he was bound by nothing but a single improvident night, than for any other? He would be scrupulous about paying support; he just didn't want anybody making him fight for his son in the name of paternal sentiments!

Needless to say, he found no sympathizers. His own parents condemned him roundly: if Tomas refused to take an interest in his son, then they, Tomas's parents, would no longer take an interest in theirs. They made a great show of maintaining good relations with their daughter-in-law and trumpeted their exemplary stance and sense of justice.

Thus in practically no time he managed to rid himself of wife, son, mother, and father. The only thing they bequeathed to him was a fear of women. Tomas desired but feared them. Needing to create a compromise between fear and desire, he devised what he called erotic friendship. He would tell his mistresses: the only relationship that can make both partners happy is one in which sentimentality has no place and neither partner makes any claim on the life and freedom of the other.

To ensure that erotic friendship never grew into the aggression of love, he would meet each of his long-term mistresses only at intervals. He considered this method flawless and propagated it among his friends: The important thing is to abide by the rule of threes. Either you see a woman three times in quick succession and then never again, or you maintain relations over the years but make sure that the rendezvous are at least three weeks apart.

The rule of threes enabled Tomas to keep intact his liaisons with some women while continuing to engage in short-term affairs with many others. He was not always understood. The woman who understood him best was Sabina. She was a painter. The reason I like you, she would say to him, is you're the complete opposite of kitsch. In the kingdom of kitsch you would be a monster.

It was Sabina he turned to when he needed to find a job for Tereza in Prague. Following the unwritten rules of erotic friendship, Sabina promised to do everything in her power, and before long she had in fact located a place for Tereza in the darkroom of an illustrated weekly. Although her new job did not require any particular qualifications, it raised her status from waitress to member of the press. When Sabina herself introduced Tereza to everyone on the weekly, Tomas knew he had never had a better friend as a mistress than Sabina.

6

The unwritten contract of erotic friendship stipulated that Tomas should exclude all love from his life. The moment he violated that clause of the contract, his other mistresses would assume inferior status and become ripe for insurrection.

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇九
《不能承受的生命之轻读后感 英文》

READING REPORT

After reading the book named 《The Unbearable Lightness of Being》,I feel very depressive. Milan Kundera’s writing style is quiet direct and incisive. Unfortunately, people can’t admit that the veritable desire because of these we have progress. I think what Milan wants to tell us that no desire no improvement.

One of a scene in the book is that Teresa’s mother was beautiful when she was young. She had nine pursuers the first one was the most handsome, the second one is the brightest, the third one is the richest, the fourth one is the healthy, the fifth one is the most noble, the sixth one is the most poetic, the seventh traveled around the world few years ago, the eighth one can played the violin, the last one was full of manliness. Finally, Teresa’s mother got married with the ninth man not because she loves him but they have a baby named Teresa. Her mother didn’t love Teresa at all, she always think the rest eight men are better than her husband, she didn’t pursue others, so that she left her husband and pursue a no manful man who had few times crimes and he divorce twice. She married him, but after that she starts sinking and lost her beauty become a shrew.

This period gives me the deepest impression. Milan put nine different peculiarities to nine individual persons, Teresa’s mother can only choose one. She wants everyone because she doesn't know which one she loves most. Her greed let her come to a man of nothing. She began to lose, lose beauty, lose the quality of life and the soul. When Teresa locked the door and asked for their most basic right, as a mother of her on the rampage, she realized that everything left her, and she in the last mother's identity, is almost coerce her daughter left. But these are all in vain, because she never taken any responsibility in life, whether to society and family, or relatives. She died just gently closed my eyes, there won't be any heavy soul.

On the other hand, I'm thinking of Milan to convey love. "Love" is always a secret. I once thought that love is pure perceptual things, if you use too much rational thinking to think it, then love will not be pure. Now this view was almost subverted. The love needs conditions and rational thinking. You need to know what you need most, find a person can satisfy our needs, and then forgive his faults, perform your responsibilities to the others, this is love. Milan says "burden is heavy, our life more close to the earth, more real it is." Probably with responsibility through love is real love. Wrote here, I found that the rigid pursue a person that you think how is a foolish thing, love is in the special time meet someone special.

Unconsciously ,I wrote so many, but there are boundless feeling, it is difficult to read《The Unbearable Lightness of Being》, if I want to know every word meaning, I might spend a few years time to read it, but it has really made me grow up and I do benefit from it..

生命不能承受之轻英文评论篇十
《生命中不能承受之轻 读书笔记》

《生命中不能承受之轻》读后感

营销与物流管理学院 物流0970 邹家华9208097035

最近，读了捷克作家米兰·昆德拉的小说《生命中不能承受之轻》，这是一部充满哲理的小说，描写了二战苏联入侵捷克的那段期间，托马斯，特蕾莎，萨宾娜，弗兰茨四个人的离奇生活。透过他们的种种经历，托马斯与特蕾莎灵魂与肉体的纠结，萨宾娜与弗兰茨面对媚俗的选择，从不同层面表现文章的主题，置换主人翁，置换时空，深入思考，反复迭代，回归自然。人生中充满了选择，每个人都有选择的权利，但是选择的背后却是无法抗拒的责任，因为有了责任，生命才变得真切而美丽，才有存在的意义，否则，不过是一张躯壳而已，毫无意义。

作者深刻地揭露了生命的重与轻，主人公托马斯一直在固执地拒绝着“媚俗”，对爱情的追求亦是如此。他不可遏制地爱上了特蕾莎，但又不愿成为家庭责任的附庸，更不愿像别人一样甘于平淡地生活，去爱。他用很不负责任的且不得已的方式向情人表明：我爱你，但我不属于你！他不断地与别的女人偷情，迫使所爱的人能不固守自己，能给自己自由。可是，当他感受到所谓的自由时，却体会到了失去责任的“轻”，很快变得空虚难耐，他发现，承担一份家庭责任的“重”对生活本身是何等重要！

也许最沉重的负担同时也是一种生活最为充实的象征，负担越沉，我们的生活也就越贴近大地，越趋近真切和实在。相反，完全没有负担，人变得比大气还轻，会高高地飞起，离别大地，亦即离别真实的生活。他将变得似真非真，运动自由而毫无意义。人如果没有了责任，那就没有了动力，那活着就像一具行尸走肉，生命就没有了任何意义了。活着，就要承受。生命之重能让人脚踏实地，活着踏实。有重物压住才能感到存在感。轻就会像氢气一样把你符在上面轻飘飘的没有支撑点很没有安全感，轻是不能承受的。只有扛住生命之重才有存在感和成就感。

这几位年轻人“追求”与反“追求”的矛盾，道出了人生本身的荒谬与悖论：每个人都有生活的目的和理由，但每个目的都有本身的空虚，追求爱情时怨恨多于欢乐，追求名誉像水中月镜中花一样遥不可及，追求钱财到头来竹篮打水一场空。透过种种幻觉，米兰·昆德拉感到，也许这种“追求”本身，就是一种错误。米兰不仅仅是在探讨性的问题，他在更深的一个层次上挖掘人的本性，以及更不能言传的复杂内心。他会让我们学会思考，学会释放，学会自信，让我们以更加严谨的态度来审视我们的生命，轻浮绝对不可取，但是太过看重一件事也只是增加生命的负担。

托马斯，布拉格的一位外科医生，出诊到一个小镇上邂逅了特蕾莎，一位旅馆的服务生。只是很短很短时间的打了一个照面托马斯就离开小镇了。然而难以置信的是他竟然难以忘怀她，而她也竟不可思议地出走到布拉格与他见面。他，一直都跟很多女人发生着肉体关系，不过奇怪的是他从不让她们在自己的住所里过夜。然而，很自然的，他与特蕾莎过了一夜，而且是在他的房间里 ，而后的

而后他与她结婚了。结婚，并不是结束。婚后，特蕾莎对托马斯又爱又恨，她深深地爱着他，但又忍受着他那喜好其他女人的癖好；托马斯对她是一直的爱着的，但又抑制不住自己幽会其他女人。其中，有一个人物——萨宾娜，他最好的情人。苏联入侵布拉格，为了特蕾莎，托马斯和她离开布拉格去了瑞士，而后又是为了特蕾莎，他又追随她回到了布拉格，还是为了特蕾莎，他们去了乡下。特蕾莎出走的原因，还是对于他与其他女人的关系的难以忍受，而他，甘愿陪着他最爱的人而漂泊。 米兰说：“爱是性的附属。”我同意却也感到悲哀。一个人能和自己不爱的人做爱，或许我们不能苟同，却也必须承认。所以背叛也好，欺骗也罢，如果他爱你，又何必在乎其他呢？忠诚，贞洁，一个心属于你的人总比一个心不属于你而肉体却依附于你的人要更让你幸福和满足。所以爱情不是占有，爱不是我行我素，而是包容和呵护。特蕾莎最终明白了托马斯对自己的爱，尽管有些太迟太迟，但这并不妨碍他们的幸福。

就像书中米兰所说的，生命中所承受的重，来自于尼采所说的“永劫回归”观。“如果我们生命的每一秒钟都有无数次的重复，我们就会像耶稣钉于十字架，被钉死在永恒上。这个前景是可怕的。在那永劫回归的世界里，无法承受的责任重荷，沉沉压着我们的每一个行动，这就是尼采说永劫回归观是最沉重的负担的原因吧。确实如此，假如我们总是在做着同样的事情，我们的每一天都是同一天，没有了明天，这是一种什么样的状况？无论你做什么事情都是枉然，只要你一觉醒来，什么事情就得重新来过。就像那位不断的推着石头上山的希腊英雄，就像上帝。上帝，之所以是全知全能的，也许我们可以解释为他是处在于永恒中，处在不断重复的一天中，由于重复，不断的了解我们，所以对我们是无所不知，所以上帝凌驾于我们之上。耶稣被钉于十字架，上帝代我们承担了这种生命之重，这，就是仁慈。也许，我们对于这种生命之重的体验，可以反映在两次的世界大战上。战争的回归，造成了永远的劫难，成千上万的人承受着这种不堪忍受的痛苦与无奈。也正因为这种重复，让我们有了祈求和平，谴责战争的信念；也正因为这种“永劫回归”，让我们有了对于上帝的依托。

姑且让我们选择了生命之轻吧，看看是否会活得更为轻松，更为辉煌。这时的我们不会陷入于“永劫回归”，没有了重复，没有了历史的可比较性，我们就陷入了另外一种状况：偶然，永劫偶然。我们的体验不会重复，我们的生命不会回归，我们的生命轻得只有一次。 “因为人的生命只有一次”，“我们既不能把它与我们以前的生活相此较，也无法使其完美之后再来度过”。因为“只发生过一次的事就像压根儿没有发生过”，“如果生命属于我们只有一次，我们当然也可以说根本没有过生命”。轻，意味着偶然；偶然，又使生命轻得没有过。我们必须为我们的选择而负责，而选择又是偶然的，我们也同样的为我们的偶然，为我们的生命之轻负责。承担这份未来未卜的责任，就是承受着这一片生命之轻。托马斯，特蕾莎，萨宾娜，他们的一生就是在承受着这种“轻”，承受这种不可承受之“轻”。

一直在思索着生命为什么要存在，为了什么而生活。也许是思维的一种无理

取闹,但却让我为此困惑了很久，我尝试着做改变,但很多时候都是无疾而终，被当在了"深入探索"的门外，一直没真正的弄明白，所以还若以前，一样的困惑，一样的生活。自然，有了一些感悟，从中感觉到，茫然的状态多了，生命变得会更加的沧桑和脆弱，如果对待事情的处理方式上多了些犹豫，那么坚强的人也会懦弱，而从未没有成就感的完成一件事情，那从不会体会到坚强毅力的重要性，而我很长一段时间内，从没有了那种胜利喜悦的领悟，让我倍感压力中，觉得对生活的空寂。于是，去积极的寻求一种信仰，去弥补心灵随时出现的道德弱化，或者思想的挣扎，去积极的面对生活，以填充空余时间带给的凌乱，但生活还要生活，所以一直改变生活让之更好的生活，或许，这就是生活的真正目的，生活着，探索着，这就是人生最终经历的过程。继续行进，不管是怆然，还是平坦，都是一种阅历，而阅历中感悟到的，会增补生活的单调和乏味，而在强调这意义时，人更应该多尝试寂寞带给人生的享受，而不只是充满"色彩"的部分才是向往之所在。曲折会让人柔韧，这才能让人曲伸自如。余华想告诉我们的是，人的忍受力是无限的，对希望的期待也是无限的，人的生命力在极端的状态下仍然可以顽强地生存，这不仅是对生命状态的提示，更是对人的生命力的肯定。“人为了活着本身而活着”。

人活着一直都在反抗，反抗过去，成就未来。米兰.昆德拉，作品透露出两个字：颠覆。颠覆生活，颠覆爱情，打破一切伪原装存在的美好，然后以最自我的方式重组，炫耀那些变态的美丽。然而米兰，你的重组也不过是一厢情愿，那些流离的感情，那些残破的故事，那些漫不经心的喃喃自语，都是你精心策划的 骗局！即便是我心甘情愿沉溺其中，我还是会在生命的桎梏里挣扎，我会脚踏实地地学习、工作、生活，承受这份生命之重，即使这样的状态很有可能会让我感到辛苦。但是，在这个旅程中，我将学会勇敢面对困难，从容面对责任。在一个接着一个的窘境面前，渐渐成熟。

i 参考文献：[1]范文先生网：读《生命不能承受之轻》有感

[2]中山大学求进报社［52期——书评］轻与重

[3]古社人文网 文学杂谈 马失 《生命中不能承受之轻》的读后感

生命不能承受之轻英文评论相关热词搜索：不能承受的生命之轻 生命不能承受之轻 生命中不能承受之轻

1、生命不能承受之轻评价篇一《生命不能承受之轻读后感》 生命不能承受之轻评价。(2015-12-23)

2、承受责任篇一《论企业的社会责任及其承受能力》 承受责任。(2016-01-04)