Chapter 46 James Bond - a knight who was a spy by profession

García Márquez recalled such an incident. On a plane in Latin America, Green told him: "They will never give me the Nobel Prize because they think my book is too good to sell. It’s gone.” This passage is completely true today.Leaving a record in the history of the Nobel Prize that is difficult to break, that is, Green has been nominated more than 20 times, and the runner-up in ten thousand years-fortunately, the Nobel Prize is not really a real ranking of novel achievements. Today, if anyone wants to defend Ian Fleming, who has achieved such success, he is the number one seller in the history of spy novels, and the overwhelming number one in the history of spy movies in the world of images. Some moral embarrassment is a bit like saying that you have nothing to insist on, and you must convince the world that billionaires like Bill Gates or Wang Yongqing Guo Taiming also have their pain, their last resort and troubles; or you must brazenly speak loudly Help, talk about how lonely our leader and his wife are and how unseen grievances are.Of course we know that the power and wealth of a country is not equal to the kingdom of heaven. As long as a person is still a person, he must have the torment of life that he cannot escape and resolve. Consumables that are difficult to replenish quickly, and therefore should be used correctly, should be consumed by those who are unemployed, homeless, who cannot pay for children's school fees and nutritious lunches, those who, as Dostoevsky said For the insulted and oppressed, for the aboriginals whose annual summer typhoon season has been a "premeditated landslide disaster", and for perpetually hungry children across oceans such as East Africa.When you open the list, you will immediately find out how limited and insufficient our sympathy is, so you will also be clear at the same time that that kind of hoarse defense for the powerful is not sympathy, it is another thing, The official scientific name is "flattery".

Therefore, to say that Green is better than Gao Xingjian and Coetzee, so much better that he is not a writer of novels of the same level at all, is not idle sympathy (why does Green need sympathy?), but just a serious evaluation of literature itself that cannot be compromised and cannot be transferred. It is related to our correct cognition and true feelings of reading, and it should be said in an upright manner. It has nothing to do with whether it is best-selling or cannot sell three or five hundred copies at all. For the same reason, we still have to say it out loud here. Ian Fleming's 007 intelligence agent series novels are far better than the common sense or the introduction and discussion texts circulated in the market, especially those who only watch movies. Or people who watch the movie first and then read the novel without thinking, the James Bond they think or describe in their mouths, don't pretend, it is simply Sean Connery or the current Pierce Brosnan, including this Bo once again courageously introduced a famous domestic writer Zhan Hongzhi who wrote Fleming's original novel. I read the introductory text he wrote in front of the book, and found that he was still talking about "The Sequel to Agent 007" (which is already the most successful of all Bond movies. Good one) the Bond played by Sean Connery, not the Bond with certain flesh and blood and rich literary style in the original novel "Russian Love Letter".

In recent years, the British Penguin version of the novel, which is the living indicator of classic literature, has finally made a major decision to officially include Ian Fleming's "Russian Love Letter", "Goldfinger" and "Dr. NO". , this is the right, and it is time to decide, the prosperity will end, the ups and downs will eventually stop, and in the end Bond novels are still worth keeping for us to give to the next generation of readers. This group of spy novels by Ian Fleming is a product of the Cold War era that lasted half a century in the 20th century. It represents a psychological aspect of this important but absurd history that is relatively shallow but believed by more people, that is The entire human world is split into Zoroastrian-style good and evil sides. The other side is a demon, who is deliberately trying to destroy us. Therefore, this world is dangerous or extremely fragile, which constitutes a human being. Five days, twenty-four hours a day, the dramatic nightmare haunts and waits, that is, destruction, or being conquered. In the thinking of the ultimate duality of good and evil in the Cold War, both of these are also equivalent to the end of the world. The difference is most likely only A quick death, or a slow, painful death of despair in installments.And James Bond, a British agent with a secret mission and a license to kill, plays the tireless guardian hero who prevents the seal of the end of the world from being lifted, no matter in the movie or in the book. We can easily notice that he Not only has unlimited freedom of action including killing, but is always in a passive defensive position, the goal is so sacred that it is not restricted by any legal and moral norms, and it will never go beyond the rules and stop at never carrying out the "first strike" or That is to say, I don’t want to go straight to the Yellow Dragon, and simply pull out the boundary of all evil forces at once. This is not only a synonymous practice of the well-known anti-blocking and deterrence strategy during the Cold War, but also the ultimate philosophical thinking of the Western camp at that time. Even the belief is close to some kind of semi-fatalism (is evil everlasting? Is it impossible for demons to be eradicated?) Religion.

However, it is also in preventing the end of the world such as the prophecy of the apocalypse that we see the first difference between Bond in the movie and Bond in the novel, which is interesting. The movie Bond, pushes the doomsday threat directly to the critical point of the drama, just one cent away from being omnipotent (because only God is the only omnipotent, but he is too lazy or peace-loving to stop him This venerable opponent, who has always struggled tirelessly and with great ambition, makes all ambitious people from all walks of life, countries and towns think and it is strange that they all have the ability to destroy the world, no matter whether he is a communication giant or a sea creature a scholar, a diamond hoarder, a mafia boss, a kidnapper, a Kazakh-British rebel agent, or just a little North Korean colonel at all (we're forced to believe or accept because only then can we enjoy The next image satisfies).So the movie Bond also has to rise to such a level of work, fighting side by side with Superman, Batman, Spiderman and the Archmage, but the weapon used is a Beretta .25 pistol.

But this is not the case with the novel Bond. The mission of the novel Bond, such as "Russian Love Letter", is just to bring back a Soviet cipher machine, and "Goldfinger" is to hunt gold smugglers to prevent financial markets from being attacked, or Like "You Can Only Live Twice", the adapted movie "Thunder Valley" became a huge plan to destroy the world by kidnapping the satellites of the United States and the Soviet Union in space orbit, but the original novel is just a crazy doctor who is on a small island in Japan. A death paradise was established, attracting suicidal Japanese people rushing to die. At that time, Bond, who had lost his mind, was ordered to cooperate with Japanese intelligence agencies to eliminate it.

That is to say, in the Bond story of the novel, the threat of doomsday exists, but this is only in the huge Soviet Empire's world revolution plan that will not happen overnight. Many major crimes have been suspected and even finally proved to be directly or indirectly caused by this plan. One of the sorties was launched under the command of the Soviet intelligence unit SMERSH.Bond, who fights against SMERSH in public responsibility and private personal hatred (many of his British intelligence colleagues and friends died at the hands of SMERSH), is correspondingly only a part of the same huge anti-blocking force in the West. He has made great achievements in battle, but The position is only a lieutenant colonel, and he can only do what the lieutenant colonel can do or the most imaginable things.

What difference does it make to narrow down the mission from a global to a specific city or place?This is like a map or picture of the same size. When it is directly reduced from a sketch of the world to just a certain city, every part of the map or picture is greatly enlarged, and we begin to see hills, Mountain trails, woods, streams, lakes and farmhouses can initially accommodate cattle and sheep, crowds, and even vehicles and trains, and can also imagine the activities of people in between, including hot markets, bars and cafes with music flowing , an after-dinner nap by the fire, reading and a game of backgammon, an unexpected love affair or a fight in the street, and so on—a difference in size reaches a certain point where it becomes not just a difference in quantity, but a qualitative one. Changes in the world, from abstract concept symbols to concrete objects, from "false" to "true".

"For a not-sweet martini, shake it, don't stir it." This line often appears in James Bond's mouth, and it has almost become the same as the silhouette with a gun at the beginning of Bond's movie titles. There is only one family without a semicolon in the world. Forget about what Sean Connery looks like (it's not easy for us to know, but try), forget about Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan, and of course don't worry about George Lazenby and Timothy Dutton, no one What impression do you have of the two of them, let's see what the real Bond looks like. Through the eyes of others, especially the eyes of the enemy, it may be better. The following is the description of the photo taken by Bond's sworn enemy SMERSH - his face is dark and clear.There is a white three-inch long scar on the right cheek that has been sunburned.Under the thick black eyebrows, there is a pair of big eyes.Her black hair was parted from the left, and due to careless combing, a thick lock of hair hung down above the right eyebrow.The long and straight nose is straight down to the short upper lip, and the upper lip is followed by the wide lower lip with a slight curl at the end, which looks quite cold.The ridge of the jaw is sharp and powerful.A dark suit, white shirt, and black knitted tie complete the picture. …Fortitude, majesty, no mercy—such were the traits he could see.

Then, the file text reads: "Name: James. Height: 183 cm; Weight: 76 kg; Build: Slender; Eye Color: Blue; Hair: Black; There is a scar on each of the right cheek and left shoulder. Signs of plastic surgery. All-around sportsman, good at pistol shooting, boxing, and throwing knives. No makeup to hide his true face. Languages: French, German. Heavy smoking (note: special cigarettes with three gold rims). Hobbies: drinking , but not too much. Femininity. No intention of taking bribes. The gun bag on the left armpit contains a Beretta . Weapons, know the basic judo moves. Generally speaking, they are indomitable in battle and have a very high tolerance for pain."

Such a James Bond, of course, is still an outstanding hero. "Zoran" and "not group" are synonymous and connected, which means that he must be a person who will be recognized at a glance in the crowd and probably will not be easily forgotten, and for example, the middle-aged man described by John le Carré He is different from Smiley, who is short, fat, and ordinary-looking so that he can disappear into the background of any environment anytime, anywhere. Is such a person suitable to be a secret agent? ——In terms of literature, Fleming, the hero Bond, is basically a conceptual character, a typical character, or a flat character as EM Foster said, sacrificing part of the truth in order to highlight its characteristics. After all, It can only be a paradox that women can catch him at a glance and opponent spies should ignore him.Here, Fleming did not accomplish such an impossible miracle. His real achievement was to write one of the most successful and fascinating concept characters in the history of human fiction, just like Conan Doyle's concept character Sherlock Holmes.

The two insurmountable pinnacles of spy novels are facing each other far away. Fleming and Le Carré are two completely different writers and two people. Basically, Le Carré seriously looks at the absurd spy world of the Cold War era, Describe it as realistically as possible Think about it, which makes him go beyond and pierce the vulgar binary ideology of good and evil, pointing directly at the deepest human heart and its moral dilemma, Le Carré's mind is old and his eyes are sympathetic , the tone of speech is low and sad. In the end, the spy world has become a labyrinth with no exit, a nightmare from which one cannot wake up.Relatively speaking, Ian Fleming is happy. He cheerfully accepts the ideology of the binary opposition of good and evil in the Cold War. He is very firm and regards it as an excellent opportunity to show his talents. This is a moment in history, just as Bond in his writing got the performance stage because of this.In this regard, Fleming is very similar to the senior writer Conan Doyle, and even a group of intellectuals under the old British imperialist thinking. They have endless loyalty to Her Majesty, but at the same time, they also have a clear pirate and hooligan atmosphere in their own characters. , who is both patriotic and eager to have the opportunity to become famous and profit, not only destroys enemies one by one happily in the pen, but also actively seeks to have his own position in the real war, and can contribute his proud wit.Conan Doyle actively participated in the Boer War in the former South African colony, and participated in the war at the age of fifty-six in the First World War and lost a son's life; Fleming's was later in the Second World War, serving His unit is the naval intelligence unit to which Bond belongs, and his rank is also Bond's lieutenant colonel. At that time, the German army's magical cipher machine "Enigma" has always been a serious problem for the Allied forces on the European battlefield.At that time, Fleming drew up an extremely bold and possibly costly (human life in the novelist’s heart is not worth it?) mystery machine hunting plan, called "Jedi Project", which was approved by Churchill, but in the end it was too much for the ether. Take the risk and call it quits. Even if he takes writing genre novels as his career and tells himself that Caesar’s Return to Caesar does not involve truth, few spy writers who are generally good enough are as completely free of moral fetters, doubts, and even powerful as Fleming. The support and inspiration of sacred patriotic beliefs.Or we should say that the most special difference between Fleming and the general spy writers is that his extreme intelligence seems to be completely concentrated in the world of wit and victory of little boys, regardless of the sophistication and sympathy of mature adults. In the writing of spy novels, he is happier and freer than serious and gloomy writers like Le Carré, and far more sincere and unreserved than ordinary writers who only regard spy novels as a profession.He put all his extraordinary ingenuity on the "big game" as Kipling said, concentrated on telling stories, concentrated on describing and boldly imagining, and constructed a world that was completely his own and could never be satisfied from reality. Nothing can stop the gorgeous spy kingdom. In this own virtual world, he is God, Alpha Omega, and he is everything. Just as we or anyone with a basic sense hates Kipling's imperialism, but at the same time we all admit and even sincerely admire Kipling's epic storytelling ability, which is through Borges Or it will be reconfirmed by masters such as Calvino.The same is true of Fleming, you can dislike him, but in the world of spy novels, even in a higher standard beyond spy novels, Fleming is an outstanding storyteller. Ian Fleming may be shallow, to be disrespectful, but his sincere and focused shallowness gives his work a strange thickness and brilliance—yes, even shards of glass instead of diamonds, when the light is focused Shines brightly in the light, as Virginia Woolf said: "He must first believe." Not just a good story.Fleming's spy world is "false", at least true and false, James Bond is an unparalleled hero rather than a normal spy like an invisible man, but under this false framework or basic premise, What makes Fleming great is not just telling us a story full of climaxes and thrills. What Fleming is most ignored or underestimated is actually his unique literary "touch". His excellent writing skills, his exquisite and always interesting observation and description ability, fully reveal the childish curiosity, lack of distraction and some kind of ignorant self-confidence or insistence on going his own way deep in his character.Unlike Le Carré, other serious spy novelists who focus on criticism and reflection, ideas come first and meaning comes first, so they are impatient with details and clumsy at the content and objects; it is not like the general profession that only focuses on the sense of plot Writers of vulgar novels simply fake everything to the end, and the big and generalized story framework is also just simple artificial scenery and props.When reading Fleming's novels, you are often surprised to find that he will suddenly diverge or stop in a way that does not conform to the normal rules or rhythms of genre novels, like a little boy coming home from school suddenly being caught by a plant or leaf on the roadside. Like an insect sucking it in, it starts a big discussion about something or something, as if showing off the rich knowledge it heard or saw last night to impress its playmates. This is the case with the long lecture-style dialogue with the bank gold expert before the task; I will also plunge into it out of proportion and describe a certain scene or a character who does not need to be introduced in this way, such as the book "Dr. NO" The natural landscape on the island of Central Jamaica, for example, the fascinating depiction of the naked body of the Soviet SMERSH killer at the beginning of "Russian Love Letter", I personally believe that it is this long and strange writing obsession that inspired the people who later adapted the film , so that Robert Shaw, who played the role of the villain, glowed with a cold, evil, evil spirit and cheetah-like brilliance, which unexpectedly became an instant hit. At the same time, have we also noticed that the so-called Bond girl who should be more important in the novel and will become a major gimmick in filming in the future.Regardless of her black hair and blond hair, no matter which country she comes from, the East or the West, Fleming's descriptions are always boring and formulaic, as if he is obsessed with his own aesthetic view that has no semicolon.Tell me, which glamorous girl doesn't have high cheekbones and big, thick sexy lips? Many mystery fans know that Conan Doyle, who wrote Sherlock Holmes, hates the detective he created. It is not entirely hypocritical. The main reason is that the great success of Sherlock Holmes has relatively deprived him of his writing time allocation and covered up the brilliance of his other works. (Talk about it, who knows what non-Holmes story Conan Doyle has written today?), this Irishman who likes to boast about his aristocratic background, his favorite and he thinks he writes best are not mystery novels, but novels. It's a knight adventure story. This quirky obsession gives us interesting clues for further thinking about Fleming Bond's novels. What needs to be explained is that I personally very, very firmly believe that many successes, especially the success of worldly fame and wealth, are not justified most of the time. Shit and blah, call it what you want, but that's what it is, and hedonic expendable pop fiction includes it.Of course, being unreasonable doesn’t mean that you can’t attach it. If someone must adhere to the so-called “success to find the reason for success, and failure to find the reason for failure” to understand people, you don’t need any special talent and imagination to talk about it eloquently. It's a lot of nonsense, we don't need and should seriously resist such frivolous remarks that tend to be popular.But there are some, remember that the number must be rare, and the examples of secular success are interesting. Like gold hidden in the sand, there are thought clues that we are easy to miss, and they are worth a little more careful study. I think Fleming's Bond novels fall into this category as well. Croce once said: "Determining whether a book is a fable, a novel, or a treatise on aesthetics is about the same as telling you that it has a yellow cover and that we can find it on the third shelf from the left." If we don't understand Bond novels according to the classification of spy novels, what path do we have? Conan Doyle's lifelong regrets, as if traveling through time to give us prophecy, or at least advice: an adventure story. A lot of things, asking the right questions, it’s like casting a spell, a cave and a completely different world suddenly open up like magic before our eyes——I think, try to use the more ancient history of human novels to explore Looking at the Bond novels in the tradition of novels, it seems that not only the content and writing style of Bond novels can be explained more accurately, but also the relationship between this group of novels and people’s reading can be explained more accurately, which finds a more profound reason for their great success in the world , may also give us additional inspiration. Otherwise why is it like this?If it weren't for the adventure story, why would Bond's character modeling and equipment be like this (including looks, ways of acting, the number and meaning of ways to take human life, his hedonistic lifestyle and philosophy, and his understanding of The strange tolerance of pain, and some yearning and masochistic trials implied in it)?Why is his relationship and weight with women the way it is (a certain proportion that must get in the way of the mission, and that polite sensuality, coveting and restrained quasi-medieval knightly way)?I personally think that the most interesting thing is that, as far as the most basic field of activity of spy novels is concerned, shouldn’t the time and energy be concentrated on the cities along the border of the Cold War, such as Berlin, Vienna, Geneva, and Istanbul?Especially when he's an out-of-the-field, operationally organized spy, but where's Bond, you see?He ran around all over the world, and spent more time in the Americas, especially the Caribbean Sea, than in Europe. Even before the First World War, when the old Britain was still a universal empire where the sun never set, there was no need to control it so broadly, right? The Caribbean Sea has become the main range of activities for Bond to go back and forth. Of course, there are direct and uninteresting written explanations. That is Ian Fleming’s personal life footprint. He has lived in Jamaica for a long time and is familiar with the local people and natural landscapes. , but doesn't that illustrate Fleming's disregard for the real world of espionage?It is impossible for him to be so uninitiated in Cold War espionage affairs. It can only be said that his real thoughts are not there. He let his personal concerns override the collective burden, and he thinks so much about his wandering life. As well as the unrealized big dream, refraction and embellishment, create a gorgeous adventure story that is close to bragging. Don't doubt Fleming's ego, it's so big, it must be so big that you would rather read his novels than really know him and listen to his chatter. If we read not only his complete and well-known novels, but also his detailed short stories like The Spy Who Loved Me, then we will more clearly find that Bond is not always on a mission, let alone saving the world, he will be in it. On the way, he stretched out his hand to punish a group of kidnappers, and of course the one who rescued must be a young beauty (high cheekbones, wide mouth) and got a reward afterwards; he also witnessed a family murder tragedy on a yacht, when he More of an easy-chair detective than a spy at all; he has a much more personal, gang-brother hatred for SMERSH, can't tell if he's fighting for Her Majesty or standing up for himself, not only his own personal grudges, but also His boss M's personal grievances, like in the short story For Your Eyes Only, he went to Jamaica with revenge for the death of M's friend; even in the book "Goldfinger", he can also transit in Miami In his free time, he hired a rich guy to help him expose a gambling scam.This kind of behavior was either omitted in the later movies, or turned into a necessary part of the action against the great conspiracy to destroy the world, but it is very clear that it is just a person who happened to have the identity of a secret agent. Telling an absolutely unacceptable willful adventure story, it is purely a personal adventure story. From here, it seems that Bond novels can be considered to change a group of bookshelf positions, and they can also be placed in the middle of adventure stories such as Stevenson, Kipling, Rabelais, Cervantes, etc. You can see Homer, you can see epics and myths-I'm not saying that the Bond novels are so good, I'm just saying that we should also recognize the Bond novels with the genetic characteristics of this ancient glorious family, which is the storyteller. A descendant of a big family, even if he is more frivolous, should go home occasionally to see his relatives. From Bond novels to Bond movies, it constitutes a modern adult fairy tale, or to put it more carefully, let us see (or even participate in) the process of slowly building and forming a fairy tale, which lasted for half a century - the first The Bond movie "007 Agent" (that is, the novel "Dr. NO") was released in 1962. That was my personal childhood. The carnival is always selected during the Spring Festival. We have never missed any one since we were young, and we can't afford to miss it. It will always be connected with the cheerful Chinese New Year atmosphere in our memory, and at that time, people were serious and happy during the Chinese New Year. Regarding fairy tales or fairytales, Borges said that all novels that are good enough should turn into fairy tales after a certain time. It's like saying that the once intense and dangerous mysteries of human thinking have since unraveled into common sense, like the fact that the earth revolves around the sun.So Kipling's novel "The Jungle Book" full of the laws of the imperial jungle has become the lovely jungle prince Mowgli today, and Jack London's novels revealing the cruel phenomenon of Darwinism has become a sweet animal story.Mark Twain's, Melville's, Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein", Cervantes' "Don Quixote" and even all the wild or dark or cruel or mysterious myths have indeed been Changed the tone of the storytelling and became a children's bedside story.However, the counter evidence is also strong. For example, "The Brothers Karamazov" or "Heart of Darkness" and other equally good enough novels have not yet softened into fairy tales. I guess, find a place to bury them for two hundred years Three hundred years later, when they are dug out, they still look stubborn and cold, which is not suitable for children. A erudite wise man like Borges usually has a special meaning and wants to call out something particularly wonderful when he utters such obviously indiscriminate words.That is the element of storytelling in fiction, which is far longer than the writing tradition of modern fiction, which is only a few hundred years old. It is generally believed that it is far earlier than the invention of writing, and not too late after the appearance of human beings on the earth; and Not limited to Europe, where the modern novel originated, it is universal, for every people, including those extinct and vanished, and therefore it must reach some depths of the human heart, some almost presumably common needs or basic human stuff.Compared with modern novels, it is more universally involved, as if everyone is its listener; it is not bound by rational disenchantment, it is likely to be more mysterious and less fearful, facing death calmly, and asking about all life The mystery of existence, without suspending a single doubt—in Borges's more modest words: "I don't believe that people get tired of hearing stories." This long and open tradition of storytelling, such as the sun shines on good people and also on bad people, is the main contemporary successor of modern novels, but it seems that some things have escaped, such as Wang Xietangqianyan. This loss constitutes the universality of modern novel writers. Borges, García Márquez, Italo Calvino, Kundera, and Green Yunyun all summoned it in different languages, and even tried to capture part of it in their own writing practice, like García Márquez The novels of Cia Márquez's "my old grandmother's way of telling stories", such as Calvino's collection of rewriting Italian folk tales, or Green's direct marking of "for entertainment" on the covers of some of his novels, make it clear to Popular fiction marches in.Not only novel writers, but also novel commentators, such as Lukacs, Bakhtin, and of course Benjamin. Benjamin's "The Storyteller" is particularly profound and poetic, and anyone who is interested must read it.According to Benjamin, the story itself (including characters and plots) has the ability to communicate than the meaning, and it is wider in space and longer in time. Just because the story itself is easier to remember and retell, it is more public than meaning. of. When modern novels tend to be more and more meaning-oriented, things will inevitably have the taste of impoliteness. This wonderful storytelling itself is preserved and practiced intermittently in a small number of popular novels and movies, so Borges said in the article "Detective Fiction": "One thing is clear and worth pointing out: our literature is tending to chaos, to writing free prose, because prose is easier to write than metrical verse, But the truth is that prose is very difficult to write. Our literature tends to eliminate characters, eliminate plots, and everything becomes vague. In our chaotic age, there is something that still quietly maintains the virtues of classics, That's the detective story; for you can't find a detective story that is headless, devoid of main content, and without ending. Some of these detective stories are written by second- and third-rate writers, and some are written by outstanding writers, such as Dickens , Stevenson, and especially Collins. I would say that the detective novel (which has been somewhat neglected) should be defended which need not be defended, because this literary genre is saving order in an age of disorder." Of course, the bad news is that those popular novels that quietly maintain the classics, that is, maintain the traditional virtues of good storytelling, are extremely rare, and in the midst of their rarity, they are also tending to the sensibility of the moment in an all-round way, just as they are today. The new 007 movie of Ian Fleming's novel, they shot dazzling special effects, and Bond also changed from the old Sean Connery of contemporary knights to today's Superman, Batman, and Spiderman in suits . Similarly, Fleming's Bond novels, as Borges said, originally did not need our defense. Even Fleming needed to defend seriously, and the image of this world appeared extremely desolate-this is A group of novels, like its heroes, cannot save the world, at most it can only delay time and keep hope. The only good news is that the books are good enough during the reading process of this slow and worse situation. You know, there are very few meaningful things that are enjoyable at the same time, just as there are few healthy foods that are delicious at the same time.