Late in January 1975, a 17-year-old German girl called Vera Brandes walked out onto the stage of the Cologne Opera House. The auditorium was empty. It was lit only by the dim, green glow of the emergency exit sign. This was the most exciting day of Vera's life. She was the youngest concert promoter in Germany, and she had persuaded the Cologne Opera House to host a late-night concert of jazz from the American musician, Keith Jarrett. 1,400 people were coming. And in just a few hours, Jarrett would walk out on the same stage, he'd sit down at the piano and without rehearsal or sheet music, he would begin to play.
喺 1975 年 1 月 一個 17 歲叫 Vera Brandes 嘅德國女仔 走上科隆歌劇院嘅舞台 嗰時觀眾席無人 歌劇院內 只有緊急出口牌綠色微弱嘅燈光 但嗰日係 Vera 人生裏面最興奮嘅一日 佢係德國最年輕嘅音樂會籌辦人 佢成功說服科隆歌劇院 舉辨一場美國音樂人 Keith Jarrett 嘅 深夜爵士音樂會 音樂會有 1,400 個觀眾出席 喺幾個鐘頭之後 Keith 走上同一個台 坐低喺鋼琴前面 喺冇採排或者樂譜嘅情況下 佢開始演奏
But right now, Vera was introducing Keith to the piano in question, and it wasn't going well. Jarrett looked to the instrument a little warily, played a few notes, walked around it, played a few more notes, muttered something to his producer. Then the producer came over to Vera and said ... "If you don't get a new piano, Keith can't play."
但喺宜家 Vera 預備俾 Keith 用嘅鋼琴原來有問題 而且情況並唔順利 Keith 小心咁睇個鋼琴 彈咗幾個音 圍著鋼琴行咗一圈 又再彈咗幾個音 然後向佢嘅監製細聲講咗幾句 嗰個監製走過去同 Vera 講︰ 「如果你唔換個新鋼琴,Keith 表演唔到。」
There'd been a mistake. The opera house had provided the wrong instrument. This one had this harsh, tinny upper register, because all the felt had worn away. The black notes were sticking, the white notes were out of tune, the pedals didn't work and the piano itself was just too small. It wouldn't create the volume that would fill a large space such as the Cologne Opera House.
科隆歌劇院搞錯咗 歌劇院俾咗錯嘅樂器 鋼琴特別高音 係因為鋼琴一條條吸音毛頭經已損耗 嗰啲黑鍵彈唔返上嚟 白鍵走曬音 腳踏又用唔到 而且鋼琴太細啦 彈出嚟嘅音細聲得制 尤其是喺咁大嘅空間 唔會所有人都聽得到
So Keith Jarrett left. He went and sat outside in his car, leaving Vera Brandes to get on the phone to try to find a replacement piano. Now she got a piano tuner, but she couldn't get a new piano. And so she went outside and she stood there in the rain, talking to Keith Jarrett, begging him not to cancel the concert. And he looked out of his car at this bedraggled, rain-drenched German teenager, took pity on her, and said, "Never forget ... only for you."
所以 Keith 走咗 佢出去,坐喺佢架車裡面 留低 Vera 自己一個 打電話去搵另一個琴返嚟 Vera 成功搵咗個鋼琴師傅 但佢搵唔到一個新嘅鋼琴 於是佢出去外面 喺大雨之下企 同 Keith 話 請求佢唔好取消音樂會 Keith 望著呢個狼狽 淋濕曬嘅德國青年 因為同情佢 所以 Keith 話 「唔好忘記呢件事…今次只係為你。」
And so a few hours later, Jarrett did indeed step out onto the stage of the opera house, he sat down at the unplayable piano and began.
幾個鐘頭之後 Keith 走上歌劇院嘅台 佢坐低喺嗰個彈唔到嘅鋼琴 開始演奏
(Music)
(音樂)
Within moments it became clear that something magical was happening. Jarrett was avoiding those upper registers, he was sticking to the middle tones of the keyboard, which gave the piece a soothing, ambient quality. But also, because the piano was so quiet, he had to set up these rumbling, repetitive riffs in the bass. And he stood up twisting, pounding down on the keys, desperately trying to create enough volume to reach the people in the back row.
但神奇嘅嘢發生咗 Keith 避開高音 佢反而彈中間嘅音 令到呢首歌有撫慰同平靜嘅效果 因為鋼琴本身嘅音量唔大 Keith 唔單止要重複彈低音 仲要企起身用力襟啲鍵 確保後排聽眾都可以聽到琴聲
It's an electrifying performance. It somehow has this peaceful quality, and at the same time it's full of energy, it's dynamic. And the audience loved it. Audiences continue to love it because the recording of the Köln Concert is the best-selling piano album in history and the best-selling solo jazz album in history.
呢場表演令人興奮 呢個表演雖然有平靜嘅特質 但同時又充滿活力 聽眾唔但之鍾意 而且繼續鍾意 因為呢次科隆音樂會嘅鋼琴專輯 係史上最暢銷嘅鋼琴專輯 亦係最暢銷嘅獨奏爵士樂專輯
Keith Jarrett had been handed a mess. He had embraced that mess, and it soared. But let's think for a moment about Jarrett's initial instinct. He didn't want to play. Of course, I think any of us, in any remotely similar situation, would feel the same way, we'd have the same instinct. We don't want to be asked to do good work with bad tools. We don't want to have to overcome unnecessary hurdles. But Jarrett's instinct was wrong, and thank goodness he changed his mind. And I think our instinct is also wrong. I think we need to gain a bit more appreciation for the unexpected advantages of having to cope with a little mess. So let me give you some examples from cognitive psychology, from complexity science, from social psychology, and of course, rock 'n' roll.
雖然 Keith 嘅表演開始前唔順利 但佢接受咗,仲將佢搞好 等我哋諗一諗 Keith 最初嘅反應 佢唔想演奏 將心比己 如果任何一個喺類似嘅情況 我哋都會有一樣嘅感受 我哋都一樣唔想演奏 我哋都唔希望人哋叫我哋 用差嘅工具做好一件事 我哋都想避免不必要嘅障礙 但我哋都知道 Keith 最初嘅反應係錯嘅 好彩佢改變諗法 我認為我哋嘅判斷都係錯嘅 我認為我哋應該反而感激 因為解決麻煩而獲得意想不到嘅好處 所以等我由認知心理學 複雜性科學 社會心理學 以及搖滾樂裏面 講一啲例子
So cognitive psychology first. We've actually known for a while that certain kinds of difficulty, certain kinds of obstacle, can actually improve our performance. For example, the psychologist Daniel Oppenheimer, a few years ago, teamed up with high school teachers. And he asked them to reformat the handouts that they were giving to some of their classes. So the regular handout would be formatted in something straightforward, such as Helvetica or Times New Roman. But half these classes were getting handouts that were formatted in something sort of intense, like Haettenschweiler, or something with a zesty bounce, like Comic Sans italicized. Now, these are really ugly fonts, and they're difficult fonts to read. But at the end of the semester, students were given exams, and the students who'd been asked to read the more difficult fonts, had actually done better on their exams, in a variety of subjects. And the reason is, the difficult font had slowed them down, forced them to work a bit harder, to think a bit more about what they were reading, to interpret it ... and so they learned more.
我哋由認知心理學開始 實際上我哋已經知道咗有一段時間 一啲難度同一啲障礙 可以提高表現 例如 喺幾年前 心理學家 Daniel Oppenheimer 曾經同中學老師合作 要求佢哋重新編寫 派俾其中某幾班嘅筆記 一般筆記嘅字體都係大路, 譬如 Helvetica 同 Times New Roman 但另一班收到嘅筆記嘅字體係比較強烈 例如︰ Haettenschweiler 字體 又或係一啲比較跳躍嘅字體 例如斜體嘅 Comic Sans 字體 呢啲都係核突嘅字體 而且佢哋好難閱讀 等學期結束時 學生要考試 嗰啲獲發難睇字體筆記嘅學生 喺考試入面唔同科目 表現都較好 原因係 難睇嘅字體減慢佢哋閱讀速度 令佢哋要落多啲苦功 要花多啲時間諗下佢哋到底寫乜嘢 要多啲時間去理解 所以佢哋學得更加多
Another example. The psychologist Shelley Carson has been testing Harvard undergraduates for the quality of their attentional filters. What do I mean by that? What I mean is, imagine you're in a restaurant, you're having a conversation, there are all kinds of other conversations going on in the restaurant, you want to filter them out, you want to focus on what's important to you. Can you do that? If you can, you have good, strong attentional filters. But some people really struggle with that. Some of Carson's undergraduate subjects struggled with that. They had weak filters, they had porous filters -- let a lot of external information in. And so what that meant is they were constantly being interrupted by the sights and the sounds of the world around them. If there was a television on while they were doing their essays, they couldn't screen it out.
另外一個例子 心理學家 Shelley Carson 一直喺度測試哈佛本科生 佢哋過濾事物嘅能力 咁到底係咩意思呢? 我嘅意思係,想像你喺一間食肆裡面 你同人傾緊偈 食肆裏邊仲有其他人傾緊 你想將佢哋把聲都篩走 集中你目前嘅對話 你做到嗎? 如果可以,你嘅過濾做得唔錯 但有啲人比較吃力 一啲 Shelley 嘅本科生比較吃力 佢哋嘅過濾好弱,佢哋嘅過濾有問題 好多無關重要嘅訊息 進入咗佢哋嘅腦裡邊 意思係佢哋會不斷 被外界嘅影像同聲音干擾 如果佢哋做論文嘅時候,電視開著嘅話 佢哋無法子專心喺論文度 你可能會話呢樣係缺點…
Now, you would think that that was a disadvantage ... but no. When Carson looked at what these students had achieved, the ones with the weak filters were vastly more likely to have some real creative milestone in their lives, to have published their first novel, to have released their first album. These distractions were actually grists to their creative mill. They were able to think outside the box because their box was full of holes.
但,唔係 當 Shelley 睇返呢啲學生所做到嘅嘢 佢發現嗰啲過濾比較弱嘅學生 佢哋係更加有可能 喺佢哋嘅生命裡面成就一啲嘢 出版佢哋第一部小說 發行咗佢哋第一張專輯 分心實際上係佢哋創意嘅來源 佢哋突破原有思維 因為佢哋唔會鎖死自己
Let's talk about complexity science. So how do you solve a really complex -- the world's full of complicated problems -- how do you solve a really complicated problem?
我哋嚟講下複雜性科學 你點樣解決一個非常複雜嘅… 我哋世界充滿複雜嘅問題 你點能夠解決一個非常複雜嘅問題?
For example, you try to make a jet engine. There are lots and lots of different variables, the operating temperature, the materials, all the different dimensions, the shape. You can't solve that kind of problem all in one go, it's too hard. So what do you do? Well, one thing you can do is try to solve it step-by-step. So you have some kind of prototype and you tweak it, you test it, you improve it. You tweak it, you test it, you improve it. Now, this idea of marginal gains will eventually get you a good jet engine. And it's been quite widely implemented in the world. So you'll hear about it, for example, in high performance cycling, web designers will talk about trying to optimize their web pages, they're looking for these step-by-step gains.
例如,你想整一個飛機引擎 呢度有好多、好多唔同嘅嘢要考慮 包括運行時嘅溫度、材料 尺寸、形狀 你唔能夠一次過解決所有問題 因為太難啦 咁你會點做? 好啦,你可以一步一步咁解決呢啲疑難 然後你有原型 你調整一下佢、測試佢、改良佢 再調整一下佢、測試佢、改良佢 呢種逐步改良嘅方法 最終會令你整到一個好嘅引擎 而且呢種方法全世界都廣泛應用 你會聽到,例如 喺高水平嘅單車運動裏面都會有 而網頁設計師會講 佢哋逐步優化佢哋網頁
That's a good way to solve a complicated problem. But you know what would make it a better way? A dash of mess. You add randomness, early on in the process, you make crazy moves, you try stupid things that shouldn't work, and that will tend to make the problem-solving work better. And the reason for that is the trouble with the step-by-step process, the marginal gains, is they can walk you gradually down a dead end. And if you start with the randomness, that becomes less likely, and your problem-solving becomes more robust.
呢個係解決複雜問題嘅好辦法 但你知道個辦法其實係點樣? 就係要亂七八糟 又要一開始時隨意咁做嘢 你做出瘋狂嘅嘢 你嘗試一啲一定唔會成功嘅愚蠢嘢 呢啲都會令問題解決得更加好 原因係 逐步做嘅問題 幾乎冇嘅收益嘅情兄 可以令你慢慢行入死路一條 如果你一開始時係亂咁做 行入掘頭路嘅機會都低啲 你嘅解難能力就會勁啲
Let's talk about social psychology. So the psychologist Katherine Phillips, with some colleagues, recently gave murder mystery problems to some students, and these students were collected in groups of four and they were given dossiers with information about a crime -- alibis and evidence, witness statements and three suspects. And the groups of four students were asked to figure out who did it, who committed the crime. And there were two treatments in this experiment. In some cases these were four friends, they all knew each other well. In other cases, three friends and a stranger. And you can see where I'm going with this.
講下社會心理學 心理學家凱瑟琳 ‧ 菲利普斯 同一啲同事 俾學生一啲謀殺謎團去解答 學生四個人一組 佢哋有一叠關於罪案嘅資料文件 不在場證據、證人嘅供詞同三名嫌疑犯 佢哋要搵出係邊個做 邊個犯法 呢個實驗有兩種情況 一係一組人都係識得嘅朋友 第二種就係三個朋友加一個唔識嘅 你可以估到我要講啲咩
Obviously I'm going to say that the groups with the stranger solved the problem more effectively, which is true, they did. Actually, they solved the problem quite a lot more effectively. So the groups of four friends, they only had a 50-50 chance of getting the answer right. Which is actually not that great -- in multiple choice, for three answers? 50-50's not good.
好明顯 第二種情況嘅組別更有效解決問題 咁事實上真係,佢哋係更加有效率 喺第一種情況嘅組別裏面 佢哋只有一半機會答啱 佢哋唔係做得好好 當選擇題有三個選擇 得一半答啱確實唔係好好
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
The three friends and the stranger, even though the stranger didn't have any extra information, even though it was just a case of how that changed the conversation to accommodate that awkwardness, the three friends and the stranger, they had a 75 percent chance of finding the right answer. That's quite a big leap in performance.
第二情況嘅組別 即使個陌生人冇俾任何額外嘅訊息 雖然呢個情況只係話 點樣令交談冇咁尷尬 第二個情況嘅組別 有 75% 機會搵到正確答案 個結果係好大嘅進步
But I think what's really interesting is not just that the three friends and the stranger did a better job, but how they felt about it. So when Katherine Phillips interviewed the groups of four friends, they had a nice time, they also thought they'd done a good job. They were complacent. When she spoke to the three friends and the stranger, they had not had a nice time -- it's actually rather difficult, it's rather awkward ... and they were full of doubt. They didn't think they'd done a good job even though they had. And I think that really exemplifies the challenge that we're dealing with here.
而我認為真正吸引嘅 唔係呢三個朋友同陌生人做得更加好 而係佢哋對件事嘅感覺 所以當凱瑟琳採訪咗第一種組別嘅時候 佢哋都認為佢哋有愉快嘅時光 都認為佢哋做得好好 佢哋好滿足 當佢採訪第二種組別嘅時候 佢哋都認佢哋冇一個惀快嘅時光 佢實際上相處得好困難、又尷尬 佢哋中間都有好多疑難 佢哋冇諗過會做得咁好 我認為,呢個測試嘅結果可以用喺 我哋面對梗嘅嘢
Because, yeah -- the ugly font, the awkward stranger, the random move ... these disruptions help us solve problems, they help us become more creative. But we don't feel that they're helping us. We feel that they're getting in the way ... and so we resist. And that's why the last example is really important.
例如︰ 核突嘅字體 尷尬嘅陌生人 隨機嘅做法… 呢啲干擾其實幫梗我哋解決問題 幫我哋更有創意 但我哋從來並唔覺得係咁 我哋覺得佢哋係窒礙我哋 所以我哋抗拒佢 所以就係話點解最後呢個例子係好重要
So I want to talk about somebody from the background of the world of rock 'n' roll. And you may know him, he's actually a TED-ster. His name is Brian Eno. He is an ambient composer -- rather brilliant.
我諗講一個人 佢背景係搖滾音樂 你可能認得佢,佢係一個 TEDster 佢叫布萊恩 ‧ 伊諾 佢係一個出色、有實力嘅作曲家
He's also a kind of catalyst behind some of the great rock 'n' roll albums of the last 40 years. He's worked with David Bowie on "Heroes," he worked with U2 on "Achtung Baby" and "The Joshua Tree," he's worked with DEVO, he's worked with Coldplay, he's worked with everybody.
喺過去40年,佢都係 一啲好嘅搖滾音樂專輯嘅幕後推手 佢曾經同 David Bowie 喺作品 Heroes 裏面合作 佢亦曾經同 U2 喺 Achtung baby 同 The Joshua Tree 裏面合作過 佢曾經同 DEVO 一齊工作 佢同 Coldplay 合作過 佢同每一個人都合作過
And what does he do to make these great rock bands better? Well, he makes a mess. He disrupts their creative processes. It's his role to be the awkward stranger. It's his role to tell them that they have to play the unplayable piano.
佢做過乜令呢啲出色嘅 搖滾樂隊更加好? 佢整爛攤子 佢干擾佢哋嘅創作過程 佢嘅角色就係頭先講過嘅陌生人 佢就係要話俾佢哋聽 佢哋要彈嗰個彈唔到嘅鋼琴
And one of the ways in which he creates this disruption is through this remarkable deck of cards -- I have my signed copy here -- thank you, Brian. They're called The Oblique Strategies, he developed them with a friend of his. And when they're stuck in the studio, Brian Eno will reach for one of the cards. He'll draw one at random, and he'll make the band follow the instructions on the card.
佢整呢啲亂攤子嘅其中一個方法係 係用呢款啤牌 呢度有我親筆簽名嘅啤牌 多謝你,布萊恩 佢哋被稱為 Oblique Strategies 佢同佢朋友設計嘅 而當佢哋喺工作室毫無頭緒嘅時候 布萊恩攞其中一張卡 佢隨機抽一張 佢會叫樂隊按照卡上嘅說話做
So this one ... "Change instrument roles." Yeah, everyone swap instruments -- Drummer on the piano -- Brilliant, brilliant idea.
所以呢個… 「更改樂隊成員嘅崗位」 每個人都要換一換位置 鼓手去彈鋼琴 唔錯嘅諗法
"Look closely at the most embarrassing details. Amplify them."
「仔細睇令人尷尬嘅細節,放大佢哋」
"Make a sudden, destructive, unpredictable action. Incorporate."
「做一個突然、破壞性、 不可預測嘅行動。
These cards are disruptive.
合拼入去首歌裏面」
呢啲卡係有破壞冇建設性嘅
Now, they've proved their worth in album after album. The musicians hate them.
透過一張又一張嘅專輯 我哋見到卡嘅價值 但樂手好憎佢哋
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
So Phil Collins was playing drums on an early Brian Eno album. He got so frustrated he started throwing beer cans across the studio.
菲爾 ‧ 柯林斯喺早期 布賴恩嘅專輯裏面打鼓 佢開始沮喪,佢開始喺工作室扔啤酒罐
Carlos Alomar, great rock guitarist, working with Eno on David Bowie's "Lodger" album, and at one point he turns to Brian and says, "Brian, this experiment is stupid." But the thing is it was a pretty good album, but also, Carlos Alomar, 35 years later, now uses The Oblique Strategies. And he tells his students to use The Oblique Strategies because he's realized something. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't helping you.
Carlos Alomar,傑出嘅搖滾吉他手 曾經同布萊恩喺 David Bowie 嘅專輯 Lodger 裏面合作 一次,佢同布賴恩話: 「布賴恩,呢個實驗係蠢嘅。」 但事實上,個專輯相當唔錯 而且卡洛斯喺 35 年後嘅今日 都用梗 Oblique Strategies 佢叫佢嘅學生都用 Oblique Strategies 因為佢意識到 你唔鍾意佢,唔代表佢幫唔到你
The strategies actually weren't a deck of cards originally, they were just a list -- list on the recording studio wall. A checklist of things you might try if you got stuck.
實際上,Oblique Strategies 並非一副啤牌 佢只係一個表 喺錄音室牆上嘅一個表 當你卡住咗,你可以試下用嘅一個表
The list didn't work. Know why? Not messy enough. Your eye would go down the list and it would settle on whatever was the least disruptive, the least troublesome, which of course misses the point entirely.
但個表冇用 知道點解嗎? 唔夠亂 你隻眼睛會掃落個表度 然後會停喺破壞性最小嘅一樣嘢 最少麻煩嘅一樣嘢 咁樣當然係完全冇意思啦
And what Brian Eno came to realize was, yes, we need to run the stupid experiments, we need to deal with the awkward strangers, we need to try to read the ugly fonts. These things help us. They help us solve problems, they help us be more creative.
布萊恩覺得 我哋需要運行做愚蠢嘅實驗 我哋需要面對尷尬嘅陌生人 我哋要讀核突嘅字體 呢啲嘢幫我哋 解決問題 幫我哋更加有創意
But also ... we really need some persuasion if we're going to accept this. So however we do it ... whether it's sheer willpower, whether it's the flip of a card or whether it's a guilt trip from a German teenager, all of us, from time to time, need to sit down and try and play the unplayable piano.
而且… 如果我哋要做以上嘅嘢 我哋首先要說服自己 所以,無論我哋點做… 無論係純粹意志力 無論係一張卡 定係 Vera 俾個彈唔到嘅琴你 我哋所有人都應該定時 坐低,彈嗰個彈唔到嘅琴
Thank you.
多謝
(Applause)
(掌聲)