花便当

这条剧评算是自己的一个树洞吧。

很烂的剧评，或者说是观后感。

我本来不会表达，看完这剧更是有很多想讲的但是讲不出。

很多很多很多剧透，几乎每集都有，还夹带了很多很多很多私货，介意勿看。

基本上从1月底定档就开始期待了，过年的前两天找了几个同好一起说好要给这部剧配字幕。

我们几个都很喜欢原著，又很喜欢本老师，这部剧的预告又是喜剧。

（当然被骗了等我反应过来已经被淹没在眼泪里了）9号（北京时间）早上一起来我就开始看第一集，开头还在笑，到Adam在厕所打电话给Harry那里我疯狂滴滴朋友说“靠这个男朋友光是说话我就已经爱上他了”“救命救命男朋友好可爱”诸如此类的blabla。

开播前有张幕后照是他们两人在街上的场景，放大之后比较模糊，我当时还想“nah这个男朋友看上去不太可诶”，开播就被光速打脸。

Rory老师演的Harry是我在本剧里最喜欢的角色之一，总共有两个，另一个是Adam。

这是那张幕后照

很喜欢的一张剧照基本上是一边给第一集配字幕一边看后面的。

第一集保持着这种又丧又搞笑的风格，我自认为搞笑居多，加上我个人比较喜欢也很能get到英式幽默，就非常享受。

Adam在手术台那里鼓励Shruti来上手接生的时候，我心里也有一动，直到25周的孩子出现。

从第二集开始，这个25周提前被剖出来的胎儿就一直像个梦魇一样不放过Adam。

和好朋友及其未婚妻一起聚餐，Adam也是很阴阳怪气的一副样子，而Harry在一旁打圆场。

朋友走了之后Harry很委屈，而Adam也有怨气。

我当时整个人差点暴走，是因为两个人的心情我都完全能感受到，站在Harry的角度就是“有那么多个无关紧要的晚上为什么非要选在今晚表现得这么混球”，站在Adam的角度就更简单，“我可以给最好的朋友当伴郎但我真的不太需要每过几天就被提醒谁谁谁过得有多么好因为我自己的生活真tm烂透了。

”（well我当时一直觉得他有Harry就不算烂透）从Adam收到投诉开始，整个剧给人的感觉就是很紧张甚至好像快要窒息了，虽然其中有很多笑点和冷幽默，Adam没法平衡工作和生活，重压之下喘不过气来。

这里的两条线，一条是以投诉为中心的线，是Shruti Lockhart Tracy这些人参与其中让这件事变得更加复杂；另外一条是他和Harry订婚的波折的过程（让我心碎）我觉得导演和编剧很绝的地方之一就是对这方面的处理，有很多事情发生但完全不会让人觉得看不懂或者混乱，反而观众都很清楚稻草是怎么一根根压在Adam身上的。

而且这两条线没有平行，Adam还是给同事透露了一点他的感情状况（“fiance, with one E"）邀请大家去参加他的订婚派对，而和Harry聊工作的时候终于没有只是“fine, thanks”而是说自己救人之后感觉真的很好。

第2-4集Adam和Harry有好多互动我真的会被甜死，甜死。

Rory老师接受文字采访的时候说真的Adam和他聊了很久应该怎么塑造这个角色，Rory说Harry是这段恋爱里更加阳光更加活泼的一面，在剧里也确实是这样呈现的😭虽然Adam在面对Harry的时候也很毒舌，但是就是能感觉到，他在恋人身边是难得的稍微放松一点的状态。

就连他女巫一样的妈妈都让他绝望。

病人想要他救人，同事想要他态度好点配合点，妈妈想要他posh。

只有Harry想让他开心，会吻他，像可爱的金毛狗狗一样😭第五集对Adam来说是一个爆发的点，是两条线交叉之后出现的无可避免的矛盾。

这集开始我持续心碎，我甚至能听到我心碎的声音（。

）Adam收到一个匿名complaint，他在订婚派对上没控制住情绪，伤了未婚夫的心，两个人之间出现了无法弥补的裂缝。

他忍不住指责了错的人，而且再也没有机会道歉。

Shruti这条线基本就是SHO时期的Adam，第6集的时候她一个人顶了下来那么多病人，考试也过了，原本以为她就要熬过去了，就要迎来新的阶段了——虽然可能并不会好多少。

最后一集Adam去找了Harry，在他们分开之后，问他愿不愿意做自己的plus one，可以一起去好朋友的婚礼。

他一个人坐在台阶上喝酒，看见了想见的人。

"I don't care. I'm just glad...... you're here"鬼知道我在这哭成什么样子。

Adam不好好对待Harry不好好对待Shruti的时候我简直想打他, but he IS trying to make things better. 他在湖里和Harry说我想你，说我要和你结婚，也觉得自己离不开NHS离不开这一行。

这部剧就是Adam写给NHS的情书😭love and suffer, you always got to do both.你没法怪他。

甚至不需要当医生就能共情Adam。

生活里没有什么事业爱情选一个，更不可能两手抓，大部分人很可能最后生活都稀碎。

（没有针对没有冒犯，我的生活早就稀碎了）life sucks with loads of shits and we're keeping getting by with it, not because we love it, but because we just cannot fucking let it go like that.

最后一集的剪辑顺序让我第一次感受到什么是丰富了思考空间。

一开始以为adam会说是shruti，中后期找工作时都因为惯性没有意识到其实没有，直到结尾重新回来听了adam的发言，才明白他还是陈述了事实，这样的波折比前后顺序直叙精彩得多。

后面adam和harry重新尝试，但兜兜转转还是无法放弃事业，回到那个医院继续工作，让人觉得人生真的会是这样啊：要面对好多好多难事，卡在工作中度过时间，偶尔在其中能因为生活中的其他事开心一点。

嫂子的夹枪带棒，工作环境和内容的压力，同事和患者和医疗体系的复杂方程式，母亲的压力，和harry的相处……（或者生活中一些偶尔的开心小事）（有点像我相册和日记）结局算是给了一点希望，但相比看到的即将麻木的工作来说, 带着shruti的一根刺，still hurt sometimes。

所以说哲学也不是所有人都需要去思考的，有时候思考人生的意义只会给自己secular life带来一些精神折磨。。。

PS.有些分娩的画面真的有点冲击……很佩服剧组和医生的心理承受力，I can't……

决定结束一切的那天Shruti很好地处理了工作中的问题，得到了同乡、主管医生和Adam的认可，通过了考试，完成了从菜鸟实习生到能独当一面的专业医生的蜕变。

不论是从剧情发展还是人物自身的成长，关于Shruti的故事都达到了高潮，然后她下坠了，在对着镜头说“I am sorry,l really did try.”之后。

Shruti不是懦夫，她不是在用结束一切逃避困难的考试或者是人生的其他困难，她是有能力去面对困难并解决困难的人，她就像最后父母、同事赞美的那样优秀，并且她自己也很清楚这一切。

与一开始学到任何新东西都会雀跃不已的Shruti相比，现在的她如同上了发条的机械一样麻木，在耗尽能量之前完成工作，不知道怎么和父母谈论自己的真实生活，尝试与对她有意思的同事约会也无果，情感已经被高速轮转的工作吞噬殆尽了。

如果说Shruti有什么人生愿望清单，我想在此刻她已经勾画完成了上面的所有项目，并且她可以预见，余生不过是在疲惫中日复一日地重复着几个月，没有好转，没有尽头。

那么在此刻终结也未尝不可。

伤痕累累的Shruti以她的方式与这个积重难返的体系同归于尽，完成仅几个人可见的爆炸，燃尽她生命的最后一点星火。

你是一个医生，每天工作近16个小时，每天至少要接诊上百位病人和家属，其中不乏奇奇怪怪之辈。

如果遇上夜班，各种科室，各种病症，各种突发情况都要一个人承担。

每个医生身上都会带着一个不停响起的传呼机——大家亲切地称之为“小哔哔”，像失灵的定时炸弹。

医院每日三套手术服的配额根本不够用，早已放凉的盒饭根本来不及吃，病人的投诉不知什么时候会出现，同事的抱怨却时时刻刻都回荡在耳边。

旁边还有实操经验为零的实习生，紧张兮兮地站在一旁，呼吸都很小心......本文改编自一位医生的工作日记，细节之真实让你毫不怀疑作者的医疗行业背景，虽然最后他不堪重负选择了转行。

患者一夜未排尿是因为导尿管被床下的轮子压住了，种族歧视的患者尖叫着不许巴基斯坦裔的医生为她接生，坚信狗可以吃胎盘为什么人不能吃的产妇错吃了血块（当然得知真相后喷了男主角Adam一身），发现产妇的丈夫有家暴倾向后努力营救，却被产妇本人拒绝......这里没有机智的医生生活，没有人间真善美，没有真相大白后的感人转折，没有下班后和多年好友兼大学同学一起组乐队的温馨闲暇。

有的只是不停响起的传呼机，医生之间的相互指责和永远挂在每个人脸上的黑眼圈。

无休止的加班，同事之间的冷漠举报，无处排解的情绪，很快被耗尽的医者仁心，病人和家属的投诉以及各种执业考试和培训，最终耗尽了每一个人。

就像实习医生Shruit在被算是mentor的Adam忽视并毒舌相向了很久之后，终于遇到了资深又善待实习生的Houghton医生，在她的鼓励下亲自接生了三胞胎，还获得了她毫不吝啬的赞美。

Shruit鼓起勇气请教问题，却意外获得了和Houghton医生一起吃饭的机会。

当自我怀疑了太久的Shruit抛出那些疑问，为什么我撑不下来？

为什么工作这么累？

为什么我的父母还以为我做得很好？

为什么还要苦苦挣扎？

Houghton医生毫不掩饰的说，你以为我会说什么，熬过这段时间就好了吗？

我们的工作就是这样，你或许该想想，自己到底适不适合做医生？

就像年轻的玛蒂尔达问杀手莱昂，是不是人生总是如此艰难，还是只有童年如此？

莱昂回答“总是如此”。

原来如此，实习医生、住院医师、副主任医师、主任医师......不管什么时候，人生总是如此艰难。

扛得下去是超人，扛不住才是常态。

于是Adam多次在停车场自己的车里睡着，不断闪回手术事故的画面，搞砸了自己的订婚派对，伤害了最亲近的伴侣和朋友。

Shruit每天不是备考就是工作，放弃了所有的生活和社交，终于在独当一面成为可靠医生并顺利通过考试的时候，用一句“对不起，我真的尽力了”宣告自己生命的结束。

Houghton医生耐心安抚病人和家属，冷漠指出实习生所做完全不合格。

主治医师Lockhart成为金字塔尖的成功者，开着阿斯顿马丁，去私立医院高新兼职，大部分时候在外出席酒会，在Adam出现医疗事故后建议“你可以说是我的错”却又出尔反尔，最后甚至明示Adam可以甩锅给自杀的Shruit。

医院有各种规章制度，什么情况下要把终于熬成主任医师后花天酒地的BOSS喊来，什么情况下要管“病人”叫“客户”以提升他们的体验，什么情况下要跟前来视察的领导亲切会晤，却没人关注始终漏水的天花板和坏掉的报警器，没人关注永远不够的床位和身心俱疲的医护人员。

在因为投诉出席庭审时，Adam不顾律师的反对，冒着丢失医生执业资格的风险执意要说下去。

他说起了Shruit，“她并不认为考试通过是成功，因为在这样一个破碎的系统中继续工作，怎么看都不想一个该死的光明的未来。

”工作过的人很容易从这部英剧里看到自己的影子。

我们都会被繁重的看不见希望的工作伤害，进而伤害自己，失去生活，对亲近的人恶语相向，为自己裹上坚硬的带刺的外壳。

永远做不完的工作，没有同理心的上级，互相争吵的同事，难缠的客户......这一切在各行各业都是问题。

于是我们也像剧中人一样，被消磨得失去意义感，失去热情和好奇心，被工作异化成机器，却因为一路走来付出的沉没成本而不甘心放弃，最终让自己支离破碎，生活分崩离析。

如果说除了深入骨髓的丧之外，这部剧还留给我什么，那就是演员本·卫肖的演技，将男主角的毒舌致郁刻画得淋漓尽致。

如果不得不继续从事这份狗屎工作，不要像Shruit一样默默忍受直至忍无可忍，起码痛快骂出来，将血淋淋的真相摆在人们面前，让那些自以为是的上级，高高在上的官僚看见。

在一切变得不可挽回之前，把工作中的痛苦留在工作里，减少对自己的消耗和伤害。

毕竟工作只让你出卖一部分时间，而不是全部的身心。

How gender politics evacuates in This is going to hurt --By Adam kay. BBC series This is going to hurt adapted by the same name book written by formal gynae senior doctor Adam kay captured every audience member’s empathy as soon as it was released.Here are some issues we may draw attention in terms of racial and sexism content (racism patient refuse to accept Pakistani doctor and black midwife) of modern British society, domestic violence, and the homophobic content. Among those crucially provocative issues, my point of interest focuses on the discourses of male entitlement including Toxic Masculinity and male empowerment and the female representation of pregnancy stigma. Introduction: In traditional media representation, Males are more likely to be portrayed as aggressive, argumentative, and competitive. Females are more likely to be described as affectionate, emotionally expressive, passive, and tender. The old binary opposition which put femininity at one end of the political spectrum and feminism at the other is no longer an accurate way of conceptualizing female experience. Gender segregation now by itself becomes a power mechanism. Representation of male privilege within the ‘female’ spaces.Center stage problem, center stealing and Overconfidence: In the first episode of this is going to hurt, by saying “I am the most senior doctor here. I am running this ward now and it’s up to me.” Adam attempts to entitle and empower his social identity. This action gets denied immediately by the black midwife leader Tracy by saying “I am running this ward, young man. I am more than capable, and I am handing myself.” The power dynamic is being shifted abruptly and making Adam look small in his position by the next sequence of reverse shots which kind of foreshadows the MacGuffin for Adam in the next chapter (who is the complainer about him to GMC). Psychological or personal entitlement refers to one’s sense of deservingness. Entitlement reflects the belief that a person deserves a set of outcomes because of who they have done. Men give higher estimates of their ability than do women, and men’s self-estimates tend to be independent of their actual ability. On cognitive tests, for instance, men give themselves higher ratings than their actual performance merits, whereas women tend to have a more realistic appraisal of their own performance. When those who are used to being at the center of everything important in society are moved from the center, however briefly, group members experience a threat and therefore are motivated to re-assert their privilege which feels natural, comfortable, and the natural order of things. Members of dominants groups assume that their perceptions are the pertinent ones, that their problems are the ones that need to be addressed, and that in discourse they should be the speaker rather than the listener. Male entitlement: hegemonic masculinity, perceptions of male marginalization and Sanction authority of the white male doctors. Hegemonic masculinity extensively critiqued the male sex role literature and proposed a model of multiple masculinities and power relations. In turn, this model was integrated into a systematic sociological theory of gender. The defense of hegemonic masculinity is usually done quietly through institutions. For example, when Adam’s best friend Greg introduces a bunch of guys to a female strip club as his own bachelor party, by enforcing all the male members of the group into a solid clan in which all the discrimination towards women is generally acceptable, they enhance their hegemonic masculinity mechanism. On overt masculinity politics emerges that exalts men’s power and opposes feminism and by obeying all the criteria and principals within the convention of hegemonic masculinity, anything opposite that is impossibly inclusive such as homosexuality. For Judith Butler, nonetheless, Gender and sex were nothing more than cultural constructions.So, in episode two of This is going to hurt, when Adam and his partner Henry finish the dinner with the couple Greg and his fiancée, by saying “Greg’s life seems settled and normal.” Adam refuses to accept his own feeling of belongingness by admitting Greg’s heterosexual normativity and denying his own sexual performativity. Heteronormativity is the idea that heterosexual attraction and relationships are the normal form of sexuality. It is rooted in a linked essential, dichotomous understanding of sexuality and gender and the perception that these things are fixed and unchanging. The construction of gender identities is produced through repetitive performance of behaviors, physical stylistic expressions, without which the binary distinction has no sense. The instability of the relationship between sex and gender attest to the performative nature of identity. By denying the homosexual identity and relationships with community, it defines the heterosexuality as natural and the norm. It enacts the heterogeneity of drives through the proliferation and destruction of univocal signification. This could be regarded as the primitive origin of homophobic performativity which is unforgivably toxic. Meanwhile, by denying men’s approach to vulnerability, the dichotomous binary mechanism is constructed by itself. When in episode three Adam’s partner Henry asks about his situation by saying “I know something is up for you”, he shows his concern and sentimentality towards Adam but at the same time, Adam refuses to tell Henry about the medical negligence. When Henry says, “let me in, let me know what is going on in there”, the director uses a lot of over the shoulder shots of Henry over Adam and Adam’s singular medium close-up shots in the continuity editing to illustrate Adam’s interior emotional turbulence. Here, again as audience we can perceive that Adam is going through a tremendously traumatized internal journey without letting Henry be aware of it. When Adam says to his eight-five-year-old polish patient Mrs. Winnicka, ‘I used to reckon I was good at medicine but bad at other stuff. Not great either right now’, he finally acknowledges his vulnerability and weakness by admitting that it is inappropriate using his medical knowledge as a mechanism of generating power entitlement in public medical sphere.Afterwards, when the consultant of the hospital Mr. Lockhart warns Adam by saying ‘shits happen, you can’t let yourself fell it all.’ Which becomes the last front line that block Adam to break down. In this way, toxic masculinity principals are transmitted among generations by denying the plausibility of showing men’s sensibility and sentimentality. The death of Mrs. Winnicka in some level serves as a dramatic impulse and plot motivation to imply Adam’s collapsing point in the next chapter. The whole narrative does not approach sexual masculinity issue by telling the storyline itself, but this is still deserved to be regarded as Toxic Masculinity related issue because by enhancing that masculinity is strong, tough, and natural while femininity is weak, vulnerable, and artificial, it proliferates the conception of binary construction even among people who believe that women and men are equals. So, the people understand masculinity as the drive for power, domination, and control. If any social representation and public behavior demonstrate that it is acceptable for men to be fragile, it breaks down the whole dichotomous structure where masculinity is an experience to entitle power and female body is naturally entitled with the responsibility to give birth. The process of moral regulation through discourse makes ontological and epistemological promises of a particular and historical form of social order natural. In this process of resonating binary structure, discourse of ideal pregnancy must be understood as situated moral constructs, which regulate women’s maternal experiences, expressions, and responsibilities. Our collective fear of dangers has forced us into a position where we have created a theory from the body of damage done to us in terms of masochism but expediency. Particularization and negotiation:By representing the voices of women and ethnic others as normal, they become possible objects of identification for men. Particularizing may also be carried out by representing what men do as being particular and only representing a certain social group of men, that is denying them the right to represent the universal any more than women do. In the episode six, when Doctor Shruti meets up with her subordinate junior locum doctor—a tall young white guy who seems very boyish and innocently naïve, the cinematographer opens with a medium profile shot by moving the camera around to the side and subsequently reversing the over-the shoulder shot towards the young man functioning as emphasizing how small the young white apprentice is and empowering Doctor Shruti. Intriguingly, in the next sequence, when the junior doctor stands up and looks down Shruti by saying to Shruti ‘are you one of the midwives, love?’ and Shruti replies by saying ‘I am actually your boss, love.’ We see how the whole power dynamic is solidly constructed. And in the next theater operation scene, the apprentice directly faints during surgery because of witnessing huge amount of blood. While Shruti calmly completes the mission with her intellectual background and wisdom. From here, we notice that the relationship shot in any power dynamic constructing scenario is ought to be established on the figure situated in a weaker position so the power dynamic can be shifted by the reverse shots. If we compare this scenario with the former scenario where Shruti was subordinated towards Adam, we can reach on an undeniable conclude that gender is nothing more than a social construction. Judith Butler defines gender as the consequence of reiterated acts or practices, even if there is a contradiction or instability between their biological sex and their gendered actions. Through gender performativity, one may cause themselves to shape their desire. Gender is performative which means we are not acting it like in a performance but rather constructing it. In the episode four of This is going to hurt, when being asked about his fiancée by his subordinate college Shruti, Adam corrects her spelling as a male version fiancé by saying ‘My alpha male demeanor clearly threw you off the scent ’which is kind of an ironic sarcasm for stereotypes towards queer male intellectuals in social sphere. As For Foucault, an ethical sensibility is a process of constant experimentation and reappraisal, in which new experiences are integrated, and reflection helps determine future actions. From this perspective, if any newly liberal social order is trying to be reached out, we must aspire to building processes of socialization of the new generations within a framework of gender sensitivity where the culture of peace prevails over violence without discrimination, establishing relations of equality and justice, not only in the rights recognized by states among their citizens, but also in daily life, in schools, workplaces and within governments. How those female representations subordinated to Adam are used to consolidate his power in privilege. Firstly: Racial issue: In the first episode of This is going to hurt, the Woman in labor is more comfortable with a Cis gendered white man delivering their baby instead of a black midwife which is particularly bizarre. Again here, black women are unempowered by others. This phenomenon is repeated in the next theater scenario when the white woman in caesarean is unwilling to let the Pakistan origin doctor Shruti to hold her newborn baby. It’s quite intriguing that even though the racial discrimination is clear, the racist herself refuses to admit the offensive fact. However fortunately, the establishing process of the characteristics of the character black midwife leader Tracy is being achieved by performative narrative. When consultant of the hospital Mr. Lockhart asks her why not put the alarm sector issue at the list, she answers him by saying “would you like me to take off the list to make time?” which is a very directly confronting way and reveals that she might be the real ‘assassin’ to kill Adam’s obsessive delusion. The second part: empower shifted. In the episode four when Adam faces in front of his senior consultant obstetrician Mrs. Houghton, he is asked to buy coffee for the team crew which was exactly what he urged his junior subordinate Shruti to do in the last chapter. By saying ‘why don’t you get around coffees in.’ Doctor Houghton empowers herself and underpowers Adam. In the next sequence, by saying ‘I wonder if you might allow me to perhaps do the caesarean.’ Adam puts himself in a weakening position of this power dynamic shifting relationship. Actor Ben Whishaw dissimulates Adam’s penance and awkwardness by a series of body gestures which is a real verisimilitude spectacular for the viewers. The formulaic onscreen depictions are limited along gender and racial lines emasculate the universal female experience of adulthood tragically. This demonstrates their success and respectability within the white dominated literary space. If we compare Shruti, Tracy and Doctor Houghton’s identity, we can see more clearly the distinction between their different representations. Embodiment and representation of Womanhood pregnancy stigma. The issue crucially being concerned about This is going to hurt is the women in labor. How they look life, how they feel and why this show is so cruel to our audiences. And, how those female patients around Doctor Adam enhance their feminized statement. Part of the complexity of misogyny is that women can be punished for stepping outside bounds of femininity, and for residing within those boundaries.In the episode five of This is going to hurt, when doctor shruti tells this middle-aged couple about the implausibility of being parents by saying ‘you only got one percent change to be successfully pregnant.’ We can see the agony and disappointment expressed by the wife’s face not by the husband. And, when we see the frame and composition of this reverse shot, the camera attempts to focus on captivating the woman’s facial expression. All the narrative in this dramatic space emphasizes how suffocating and struggling it is for women to accept the impossibility of being pregnant. The woman’s body, with its potential for gestating, bringing forth and nourishing new life, has been through the ages a field of contradictions: a space invested with power, and an acute vulnerability, a numinous figure, and the incarnation of evil, a hoard of ambivalences, most of which have worked to disqualify women from the collective act of defining culture. The pregnant woman is not identified as a sole entity, but as one figure in the interrelation between mother and child. The pregnant woman is subordinated to the interests of her unborn child. Women are simultaneously assigned to a passive role, as recipients of care and containers for their infants. Also in the episode five, when Doctor Adam operates a surgery for this nineteen-year-old girl to fix her vulva self-damage. It shows us the destructiveness and cruelty the performative normality and social constrictions have done to a young girl. Pregnancy is simultaneously one of the most embodied of human experiences and one of the most discursively regulated. The disciplinary power of discourse lies in producing types of knowledges and making specific kinds of subjectivities socially viable. The mother child dynamic is set up as the ultimate paradigm of the natural caring relationship, and therefore as the ultimate paradigm of all social relations. The mother child dyad is not seen as a particular social and cultural construct, nor is any consideration given to the fact that an ethics of caring may not be an appropriate approach to all forms of social interaction. Possibility of womanhood as a complex and idealized conjunction of a multiplicity of female identities: sexual, domestic, and so on, as a palliative for the narrative’s frequent focus on the question of women’s incompatible social roles. The narrative mode in This is going to hurt by only showing pregnant women condition in public sphere offers an idealized vision of family life and working motherhood. Through its blurring of the boundaries between home vibe and public vibe, it undermines patriarchal capitalism, a system which insists on keeping separate, gendered, and differently valued the two independent atmospheres. The distinction and conflict between public and private and feminist and feminine identities is irrevocably integrated. For example, when Shruti found out domestic violence track of a female pregnant patient from her bruises in arms and shoulders, she immediately took action to rescue the situation. However, when the dramatic complicity is reached out on climax, the midwife Tracy tells Shruti that we still are uncapable to do anything when the patient suffering from domestic violence confronts the same situation in her own house in the future. From here, we are aware that social resources are limited when intervening family issue. How can we change the traditional male approach to international politics by the re-traditionalization of gender.Paternalistic patriarchy.In the early capitalist regions of England and elsewhere, the putting out system, where urban capitalists employed rural households for parts of the production process, led to a strengthening of an archaized version of male household power, which in turn, paradoxically, turned women into a main production force in the early industrial revolution. The putting-out system was formal factorization, while industry make it a reality- outside the home, for the first time outside the reach of reproduction activity logic and rationale. The fact that the paternalistic framework differed from the male/female, production/reproduction-like spontaneous ideas of gender in our time has been underscored of intimacy and the body survived long into the modern age. The Paternalistic stereotypes contribute to justifying and maintaining a social system of gender inequality. There are gender stereotypes not merely descriptive but prescriptive, expressing expectations about how women ought to be. It assumes that women are weak, fragile, and incompetent, women who are subjected to benevolent sexism view themselves as less competent; such women are viewed by others as less competent; moreover, women who reject benevolent sexism are viewed as ungracious and cold. Attributions of non-traditional women’s supposed lack of warmth further serve to rationalize acts of discrimination. In political terms, paternalistic patriarchy was dismantled by democratic movements mainly among men, including the bourgeois revolutions that symbolically and sometimes literally cut off the heads of the old order. It is misleading to say that masculinity became more democratic, since what was involved was the fabrication or factorization of a new sense of identity. Equating difference with inequality provides men with an instrument to use violence against women when other forms of control no longer suffice. Collaboration and interdisciplinary exchange are key factors in terms of inclusiveness. In Foucault’s work, the idea of technologies of the self is part of an attempt to formulate a view of subjectivity that explains how individuals must draw on available discourses, and yet can act autonomously. Judith Butler is concerned with the production of subjectivity within the processes performatively through the repetition of given signs and norms. According to Foucault, agency should be located within the possibility of a variation on the repetition of norms and conceptualized in terms of a taking up of tools where the very taking up is enabled by the tools lying there. From this perspective, agency can be seen as self-reflexive adoption of a specific discourse, and we can extend this to kinds of acts which sartorial choices and uses of media technologies might indicate. Conclusion: Agency in post feminism: Post feminism is a set of ideologies, strategies, and practice that marshal liberal feminist discourses such as freedom, choice, and independence, and incorporate them into a wide array of media, merchandising, and consumer participation whose dynamic is a paradoxical double movement where the dissemination of discourses about freedom and equality functions as a hegemonic strategy to dilute those very politics, providing the context for the retrenchment of gender and gendered relations. The post in post feminism represents not only a temporality, or a backlash against feminism, but also a sensibility; core features of post feminism included an emphasis on individualism, choice, and agency, a resistance to interrogating structural gendered inequalities, and a renewed focus on a woman’s body as a site of liberation. Post feminism responds to a history of feminisms that have directly challenged media representations of women and the commodification of gender, and have focused on social realms including legal discourse, politics, and education. This post feminism sensibility authorized the individualism of women more than anything else, celebrating a kind of gendered freedom from both patriarchy and feminism, whereby women are apparently free to become all they want to be. Indeed, post feminism is enabled by a neoliberal capitalist context, where values such as entrepreneurialism, individualism, and the expansion of capitalist markets are embraced and adopted by women to craft their selves. Ultimately, abdication by feminist theory from the task of proposing a critical perspective on the authenticity of our felt needs and demands means that it necessarily remains locked into a legitimation of present social relations as offering the most appropriate management of needs spawned by it. Television has been historically and pejoratively constructed as a feminine medium. It is useful to contextualize such journalistic accounts of the perceived female takeover of television and discourses of the feminization of television with reference to the narratives of female success, empowerment and mobility that were circulating in the wider culture. Attendant process of detraditionalization and individualization have particularly destabilizing effects on key abstract collective categories and forms of modernity such as class, gender, identity. However, such postfeminist narratives and signs of female choice and empowerment, held up as marking the successes of feminism, betray the extent to which they simultaneously mark its incorporation, revision and depoliticization. Gendered hierarchies are reinstated through new subtle forms of resurgent patriarchal power. The characteristics associated with the feminine, including: the predominance of surface, simulation, and masquerade; the authority of the consumer; and a dedifferentiation of the social, involving a domestication of the public sphere, are understood to be the dominant aesthetics and practices of consumer culture. Gendered metaphors of television are also classifying metaphors in which the female viewer is once more constructed as the possessor the naïve gaze of mass consumerist culture against which the knowing gaze of the middle-class critic is constructed. Even though shifts are taking place regarding gender in contemporary culture, there is a need to be cautious of overstating the gains and freedoms open to women in the reflexive, post-traditional and post-feminist context of late modernity. There process fosters a reconfiguration of these central categories such as class, gender, and sexuality. This reconfiguring process is illustrated precisely by the reflection upon women’s liberation from the rules and norms of traditional gendered discourses wherein liberal feminist values should have been felt to become a common sense across culture landscape. References: Male roles, masculinities, and violence: a culture of peace perspectiveBreines, Ingeborg; Connell, Raewyn; Eide, Ingrid; UNESCO; Expert Group Meeting on Male Roles and Masculinities in the Perspective of a Culture of Peace. This is going to hurt: secret diaries of a junior doctor. Adam Kay. Men who hate women: from Incels to pick up artists: the truth about extreme misogyny and how it affects us all. –LAURA BATES. EVERYDAY SEXISM—LAURA BATES. Modern misogyny. Anti-feminism in a post-feminist era. Kristin j. Anderson. New femininities: post feminism, neoliberalism, and subjectivity. Edited by Rosalind Gill and Christina Scharff. Foucault and Feminism. --Lois Mcnay.Interrogating post feminism: gender and politics of popular culture, Yvonne Tasker and Diane Negra, editors. The history of sexuality volume 4: confessions of the flesh. –Michel Foucault. Dude, you are a fag: masculinity and sexuality in high school. –Pascoe, C.J. University of California Press.

（原载于虹膜公众号）要说简中世界吧，很多时候还是挺好笑的，至少，要比许多所谓的喜剧片好笑。

不仅懂得把能量从负掰扯成正，而且懂得把本质从悲逆转为喜，这「大智慧」就有无与伦比的喜感。

好比戏说，可谓抓到了博古通今的历史价值。

好比阿Q，可谓摸清了翻云覆雨的现实态度。

又比如指鹿为马，把「疼痛难免」（This is going to hurt）包装成「绝对笑喷」。

亚当·凯以此为名的书，中文版叫《绝对笑喷之弃业医生日志》，封面上赫然印着「掀翻整个英国卫生部的爆笑核武」，宣传文案则是「6年221篇男妇科大夫的私密日记，风靡33国的爆笑妇科段子集锦！

3句话1个笑点，脸红心跳到根本停不下来！

这次可是真的读懂女人了！

」文案末尾提到作者致英国卫生部长的公开信，揭露医疗服务体系各种问题，转头就不无欢欣地宣示「出版当日就被部长喊去谈话了」。

也说到医者之心和珍惜生命的，但更主要是烘托「冷面笑匠」的定位。

至于在正文里「义正词严」地把亚当的同性伴侣翻译成女朋友，那更是具有本土特色的至高幽默了。

卖书真难。

但接受不同，面对伤痛，处理悲剧，看来更难。

最近，由这本书改编的七集迷你剧《疼痛难免》上线，迅速以9.4高分拿下全球口碑剧集榜冠军，这一面提高了书的曝光度，一面也让人体现到这差异之下的辛辣讽刺。

故事的主角是本·卫肖饰演虚构的亚当，一名妇产科的执行主治医师。

他夹在科室不上不下的位置，每周工作得有97小时，疲于应付各种生死攸关的任务以及上司、病患的指责，却没有足以适配的薪资待遇，而且私人生活被不断挤占，直至爱情、友情都受到威胁。

哪怕是这样沉重的故事，也确实可以充盈诙谐成色。

这主要来自于他的日常斗嘴，以及自言自语或打破第四面墙的吐槽。

譬如他跟态度不好的温妮卡太太对话，每次都在互损，对方说自己死了没人在乎，他就说狮子和魔衣橱没准会想着你呢，对方口嫌他送的酒，他就说那是新鲜的蝾螈眼泪，总在暗搓搓调侃对方是老女巫。

又或者听到家长要给三胞胎取名米莉、比利和莉莉，亚当也会嘴上说好，心中暗笑，并联想到唐老鸭的三个侄子辉儿、杜儿、路儿。

欧美影视真实的一个表现，是允许主角或一些背负道德光环的人，用某些兴许带有冒犯性质的方式来不完美。

亚当应对过许多堪称稀奇古怪的病例，比如要帮患者从下体取出各式（不乏创意）的物件时，也像在替观众念出犹如神来之笔的弹幕。

这些相当英伦的幽默，往往能带来具有余味的会心一笑。

但相比日记体的原著，剧集的段子还是少了，在抻长的医院生涯展现中，搞笑的比重是要有节制地下降的。

结合过于困苦的环境和过于端正的旁人，亚当这种小人物式的磨难，把即时的心理活动烘托出了伤痛的气氛。

不同于国内出版社，或者许多受众对于爆笑近乎病态的追逐，亚当所表现的，更像是一个人在应对压力与负面情绪时的应激反应，他不只拿这些笑话当作繁重工作的调剂，而是当作溺水时好不容易得来的一根吸管，可能否喘上一口气，还得取决于风与浪。

也就是说，这并不是以悲写喜，不是从苦难里寻找笑料，来彰显一文不值的塑料乐观。

英国人的实诚，在于明刀明枪地告诉你，疼痛就是难免的。

亚当最常对男友哈利说的一句话，就是「还好」，掩耳盗铃地隔断了交心的宽慰，最终印证了事实上「一点儿也不好」的灾难性打击。

他的崩溃过程，剧集构设得很巧妙。

在非人性的日常职场中穿梭，亚当与刚才提及的温妮卡太太之间，有一段很特别的呼应关系。

那位85岁的寡妇，从来没见过两个儿子前来探望，渐渐地把孤独中的失望表现为冷漠与毒舌。

疲惫地封闭自我的亚当在某种程度上，也是这么一匹独狼，只是表现得更有隐藏性而已。

他们每日的互损，其实夹杂着一些期盼，期盼对方在又一天把自己从麻木中激活。

那么大的医院，或者说那么大的人间，谁能想到他们才是真正知根知底的「对手」呢？

所以，当老太太濒死，亚当还曾想过枉顾她不许抢救的愿望，而即便上司禁止他过多介入病患关系，他也还是去参加了丧礼，而且郑重地带上了男友。

温妮卡之死所造成的影响很深远，相当于切断了亚当跟自我的很大一部分沟通意愿与能力。

与此同时，《疼痛难免》还布设了施芮缇一线。

她是亚当的手下，也是亚当的过往。

聪明的她需要同时招架繁重的日常工作以及备考任务，严重缺觉，身心俱疲，最终，集中爆发的抑郁症造成了无可挽回的悲剧。

在这个时候，她又成了亚当的一种未来。

而且，剧集揪心地表现出，心理疾患缠身的历史只能在这个地方不断重演，就像亚当后来说的，英国平均三周就有一位医生自杀。

很明显的一点，就是总被批评的亚当会不留情面地骂施芮缇，当后来施芮缇面对手下艾尔的时候，也无意间重复了这一套。

但她还没有彻底「亚当」化，所以还能在语气重了的时候及时刹车。

可又因为得知自己终将要变成的模样，加重了抑郁，更能印证亚当避无可避的宿命。

施芮缇极其短暂的经历，像是亚当甚至亚当们的缩写人生。

温妮卡预示的自我死亡与施芮缇预演的精神死亡，连带着真真正正的肉体死亡，把在繁重工作中还要应付上司玩弄、投诉威胁的亚当，彻底逼到了绝路边缘。

原著作者自身也患有PTSD和抑郁等心理疾病，只是在剧中，分派给了亚当和施芮缇。

他让角色跟他在现实中那样选择弃业，通过无奈的事实，来一反苦等柳暗花明的励志套路。

这部实质上贴着喜剧标签的丧剧，并没有兴趣教人化解悲恸或逆风飞翔，而是提醒人们不必一味任由外界折磨自己，甚至不要只从自己身上寻找问题的根源。

也就是说，剧集展现亚当、施芮缇这些个体在工作中分身乏术，并导致在爱情、友情等多方面全线溃败，不只是为了达到跟无数有过相似体验的观众的共鸣，而且要立体地展现一个可以说是吃人的体制。

最首要的对象，是NHS（英国国家医疗服务体系）。

这体系通过税收来保障公费医疗保健，诚然有过相当积极的影响，但是，资金匮缺、人手不足、浪费严重、效率低下，又使得服务很难跟上病患需求，而从业人员困在超负荷工作中，身心都受到严重损害，却很少有人关注，甚至不被允许自我修正调节。

公立医院条件恶劣，但是一如剧中所示，私立医院有着极其豪华的硬件配置与福利待遇，哪怕医务专业水平完全跟不上，而即便是在同一个奔忙的公立医院里，高级别医生可以油滑地躲过许多差使，来保障自己的权益。

巨大落差带来了难以逃避的剥削举动，作者以清醒的认知，引发了关于学医、从医的质疑。

他很现实地粉碎了职业光环，从最人性的角度，指出了医者仁心这种使命感下的医者不自医，指出了制度的漏洞百出只能引发越来越大范畴的恶性循环，而这才是促动卫生部长乃至全社会关注的理由。

不仅如此，他指出了吃人的并不只是垂直的医疗体系，还包括有着相似本质的社会。

因为内在慕强、攀比、趋利避害、重利轻义的环境，使得很多人从出生开始就被各种目光所绑架，亚当母亲就是一个非常突出的例子。

冰冷、畸形的亲子关系所钳制、蹂躏出来的心病，也早该引起重视了。

跳出自我审视之后，他还通过勾画形形色色病患及其家属的短暂照面，还原出现实世界的诸多面相。

各种不健康的人际关系，包括失责、漠视、功利、刻薄等等，再西方，也很容易让所有人对号入座，至于家暴、自残等需要更破解关注的普遍问题，更有痛心疾首的一段段戏剧性展示。

《疼痛难免》竭尽所能地，从一个良心医生的角度，检视下至个体感官，上至体制构建的谬误与漏洞。

它必然存在满溢的窒息感，也必然不会让普罗大众得到轻松愉悦的观赏兴头，哪怕它在软硬件上，无懈可击地抗打。

剧集主创没有一丝遮掩、粉饰的兴致，但正因为有这赤裸的勇气与道义，带给外界许多改变的倾向性与急迫感。

这无疑是场「负能量」的胜利——不是指一味怨天尤人或尖酸刻薄的糟心情状，而是指这些能让人拨云见月的视角，让人抽身重启的魄力。

既然疼痛难免，起码不该一无所得。

冲着本喵和喜剧的标签看完剧，结果整个人陷入了重重的抑郁情绪。

这实在是非常优秀的一部作品：扎实的制作，优秀的演绎，用心的细节，严肃的话题碰撞上英剧独特的黑色幽默，真的让人很难不打高分。

不长不短的7集，通过Adam为首的各位医护人员在妇产科经历的一个个小故事其实是在对整个NHS完成了泣血的控诉又表达了深深的无奈。

医护人员一边要背负起高负荷的工作强度，还要各自在学术专业上不断深耕完成自己的成长，同时还要承担起自己工作失误所带来的不可估量的后果以及由此而来的心理压力，然而工作环境和待遇却又难以得到改善。

这种渡劫磨难式的职业道路真的有太多的不合理和不人道。

但转向患者方面，他们在病痛之中仍在面临漫长的等待，糟糕的就诊环境和医疗体验。

这种现有公共医疗环境下医患的全方面的冲突真的让人深感无力，无可奈何。

其实不仅仅是NHS，放眼全世界，大多数国家的公共医疗体系都面临着同样的问题。

不然也就不会有那么多在等待中错失治疗机会的新西兰患者，也不会有日韩的研修医高自杀率，更不会有国内这么多的伤医事件。

说到底，每个国家能够提供各公共医疗的资源仍然是太有限了：越来越高的医学生培养成本，日益增多的患者数量，不断紧缩的财政分配，这似乎就是一盘无解的棋局。

很有感触的一个情节是第6集关于私立医院和公立医院的对比。

NHS这边忙到医生随时可以崩溃患者无法收治，一边私立医院每个病患超大的病房度假般的体验。

这真是资本的力量和阶级的差异的极好的现实描画。

所以你看， 底层人民的种种冲突对于高收入人群而言仿佛并不存在。

放在国内其实情况也很类似，我们的医保体系和一线的临床医生的环境其实也并没什么太大不同。

去年因为生病需要做一个特别的住院治疗，北京的几家公立医院都要排队五个月以上，而且只有小破的三人间；私立医院却能随时安排住院，还是星级酒店一样的独立病房。

公立可以走医保，私立全自费，加上服务费等等两者费用差了四倍多吧…当时也是很感慨钱的重要性，想要吐槽命运的不公平的同时却又不得不承认这便是现实，因为这也有他符合市场规律的合理性。

而另一方面，Adam说私立医院有最漂亮的吊灯，但NHS能救你的命。

某种意义上也确实是这样吧。

私立医院用高额的费用换来了更加优秀的服务体验，然而同时又因为私立医院的医疗资源存量和医院体量的原因在发生小概率/高复杂度紧急事件时很难很好的应对。

同样是去年见证的事，一个私立医院的一个骨科小手术，发生了紧急麻醉事故，患者就这么没了，要实在公立大三甲其实应该还是能救回来的…所以又一次感受到了这个世界的荒谬…说到底，私立医院的存在是靠市场规律来平衡公立医疗资源的稀缺性，但两种体质各有优劣，最终到每个患者，只要医疗资源本身的稀缺性没有改变，其实这一切仍然是没有绝对最优解的啊…剧中Adam的形象非常鲜活，在于他并不是一个完美的人，他也会犯错，他也有私心，他本性善良却也有恶的念头。

他是个救人性命的英雄的同时，也是个无法平衡工作和私欲的普通人。

他为了自己的误诊而懊恼，为了患者离世而悲伤，却也惧怕投诉会让他丢掉工作，甚至会用些小手段。

也很喜欢Adam和Harry的对手戏，Adam内心的挣扎和脆弱都在Harry面前被小心的隐藏又被无情的暴露。

这段感情温暖却不能对等，坚定却又非常脆弱，让人叹息可也惹人羡慕。

剧集呈现给我们的就是这么一个个鲜活而真实的年轻人的形象，而不是在一味的造神或造抓马，这也是它吸引人的原因之一吧。

Adam最爱说I'm Fine，其实大家都知道当你用fine这个词来形容与自己相关事情的时候，基本就是not fine了。

很多年前的电影就告诉过我们I'm fine means I'm "Fucked Up/Freaked Out, Insecure, Neurotic and Emotional". 一点不假。

Adam又用他的故事再次演绎了这个解释…剧集在最后用Adam的崩溃和Shruti的自尽完成了对NHS的控诉，又在湖中的对话中完成了Adam对他自己医生这个职业选择的正当化和救赎。

现在的我们其实都忘了，“医生”终究也只是人，是人就会有犯错误的时候，是人就有能力的极限。

不是所有的疾病都能被治好，不是所有的治疗都是简单的打针吃药。

真实的人生里疼痛难免，真实的医疗也只能做到偶尔治愈。

特别是在医疗资源的稀缺性无法被解决的当下时代，让我们都看清现实，多几分理解吧。

最近反复思考死亡的事情，确切的讲是思考自杀，人在怎样的境遇下，才将它作为了一种选择。

昨天在看《疼痛难免》，一部医疗剧，非常真实，原著我也是看过的，但改编的剧更加深刻，更加感同身受。

实习生shruti，巴基斯坦人，一个外来者身份，一个百般努力才能考上医学生的人，来了2个月还被男主认为才来了一周，每天给上级买咖啡，夜班本不是她的责任，却仍要鞍前马后的听从指挥，因上级的狗屁命令被其他人指责，也只能默默吞下。

就算这样，她仍然热爱着自己的职业，坚信这份选择，遇到被家暴的孕妇，努力帮助其进入法律程序，尽管并无后续。

她是什么时候开始失望的呢，连日的疲劳不至于压死她，毕竟小镇做题家一样的身份，肯定早已适应了在夜班的间隙中备考。

是前辈的言语杀死的她，是有毒的环境杀死的她。

所有人都被给予了超过自己能力范围的责任，主治医生，助产士，会诊医生，每一个都是火药桶，火力不会向上射，只会向下，最终集中到地位最低的实习生身上。

言语的嘲讽被视为幽默，没有直接的情感表达，所有的压力痛苦都只被一笑而过，她曾试图和主任医生倾诉，但只被视作无所谓的抱怨，被告知“不要跟我哇呀哇呀的诉苦，想清楚再踏进这个职业，后面只会更难，没人在乎你的小矫情，要么忍着，要么转行，来，再喝一杯”。

转行是从来没在她考虑范围之内的，她是父母的骄傲，她没有人可以倾诉这份工作的艰难，父母只见其光鲜之处，上级毫无后盾之感，满脸写着有事别找我。

这不就是我的真实生活吗，夜班遇到可疑胃出血的，想给上级打电话，要先拿脚趾把地板抠出个洞来，好好自我建设一番，打通了电话，也只被拷问基本问题，教育一番之后弃你于慌乱中不顾。

明明都是压力中的人，为什么不能互相善待，明明都曾走过这条路，为什么转眼就忘记曾经的苦痛。

没有人告诉shruti错的不是她，是这个有毒的环境。

她是打心底里认为，上级的毒舌是没问题的，错的是能力不足的自己，毕竟来了新的见习生，她几乎是把主治医生施加在她身上的压力、言辞一股脑的砸给了新来的。

就算最终可以独自处理产妇大出血，就算最终获得了一次夸赞，但是她的心依然死了，干涸了，无法滋养她这颗共情力极强的灵魂了，死亡于是成了唯一的选择。

This Is Going to Hurt 疼痛难免，这个翻译太好了，像是提醒，又像是谶语。

1Everything is shit.Everyone is shit.我看的医疗剧极少，但是医疗剧不都是“常常治愈”的吗，这部和治愈关系不大，致郁的效果极佳。

看到类型栏的“喜剧”标签简直怀疑我的眼睛，苦笑也算笑是吧。

作者说这部剧是“一封写给NHS的情书”，依然让我惊讶，谁家情书写得这么苦涩！

真实到残酷的一部剧，好看（真实精彩）又难看（压抑致郁）。

我对《良医》的剧评是：“可能医疗剧的魅力就在于：众生皆苦，而这反而让人感到安慰。

”这部依然成立，只是更苦了。

生活太苦了，苦涩的成年人在寻找虚幻的安慰的时候都嫌“幻想太脱离现实了”、“快乐水含糖量太高了”，所以，苦涩沉重的《疼痛难免》成了“一封情书”一下子就合理了起来。

甚至让我想到《BJ单身日记》里那句超经典超让人心动的表白：“I like you very much, just as you are.”因为照见现实，因为照见自我，所以在灰暗中找到一丝亮，在苦涩中反刍出一点甜，在流泪后吐出一口气。

人生大事，生老病死，在医院是天天、时时都在上演，妇产科更是浓缩的精华。

主人公Adam就是一个悲惨又寻常的妇产科医生。

疲惫、憔悴、痛苦、煎熬、 窒息、压抑、愤怒、自责、摇摇欲坠、勉强支撑。

看起来熟悉吗？

听起来熟悉吗？

2很喜欢第三集Adam的墓地求婚。

如果众生皆苦，生命的意义是什么？

如果疼痛难免，疗愈的良方是什么？

当Adam单薄的身影摇摇晃晃走在坟墓中间时，那画面真的很美。

就像是有无形的东西在吸走Adam的生命力一样，那句英文的表达很准确——“suck life out”，后来又想，是什么呢？

工作、压力、情绪、良心……然后发现，It's life itself that sucks life out of us.每个人，活着就是要死的。

每一天，都是在走向死亡。

生命在流逝，在消耗，流完了，耗尽了，就结束了。

写到这的时候，连我自己都觉得有些太悲观虚无了，但是其实我真的不是这个意思。

生命肯定有其值得珍惜的地方，不然人间真的会空荡荡的……就是因为生活很苦，生命虚无，才更要珍惜生活里的那些小小的甜蜜和幸福，在终点之前赶紧做点什么抓住些什么，就算终将失去，哪怕终将失去，恰恰是因为终将失去。

3喜欢Adam的人，应该都会喜欢Harry吧，因为他有生命力，有光有热，有让人幸福的能力。

所以想钻进屏幕把Adam暴力摇晃：醒醒！

抓住这个男人！

所以，剧里又一个很喜欢的名场面来了，最后一集好友婚礼上他俩偷溜的身影，美得想原地给他们证婚。

在湖里的坦白，又痛又美。

无法逃避的痛苦挣扎，无比脆弱的真诚与爱。

我们所爱的、所投入、所付出的，是我们的诅咒。

最后一集最后一幕，Adam穿着崭新熨贴的白衬衣，眼睛里也有了光彩，虽然毒舌仍在，但看着不再是前面六集丧到不行的模样。

这一幕之前，是Adam脱掉衣服跳进湖里，想必到最后一幕时，Adam也已经把自己的精神清洗了一遍，he survived.同样在这一幕，Adam再一次“意外”帮助一名车里的产妇接生，但这一次，也是全剧中唯一一次，他的衣服没被弄脏，没有沾上任何不可名状的东西（相比之前的血迹、呕吐物、精液、灰尘等等）。

我想这也暗示着，Adam之后不会像以前那样，轻易深陷环境的淤泥，轻易被周遭污染，甚至被吞噬。

所以，虽然最后一集看得我哭到不行，但我还是被这样的结局轻轻抚慰住了。

然而冷静下来后，我又开始反思自己的“被抚慰”，甚至开始警惕，这样的抚慰来得太容易了，就像Shruti哀悼仪式上那棵弱小的橡树，被随意栽下，日后不久就会被随意践踏。

本篇影评，我试着从Adam和Shruti两个人，慢慢道来我这份矛盾的观后感。

必须在「个体」层面才能理解的Adam有人觉得本剧主cp结局be了，因为Adam最后还是当回了医生。

但我想说，Adam让人讨厌并不是因为他是医生，而仅仅因为他是Adam，所以，我相信Adam和Harry一定会复合（能不能走到最后另说）。

因为Harry爱的，就是作为Adam的Adam，如果不是，那么在Adam当医生这两年里，二人早分手八百次了。

这也是为什么最后一集当Adam兴冲冲地对Harry说自己打算不再做医生了，进而希望二人再尝试一次的时候，Harry反而拒绝了：I don't think it was that simple是的，如果轻易归咎到医生这个职业上，Adam其实还是在逃避自己的性格缺陷，Tracy曾一针见血：如果你恨身边的每一个人，也许你只是恨你自己（if you go round life hating everybody you meet, maybe you hate yourself）Adam是一个无法与自己和平相处的人，他无法诚实地、安然地面对自己，因此也无法坦诚地、友善地面对他人。

他自命不凡，居高临下，以为自己最聪明，以为自己能解决大部分问题（if not all），以为自己很擅长工作……这也是我很佩服编剧的一点，TA要写的并不是一个“和普通人不一样”的主角，TA要写的，就是一个和我们所有人都一样的人，会玩忽职守，会自高自大，会对下属不耐烦，会对上司阿谀奉承，会冷嘲热讽，会懦弱无能，不会做手术就是不会做手术，没有爽文反转，也没有什么天赋异禀。

因此只看第一集的话会很容易弃剧，我看到有一条只给了一星的短评写道：在手术室接电话？

雷死我了。

哈哈不妨对此深究一下。

我们习惯了主角是不一样的，或神神叨叨，或不按常理出牌，在这样的先入为主下，无法接受“在手术室接电话”的背后，其实是对编剧的不满，觉得编剧为了塑造“不一样的”主角人设什么剧情都写得出来。

但编剧写这样的剧情，并不是为了写出Adam的不一样，编剧的本意是想说，对，Adam就是这么一个烂透了的人。

你觉得雷就对了。

但不是编剧雷，是Adam雷。

而身为医生，只不过是把这种性格缺陷放大了。

Harry完全知道这一点，所以他会对Adam说：being a doctor is who you are，扪心自问，你真的想放弃吗？

Adam沉默了：I don't think I can接着Harry抱住他，轻声说了两遍：it's ok呜呜呜呜呜呜呜呜呜还会有比Harry更好的男朋友吗？

不会了，Adam你这个烂人真是走运。

必须在「机制」层面才能理解的ShrutiShruti真的。

这个人物是全剧最沉痛的、最让人意难平的人物。

第六集是Shruti大放异彩的一集，她彻底成长为一个能准确判断、果断行动、拥有丰富临床经验的成熟医生，甚至主角Adam在这一集都只能在她后面打下手，两个人的权力关系瞬间倒置。

但即便如此，这些所谓的“成长”依然没能挽回Shruti。

而我们之所以能把第六集发生的种种，理解为“成长”，是因为我们还属于“正常人”，我们作出的反应是主流价值下的反应。

但Shruti，她早就异化了。

这种异化早有端倪。

还记得那对不幸胎死腹中的黑人夫妇吗，Shruti对他们的安慰是：你们其实不需要把它看成是一个生命，它只是a bunch of cells早在这个时候，Shruti就无法正常感知生命了。

深陷在畸形的NHS下，自身也被压抑到心理扭曲，于是只能用更扭曲的方式拯救（解脱）自己。

但Shruti的异化源于何处？

比如源于她和顾问医生Miss Houghton的那番餐桌谈话，后者的直言不讳和冷酷无情，彻底浇灭了Shruti心底的希望，这些希望甚至还没来得及长出形状。

但还可以追溯得更远一点，因为如果只停留在这里的话，我们还是容易把它归结为工作环境的恶劣，那为什么Adam没有自杀？

为什么Tracy没有自杀？

Adam当然没有自杀，因为他有一个愿意理解自己包容自己的男朋友，因为他更有一个良好的英国中产阶级家庭的主流出身背景。

对比一下Adam和Shruti两个人居住的公寓，看到后者的时候，我忍不住就要落泪。

一张木板床，一张薄床单，床对面就是灶台，从来没有使用过，冰箱空荡荡，只有一盒过期的牛奶，厕所呢，一个杯子一根牙刷，我甚至没看到任何护肤品。

Shruti就是一个底层因素集合体的化身。

也许会有人说，Shruti至少上了大学，踏入了代表精英阶层的医生一职。

但不妨把自己代入Shruti，当你以为自己找到了一条摆脱底层的路，却发现它背后的机制依然畸形残酷，依然牢不可破，这样的打击，往往更甚。

Shruti死于机制的恶，不仅仅是NHS的恶，也是阶层机制的恶，是移民机制，是性别机制的恶。

然而更可怕的是，我们并不是不知道，相反，每个看完本剧的观众都能get到“Shruti死于机制的恶”这句话，但然后呢？

就像Shruti在医院的哀悼仪式，我本以为编剧会在这场戏上安排各种泪点，但实际上这个仪式充满陈词滥调，充满敷衍了事，甚至人们流的眼泪，也只是例行公事。

当Adam鼓起勇气问Miss Houghton，我们是不是应该有个调查之类的东西。

Miss Houghton一如既往不屑一顾的样子，那你应该去政府部门工作。

Adam立马怯懦了，what do we do now, then?well, we all toddle off back to work, don't we?这就是Shruti的然后。

可悲吗？

可悲。

真实吗？

真实。

但，就这样吗？

这就是我为什么会警惕自己被结局“抚慰”了的原因——因为这种“抚慰”，来自个人精神的刷新，而不是来自机制的变革。

这一个Adam改变了，但下一个Shruti呢？

我不得不承认，这个电视剧其实最后也自我放弃了，停留在新自由主义的解决方案上。

本剧前面铺垫的对环境机制的批判精神，最后也不过沦为了大众文化的消费品。

最后。

看到一个影评说本剧的中文翻译“疼痛难免”不是很好，没有力度，建议改成“疼痛难忍”，直面剧中展现出的种种“疼痛”。

但我觉得“疼痛难免”很恰当，自嘲得很恰当。

难免嘛。