第2章 你还记得吗？

加入向峨

在中国，灾后援建是一项政治任务，灾后的都江堰是由上海市统一援建的，这样的援建工程是交钥匙工程。因此，上海市援建都江堰指挥部有着绝对的权利，就连当地政府，也无权干涉上海援建都江堰指挥部的工作。当年他们落地都江堰，便非常低调地在青城山脚下一幢不起眼的小房子里。

我们无知无畏募集到的资金如何用在灾后重建上？我们如何可以加入上海市援建都江堰的队伍？在相当长的一段时间里，这是摆在我们面前的一件大而紧迫的事情。

我当时想，我们远在美国，参加震后第一阶段紧急救援和第二阶段临时安置的工作，基本不可能，也不现实。那个时候，在中央的统一部署和支持下，当地政府和军队起着非常重要的主导作用：2008年11月6日，中央人民政府宣布投入一万亿元人民币用于历时三年的灾后重建。许多志愿者的加入只能作为补充。但进入第三个阶段的重建工作，却是全面铺开的，需要耗费大量的人力、物力和财力，我想我们的善款也许就可以在这个阶段发挥作用。那期间，媒体关于学校倒塌、孩子们受难的报道比较多，自然而然地，我就想到了能否参加学校的灾后重建工作。

相信我可能也是比较早询问和关注学校重建的人。我查阅了过往邮件，5月底我就发送了第一个邮件给刘伶，请她帮助了解学校受灾和重建的情况。这是一项并不简单的调研工作，虽然当时的媒体有铺天盖地的地震相关信息，但如何从官方拿到这些确切的政府的数据和真正可以实施的来自政府的灾后重建计划，并不容易。刘伶先后走访了四川省教育基金会、四川省教育厅和都江堰市教育局等部门。几周后，大约6月底，得到了两份灾后重建的学校清单，一份是绵阳市的，另一份是都江堰市的。这些清单非常详细地列出了需要重建的学校名称、受灾情况、重建要求（加固还是重建）、重建规模、重建资金要求等。我至今还非常清楚地记得，拿到第一手资料后我们非常兴奋，刘伶在成都，我在美国，都不约而同地打印了所有的文件，堆在案头足有3英寸厚。接着，我们花了大量的时间去一个一个学校研究，看看哪些地方我们可以出力。但是，当我们统计了所有灾后重建的学校的重建资金要求后，我们被震住了：每个学校重建动辄需要几千万人民币，我马上意识到我们要独力重建一个学校是不可能的。那时我们才刚刚筹集到两万美元左右，而且经济危机开始袭击美国，汶川地震的新闻被经济恶化的坏消息取代，好像有点募不动了。我在路易维尔四川地震救助基金会里报告了支援学校的想法，得到基金委员会的认可。既然不能单独重建一个学校，退而求其次，我们能不能参加一个学校的重建？这个想法也得到了支持。

剩下的问题就是怎么才能加入？以什么样的方式参加？那段时间，刘伶在成都尝试各种可能，也积极听取各方意见。在援建的滚滚洪流中，我们在努力寻找自己那颗小水珠的位置。首先是地点的选择，来自四川省教育协会的陈会长甚至非常直率地对刘伶说：去比较偏远的地方吧，都江堰太热了，现在的问题不是没有善款，是怎样才能争取到有用善款的机会；其次是咱们的这笔善款，究竟可以用来做什么。这是那些日子里一直困扰着我的问题。我在路易维尔附近一个森林公园的董事会里任职，那里的接待中心刚刚获得美国绿色环保可持续发展工程的最高奖。受此启发，我想在灾后重建的时候引入绿色环保、可持续发展的概念，让绿色工程提早进入中国！这个念头一闪，令我自己激动不已。

再说刘伶在成都的进展。当时募捐过程中已经募集到的两万美元，按照今天中国的土建造价，可能只可以修建一所学校的类似大门、围墙、铺地、景观中的一部分，有些人甚至戏谑地说，就去帮助建一条排水沟吧。这话虽然难听，但却成为了这个项目一个历史性转折的思考：对呀，为何不建一套雨水回用系统来浇灌花园？

那段时间，我在美国遥控，刘伶在成都尝试，我们紧张地工作，频繁地进行电话和邮件交流，夜以继日，完全没有12小时的时差。当我在电话中和我们的建筑师刘伶一说引入绿色建筑的想法，她立马惊呼出“雨水回用”，真叫一拍即合。

有了好的项目，接下来就是寻找进入的机会。不久，紧急安置的工作逐渐走上正轨，重建工作提上了议事日程，所有的灾后援建项目中，学校、医院等公共建筑优先援建，这时候，我们感觉自己可能有机会进入援建了。在同济大学援建向峨小学驻工地现场代表刘杰那里，我们了解到都江堰向峨小学是规模最小、受灾最严重、开始重建最早的学校，我们研究了学校的全套设计图纸，发现它没有雨水回用的设施，同时在设计说明里面明确地提到绿色环保的主旨，我们相信，雨水回用系统的引入，刚好和同济大学的设计目标契合，于是，我们果断地锁定向峨小学为我们实施的目标。

怎么进入？几乎每一步后面都有好多说不完的故事，每一步都是不亲力亲为就不可能走下去的故事。那些日子，我和刘伶像一台24小时高速运转的机器，通过艰苦曲折的摸索，我们很快理清了项目能够进入的步骤：第一步，我开始给当时主持向峨小学项目的同济大学土木工程学院的何敏娟院长以及熊海贝教授写邮件，向她们阐述我们的雨水回用系统将使得向峨的绿色概念再增添一个亮点。这一点，得到了她们的赞同。我同时向她们承诺，完成土建建设后，我们会持续地对向峨小学的音乐、美术、英语及图书馆的特色建设给予支持。这一点，也让她们感动。至此，加入同济大学的团队成为一种可能。第二步，国家一级注册建筑师刘伶马上动用设计院的优势，鼓动成都几个甲级设计院的国家注册设备工程师火速组成志愿者设计团队，并在北京专家和上海厂家的支持下迅速完成了向峨小学雨水回用系统从方案到施工图的设计，很快把这个设计成果赶在同济大学设计研究院用于施工的正式施工图出图之前，通过他们审核后将此部分设计文件并入到同济大学的正式施工图设计文件。至此，我们走完了非常关键的一步。第三步，为了向上海市援建都江堰项目指挥部推介雨水回用系统真正实施（因为同济大学早期的施工图里没有包含这套系统），同济大学熊海贝教授陪同常务副校长李永胜教授亲自到都江堰，在由上海市援建都江堰项目指挥部主持的会议上正式提出向峨小学增加建设一套雨水回用系统。并在会后由上海市援建都江堰项目指挥部以会议纪要的形式下发了建设通知。至此，美国路易维尔四川地震救助基金援建向峨小学的雨水回用系统，正式登堂入室，开始与土建一道建设。

我们是历经艰难困苦，作为同济大学的新理念合作伙伴才进入向峨小学项目的，这样难得的机会，不好好干，行吗？

现在回想起来，那段艰苦的工作里，还有一个非常有趣的故事：在研讨初期，刘伶联系到上海一个生产雨水设备的厂家，这个厂家非常热情地想帮助这个雨水回用项目，他们建议的系统比较简单，同时打算捐赠一部分设备，这样，刘伶报来的估算只需要大约两万美元，与我们初期募到的资金相近。但随着研讨和设计的深入，成都的志愿者设计团队在北京专家的帮助下，最终选择的是一套比较严格和正规的雨水回用系统，这系统本身（就是泵房内的那套设备，还不含配套所需的庞大室外及室内管网、所需的巨大储水池及土建泵房）的估算，将需要七万美元！而与此配套的室内外管网，以及储水池、沉淀池、泵房所需要的土建费用，同济大学要求我们按比例分担（因为雨水回用的泵房和消防水泵房是合并分区使用的），光这部分，保守估计也要人民币300万元，折算成美金约50万元。这个投资吓我一大跳：我们的资金仅仅是整个雨水回用项目的九牛一毛！怎么办？我们好不容易才挤进同济大学的援建队伍，我们找到了这么好的援建理念，能退出来吗？不能！我们再一次无知无畏地骑上虎背了。

接下来我的工作重心转移到了再次募捐，没想到，早期的筹款我并没有担当重任，但资金有巨大缺口以后，筹款的责任，最终还是落到了我的头上。也还是那份责任感，我把几乎所有的人缘资本都用上了，超额募集达到了12.5万美元。

Joining the Xiang-E Project

After the Wenchuan Earthquake, we all closely watched the progress of the relief effort—the rescue, temporary settlements, and rebuilding—with one specific question in mind:What would be the most effective use of the donations collected by the Relief Fund?The easiest answer would have been just to send all the money to a relief organization in China and become a partner in the background.

But, doing that would have broken our "100%"promise. So, then, we considered a project suited to our Relief Fund mission and an endeavor that would properly apply our funds, while allowing us active participation. Come to think of it, it is very possible that I had already considered this idea at a much earlier stage of the Relief Fund.

We in the United States literally were quite removed from the earthquake region at that time. Realistically, we could not participate physically in any post-earthquake emergency rescue, nor was there time enough for us to support the large-scale temporary settlements immediately. Nevertheless, for any severe natural disaster, we knew that good rescue efforts must be led by professionals and temporary living arrangements must be well-organized and well-coordinated. The Chinese government responded to the quake immediately, and the coordination between all levels of local government with the military and professionals was quite effective. We saw the intensive rescue work begin in the critical initial 72-hour period, followed by mostly professional search and rescue efforts during the next three weeks, and finally the establishment—in the midst of frequent aftershocks—of thousands of tents to house millions of displaced residents within just several subsequent months.

On November 6, 2008, the Chinese Central Government announced that it would dedicate $1 trillion RMB (Renminbi, or about $146.5 billion US) over the next three years to rebuild the areas ravaged by the earthquake. Rebuilding was the third stage of recovery, and rebuilding was a process that required a lot of manpower, material, and financial resources. We were convinced that this stage would allow the best application of our Relief Fund. Personally, I had really wanted to see the raised money play an important role in the rebuilding process, especially for the schools. Because of the timing of the earthquake, students were in their first afternoon classes, so the schools' collapse caused heavy casualties. Naturally, to us it was evident that participation in rebuilding a school would be the ideal project for the Relief Fund.

Maybe I also was the only person making inquiries about school rebuilding projects almost immediately after the quake. To clarify my recollection, I reviewed my old e-mail messages and found one that I had sent to Liu Ling in late-May, 2008, asking her for information about the quake's destruction to the schools and possible recovery plans. That may have been the very first seed of thought about school rebuilding efforts. After a few weeks, around late-June, Liu Ling responded with two lists of preliminary damage assessments of the schools, one for the city of Dujiangyan and the other for the city of Mianyang. The statistics were compiled by the Sichuan Education Foundation, Provincial Education Department, and the Dujiangyan Education Bureau. The report included the name of each school, individual assessment of damages, recommendations to repair or rebuild, the proposed capacity of any new school, and an estimate of cost. Although the information may not have been very accurate, it still was quite detailed. Understandably, it would take much time and effort to collate this still-inconclusive data and turn it into a blueprint for the region. Indeed, it did turn out that many changes occurred in the subsequent years to come. I spent a lot of time analyzing the two lists containing almost 500 schools, learning about each of them, with aid of a regional map spread open next to me and as much background information as I could find online. The resulting paper printouts stacked on my desk grew well over three inches high.

Seeing that the estimate for either school rebuilding or repairing amounted to over $10 million RMB (or roughly $1.5 million US) per school, I immediately realized that we would never be able to rebuild a school solely with our Relief Fund money. At that point, in 2008, we had only raised slightly less than $20,000, but with the American economic crisis starting to impact people's finances locally, fundraising had become even more difficult.

At a previous committee meeting of the Louisville Sichuan Earthquake Relief Fund, I had introduced a sketchy idea of rebuilding a school, and that thought was endorsed by the full committee. Subsequently, armed with the new analytical information, I returned to the committee and presented the possibility of collaborating on a school rebuilding project, reasoning that we could not have supported a full school rebuilding completely on our own. Therefore, a partnership became the next best thing we could do. The committee agreed with the rationale and I was authorized to explore the details further. Then came the question of how to find a rebuilding project that we could connect with and what we needed to do to become a true active partner. Those were days of worry and nights of sleeplessness.

Among my varied community service projects, I served on the Diversity Committee the Bernheim Arboretum and Research Forest, a beautiful Kentucky park the Visitor Center of which had recently received the highly prestigious LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum Certification from the U.S. Green Building Council. When I had shared plans for the potential school rebuilding project, I was strongly urged to include the green and environmentally friendly concepts in all the plans. Thus, I spent quite a while studying the LEED standards and found the rainwater conservation system at Bernheim to be especially impressive.

Naturally, whenever using environmentally green methods was mentioned, harnessing solar power and water also was recommended. Solar power in Dujiangyan would not have been an optimal investment, but water ... ah water! The area was surrounded by water. The concept of incorporating green building and sustainable systems in China—especially applying them to recovery from a disaster—what a great idea! Afterward, I could not wait to call Liu Ling. Rebuilding with focus on being environmentally friendly struck a chord with her, and, using that concept as the underlying theme, we launched the Relief Fund's school rebuilding project.

Soon after the quake, during mid-summer of 2008, the regional rebuilding efforts began in earnest amidst the temporary settlements of displaced residents. Because hospitals and schools took top priority, I felt the slight lag was the perfect time for us to better define our school rebuilding project. Xiang-E Elementary School came to our attention because it had suffered one of the worst casualties and, because it had only grades one to six, the small countryside school would suit our capabilities and goal. Once we had completely honed in on Xiang-E School, we devised an initial plan:a water conservation system for the immediate area. That was in mid-August of 2008.

As I thought more about rebuilding with good green ideas, I was confident that Xiang-E was the right school for us to help. In hindsight, choosing Xiang-E seemed simple and the decision clearly was right, but during the chaotic post-quake time the choice was neither easy nor clear-cut. We heard countless different, changing quake accounts time after time, and something unexpected always turned up at each and every step. We knew that the whole project could be a total failure if we were not diligent and vigilant.

Actually, it seems quite unbelievable that we, a small private group from Louisville, were even allowed to participate in a major school rebuilding project in China. At the time, we had heard many accounts of donors who were ever-ready to fund projects but were given no opportunity to participate in them. Moreover, the Chinese government assigned large metropolitan cities to officially adopt and supervise quake recovery regions. In the case of Dujiangyan, it was paired with Shanghai, and Shanghai was in complete control of every aspect of the recovery projects, from city planning to architectural design, and from the actual construction contractors to all the finances. In essence, the Dujiangyan-Shanghai collaboration was one in which Shanghai would control every single rebuilding step from beginning to end, and the city of Dujiangyan just would receive the "key"to the finished buildings. Hence, it is evident that the Xiang-E Elementary project was indeed a very special exception to the established governmental collaboration arrangements.

Almost immediately after the earthquake, the Canadian government announced a donation of $6 million (Canadian) to the Chinese government for recovery. However, rather than cash, the $6 million came in the form of construction lumber. Nevertheless, the Chinese government agreed to accept the terms of the donation and subsequently worked with a technical team from Canada Wood to build three lightwood-framed public complexes:an elementary school, a special education school, and a home for seniors. Xiang-E became the first and only wood-framed elementary school to be rebuilt. Under a governmental agreement, Canada Wood worked with Tongji University (in Shanghai) to design and provide technical support for the Xiang-E project.

At the time that I was reviewing the various possible schools to rebuild and discussing with Liu Ling the most likely project we could join, Xiang-E School consistently stood out. Now, adding another international partner to the initiative and incorporating the concept of building green was sure to make Xiang-E an example of an environmentally friendly and sustainable new school. As for our part, Tongji University accepted our ideas and agreed to a working partnership as long as we adhered to rules and did not create any problems. Oftentimes, as I look back, I believe I was lucky and that we were all very lucky. What a rare opportunity we had—but why not？

After the partnership was sealed, groups of volunteers from Beijing, Shanghai and Chengdu formed three teams to explore and design the rainwater conservation system for Xiang-E Elementary. At this point, though, I must recount an interesting story to exemplify some of the "small"challenges and hurdles we encountered.

An environmental engineering firm in Shanghai had proposed to donate equipment for their idea of a simple system to catch rainwater from downspouts. Based on that proposal, Liu Ling reported to the Relief Fund Committee with a draft of the design and an estimated cost of about $20,000. Of course, that was in early-fall of 2008, and the amount was close to the total that the Relief Fund had raised to date. We were all still quite happy and proud to accomplish what we set out to do. But, that elation lasted only a few days—not even weeks—when the thorough review by the Chengdu team came back.

The cost of the project was grossly underestimated. There had been no pricing consideration for installation or required piping, plumbing, and underground storage structures. The review further found that the simple proposal from Shanghai was not as simple as it appeared and, in fact, plans did not fulfill the set purpose of the rainwater capture system. Then, with help from the Beijing team, we submitted a revised system design, which soon was optimized by the engineering team in Chengdu. Finally, the revised rainwater conservation system passed the strict design regulations and was accepted by Tongji University.

Alas, the new financial estimate added up to a total projected cost of $70,000. What an incredible shock and surprise it was! We had only raised less than $20,000, just a fraction of the entire rainwater conservation system. But, what were we to do? We already had expended so much time and energy on proposing the rainwater conservation idea, working on the feasibility and design aspects, and convincing Tongji University to create a blueprint of the rainwater system. Moreover—perhaps most critically—we were allowed rare inclusion in the regular updates of the monthly meeting at the Shanghai-Dujiangyan Rebuilding Headquarters. At that point, it was not only too late to back out, but our reputation and partnership would have suffered if we withdrew. We were at the point of no return, and the only persons in the world who knew about the deep hole we dug for ourselves were Liu Ling and me. There is an apt Chinese saying:"It is hard to get off when you are riding on a tiger's back."I think we were doing just that.

I did not anticipate these turns of events. Not at all! In the early stage of fundraising, during roughly the first four months after May 2008, I did not take a lead role. However, even though I saw a huge gap, I realized we already had forward momentum, so I decided to take charge of the fundraising initiative—well, actually, it seemed that eventually the task would fall onto my shoulders anyway. Out of a deep sense of responsibility, I reached out to every contact I ever had or people I ever worked with in the community over the last 15 years. I used up almost all of the political capital I had, but by the end of 2008, we had raised over $125,000, which was more than we needed for the rainwater conservation system.

What made the difference in this, my last fundraising push? First of all, the rainwater conservation system was a worthy project; second, we had a very clear mission and very specific goal; and third, we earned very strong support from Louisville's C. E. & S. Foundation in the form of a matching grant. As we neared our challenge goal, two organizations in Lexington, Kentucky, and two organizations in Jiujiang, China, attracted by the rebuilding project, elected to combine their donated funds with ours. When we met the matching grant goal at last, I received a $25,000 check from the C. E. & S. Foundation with a letter that recognized the Relief Fund's leadership and skillful fundraising efforts, especially at a time of national economic downturn. Now that we had procured all the funds, we were ready to advance to the next step. Again, I felt that the support we enjoyed was because of the special nature of our post-disaster recovery plans. Now, it was time for us to develop educational links in the disaster area so that we could share the instructional values and increase student exchange programs.

记得

2010年的圣诞节，我与本书的主角曾唯斌教授参加一场分享活动，分享的对象是几百个大小不一的孩子。我问他们：记得那场地震吗？没有人回答，好一阵之后，一个初中生模样的孩子怯生生地站起来回答我。她说：她记得她捐款了。其实，这个问题并不是去质问孩子们，而是拷问今天所有中国人的疑惑。你还记得那场地震吗？还记得什么？

6年，太短的历史；6年，太长的2190个日夜。

当年那些冲向地震灾区的志愿者，今天你们在哪里？那些守在电视机前面通宵祈祷的观众们，你们在哪里？那些为中国人寻找生命感动的故事主角，为爱而坚守的身影，你们在哪里？或者，大家早已被日复一日的生活淹没在无边无际的时空之中？又或者，被谎言与欺骗冲刷在麻木的沙滩上。今天，我们还能记住什么？需要记住些什么？

记得，不是回忆痛苦，不是纠结过去，而是面对灾难开始自己或者人群的价值思索。

每一个人在6年前，都可以讲出一个自己与地震有关系的故事。

记得，不是回忆痛苦，不是纠结过去，而是面对灾难开始关于自己或者人群的价值思索。这是我们记得的意义，只有记得，才会有未来。

在乡村，为真相、为反省、为重建、为公平与信念活着的人们，这是中国最真实的希望，正是因为这样坚持的故事，我们才明白活着的价值。

感恩不是质问那些受伤土地上的人们为什么不感恩，而是提示所有曾经感动过的人们，当时间逝去之后，你心底是否还能升起良知与恩典？经历过的感动与你今天有关系吗？

记住这场灾难从物质上是很容易的。这是一个大众媒体时代，每个人都有可能通过自己的终端设备保存影像。我们看见灾区有的妈妈在并不太昂贵的手机里还保存着遇难孩子的录像。每一个人都可以在网络上下载有关灾难的文献、实况与记录。多年后，那些完全没有经历地震的人也可以身临其境地感知那些生命陨落的过程。镜头与书卷中那些身影飘忽而过。但是，感动不是保存在硬盘里面的数据，更不是可以调出的复制文件夹。地震的博物馆、纪念馆有了，那头坚强的猪都被人收藏了，地震旅行线路图在成都的旅行社都能免费派送。伤痛可以以消费的需求进入市场，死难可以以缅怀的名义被置换为猎奇。

2008年，我在南京的大屠杀纪念馆看见了一个颇有意味的开场。黑暗的空间里，深邃的空间尽头墙面上，有巨大的投影将30万死难者的标准照一一投影，模糊、清晰、消失，一切都在静静地发生着。很多时候屠杀不再是空洞的数字，粗鄙的仇恨。它变成了生存的冲动与活着的感恩。

Memory

On Christmas Day in 2010, Professor Wei-Bin Zeng and I attended an event that included hundreds of mixed-aged children. I asked them if they still remembered the earthquake, but no one answered. After a while, a junior high school student timidly stood up to answer my question. She said that she remembered giving a small donation. I did not mean to sound interrogative but, actually, this would be my general question for all Chinese people today:Do you still recall the earthquake? What is it that you remember?

Six years is too short to be considered history. Yet, six years, consisting of 2,190 days, 24 hours a day, is too long.

To all the volunteers who rushed to the earthquake disaster regions that very year, I ask, "Where are you today? "To those of you who took on leadership roles in that emotional situation, who searched for life and loved ones for the Chinese people, "Where are you? "Possibly,these people have blended into ordinary daily life, have been drowned out by the crowds, or maybe they have disappeared into the numbing ocean waves because of lies and deception. What shall we hold in our mind today? What should we remember?

Five years later, nearly everyone still could recount a personal story about the earthquake.

To remember is not to recall only suffering or to be lost in the past, but to face all aspects of the situation straight-on and to value oneself and others in the process. Only memories that are treasured by a person will help create a meaningful future. The people who seek truth, self-examination, reform, and justice truly believe in rural life. These are the people who are the most realistic hope for the Chinese countryside. To understand this concept is to understand the value of life.

Giving a contribution should have nothing to do with expecting gratitude from earthquake victims. Contributing should be an act that moves people. As time goes by, would the contributor still feel guided by good conscience and a sense of altruism? And, if a person had engaged in this kind of moving experience, would the human connection still linger?

It is easy to be reminded of past disasters because we are now in an era of public media. Everyone can keep images on a personal computer. We can review the photos and videos of fallen children that some mothers have saved on their inexpensive cell phones. Everyone can download disaster documents, images, and records from the Internet. Many years from now, someone who has never experienced an earthquake may easily be placed at the scene via computer, virtually, to witness personally how people perished.

Real human lives were lost amidst cascading events so fast-moving that they were not captured by photograph or video at the very second the earthquake struck. Thus, the events never had a chance to be recorded in electronic computer files that could be opened and reviewed. An earthquake museum and memorial have been erected, and artifacts from the disaster have been collected for display—even a pig that survived. An earthquake tour route set up by a travel agency in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, can be emailed for free, so now the villagers' pain is available through tourism in the name of consumerism. Alas, remembering the emotional toll of earthquake victims has become objectified into a profitable commodity.

In 2008, I visited the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall and experienced something moving. In a darkened area, a large projector displayed images of 300,000 victims onto the wall, who seemed to float into deep space. The images were at first fuzzy, then clear, then faded to nothing. Everything happened silently. The digitally memorialized images were not about random, meaningless numbers of people, but reflected each person's will to survive and their gratefulness to be alive.

我的历史

2012年是挺有意思的一年：我在中国和美国度过的时间，正好各是28年。

正因为这样，我觉得自己对中美文化、教育制度的理解恰好比较透彻，批评也好表扬也好，比较客观，偏见比较少。更重要的是，将近二十年来致力于中美文化教育交流，积累了不少经验教训。也许数一数从1993年到现在歪歪扭扭的一串脚印就可以说明一些问题。

1995年我正式进入鹤庐亚洲文化中心董事会，担任副总裁、国际交流总监，主管介绍亚洲文化的讲座系列。1996—1997年聚焦中国经济发展，成立商务网络，从文化的角度协助美国公司了解中国的国情商情和进入中国市场的要点。1998年从Freeman基金会申请到经费，将暑假英语培训班从两个教学点、两名老师参加扩大到8个中国教学点、2个越南教学点，三十多名教师参加。2000年创立年度鹤庐亚洲文化讲座系列，邀请全美知名专家到路易维尔作专题报告。2003年起工作重点转向路易维尔姐妹城市协会。和九江建立姐妹城市关系以后，我们每年做一件事情：2004年开始两市之间的中学生交流；2005年九江中层干部城市管理培训计划启动；2006年推介九江系列讲座、影视系列；2007年对我而言是非常特殊的一年，这一年我组织了中国改革开放30年讲座系列；同时成功组织了广州市少年宫艺术团来访，为美国小朋友演出10场，公演一场，轰动整个肯塔基州；2008年同样是非常重要的一年：四川地震救助基金成立，为灾区重建筹款，同时还有北京的奥运会；2009年北京奥运会纪录片专场系列，2010年姐妹城市青年学者奖学金项目启动。

这些不乏获得奖项的项目，所以，我主持路易维尔支援向峨小学这个项目，为向峨小学引入特色教育，得心应手地一步一步向前推进，的确不是凭空而来的，是一种积淀，也是一种必然。

Counting My Footprints

The year 2012 was a very interesting time. The number of years I spent in China and in the States became even:exactly 28 years here and there.

Maybe I can now say that my understanding of Chinese and American cultures and education styles, their similarities and differences, is more objective and thorough. I am less critical and more appreciative when it comes to the comparisons. More importantly, I have been committed for almost 20 years to cultural and educational exchange between the States and China, and gained many experiences and lessons.

"How do I love thee? Let me count the ways."We all know Elizabeth Barrett Browning and her most oft-recited poem in China during the time I fell in love with English. Here, I will recount some shadows I have left from 1993 to the present.

I joined the board of directors of Louisville's Crane House, the Asia Institute (previously the China Institute) in 1995, and served in various capacities at different times—as vice president, first vice president, director of international exchanges, and chairman of the program committee. I oversaw the cultural and educational programs, helped to establish a business network in 1996 to address China's rising economic status worldwide and focus on the cultural aspects. The business seminars over the years provided to American companies a deeper understanding of conducting commerce in China and of the Chinese market from a cultural perspective. Since 1998, a grant from the Freeman Foundation has funded Teaching in Asia (TIA), a summer intensive English program for Asian teachers and students, and greatly expanded the program from fewer than 10 teachers per year to over 30 in some years, and increased teaching sites from two in China to over 10 in China and Vietnam at the height of TIA. When the program had a reunion in 2009, almost every teacher said that TIA was a life-changing experience. For each year I served at Crane House, I tried to originate one new project, then improve on the program offerings with themes and serialization. The establishment of a Crane House Asian Culture Lecture Series in 2000, entitled "Asia:Insights and Perspectives, "was a good example of this initiative. It was set up as an annual lecture presented by well-known, invited experts speaking on specially selected topics.

In 2003 I shifted my focus to the Sister Cities organization when Louisville and Jiujiang cooperated to build a cultural exchange relationship, which became an official Sister Cities in fall of 2004. Good things happened one after another subsequently:A high school student exchange and a Sister School program started in 2004; a public administration training program for Jiujiang mid-level officials, jointly sponsored by University of Louisville (U of L) and Louisville Metro Government in 2005-2007; a series of lecture and film programs to introduce Jiujiang to Louisville in 2006-2007; and a moving flag-raising ceremony at Louisville's Jefferson Square.

The year 2007 was a very special one for me. I organized a four-part lecture series on China's economic reform in honor of Crane House's 20th Anniversary and successfully initiated the project,"China Through the Arts, "with the first group of visiting performers from the Guangzhou Children's Palace. In early 2008, I coordinated hosting 24 students and six teachers from Guangzhou, who staged 12 sensational performances throughout Kentucky, touching the hearts of more than 3,600 students and parents and, in particular, 24 host families and over 120 volunteers. Year 2008 also was a very eventful year because of the May 12 Wenchuan Earthquake, the Louisville Earthquake Relief Fund, the Xiang-E Elementary School rebuilding project, and the Beijing Olympics. Later in 2009, the special Beijing Olympic Documentaries series was presented at U of L. Moreover, the Sister Cities Young Scholars program, a new endeavor to attract high school graduates from Jiujiang and Chengdu to Louisville's universities and colleges, was initiated in 2010.

It is a long list of activities and involvements. Among those are quite a number of award-winning projects with my fingerprints on them. It was indeed the invaluable experiences I gained over the years that made it natural for me to assume a leadership role in the Louisville Sichuan Earthquake Relief Fund, to take charge of the Louisville for Xiang-E School programs once the school rebuilding had been completed, and to continuously move ahead one step at a time during the last five years. It was not really a case of my making a sudden move from nowhere; instead, it was steady and determined growth over the years.

When I graduated from University of Pittsburgh in 1988, I asked a friend to take a few photos of the autumn leaves in the city so that I could place them alongside my dear Robert Frost's mountain road verse:"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood / And sorry I could not travel both / And be one traveler / long I stood / And looked down one as far as I could / ..."

I stayed in the States instead of returning to China. Over the last 20years, I, again "... took the road less traveled by / And that has made all the difference."It may just be my faith.

曾教授

第一次和曾唯斌一起去向峨时候，我还不是很习惯称呼他为“曾教授”。在中国的大学里，很少有称呼对方为某教授的习惯，再有成就的也称老师。除了开玩笑，很少这么郑重地称教授。什么时候我也开始习惯这个称呼的呢？就是到了向峨，我发现所有人都在热情地跟他打着招呼，政府官员叫他“曾教授”，路边走过的老农也热情地跑过来叫上一声“曾教授”。更别说向峨学校里面的孩子，此起彼伏地叫着这个熟悉而陌生的称谓。

与向峨有关的人好像都在这样叫他，这有点类似一个符号了。

向峨学校这6年的历程与曾唯斌确实有着莫大的关系。一个本与这块土地相隔万里的人，开始把他生命的气息灌注在这里，开始了新生与蜕变。曾唯斌，一个30年前从广东汕头去美国的潮汕人，一个在美国匹兹堡大学取得博士学位的数学家，为什么在山里面被大家符号起来了呢？

又一次去到向峨，回成都的一个晚上，曾教授送了我一本书，一本我完全看不懂的数学专著。他说他一定要送给我，这是一种感觉。我看着这本德文版、世界数学界知名出版社出版的书，从很大程度上是在妄图理解那个数学家曾唯斌。如果没有那场地震，也许今天的曾唯斌还是一个数学家美籍华人。今天，至少在向峨人的嘴里、心里，他是那个每年都来几次向峨做教育的“曾教授”。

曾教授说自己被向峨拉过去的这6年，开始于一个无知无畏的承诺，我很荣幸在关注曾教授和向峨的这些日子里，能有机会听到曾教授自己的分享。

Professor Zeng

The first time I went to Xiang-E Elementary with Wei-Bin Zeng, I was not very used to calling him "Professor Zeng."In fact, we in Chinese colleges almost never refer to colleagues as "professor."Instead, we always say "Laoshi, "meaning teacher, regardless of how academically accomplished the person is. Except in a joking manner, colleagues rarely use such a formal title among each other. It was when we got to Xiang-E that I discovered that everyone everywhere greeted him in exactly the same way. The city officials called him"Professor Zeng; "the local residents greeted "Professor Zeng."And, of course, the students and even teachers used this now-familiar but nonetheless strange-sounding title at Xiang-E. Everyone related to the Xiang-E programs referred to "Professor Zeng"in the exact same way, so that his name became more of an emblem or special label, and any other designation would not have been meaningful. As for me, I unconsciously started to feel more comfortable with the title and also have called him "Professor Zeng"since then.

For the last five years, many changes and progress at Xiang-E Elementary School closely involved the "Professor."From thousands of miles away and otherwise having no physical contact with China at all, Professor Zeng devoted his talents, abilities, and love to make things happen. Bit by bit, he nurtured new and lively ideas. How could Wei-Bin Zeng, an ordinary person who went to America from Shantou 30 years ago and a mathematician with a doctorate from University of Pittsburgh, have become the iconic "Professor"in this mountainous countryside?

One night in early 2012, when we returned to Chengdu after visiting Xiang-E Elementary together, Professor Zeng handed me a book. It was his just-published monograph, Probability and Statistical Models, which was in the Birkhauser Applied Probability and Statistics series printed by Springer, a prestigious, international, academic publishing company founded in 1842. Of course, the topic was completely foreign to me. However, Professor Zeng wanted me to have the book and to understand his world.

I opened the cover printed by the world-renowned publishing house and looked at the dancing English alphabet and mathematical formulas. In vain, I attempted to understand the mathematician part of him. If there had been no tragic earthquake, perhaps Professor Zeng would still be one of the Chinese-American professionals concerned only with his own world. These days, at least to the people in Xiang-E and many in Dujiangyan, he is the "Professor"who had come several times a year for the children of Xiang-E Elementary.

Professor Zeng once said that his dedication to the programs to support Xiang-E Elementary over the past five years started with an innocent promise and, likely, a commitment.