疼痛难免

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。

Episode 1Nobody But Me – The Human BeinzAdam walking through the hospitalKiss with a Fist – Florence + the MachineAdam receives a call on his beeperWicky – HooverphonicAdam leaves the hospitalThe Tearjerker Returns – Chilly Gonzales & Jarvis CockerAdam performs the CaesarianThe staxte We're In – The Chemical BrothersAdam goes to the strip clubEpisode 2Trouble – Ray LaMontagneBeginning of the episodeMusic When the Lights Go Out – The LibertinesAdam goes to bedEverything I Am Is Yours – VillagersAdam leaves the hospitalEpisode 3House of Cards – RadioheadAdam returns home after dinner with his motherLet's Dance – M. WardAdam and Harry go to bedThe Tearjerker Returns – Chilly Gonzales & Jarvis CockerShruti leaves the hospitalMy Autumn's Done Come – Lee HazlewoodAdam and Harry speak outside the churchEpisode 4Toothpaste Kisses – The MaccabeesThe doctors get ready for workThree Little Birds – Bob Marley & The WailersMs Houghton singsHouse of Jealous Lovers – The RaptureAdam and Harry go clubbingThe Way I Feel Inside – The ZombiesAdam and Harry danceEpisode 5Remember Me – British Sea PowerAdam sees his first patient of the dayHands Around My Throat– Death in VegasShruti sees a couple trying for a babyDiving Horses – Death in VegasShruti tries to eat her lunchDirge – Death in VegasShruti goes up to the neo-natal wardModern Romance –Yeah Yeah YeahsEnd of episodeEpisode 6Fake Empire -The National Heartbroken Adam does his first shift at a posh private hospital and finds that it's not all it's cracked up to be. Shruti has a challenging night shift on the NHS WardSignal and Sign by Maxïmo ParkBorn to Cry by PulpOriginal Song that plays as Adam gets used to private hospital lifeEpisode 7 The Book of Love by The Magnetic FieldsOriginal Song that plays over the end credits

看第一集的时候一度要停下来喘口气，总在纳闷这个剧怎么会打上喜剧的标签，明明那么压抑悲惨。

甚至在想，假如是生孩子前看这个剧，那我一定不敢生了，对医生来说，接生是那么随意的吗？

哦不对，只有紧急情况才会有医生接生，普通情况下助产士就够了。

看完全七集，觉得自己误会人家了，他们每个人都尽自己最大的努力了呀。

可是为什么，为什么直到舒蒂死去，气愤才变得阳光一点？

难道一定要死个人，我们才意识到自己可以换个生活方式吗？

舒蒂对这份职业的迷茫，何曾不是我的困惑，换做我我也纳闷，感觉她只是需要一个一起相互吐槽的人，解解压，放松放松。

舒蒂死之前的那个晚上，她是多么淡定，多么游刃有余啊。

是不是因为已经做好了赴死的打算，人就变得从容起来？

是啊，反正这是我活着的最后一晚了，以后再也不会这么痛苦了，想想就觉得长舒一口气吧。

可是她明明那么优秀，专注、努力、负责，只需要有人拉她一把，在她自我怀疑的时候肯定她一下，她就能继续下去了啊，为什么那么冷漠，为什么那么毒舌，为什么那么苛刻，为什么要逼死一个这么优秀的医生？

甚至直到她死了，大领导还在想着往她身上泼脏水让她背锅，不敢相信，在那位院长眼里，生命到底算什么？

亏我在中间还以为自己误会了那位大领导，就因为他肯定过一次亚当，我就以为他是好人。

但怎么可能呢？

如果他是善良的人，就不会自己开豪车坐游艇去度假，却把所有压力都给了手下的人。

资本到底滋生了什么样的怪物啊？

幸好亚当最后没有像他教的那样去甩锅，不然一辈子都会良心不安吧？

赚钱到底是为了什么呢？

再来聊聊医院，不看不知道一看吓一跳，原来英国的公立医院条件也这么差啊，原以为去年生产时北京的医院条件够惨了，没想到英国也没好到哪里去啊，真就像亚当问的那句话，“医院这个地方什么时候变成了只有生死才是要紧的事了？

” 还有中间那个私立医院的插曲，仅仅几分钟就概括了医院的优缺点，是，服务很好，环境很好，但专业技术不行啊，一旦遇到特殊情况，能救命的还是公立医院，以后生孩子坚决不考虑私立医院，太吓人了。

还想说说哈利，有个细节，唯一一次以亚当视角的约会，哈里到了发现亚当在，满脸的不可置信，“都是我等你的”，说着边坐下边随手放下自己手里那本厚厚的书，就这一个细节导演就表达出以前的约会，哈里等的有多辛苦。

第四集结尾亚当和哈利在gay吧外面跳舞那段让人想哭，真浪漫啊。

让我又想问爱是什么？

爱就是让你在这操蛋的人生里活下去的理由吧，如果不是哈利，亚当会不会抑郁？

活着的意义到底是什么？

舒蒂太压抑太紧绷了，她太想让父母满意，她应该谈个恋爱或者交个朋友的，她需要有个人跟她说说话，告诉她，工作就是工作，哪怕你面对的是人命关天的工作，但你也是人啊，你要有自己的生活。

就是今年吧，我突然开始对工作释然了，就是一份工作而已，人最大的满足感还是来自家庭，最治愈你的还是家人和小动物，多花时间去生活吧，而不是工作。

以后遇到困难，就想想舒蒂，拿出赴死的精神，大概就会觉得怎么活都可以了吧。

只要不在乎别人的看法，按自己的想法活，还有什么好怕的呢？

啊！

还有那个25周意外出生的宝宝，谢天谢地，他最后活下来了！

谢天谢地。

Part 1在第五集的39分钟，Tracy对男主的那段诘问撑起了这个剧的另一层架构。

Tracy：You refused to call your consultant, even though you knew you were out of your depth with Erika......You assaulted your patients, that’s what that is. If you cut someone’s tattoo-assault. Taking personal phone calls during deliveries? And disconnecting the emergency alarms? You are a liability. And what about bullying Erika into dropping her perfectly valid complaint? That was the cherry on the top of the whole cake of shit. It’s pride and it’s dishonesty, it’s arrogance and it’s entitlement. You think you are the cleverest person in the room. And that make you dangerous.......这段诘问直接动摇了（或者是明确了，毕竟作者开始借Tracy之口开始“审判”和提出另一个视角下的见解）支撑这个剧至此的两个核心元素的地位：男主以及喜剧元素。

在这剧改编之前，我一直很好奇原作中那些作为文字存在时可读性极高的直言直语如果摆在具体的场景里，是否会将其中唐突和冒犯的一面更显性化。

毕竟讲笑话和做喜剧都是微妙的艺术，要选择合适的培养皿，调至合适的温度和湿度，再加入必要的催化剂，才能使事件/物质中的喜剧成分显形。

喜剧不是一个已经提纯后的笑料，它是必须基于原始物质的的见解和表达，它本身就是一个最强力的观点，有时候甚至强到可以看似反过来重塑现实、“误导”观众和读者的观感。

但如果对原始物质性质的判断错误、观点平庸，那就往往会趋于冒犯、恶意以及无趣。

庆幸于这部剧基本具备了各种良好的配件来模拟那个内部条件适宜的培养皿：不止一位演员恰切的表现力、对值得着重探讨的话题和细节的敏锐捕捉和铺陈、姑且算基于当下良心或境况的直言，这几点条件共同促成了这部剧里喜剧元素在培养皿里显形，它们完美妥帖地从原始物质中滋生然后附着在上面，剧情非常流畅松软地游走在原始物质和喜剧元素之间，这其间无需生硬地切割和转折，只因它们可以看作一个物理上的整体，拥有一个共同的供剧情线穿梭的空间。

但是在第五集中，几个促成了喜剧元素显形的条件被这段台词侵入，本身密闭且安全的培养皿被暴露在原本空气中。

被合理提取及显性后的喜剧成分与现实以及作者真正观点的粘合&剥离问题是个有趣的问题。

被视作理所当然的观点和某种意义上的正义似乎是被公然运用的喜剧元素的深层意义，但在Tracy的这番话中，惊人地，男主本身甚至男主的被默认为具有作者立场属性的喜剧元素部分被质疑和反驳了。

之前认为有趣的是否还是真的有趣（或者是值得赞许），那每一个生活瞬间的不经意的一些习惯、动作和倾向所带来的趣味性都可以被这段话所包含的视角生生折断，这是一个在喜剧甚至包含喜剧元素的剧情戏里都很少见的一笔。

之前的铺陈了五集的喜剧式观点铺陈和晕染被第五集的一段话侵入，但也因此使得这部剧的视角和立场产生有趣的偏移：第五集临近结尾处这段诘问的出现直接挑明了第五集的功能性（然后再由此看下去，也会发现第六集和第七集也颇具功能性。

所以这是前四集和后三集是两位导演的原因之一吗）第五集是自诘：Adam是anti-hero型角色，但在观众已经习惯了他视角下的正义（包含了一些喜剧元素所赋予的）与其共情后，他依然值得拿来再审视和推敲的。

这是编剧（即原著作者）难得的清醒：你很痛苦也相当尽力，但你的一些性格和作为依然不具有正义立场。

但哪怕如此，这个角色也不会为自己再辩解或是悔过或是与同事争吵，在被质疑了专业性之后，他惊讶愤怒伤感无解地像只被逼迫至极限但喑哑了的困兽一样返回他的订婚派对。

他被质疑他身心受创但他不会也无法做出明显地顺应质疑的举动和表示，这便是这个角色的完整性和自我意志。

在这个短暂的对峙中，一层新的视角被架构进来对主角进行诘问但与此同时主角依然保有他所有的痛苦和瑕疵。

这两者被危险地短暂打碎之后又都被很好地强化及拓展了。

由此开来：某种被熟知和默认的喜剧形式（可以指那种用喜剧元素来作为糖衣包装并合理化现实和立场的类型）被编剧又否认了一遍并由此提醒观众：留意现实和喜剧元素之间的杂糅与共存，它们都是恰当且自然的事物，惨痛的压力不足于压制奋起的讥讽触角，悲凉的情绪也不会被少许的毒辣言辞冒犯，反之亦然。

口中的犀利玩笑言语即便博得观众一笑也不代表已为自己成功开脱，随时架构进来的他人视角依然在暗处静待。

这种为男主开脱的同时依然在批驳和质疑的力量，使得共情和间离同时存在。

我想这也是男主角色塑造的一个妙处：呈现出了这个人物身上的偏移常规之处和阴暗面的存在却不去定量前者的数值和后者的面积，让这个混乱又综合的个体在保有这份不完全光明的完整性的同时又时时刻刻在让人同步他的处境和情绪，至此我知道他的“正义”，也知道了我的“正义”。

喜剧元素的提取&显形&存在及其需要的条件之一（即男主本身的个性行为和定位）在这个剧里得到了从形式到内容上的紧密统一，它们几乎被同步认知到，同步发展，但也在同一瞬间被打破，然后各自强化拓宽继而再纠缠重组，非常有机，这个反应几乎就发生在第五集的这段话中。

第六集对私立医院的诘问是对整个医疗界观察和审视的拓宽，第七集是对NHS系统的诘问，这一集有奇怪的割裂之处，有一个值得理解但又与之前所有集数内核力量有所背离的力道：它利用了一个被持续观察和审视角色来说出作者最坚定的立场。

这并非完全不妥，在人物行为逻辑都可以算无误，但却抹杀了这个剧集之前在过失和立场上的犹疑和玩味。

此刻，这份魔力终究为了一封立场鲜明的给NHS的情书而稍稍褪色。

但除了这种观感上的一些问题以外，我没有丝毫立场来指责这份清晰且迫及的处理。

整部剧的细致构架和冷峻开拓以及最后这稍稍disenchanted的倾向，基本皆因编剧对喜剧元素和男主这相互促发和依存的两件套的处理而发展或者偏移，从这点上来说，这是很完备的利用了喜剧元素的剧集。

喜剧不仅仅是“喜剧”两字本身，它是对情绪的深入浸润和信息的高度提取，它是直面现实后眼神稍稍错开但不忘回击和揭示，是遮羞布、障眼法、诡辩术、解剖刀具和蒸馏器械等等的混合体，也许无需纠结于它会促发哪种类型的笑容和笑声或激起了哪些更复杂或者灰暗的情绪。

它甚至可以代表一切次生产品和促使次生产品产生的道具。

喜剧元素和男主除了相互促发和依存以外，两者之间更内在的融合是：作为某种性格的人类，如果他不进行此类模式的日常表达，那他可能都无法直视和承受人类和这个世界。

看采访的时候发现Adam Kay也坚定认为这是个comedy drama，只能深表赞同了orz.Part 2如果结合原作来看，会发现TV的主要内容大致对应的是日记最后导致他辞职的手术事故后的几个月。

尽管时间不一样、事故内容不一样、故事的走向也不一样，但能很明晰地感觉到作者真正想要探讨的问题。

原作中手术事故后那段时间的日子作者在心理和职业规划上经历了什么被寥寥几段带过，但依然能看出那段时间里作者所经历的痛苦：没有相应的支持系统来支撑他心理层面的溃败，他在职业上做出一些改变的尝试但最终依然选择了离开。

这也是为何TV中的故事是那么让人感到混乱和压力重重（不像很多观众期许的那样稍微轻松一些和更日常一些），因为那本就是作者职业生涯中最痛苦时刻的变体。

作者非常克制地在日记里描述了那段时间的经历，但这段经历大概日后在他的脑中不断翻滚，他肯定思考过“人为何放弃”&“医者为何放弃”以及“人为何继续”&“医者为何继续”这种看似完全相反但紧密相关的问题。

于是，他也想探讨另一种走向，为何得以继续，这不仅仅是作者自己命运的另一个支线，也是很多医疗从业者选择继续的心路。

至此，我理解了这为何是一封写给NHS的情书，Adam和Shruti的选择是一个群体复数选择的浓缩，也是Kay本人复杂心绪的投射。

作者本人是清醒的人类，这部TV作品是他的第二次付诸于媒介的思索（不知道他的脱口秀是怎样的），是自我审视后的自我延展，而不是将他的书简单复制粘贴。

自此，书和TV作为脱胎于同一个体经历的两个变体（我倾向于把书作为第一个变体）互相照应相互交织。

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。

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.

本老师出演电视剧甚少，但每次出演都必定活灵活现，这次的《疼痛难免》（This is Going to Hurt)也同样深得我心。

披着喜剧的外衣对人情冷暖和社会百态进行冷嘲热讽，这是英式喜剧一贯的传统。

这种幽默与国内喜剧的区别在于，前者大多乐于揭露其文化中的虚伪与不安，而后者往往热衷于表达小人物的小聪明所带来的优越感。

这也就是为什么这部喜剧的名字以疼痛为主题——笑料的背后，疼痛在所难免。

本老师扮演的主角亚当是一名妇产科低年资医生（相当于国内的规培医生），虽谈不上医术高明，但他总是竭尽所能救助病人，有时由于时间紧迫甚至无视规定和上级的意见，不穿手术服进行手术、带病人走员工通道、让看起来并无大碍的病人留院观察等等这些都是家茶便饭，只因他关心病人的健康安危胜过一切。

不过这样的善意并不总能带来好的结局，在公立医院里，严重短缺的医疗资源给医生造成了巨大压力，无休止的加班、微薄的薪水、奇葩的病人……在没有任何解压途径的情况下，毒舌成了每个医生的标配。

我很能理解这种语言的刻薄，因为我见过在高压的工作环境下同事之间以咆哮作为沟通方式的情况——没有人能在如此不堪的环境之下保持得体的谈吐。

冷嘲热讽的话语指向，可能并不是在对话场景中的人，而是造成这种场景的体制和压迫。

当一个人毫无反抗之力的时候，毒舌是唯一的武器。

否则的话，只能被击垮，要么全身而退，要么更极端一点，诚如Shruti的死。

她的死并非是编剧生硬的一时兴起，而更像是一面镜子、一种提醒。

她的处境其实与男主Adam有着诸多相似，只不过她的出身更为底层，面对父母望子成龙的厚望，她没有办法放弃（一个显然更为简单的选择）。

Adam本来是她事业上的贵人，在没有任何人愿意教她的时候给了她帮助，给她兜底。

然而后来的阴差阳错导致他们心生间隙，她不得不再次开始独自承受压力，直到当她被Adam怀疑是那个匿名投诉者的时候，她的内心终于被最后一根稻草压垮。

在那个时候，她没有愤怒、没有反唇相讥、甚至没有一丝难过，有的只是失望，还有失望带来的麻木。

她不断重复的一句话是，“He didn’t mean it.”（他不是有意的。

)她或许不是在为Adam辩解，而是在为自己辩解——“我不是像他说的那样没用。

”另一个我很喜欢的细节是她去超市买奶酪，被售货员认出是帮他家接生的医生，于是售货员偷偷告诉她要用更便宜的价格卖给她却被经理发现，她没等这出闹剧结束就径直离开了。

因为她无法拒绝这么卑微的善意，更无法直视这种善意的卑微。

在Shruti死后，精明如老狐狸的Consultant Doctor建议Adam把医疗事故甩锅给Shruti（尽管火上浇油过河拆桥的是他自己），Adam在听证会上犹豫再三没有照他说的做，但却讲了Shruti的故事向听证会说明他们初级医生所承受的压力和痛苦，最终他保住了自己的工作。

可是之后他却宁愿放弃这份工作来挽回前男友Harry，Harry拒绝了，告诉他“医生是你的天职。

”他为了工作牺牲了一切，而当他宁可牺牲工作的时候，却得不到曾经深爱的人理解。

于是他回到了之前的工作之中，情急之下在停车场接生，然后收到违停的罚单。

在人生道路上难免疼痛，但又能如何？

说来惭愧，我本来是有机会阅读原著的，但是我错过了……至于错过的原因，当然不能怪我。

要怪就怪出版商。

《绝对笑喷之弃业医生日志》——这个书名误导了我。

我是个十足肤浅的人。

所以很显然，这本书最初吸引我的点，就是“笑喷”两个字。

然而，当我从书架把书拿下来，随便翻过两页之后，觉得这本书并不好笑，于是我就把书放回去了，从此就再没看过。

大概是我当时过早的妄下定论，认为不论医生还是我，都不过是可怜的社畜。

既然大家都是社畜，工作压力都很大，好不容易歇一会儿，何不找点乐子？

谁要听那些医疗行业和医生日常生活的糟心事？

毕竟我实在不想被人吐苦水……直到本喵的剧版上线，我终于有机会静下心来，去理解这群医生的艰难处境。

就像我没能读进去原著一样，虽然这部剧也打上了“喜剧”的标签，但我看得入迷的理由，并不是因为它好笑。

当然，要说喜剧效果也并非没有。

如果以使人发笑，作为评判一部喜剧的标准，那么这部剧确实让我笑了……但这种笑既不是捧腹的大笑，也不是轻松的微笑，而是苦笑——就是那种深刻领会了对方的窘境但又无能为力，只好挤出一个极不自然极难看的笑容，想帮屏幕里的对方（也帮自己）缓解痛楚，然而并无卵用的——那种苦笑。

是啊，还能怎么办呢。

这群医生护士忙得白天黑夜连轴转，在人力紧缺，工作繁重的情况下，还要忍受病人和同事的指责抱怨。

他们基本没有私生活。

一个急诊电话就会毁掉他们的一场约会。

为了这份工作，他们疏远朋友，冷落亲人。

为了保住职位，他们还要忍受渣领导派发的加班任务，而领导自己却在吃香喝辣开豪车。

明明是整个医疗体制出了问题，但追责的时候，却只有一人来背锅。

一个投诉、差评，就能轻易断送一个医生的职业生涯。

作为一名医生的使命感，以及接生婴儿所带来的成就感，也在日复一日的重压中消磨殆尽。

更可怕的是，因为意外导致的手术失败，就像被本喵注定撞翻的那桶水一样总会到来。

面对生死的难题，医生还需要自己学会消化负面情绪。

否则，得个抑郁症，创伤后应激障碍什么的，都是家常便饭。

就像那位主任医生所说的，直到你退休，经手的死婴可能足够有一车那么多。

为了避免痛苦，他们也只好变得冷漠、麻木一些。

他们这一行确实太苦了，并且还会一直苦下去。

坚持下去固然伟大，坚持不下去，选择辞职走人，我也完全能够理解。

我发现，喜剧永远都是越新的越好笑。

而且你笑完之后，最好别去回味。

一旦我们回味喜剧，就会发现喜剧的残酷，正是因为这“发现”，使得我们顿生怜悯之心，也就不好意思再像之前那样，没心没肺的笑出声了……所以，喜剧一般只有在看第一遍的时候才是喜剧。

就像《疼痛难免》，它确实是一部非常出色的喜剧，是它让我明白，原来这世上有一种笑，叫苦笑。

但我也知道，我不会再来看第二遍了。

如果说看第一遍还有苦笑，那看第二遍恐怕就只有苦，没有笑了。

…最后，衷心祝愿伟大的医疗工作者们都能得到善待吧。

祝愿他们都能一腔热血的投入这个行业，不至于失望透顶的离开。

愿命运不负真心人。

疼痛难免 (2022)9.42022 / 英国 / 剧情 喜剧 同性 / 露西·福布斯 汤姆·金斯利 / 本·卫肖 安比卡·茂德

绝对笑喷之弃业医生日志8.6[英] 亚当·凯 / 2019 / 北京时代华文书局

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。

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……