“The sluice(水闸) gates of mediocrity opened. Before long the audience were up to their beaks in it(深陷其中), like chickens in a flash flood.” The Daily Mail’s verdict(评价，裁决) on a recent speech by Lucy Powell, Britain’s education secretary, was not kind. Nor was the Times’s on Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, who “looked and sounded, as he always does, like a smiley rural GP doling out(分发，施舍) cod-liver oil(鱼肝油，英国传统补品) to old ladies” during his party-conference speech in September.
“平庸的泄洪闸门打开了。没过多久，听众就深陷其中，像遭遇山洪的鸡群。”这是《每日邮报》对英国教育大臣露西·鲍威尔最近一次演讲的评价，毫不客气。《泰晤士报》对自由民主党领袖埃德·戴维爵士的评论同样不留情面：在九月的党内会议上，他“看上去、听上去都一如既往，像个笑眯眯的乡村全科医生，在给老太太们分发鱼肝油”。
Both got off lightly(被从轻发落) compared with the Conservatives’ shadow chancellor(影子财政大臣). “Even 20 minutes of Andrew Griffith can rip your soul in half,” the Guardian wrote in October. “Griffith proceeded to give the worst speech ever heard. Not just in content but in delivery. It was like watching a less sentient(有知觉的) version of the PG Tips monkey(PG Tips茶广告中的猴子).”
与保守党影子财政大臣相比，这两人还算被口下留情了。《卫报》十月写道：“安德鲁·格里菲斯哪怕只讲20分钟，也能把你的灵魂撕成两半。”“格里菲斯接着发表了有史以来最糟糕的演讲。不仅内容糟糕，表达也糟糕。那感觉就像在看一个智商更低的PG Tips猴子。”
Such indelicate(粗鲁的，不雅的) sentiments are common on social media, but in most countries they rarely grace(使增光，装饰) the pages of mainstream newspapers. On Fleet Street(舰队街，英国报业代称), however, they are positively encouraged(受到积极鼓励). For that you can thank the ancient, still-thriving art of the British parliamentary sketch(议会速写).
这类粗鲁的言论在社交媒体上很常见，但在大多数国家，它们很少登上主流报纸的版面。然而在舰队街，它们却受到积极鼓励。这要归功于英国议会速写这门古老而依然兴盛的艺术。
