師任堂的英文討論留言版 - 韓劇

師任堂劇迷之海內外觀眾的反應都大同小異！哈哈！


資料來源：
https://forums.soompi.com/en/topic/343734-current-drama-2017-saimdang-lights-d
iary- - - -lee-young-ae-song-seung-hun/

討論韓劇 師任堂：光的日記 之留言版英文網站，摘錄幾則心得如下：

1、哈哈哈。我全家也是。我們如此希望有一點點徐智允和現代李謙的機會。但是看來並
非如此。嘆息。

2丶對！他們告訴我，對於徐智允一家團圓（先生未死而返家）無感，而對於李謙和師任
堂的對手戲而大哭。

3丶我應該聽你們的話對於海外版有信心的，就不會對於看韓版26集而悲傷了。

4丶無論收視率或是政治僵局如何，我們應該對於我們觀眾自己有信心，這劇真地給我們
享受丶娛樂和我們在此留言區大量的討論。

5丶這集結束，我對於此劇的愛並不因收視率表現而增加或減少，而是此劇如何吸引我及
引我入戲。李英愛在本片開始播出的訪談影片之一中，曾提到這片若有感動到一些觀眾，
就比收視率更有意義了。

6丶國際面上的好消息：Youtube印尼字幕版的師任堂瀏覽量，約每集15萬次，馬來西亞字
幕版師任堂韓版27集-海外版28集的影片張貼後幾小時內，有3000多瀏覧量。根據google
分析，我部落格張貼師任堂的網頁已達到9350瀏覧網頁量，過去七天有1288，大部分訪客
來自新加坡丶美國和澳洲。 所以別在意韓國收視率的差勁表現，在亞洲丶美國丶澳洲，
韓劇師任堂是受歡迎的！
（我自行註解：當然是就海外當地少數的平常在收看韓劇觀眾基礎而言）

7丶時間穿越的科普解說，請自行去網頁看英文...



Hahaha. My whole household too. We are so hoping for the slightest chance of S
JY and the modern Lee Gyeom. But it doesn't look that way now. Sigh.

Exactly! They told me that didn't have any emotion about the reunion and they
cried so hard about LG and SID's scenes :D

Posted 21 hours ago
On 2017/4/28 at 10:22 AM, liddi said:
I really should have listened to you and your faith in the international, shou
ldn't I, and saved myself some grief after SBS' Ep26



On 2017/4/28 at 11:15 AM, gerrytan8063 said:
No matter whatever the ratings were or the influences of political stalemate w
as at play......we will have to trust with our own viewership that this drama
indeed did provide us with enjoyment & entertainment & the comprehensive discu
ssion we had on the thread

At the end of the day, my love for the drama is not diminished or augmented b
y ratings... but rather how it appeals to me and draws me in



“More Meaningful Than The Ratings” - This Is What Lee Young Ae wishes For “
Saimdang” (Part 7/7)

Some good news on the international front:

(1) If you search YouTube (Khanzaa Clariss channel) for the Indo subbed episod
es of SLD, you'll see that the drama averages more than 150,000 views per epis
ode.

The Malay subbed video of Ep. 28 (SBS Ep 27) gained more than 3,000 views in j
ust several hours after the video was posted.

(2) According to Google Analytics, my Blogger blog post on SLD has now reached
more than 9.350 page views. For the past seven days, the blog post has had 1,
288 page views. Most of the visitors have come from Singapore and the USA, wit
h Australia coming in 3rd.

So never mind the poor Korean ratings. SLD is popular in Asia, Australia, and
the USA.








Posted 14 hours ago
On 2017/4/30 at 0:42 AM, liddi said:
Looking at what we know so far, the lines between past and present are blurred
, and it appears that two elements are at play here. The first is the time par
adox in the form of a causal loop - a future event being a cause of a past eve
nt, which in turn is the cause of that future event. Take for example SJY's di
scovery of the John Donne poem, which she copies and realises to be her penman
ship. Then in the time warp, she gives, not the original, but the copy to Saim
dang, who would in turn give it to Gyeom alongside the Soojinbang Diary, to be
brought to Italy, and discovered by SJY in the future.



This reminds me of the concept in physics known as “arrow of time” or what N
obel Prize-winning physicist Stephen Hawking referred to as the “psychologica
l arrow of time.” Hawking asked, “Why can we remember the past but not the f
uture?”

According to Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity, there’s no diff
erence between the past and the future.

(1) From “The Arrow of Time feat. Sean Carroll, physicist at California Insti
tute of Technology”

"There is no intrinsic difference between the past and the future in the laws
of physics."



(2) From ”Why Doesn't Time Flow Backwards? (Big Picture Ep. 1/5)”

"But there's no distinction between forwards and backwards in time. The past a
nd future are on equal footing as far as the microscopic laws of physics are c
oncerned."



(3) From “Arrow of time: New understanding of causality, free choice, and why
we remember the past but not the future”:

The idea that our choices at present can influence events in the future but no
t in the past is reflected in the rules of standard quantum theory as a princi
ple that quantum theorists call "causality."


(4) From “Why does time pass?” (The Economist)

“The equations of physics suggest time should be able to go backwards as well
as forwards. Experience suggests, though, that it cannot. Why? And is time tr
avel really possible?”

At the 7:57 mark, Dr. Sean Caroll, physicist at California Institute of Techno
logy, discusses if time travel is possible.



--