今天李玮玲在facebook個人主頁上說：“我不想給新加坡報業控股集團寫稿了。因爲編輯不允許言論自由。這恰好也是我寫這篇文章的原因，李光耀並不喜歡搞個人崇拜。”
她的話引起新加坡國內及國際社會各界人士關注或回應。中國的新華社也有報道。
可能大家好奇，是一篇什麽樣的文章。讓李玮玲公開表明自己的不滿。我們從facebook摘錄原文，並摘要翻譯幾段爲中文。要了解整個討論的，可以看後面的英文全文。言辭清晰，像一把手術刀，不僅令新加坡人，也可能令中國人不適。
李玮玲原文的中文翻譯（節選）
李光耀如果在世，看到他過世一年後各種對他的英雄崇拜，估計自己都會覺得煩。
我父親李光耀去世後的一個禮拜，新加坡人反應之強烈，新加坡人自己都覺得出乎意料（新加坡眼按：新加坡人一向偏情感自制，許多歌星在其他華人地區演唱都受到觀衆狂熱的歡呼，但新加坡觀衆仍是安靜看完全場），更不要說外國的觀察家們。就算我作爲他女兒，也爲大衆表現出對我父親的強烈情感而震驚。
在那場大衆的悼念中，我對我們自己的了解也有了一些新的看法，全世界其它國家的人民也對我們有了新的認識。
我們在悲痛的時刻彙聚到一起。我們耐心地等待暴風雨過後，跟這個國家的建國領袖最後的揮別——他的一生，爲這個國家和國民殚精竭慮漚心呖血。
經過那些哀傷的人都還清楚地記得，不管雨多大，每個人都極其耐心，包括對身邊其他人也表現出極大的包容和體諒。一位新加坡報業控股集團的記者把這個稱爲“奇迹”，我有同感。
我們因此對自己更加充滿信心，也因此獲得了其它國家的尊敬。作爲李光耀的女兒，我爲他一生的努力獲得國人的如此認可，深感欣慰。
但是我也清楚，全國人民，包括我，必須好好面對失去李光耀後的生活。
過去一年裏，新加坡的生活看起來已經回複正常。于我個人而言，當然情況有所不同。我沒有在公衆面前流露我的感情，並不意味著我內心不傷痛。
這種傷痛最近好多了，雖然並未完全複原。所以我拒絕對父親周年祭公衆活動發表評論。
但是，3月21號《海峽時報》頭版文章，我卻忍不住想說兩句看法。文章用了一張圖片：用4877個橡皮擦拼成了我爸爸的頭像，兩米三寬，三米一高。題爲：我們的建國父親、我們的國家，我們的旗幟。
這是110個從17歲到35歲的新加坡人用帶國旗的橡皮拼成。
這出自善良的好意的行爲，卻讓我有點難以接受。
這張照片讓我們想起1976年，我父親第一次帶我去中國。
那時正值文化大革命尾聲，我記憶猶新，孩子們在街上列隊齊聲高喊迎接我們代表團：“歡迎歡迎，熱烈歡迎。”
這些精心的安排並不讓我父親覺得多impressed（譯者按：水平有限，這兒譯者不翻）。我們是新加坡人，不太習慣比較激烈的不自然的情感表達。
爸爸那時基本沒有像在新加坡那樣向孩子們揮手致意，我也沒有揮手。我直直看著正前方，心裏想，“中央之國”的人民仍然像生活在一個過去的國度裏。
中方的主人意識到我們的反應。新方代表團既不像（後輩）返鄉祭拜祖鄉也不像是一個彈丸小國的代表。
我們代表團告別時，在大陸到香港的邊界時，對方的官員對李光炯說了一句:你們的總理是一個tough（譯者按：此處不准確地可以大概譯成嚴厲）的人。別人用盛大的排場和鋪張的好意都沒法軟（同）化我們。我們在跟中方打交道時，一直是以新加坡人這個主體身份。
我知道用橡皮勾勒出爸爸的肖像是一種致敬。但是，爲了准備這樣的“紀念”，要耗費多少時間、精力、資源，用來造福新加坡和國人豈不更好。
就算爸爸去年才去世時，許多人仍沉浸在憂傷中時，我仍然覺得有多大必要來隆重地紀念。我比較一其他國家兩個受自己人民愛戴的兩個領袖的情況。1976年9月9號毛澤東去世，全國震驚。他作爲已經被敬上神壇的領袖，也讓人民慮及他死後國家往何處去的憂慮。江青及四人幫，及毛的指定接班人華國鋒的兩邊角力，讓全國許多人都暗自擔心。毛澤東過世後不到一個月，四人幫被抓了。四人幫被抓後兩天，最高喉舌指示建設毛主席紀念堂。1976年11月24號，天安門廣場人民英雄紀念碑南側的紀念堂奠基，工程進度日以繼夜。
……
而丘吉爾葬禮的周年祭其實已經是他1965年1月30號真正葬禮的五十年後。
……
（譯者注：不翻了，你們自己去看。翻譯多了累，何況搞不好還被被刪。如果大家覺得真有必要翻譯全文，可以點贊。超過五十個贊我們就翻。）
我們需要牢記曆史。但是爲新加坡和人民的福祉好好工作，也許是向李光耀最好的致敬方式。
李玮玲英文原文
Lee Kuan Yew would have cringed at the hero worship just one year after his death
The response of Singaporeans during the seven days of national mourning when my father, Lee Kuan Yew, died last March was unanticipated – even by Singaporeans themselves, not to mention foreign observers. As his daughter, I too was astounded by the intensity of Singaporeans’ feelings towards my father.
In that collective mourning, we learnt something new about ourselves; and the rest of the world also learnt something new about us.
We came together in a moment of sorrow. We waited patiently under harsh weather conditions to bid farewell to a man who had been the leader of the nation’s founding fathers – one who had given his deepest thoughts and all his exertions towards taking forward the welfare of his countrymen.
Those who mourned remembered this. Despite stressful weather conditions, everyone was patient, tolerant, even positively kind and generous to each other. One SPH reporter described it as a miracle. I thought the same.
The lesson we learnt about ourselves gave us self-confidence and gained us the respect of other countries. As Lee Kuan Yew’s daughter, I found tremendous comfort to know that my father’s efforts were recognized by Singaporeans.
But I also knew that my fellow Singaporeans and I must now prepare for life after Lee Kuan Yew.
Life seemed to return to normal for Singapore over the past year. Personally, it was a different story for me. That I don’t express my emotion in public does not mean I am not hurting inside. The wound has only recently healed, and not even completely. So I declined to comment for publications marking the first anniversary of my father’s death.
What made me write this article was a front page report in The Straits Times (Mar 21). It carried a photo of an outline of Papa’s face made with 4,877 erasers that form an installation which is 2.3 m wide and 3.1 m tall, titled Our Father, Our Country, Our Flag.
That was the work of 110 Singaporeans aged 17 to 35 using erasers with the Singapore flag on it.
It was a well-meaning effort but it made me wince. Here is why:
The photo brought back memories of my first visit to China with my father in 1976.
It was the end of the Cultural Revolution and I have vivid memories of our delegation being greeted by young children lining the streets chanting loudly: “WELCOME, WELCOME, A VERY WARM WELCOME.”
It was very contrived and my father was not impressed. We are Singaporeans, not prone to excessive, unnatural displays of emotion.
Papa merely waved at the children, as he would have done in Singapore. I refused to even do that. I stared straight ahead, feeling very sad for the people of the “Middle Kingdom” that was still run like a kingdom.
Our Chinese hosts noticed our responses. The Singapore delegation did not come as though we were returning to our ancestral country, nor as representatives of a vessel state. When we bade the PRC delegation farewell at the China Hong Kong boundary, the PRC chief protocol officer said to Lee Khoon Choy, “Your PM is a tough man.” We didn’t think he meant only physically tough. They could not melt us with their over exuberant display of goodwill. We continued to behave as Singaporeans as opposed to PRC Chinese.
I acknowledge the outline of Papa’s face made with erasers as a sincere gesture. But in looking at acts of commemoration in general, I would ask how the time, effort and resources used to prepare these would benefit Singapore and Singaporeans.
I also question the need for a commemoration so soon after Papa deaths, when last year’s event still hang heavy on the hearts and minds of some people. Allow me to compare how two other world leaders who were adored or apparently adored were commemorated by their government and/or people. Firstly when Chairman Mao died on 9 September 1976, the country was in shock. This was partly the result of the keenly felt loss of a semi-divine leader, but also caused by the enormous uncertainty about what the future held in stock for China and its people. The power struggle between Jiang Qing and the Gang of Four on the one hand, and Mao’s designated successor Hua Guofeng on the other, which had been smoldering for some time caused grave anxiety for many people in China. However, on 6 October 1976, within a month after Mao’s death, Hua had the Gang of Four arrested. Two days after the arrest of the Gang, the highest organs of the party and the state decided that a Memorial Hall would be built as a permanent tribute to the founder of the People’s Republic. On 24 November 1976, the foundation stone for the gigantic building, located to the south of the Monument to the People’s Heroes on Tiananmen Square was put in place. The construction went on day and night, and the building was finished on 29 August 1977. On that same day, Mao’s body, which had been embalmed and placed in a crystal sarcophagus, was moved to the Hall. On 9 September 1977, a ceremony was held to commemorate the anniversary of Mao’s death and the completion of the Hall.
The anniversary of the funeral of Winston Churchill took place 50 years after the actual funeral on 30 January 1965, which brought the capital to a standstill and took place a week after his death aged 90 on 24 January, is being marked by scores of events, including a service and wreath laying at the Houses of Parliament, a memorial service at Westminster Abbey, and the rebroadcast by BBC Parliament of the original live coverage. In a tribute to his most famous predecessor, the prime minister, David Cameron, said: “Half a century after his death, Winston Churchill’s legacy continues to inspire not only the nation whose liberty he saved, but the entire world. His words and his actions reverberate through our national life today.”
Compare the actual time from death to the first commemoration, and the different activities involved in the commemoration in the twi leaders above. Which one would Papa wish commemoration to resemble. Also bear in mind, that unlike almost all leaders, Papa was dead set against a personality cult and any hint of cronyism. If he was forced to choose one form of commemoration, Papa would have objected the less if the commemoration resembled that held for Winston Churchill. Do note that Churchill unlike Papa cherished glory and a place in the history of his county. Compare what Churchill’s commemoration which was conducted 50 years after his death with the activities that have been taking place in Singapore that will continue for an entire week. I think Papa would have objected if he were able to convey his view.
Perhaps we should allow some space for sentiment for those who feel last year’s events that took place immediately after Papa’s death were not enough to honour Papa.
Papa’s focus never wavered. What he did was all for the welfare of the nation and its people. Yes, it is good that we remember history. But it would be even better if we honour Lee Kuan Yew by working for the well-being of Singapore and Singaporeans.
Any veneration could have the opposite effect and lead future generations of Singaporeans to think that my father’s actions were motivated by his desire for fame, or creation of a dynasty. He strove hard and determinedly in life to advance Singapore, and not for his place in history, or leaving a great legacy. He is a rare politician and leader, who did what he had to do with no thought to any gain for himself.