今天李玮玲在facebook个人主页上说：“我不想给新加坡报业控股集团写稿了。因为编辑不允许言论自由。这恰好也是我写这篇文章的原因，李光耀并不喜欢搞个人崇拜。”
她的话引起新加坡国内及国际社会各界人士关注或回应。中国的新华社也有报道。
可能大家好奇，是一篇什么样的文章。让李玮玲公开表明自己的不满。我们从facebook摘录原文，并摘要翻译几段为中文。要了解整个讨论的，可以看后面的英文全文。言辞清晰，像一把手术刀，不仅令新加坡人，也可能令中国人不适。
李玮玲原文的中文翻译（节选）
李光耀如果在世，看到他过世一年后各种对他的英雄崇拜，估计自己都会觉得烦。
我父亲李光耀去世后的一个礼拜，新加坡人反应之强烈，新加坡人自己都觉得出乎意料（新加坡眼按：新加坡人一向偏情感自制，许多歌星在其他华人地区演唱都受到观众狂热的欢呼，但新加坡观众仍是安静看完全场），更不要说外国的观察家们。就算我作为他女儿，也为大众表现出对我父亲的强烈情感而震惊。
在那场大众的悼念中，我对我们自己的了解也有了一些新的看法，全世界其它国家的人民也对我们有了新的认识。
我们在悲痛的时刻汇聚到一起。我们耐心地等待暴风雨过后，跟这个国家的建国领袖最后的挥别——他的一生，为这个国家和国民殚精竭虑沤心呖血。
经过那些哀伤的人都还清楚地记得，不管雨多大，每个人都极其耐心，包括对身边其他人也表现出极大的包容和体谅。一位新加坡报业控股集团的记者把这个称为“奇迹”，我有同感。
我们因此对自己更加充满信心，也因此获得了其它国家的尊敬。作为李光耀的女儿，我为他一生的努力获得国人的如此认可，深感欣慰。
但是我也清楚，全国人民，包括我，必须好好面对失去李光耀后的生活。
过去一年里，新加坡的生活看起来已经回复正常。于我个人而言，当然情况有所不同。我没有在公众面前流露我的感情，并不意味着我内心不伤痛。
这种伤痛最近好多了，虽然并未完全复原。所以我拒绝对父亲周年祭公众活动发表评论。
但是，3月21号《海峡时报》头版文章，我却忍不住想说两句看法。文章用了一张图片：用4877个橡皮擦拼成了我爸爸的头像，两米三宽，三米一高。题为：我们的建国父亲、我们的国家，我们的旗帜。
这是110个从17岁到35岁的新加坡人用带国旗的橡皮拼成。
这出自善良的好意的行为，却让我有点难以接受。
这张照片让我们想起1976年，我父亲第一次带我去中国。
那时正值文化大革命尾声，我记忆犹新，孩子们在街上列队齐声高喊迎接我们代表团：“欢迎欢迎，热烈欢迎。”
这些精心的安排并不让我父亲觉得多impressed（译者按：水平有限，这儿译者不翻）。我们是新加坡人，不太习惯比较激烈的不自然的情感表达。
爸爸那时基本没有像在新加坡那样向孩子们挥手致意，我也没有挥手。我直直看着正前方，心里想，“中央之国”的人民仍然像生活在一个过去的国度里。
中方的主人意识到我们的反应。新方代表团既不像（后辈）返乡祭拜祖乡也不像是一个弹丸小国的代表。
我们代表团告别时，在大陆到香港的边界时，对方的官员对李光炯说了一句:你们的总理是一个tough（译者按：此处不准确地可以大概译成严厉）的人。别人用盛大的排场和铺张的好意都没法软（同）化我们。我们在跟中方打交道时，一直是以新加坡人这个主体身份。
我知道用橡皮勾勒出爸爸的肖像是一种致敬。但是，为了准备这样的“纪念”，要耗费多少时间、精力、资源，用来造福新加坡和国人岂不更好。
就算爸爸去年才去世时，许多人仍沉浸在忧伤中时，我仍然觉得有多大必要来隆重地纪念。我比较一其他国家两个受自己人民爱戴的两个领袖的情况。1976年9月9号毛泽东去世，全国震惊。他作为已经被敬上神坛的领袖，也让人民虑及他死后国家往何处去的忧虑。江青及四人帮，及毛的指定接班人华国锋的两边角力，让全国许多人都暗自担心。毛泽东过世后不到一个月，四人帮被抓了。四人帮被抓后两天，最高喉舌指示建设毛主席纪念堂。1976年11月24号，天安门广场人民英雄纪念碑南侧的纪念堂奠基，工程进度日以继夜。
……
而丘吉尔葬礼的周年祭其实已经是他1965年1月30号真正葬礼的五十年后。
……
（译者注：不翻了，你们自己去看。翻译多了累，何况搞不好还被被删。如果大家觉得真有必要翻译全文，可以点赞。超过五十个赞我们就翻。）
我们需要牢记历史。但是为新加坡和人民的福祉好好工作，也许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.