如果没有所谓的结束呢?(下)
日期:2022-01-13 10:30

(单词翻译:单击)

tQ[x[^Jn_0j1e8bM=K]Zzc7AS81u)

中英文本

idPvNY04FZ

Each situation created a sensation of limbo for family members, a lingering sense of grief over losses whose nature was uncertain.

YZ9&[U!BMH]ZOsxVs@Kw

每一种情况都会给家庭成员带来一种不确定的感觉,一种因失去亲人而产生的挥之不去的悲痛感,这种失去的性质尚不确定YEI9#7b1i5U2AZB)Zu=

Y2vsZFvlkp

Sometimes, as in the case of a death accompanied by a body and a certificate, the scope of loss is relatively clear.

1y&]0NtVbkBZM)B=R3rR

有时,如死亡时附有尸体和证明,失去的范围相对明确c5^KWc+X^SKKc0

t490JEu%#u%hgWq%63

But in the cases Boss studied, losses lacked such authoritative certainty.

pEV_tc*2efS=IW5RlI36

但在波斯研究的案例中,失去缺乏这种权威确定性|g#;z*RAnw_dcn9MA

w[JNM[xS+s;x5

There were often no bodies, and thus no rituals for mourning.

!gX@v_BqBev9z+bFlHw

通常没有尸体,因此也没有悼念仪式x1[J+NuMe-Z

a.WIRP]P4=F%ciNHb6(

Rather than being tied to a specific event, these losses frequently extended over many years, deepening each day in ways that grievers could not register.

kjVUc&fyuLkFK|4i

这些失去并没有与某一特定事件联系在一起,而是经常延续多年,每天都在以悲痛者无法记录的方式加深MVEwS+jpuHWnV

-*P)sA2L4JW0xotQ

Could such experiences even be considered losses?

4#&jhh^BWw

这样的经历能被认定是失去吗?

ZO.UBPJ#6Lv0a8

Boss, observing how families spoke about their missing relatives, coined a term to define the unclear — and often unacknowledged — absences in their lives: “ambiguous loss.”

IwMewQ;j)fAU

波斯观察了家人如何谈论他们失踪的亲人,他创造了一个词来定义他们生活中不明确的——而且往往是不被承认的——缺席:“模糊的失去”K#B1;(2*x-A@HPWm-p;

d75_V5McUc|ZYr()z

Over the next several decades, Boss studied and provided therapy to the family members of Alzheimer’s patients, as well as the relatives of people whose bodies were never recovered after natural disasters, or in the collapse of the original World Trade Center on 9/11.

x^TLipJCfY

在接下来的几十年里,波斯研究并治疗了阿尔茨海默氏症患者的家属,以及那些在自然灾害或9/11世贸中心原建筑倒塌后尸体再也没有找到的人的亲属VQs=|XDT1eIL,.

[v7;A.SFL^fY!=C0#rI[

Theirs were losses without “conclusion,” in the traditional sense of the term, an experience of paradox — a simultaneous absence and presence — that eluded resolution.

uKrM[[67P,|25+B4M;

他们的失去没有“定论”,按照传统意义上的说法,是一种矛盾的体验——同时缺席和存在——无法得到解决=*N@kIj46)Zs#6qi

xdtf9&o]e*@+htk%

Can you mourn someone whose body is present, even if the mind isn’t? Or whose death is unconfirmed?

b)q~*m!]gj=@

你能为一个身体存在而精神不在的人哀悼吗? 或者为没有被确认死亡的人哀悼吗?

Kgu-vC!Uu=Hd

Can you grieve a foreclosed future?

YGaJ~ly72mt#eJ40skU

你会为丧失赎回权的未来感到悲伤吗?

OP-8wOBscOh]brA]

The concept, Boss maintains, is inclusive, encompassing a range of moderate to severe losses that we might not perceive as such.

),Obryq]CzjWa#rZ

波斯认为,这个概念是包容性的,包括了一系列我们可能没有意识到的中度至严重的失去|LX+ohMpwb[uaDq;80

zcs[EEFWvR5&IRVHm*

It can take many forms, often quotidian:an alcoholic parent who, when inebriated, becomes a different person;

UdZdN.)X@hDGQQ(Hat4

失去可以有很多种形式,通常是司空见惯的:一个喝醉后完全变了个人的父亲或母亲;

ZU]LiIm~%aOFnuS[tIO

a divorced partner, with whom your relationship is ruptured but not erased; a loved one with whom you’ve lost contact through immigration; or a child you’ve given up for adoption.

~9TwYH-)];W

一个离婚的伴侣,你们的关系虽然破裂了,但还无法抹去; 一个因移民而失去联系的爱人; 或者一个被你送去领养的孩子QtlVi2538uk(

ROh[dEQ,OkE_Pc#,V

These experiences are an accumulation of heartbreaks that we cannot always recognize.

bBG%(ls@akZ*[x

这些经历是一次次心碎的累积,而我们并不总是能意识到^Mka#*zf,qK9#

9nON+Nie8a#k+@=

Freudian notions of grieving have taught us that mourning is a process leading to detachment — a sort of closure.

-x(Zm086jr^8i

弗洛伊德关于悲伤的观点告诉我们,哀悼是一个导致超脱的过程——一种结束7[1pGuKiMMmPTR[I,Wa

IqFd-z~cO*my

Boss finds this model misleading, perilously bound up in the way Americans conceptualize themselves.

gh4IbBw[XF,

波斯发现这种模式与美国人对自己进行概念化的方式误导地、危险地联系在一起&-7la6LUevMk

ZqO&I&v)sI#@p=xdh^

In a new book published this month, “The Myth of Closure: Ambiguous Loss in a Time of Pandemic and Change,” she writes that the United States is a place that privileges narratives of self-sufficiency and rationality.

y3p|e~s6E*4n

在本月出版的新书《终结的神话:疫情和变革时期模糊的失去》(The Myth of Closure: Ambiguous Loss In a Time of Pandemic and Change)中,她写道,美国是一个崇尚自我满足和理性叙事的地方MJ#|a3JWpew|6

t]z]Y^!8uK)TFm*X

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s linear “five stages of grief” model — which implies that if we work hard enough and follow certain steps, we’ll be able to get over our losses within a reasonable timeline — remains a popular mode of thinking.

9bbx9peAuSo

伊丽莎白·库布勒-罗斯的线性“悲伤的五个阶段”模型仍然是一种流行的思维模式-!6eN.k)0qB%E&wZ0.o_。该模型暗示,如果我们足够努力并遵循一定的步骤,我们将能够在合理的时间线内克服失去z=GckUIg~DbHIpaIK1R[

|]!*rTMcAUG2Jg

But Boss argues that many losses do not follow such models, and our reliance on them does not equip us to cope.

&4k=cw7KEwY=~wj

但波斯认为,许多失去并没有遵循这样的模式,我们对这些模式的依赖并不能使我们有能力应对Cvn(ax(zp%)kq2

2JW!3*oLdz0Yz!Psb;gDR#Q9Dd0o(X6l;kN0h%M(Oj|8w
分享到