雅皮士又回来了吗 Tell Tale Signs of the Modern Day Yuppie

Of all the family-newspaper-appropriate socioeconomic slurs, one that was ubiquitous in the 1980s and ’90s is slowly on its way out in this millennium: yuppie.

在所有适于刊登在家庭小报上的特殊社会经济学称谓当中，有一个曾风靡于二十世纪八九十年代的词在进入了二十一世纪之后逐渐没落了，那就是“雅皮士”(yuppie)。

This moderately derogatory term for young urban professionals, or young upwardly mobile professionals (given more kick with the addendum of “scum”), is believed to have first appeared in print in a 1980 Chicago magazine article by Dan Rottenberg, though he does not take credit for coining it. A Google Ngram search reveals that the word’s usage in books began ascending steeply in 1983 and reached its apex a decade later.

这个略带贬义的词曾被用于那些年轻的都市职业人，或那些年轻的还在往上爬的职业人（考虑到后面带个“渣”字会更带劲）。据人们通常的看法，这个词首次出现在1980年芝加哥的一本杂志中，用于丹·罗登伯格(Dan Rottenberg)的一篇文章里，虽然他并不承认自己生造了这样一个词。而谷歌的Ngram搜索显示，这个词在书籍中的使用频率从1983年起急剧上升，并在10年后达到了顶峰。

It’s no surprise that the yuppie flourished after the gloomy ’70s had yielded to easy money in the stock market (until 1987, at least) for postcollegiate brokers and boomers eager to invest after their youthful fling with the counterculture. Television and movies amply reflected the proliferating demographic. The yuppie apotheosis on the small screen was “Thirtysomething” and “Seinfeld”; in the multiplex, there were too many to mention, but “The Big Chill” and “When Harry Met Sally” would be a good start, and, on the darker side, Michael Douglas’s 1987 filmography (“Wall Street” and “Fatal Attraction”).

雅皮士的兴起不足为奇，在此之前，昏天黑地的70年代早已屈服于股市中唾手可得的金钱（直到1987年，至少），因为那些曾在大学宣扬反主流文化的华尔街经纪人与婴儿潮一代人毕业之后都热衷于投资。那时候，有许多影视作品都充分反映了这个人数越来越多的群体。在小屏幕上，关于雅皮士的经典之作包括《三十而立》(Thirtysomething)和《宋飞正传》(Seinfeld)；而在大荧幕上则数不胜数，但是《七个毕业生》(The Big Chill)和《当哈利碰上莎莉》(When Harry Met Sally)是不错的开始，主题比较黑暗的则有迈克尔·道格拉斯(Michael Douglas)的1987年影片集锦（例如《华尔街》[Wall Street]与《致命的诱惑》[Fatal Attraction]）。

We have plenty of equivalents today, such as “This Is 40” (and nearly every other romantic comedy) and TV’s “Togetherness” and the recently departed “Parenthood” and “How I Met Your Mother” (and most other dramedies and sitcoms). Their organic-buying, gym-going, homeowning characters, however, aren’t tagged as yuppies as readily as those from the previous era were. It’s not because they aren’t from the narcissistic upper middle class; they certainly are. But they look different now.

如今，我们可以看到更多这样的作品，例如《四十而惑》(This Is 40)（和其他的几乎每部爱情喜剧片），还有电视《患难与共》(Togetherness)，以及近几年出品的《为人父母》(Parenthood)与《老爸老妈的浪漫史》(How I Met Your Mother)（和其他大部分的电视小品与情景喜剧）。但如今电影电视中的这些买有机食品、上健身房、居有其屋的主人公们，并没有像以前那样被贴上雅皮士的标签。这倒不是因为他们已经不属于自我陶醉的中上阶层了；他们肯定还是中上阶层。但现在他们看起来已经大不相同了。

The yuppie has shifted from standing on the prow of his yacht in an attitude of rapaciously aspirational entitlement to a defensive crouch of financial and existential insecurity. This instability has fragmented the yuppie’s previously coherent identity into a number of personae, each of which can trace its lineage to its ’80s paterfamilias.

雅皮士的形象已经发生了变化，从曾经野心勃勃地站在游艇前端的姿态，变成了如今为财务与存在的不安感觉而采取了防御式蹲伏的姿态。这种不稳定性已经把雅皮士曾经一致的身份拆成了多个不同的面貌，而每种面貌都能回溯到那个80年代的源头。

Collectively, these microyuppies are just as strong in their ranks as their progenitors, if not more so. Three decades ago, the yuppie was viewed as a self-interested alien invader in an America that had experienced a solid 20 years of radical activism and meaningful progress in civil rights and women’s liberation. A generation and a half later, we have so deeply internalized the values of the yuppie that we have ceased to notice when one is in our midst — or when we have become one ourselves.

这些微雅皮们即便在等级上不能超过前人，但集中起来也几乎一样强大。三十前，雅皮士被视为一群入侵了美国的外来利己主义者，当时的美国已经历了整整20年的激进主义、在公民权利与女性自由方面都取得了实质性的进展。在经过了不到两代人的时间之后，我们已将雅皮士的价值深深地融入了我们的内在精神，以至于我们已察觉不到身边的雅皮士了——或察觉不到我们自己变成了雅皮士。

(This generalization about those with ample economic and social capital doesn’t factor in, of course, the massive swath of Americans who lack the opportunity to become yuppies in the first place.)

（这项对掌握着充足经济与社会资本的人的概括并不包括许许多多一开始就没有机会变成雅皮士的美国人。）

The film critic Dominic Corry of The New Zealand Herald has described a genre of ’80s and ’90s films as “yuppies in peril” movies, and, since their affluent protagonists lack any real-world problems, their improbable crises revolve around murder and a preponderance of stalking. While Hollywood still likes a good crazed villain making life miserable for an upstanding protagonist, a fictional yuppie hero nowadays is more likely to be plagued by a layoff or the crash of his mutual fund.

《新西兰先驱报》的电影评论家多米尼克·科里(Dominic Corry)将八、九年代的一类电影描述为“岌岌可危的雅皮士”电影，而且，由于这类电影中养尊处优的主人公人们都不会有什么现实生活中的问题，他们那些不太真实的危机都围绕着谋杀和绝大多数的跟踪情节展开。虽然好莱坞现在仍然喜欢让肆意张狂的恶棍为了某个正直的主人公而落得悲惨下场，但一位虚构的雅皮士英雄如今更有可能因为下岗或共同基金的一笔现金而痛苦不堪。

And that may be the starkest difference. Unbridled acquisitiveness was the central trait of the ’80s yuppie; the dread of losing one’s property and dropping down a tax bracket may define the contemporary one. Fiercely protecting one’s existing money seems less gauche than plotting ways to grab more, even if it’s just a circumstantial response. But we have fooled ourselves into thinking we aren’t as money-oriented as the ’80s yuppie by scapegoating a perennially convenient villain: bankers. Placing all the blame for the 2008 financial crisis on this easily scorned group allows us to overlook our own overreaching transactions.

可能那就是最大的不同之处吧。八十年代雅皮士的一个重要特质就是他们肆意的占有欲；而定义当代雅皮士的一个重要特质，可能是他们对失去财产以及降低纳税等级的恐惧。相比不择手段地攫取财富，保护自己现有的财产则显得不那么突兀，即便这只是一种舍近求远的应对方式。不过，我们一直在自欺欺人，认为自己并不是八十年代那些崇尚拜金主义的雅皮士，而把这个黑锅推给了一个永远可以随意指责的恶人：银行家。把2008年金融危机的责任推给这样一个很容易指责的群体让我们可以忽略自己的僭越之过。

If slicked-back, bespoke, Reaganite Wall Street was regarded as the economy’s savior after the ’70s, the correlation now, after George W. Bush, the financial crisis and years of the global war on terrorism, would be Barack Obama’s Silicon Valley, whose digital gold rush beckons creative young minds with bedhead under hoodies.

如果人人梳着大背头、衣着光鲜得体的里根式华尔街被看成了七十年代后的经济救世主，那么在经过了乔治·W·布什、金融危机与多年的全球反恐战争之后，如今能与之对应的则是贝拉克·奥巴马(Barack Obama)治下的硅谷，那里的数码淘金热正在召唤着那些充满了创意想法、常常穿着卫衣、向往闲适生活的年轻人。

The tech sector and 21st-century entrepreneurship serve as another cover and proxy for yuppiedom. When the Venn diagram intersects, we revere their leaders almost like movie stars (indeed, they are often portrayed by them — in the case of Steve Jobs, two times in three years). In a 2014 survey of 15,000 millennials by the firm Collegefeed, 11 of the top 12 companies they most wanted to work for were tech outfits.

当今技术领域的发展与21世纪的企业家精神也为雅皮士身份做了另外的包装与诠释。当这群雅皮士在维恩图(Venn diagram)上出现重叠区域时，我们崇敬着其中那些领袖人物，犹如崇敬着一些电影明星（事实如此，他们常常被电影明星演绎——以史蒂夫·乔布斯为例，三年之中就有两次）。Collegefeed公司2014年对1.5万名千禧代年轻人所做的一项调查表明，在这一代人最希望为之工作的12家公司当中，有11家是技术型的公司。

While there is certainly something more admirable, and typically less noxious, about those who innovate ideas and services than those who place bets and structure deals, let’s call it what it is. No matter how fervently techies and entrepreneurs claim they want to “change the world” (see any episode of “Shark Tank”), far fewer of them would be in the disruption game if the potential profits weren’t world-changing as well. The lovable millennial bumblers on “Silicon Valley” may be scruffy and genuinely passionate about coding, but their goal — making money and leveraging power — is quintessentially yuppie, even if their social skills aren’t.

虽然那些革新理念和服务的人比那些投入赌注并操纵交易的人肯定有更多值得崇敬而更少令人厌恶的地方，但是，我们还是还原一下真面目吧。无论这些技术人员和企业家们多么热衷于宣称他们希望“改变这个世界”（《创智赢家》[Shark Tank]的每一集都是这样），但如果潜在的利润不能同样改变世界的话，就很少有人会投身于这个打破规则的游戏了。在“硅谷”横冲直撞的那些千禧代萌娃们可能穿得土头土脑而对编码有天生的热情，但是，他们的目标——赚钱与掌权——是深得雅皮士精髓的，即便他们的社交技能尚有不足。

As for millennials, they have inherited an economy too fragile, and student loans too insurmountable, to enable their full-fledged yuppification. But they still share their ancestors’ love for conspicuous consumption (Instagram pictures of meals, parties and vacations) and toys (in lieu of expensive cars, real estate and artwork, the sleekly technological and more affordable plunder of Apple products and apps).

至于千禧年出生的这一代人，他们继承了极其脆弱的经济形势，又面对着难以还清的助学贷款，因而无法充分展现他们的雅皮士风采。但他们仍然和那些雅皮士前辈们一样，热衷于炫耀性的消费（所以有许多关于用餐、派对和度假的Instagram照片）和各种玩具（所以将有技术噱头又更容易买得起的苹果产品和应用软件代替了那些昂贵的汽车、房地产和艺术品）。

Then there’s the yuppie’s extended family: all insatiable consumers, just of different products. We have the gentrifier (read: typically white person), who has moved into an “up and coming” (read: historically nonwhite) neighborhood now that it has a Whole Foods; the metrosexual (a term that’s already become obsolete because it applies to such a broad spectrum), who tends to his appearance as obsessively as does Patrick Bateman in “American Psycho”; the “bro,” who has transitioned from the frat house to the sports bar, and his pumpkin-latte-sipping girlfriend; the foodie; the SoulCyclist or CrossFitter; and so on, until, finally and most confusingly, the hipster, which no one will admit being.

然后还有雅皮士衍生家族的成员，他们都是永不知足的消费者，只不过消费的产品各有不同。有的是士绅族（读作：非典型白人），他们搬入一个“新兴”（读作：历史上非白人的）社区是为了那里有一家全食超市(Whole Foods)；有的是都市美男族（由于应用范围太广，这个词已经过时），他们对自己颜值的迷恋程度堪比《美国杀人魔》(American Psycho)中的帕特里克·贝特曼(Patrick Bateman)；有的属于“弟兄帮”，他们已经从当初的“兄弟会”过渡到了现在的“运动吧”（可一起观看体育赛事的酒吧——译注），还带着一个爱喝南瓜拿铁咖啡的女朋友；再就是吃货族；灵魂派骑行族(SoulCyclist)或综合式健身族（CrossFitter）等等，直到最后要提到的、也最令人迷惑的这个成员，也就是没有人愿意承认自己身在其中的嬉普士(hipster)。

The hipster may seem to be the antithesis of the yuppie in his professional complacency, in his disdain for or ironic appropriation of everything mainstream. Yet all but the most bohemian of hipsters still relish the trappings of late capitalism, when he can get his hands on them: the designer jeans and Chuck Taylors, the small-batch bourbon and maple-marinated tempeh, the borrowed HBO Go password and cracked-screen iPhone. (All things I indulge in myself, although I’m certainly not a — whoops.) He’s simply less ambitious about obtaining them and more circumspect about signaling his desire for consumer goods: a yuppie in slacker’s thrift-store clothing.

从嬉普士对工作的满意度、对一切主流事物的蔑视或讽刺性挪用这些方面来看，他们也许是雅皮士的对立面。只不过，最波西米亚的嬉普士仍然对晚期资本主义的各种噱头乐此不彼，只要他能弄得到，比如名牌牛仔裤和帆布鞋(Chuck Taylors)，限量版的波本威士忌和枫蜜腌天贝(tempeh)，借用的HBO Go应用软件密码和屏幕碎裂的iPhone手机。（这些我全都中了，虽然我肯定不是什么——呃）嬉普士不会那么野心勃勃地要得到这一切，但会更谨慎地表露出对消费品的欲望，可以说他是一个穿着懒汉旧衣服的雅皮士。

Perhaps the hipster’s rebellion from the yuppie’s careerism should be commended for its ingenuity. He has deduced how to work the minimal amount for maximal comforts. He’s seen that the yuppie lifestyle didn’t ultimately satisfy his (possibly divorced) boomer parents, has opted out of traditional adulthood and is cutting his losses now, because if the country is no longer ascendant, it probably means he can’t be, either.

也许嬉普士反抗雅皮士追名逐利的行为是一种独创，应该受到赞扬。嬉普士已经推导出如何凭借最少的工作量来追求最舒适的生活。他已经明白，雅皮士的生活方式并没有最终满足自己出生于婴儿潮那一代的（或许已离婚的）父母，他已经决定回避传统上的成年期，从而立刻止损，因为，如果这个国家不再往上走的话，很有可能他也不会。

The hipster’s laissez-faire dissent is not quite as subversive as the Weathermen’s bombing of the Pentagon. But it’s what passes for revolution in our yuppified time.

嬉普士随心所欲持有的异议并不像气象员革命派（20世纪70年代活动于美国的一武装革命组织成员——译注）轰炸五角大楼(Weathermen’s bombing of the Pentagon)那么有颠覆性。但这就是我们在雅皮化时代为革新所经历的一切。