這些年，米歇爾·奧巴馬的著裝故事

這一切是從杰·雷諾(Jay Leno)開始的。

It began, to be more specific, in October 2008, when Leno, host of “The Tonight Show” at the time, turned to his guest, Michelle Obama, wife of the Democratic nominee for president, and said — with glee, with gotcha expectation, because it had just been revealed that the campaign clothes budget for Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, was $150,000 — “I want to ask you about your wardrobe. I’m guessing about 60 grand? Sixty, 70 thousand for that outfit?”

更確切地說，是從2008年10月開始的。當時剛剛有消息披露說，共和黨副總統(tǒng)候選人薩拉·佩林(Sarah Palin)的競選服裝預(yù)算是15萬美元，于是時任《今夜秀》(The Tonight Show)主持人的雷諾轉(zhuǎn)向他的嘉賓，民主黨總統(tǒng)提名人之妻米歇爾·奧巴馬(Michelle Obama)，帶著一種“抓住你了”的勁頭興高采烈地問道，“我想問個與你的衣柜有關(guān)的問題。我猜大約是六萬大元?你這套裝備要六七萬吧?”

“J. Crew,” Obama said of her silk blouse, gold skirt and cardigan fastened with a big rhinestone brooch. “Ladies, we know J. Crew. You can get some good stuff online!” “J. Crew，”

奧巴馬說起自己身上的絲綢襯衫、金色裙子以及用一個大大的水鉆胸針系住的羊毛開衫。“女士們，我們都知道J. Crew。網(wǎng)上能找到一些好東西!”

And thus was an eight-year obsession born. Not to mention a new approach to the story of dress and power.

由此誕生了一個歷時八年的執(zhí)念。更不用說還誕生了一種新的方法，用來講述衣裙與權(quán)力的故事。

When Obama understood the impact of that early answer — when she saw the public response to her outfit (which had been chosen specifically as a riposte to the Palin news) — it set in motion a strategic rethink about the use of clothes that not only helped define her tenure as first lady, but also started a conversation that went far beyond the label or look that she wore and that is only now, maybe, reaching its end.

奧巴馬看到了公眾對她那套服裝(是針對佩林的新聞專門挑選的)的反應(yīng)，也了解了當初那個回答的影響力，于是便開始對服裝的功用進行戰(zhàn)略反思。它們不僅在她擔任第一夫人期間幫助她塑造了形象，還開啟了一場討論，其內(nèi)容遠遠超出她的服裝品牌和造型，然而這場討論現(xiàn)在或許已經(jīng)走向盡頭。

Though amid discussion of legacy and historical change fashion may seem the least of the matter, consider the number of words devoted to what both the first lady and President Barack Obama wore since the original campaign began. Consider that for 5 1/2 years there was a blog chronicling Michelle Obama’s wardrobe choices, arguably the first devoted to the clothes of a political figure, and that when Barack Obama wore a tan suit to a news conference it practically broke the internet (ditto when he eschewed a tie). Consider that Michelle Obama’s effect on fashion brands was the subject of a study by a New York University professor in the Harvard Business Review titled “How This First Lady Moves Markets.”

雖然有種種關(guān)于政治遺產(chǎn)和歷史變化的討論，時尚在其中似乎是最不重要的話題，但是，要考慮到，從第一次競選開始，有多少文章專門探討這位第一夫人和貝拉克·奧巴馬總統(tǒng)(Barack Obama)的著裝。要考慮到，在五年半的時間里，有一個博客專門記錄米歇爾·奧巴馬的服裝選擇，它可以說是第一個專門記錄一位政治人物服裝的博客。還要考慮到，貝拉克·奧巴馬身穿淺黃色西服參加新聞發(fā)布會的事真的引爆了互聯(lián)網(wǎng)(還有他不戴領(lǐng)帶那次)。還要考慮到，紐約大學(New York University)一名教授在哈佛商業(yè)評論(Harvard Business Review)上發(fā)表名為《這位第一夫人如何推動了市場》(How This First Lady Moves Markets)，研究的主題正是米歇爾·奧巴馬對時裝品牌的影響。

Consider all that, and there is simply no ignoring the fact that during these two terms, clothing played a role unlike any it had ever played before in a presidential administration.

考慮到所有這些，就不能忽視這個事實：在這兩個任期里，服裝發(fā)揮的作用超過了以往任何一屆政府。

A noncomprehensive litany of some of the designers whose clothes the first lady wore during her husband’s two terms in office includes: Carolina Herrera, Narciso Rodriguez, Michael Kors, Maria Cornejo, Thom Browne, Isabel Toledo, Jason Wu, Prabal Gurung, Donna Karan, Marc Jacobs, Oscar de la Renta, Ralph Lauren, Marchesa, Tom Ford, Vera Wang, Tadashi Shoji, Cushnie et Ochs, Tory Burch, Naeem Khan, Brandon Maxwell, Rodarte, Bibhu Mohapatra, Zac Posen, Barbara Tfank, Alexander Wang, Rag & Bone, Joseph Altuzarra, Tracy Reese, Monique Lhuillier, Thakoon, Christian Siriano, Calvin Klein, Sophie Theallet, Reed Krakoff, Diane von Furstenberg, Derek Lam, Proenza Schouler and Alice & Olivia. Also Talbots. And Target. And Ann Taylor. Sheesh.

第一夫人在丈夫的兩屆任期里穿過許多設(shè)計師的服裝，下面是一份不完整名單：卡洛琳娜·海萊娜(Carolina Herrera)、納西索·羅德里格斯(Narciso Rodriguez)、邁克·高仕(Michael Kors)、瑪利亞·科奈約(Maria Cornejo)、桑姆·布朗(Thom Browne)、伊莎貝爾·托萊多(Isabel Toledo)、吳季剛(Jason Wu)、普拉巴·高隆(Prabal Gurung)、唐娜·卡蘭(Donna Karan)、馬克·雅可布(Marc Jacobs)、奧斯卡·德拉倫塔(Oscar de la Renta)、拉夫·勞倫(Ralph Lauren)、瑪切薩(Marchesa)、湯姆·福特(Tom Ford)、王薇薇(Vera Wang)、莊司正(Tadashi Shoji)、Cushnie et Ochs、托里·伯奇(Tory Burch)、納伊姆·汗(Naeem Khan)、布蘭頓·麥斯威爾(Brandon Maxwell)、羅達特(Rodarte)、比布·莫哈帕特拉(Bibhu Mohapatra)、扎克·波森(Zac Posen)、芭芭拉·范可(Barbara Tfank)、王大仁(Alexander Wang)、瑞格布恩(Rag & Bone)、約瑟夫·奧圖扎拉(Joseph Altuzarra)、翠西·瑞斯(Tracy Reese)、莫尼克·魯里耶(Monique Lhuillier)、塔庫恩(Thakoon)、克里斯蒂安·西里亞諾(Christian Siriano)、卡爾文·克萊因(Calvin Klein)、索菲·西奧雷(Sophie Theallet)、瑞德·克拉考夫(Reed Krakoff)、黛安·馮芙絲汀寶(Diane von Furstenberg)、林達克(Derek Lam)、普羅恩薩·施羅(Proenza Schouler)，以及愛麗絲&奧利維亞(Alice & Olivia)。還有Talbots。還有Target。還有安·泰勒(Ann Taylor)。嘖嘖。

Plus, of course: Gucci, Versace, Givenchy, Alaïa, Junya Watanabe, Christopher Kane, Roksanda, Moschino, Lanvin (those controversial expensive sneakers), Dries Van Noten, Alexander McQueen, Duro Olowu, Lanvin and Kenzo. To name a few.

當然還包括：古馳(Gucci)、范思哲(Versace)、紀梵希(Givenchy)、阿拉亞(Alaïa)、渡邊淳彌(Junya Watanabe)、克里斯托弗·凱恩(Christopher Kane)、洛克山達(Roksanda)、莫斯基諾(Moschino)、浪凡(Lanvin，那雙充滿爭議的昂貴帆布鞋)、德里斯·范·諾登(Dries Van Noten)、亞歷山大·麥昆(Alexander McQueen)、杜羅·奧羅伍(Duro Olowu)、浪凡(Lanvin)和Kenzo。等等。

It is, by any measure, an unprecedented list. 不管按照哪種標準，這都是一個前所未有的名單。

The twin conditions of the historic nature of this presidency and the fact it occurred alongside the rise of social media, which turned every public second into a shareable, comment-worthy moment, combined to create a new reality where every appearance mattered. Not everyone listened to all of the speeches or read the analysis or considered the context. But everyone paused for a moment to assess the visual. And a couple who had spent their entire lives being scrutinized as pioneers understood what that meant, and instead of bridling at it, leveraged it. If you know everyone is going to see what you wear and judge it, then what you wear becomes fraught with meaning. Certainly Michelle Obama’s significance as a contemporary role model goes far beyond her image, but no one understood the role of fashion, and the potential uses of that, better than the first lady.

這位總統(tǒng)的歷史性質(zhì)，再加上他的任期正值社交媒體興起之時——它把每一個公共時刻都變得可以分享、值得評論——共同創(chuàng)造了一個新的現(xiàn)實：每一次亮相都很重要。并不是每個人都會傾聽所有的演講，閱讀所有的分析，或者考慮當時的背景。但大家都會停下來，用一秒鐘評價那個形象。這對夫婦一生都被人作為先鋒進行審視，他們知道那意味著什么，他們沒有去限制它，而是利用它去發(fā)揮影響。如果你知道大家都會看你穿什么，并進行評價，那么你的著裝就會充滿意義。當然，米歇爾·奧巴馬作為一名當代模范人物的重要性遠遠超越她的形象，但沒有人比這位第一夫人更了解服裝的角色和它的潛在用處。

“She realized very early on that everything she did had ramifications,” said Thom Browne, who made the tailored coat and dress Michelle Obama wore for the inaugural parade in 2013, as well as a dress she wore to the 2012 Democratic National Convention and also during the final debate that year. And she understood, he went on, “that people did not just want to know how she looked, but what she was about,” and that she could plant subliminal cues to the latter with her clothes.

“她很早就意識到，自己做的每件事都會產(chǎn)生后果，”桑姆·布朗尼(Thom Browne)說。他為米歇爾·奧巴馬定制了參加2013年就職游行時穿的外衣和連衣裙，以及參加2012年民主黨全國大會(Democratic National Convention)和當年第一次辯論時穿的連衣裙。他還說，她知道，“人們不僅想知道她看起來怎么樣，而且想知道她代表著什么，”后一個問題她可以通過服裝來給出隱含的提示。

Change was the promise, and change was the look — far beyond the amount of upper arm on display, or the riot of color and prints. Or the cardigans.

改變就是承諾，改變就是造型——遠不只是上臂的裸露程度，或者顏色和印花的豐富多樣。或者開襟毛衣。

But her real contribution went far beyond giving women a license to like clothes and use them to celebrate their own strength and femininity. Just as, despite the attention paid to the study on how much the first lady was worth to a brand — “I have been publishing for 25 years,” said David Yermack, author of the study and a professor of finance at the NYU Stern School of Business, “and nothing has compared to the interest in this” — it wasn’t ultimately about revenue generation. Indeed, despite Michelle Obama’s patronage, a number of labels she wore have struggled financially, including J. Crew; Maria Pinto, which closed; and Bibhu Mohapatra, which filed for bankruptcy last week.

但她真正的貢獻遠不只是讓女性得到喜歡衣服的權(quán)利，用它們來歌頌自己的力量和女性氣質(zhì)。盡管關(guān)于第一夫人對一個品牌的價值的研究引發(fā)了人們的關(guān)注——“我已發(fā)表文章25年，”這項研究的作者、紐約大學斯特恩商學院(Stern School of Business)金融學教授戴維·耶麥克(David Yermack)說，“但沒什么能比得上我對這項研究的興趣”——但它終究不是關(guān)于盈利的。事實上，盡管得到了米歇爾·奧巴馬的支持，她穿過的一些品牌依然在財務(wù)上艱難掙扎，包括J. Crew;已經(jīng)倒閉的Maria Pinto;以及上周申請破產(chǎn)的Bibhu Mohapatra。

Rather, like first ladies from Jacqueline Kennedy to Nancy Reagan, Obama understood that fashion was a means to create an identity for an administration. But unlike any other first lady, instead of seeing it as part of a uniform to which she had to conform, with the attendant rules and strictures that implies, she saw it as a way to frame her own independence and points of difference, add to her portfolio and amplify her husband’s agenda.

相反，和杰奎琳·肯尼迪(Jacqueline Kennedy)、南希·里根(Nancy Reagan)等第一夫人一樣，奧巴馬知道服裝是為一個政府創(chuàng)造身份的一種手段。但不像其他任何第一夫人，她不是把服裝視為自己必須遵從的規(guī)矩，暗示著一個場合的規(guī)則和約束，而是把它視為展現(xiàn)自己的獨立性和特點、履行自己的職責、闡釋丈夫的愿景的方式。

“Our glorious diversity — our diversities of faiths and colors and creeds — that is not a threat to who we are; it makes us who we are,” she said during her final speech, and the proof was, literally, on her back. While most first ladies turned to a small number of trusted designers to help them create their look (Oleg Cassini with Kennedy; Adolfo and James Galanos with Reagan; Oscar de la Renta with Hillary Clinton and Laura Bush) Obama seemed to work with them all.

“我們精彩的多樣性——我們在信仰、膚色和信條上的多樣性——并不是對我們身份的威脅，而是我們身份的組成部分，”她在最后一次演講中說。她的服裝就是證明。雖然大部分第一夫人依靠少數(shù)信任的設(shè)計師幫助創(chuàng)造自己的造型(肯尼迪選的是奧萊格·卡西尼[Oleg Cassini];里根選的是阿道夫和詹姆斯·加拉諾斯[Adolfo and James Galanos];希拉里·克林頓[Hillary Clinton]和勞拉·布什[Laura Bush]選的是奧斯卡·德拉倫塔[Oscar de la Renta])，但奧巴馬似乎和所有人合作。

But above all, her wardrobe was representative of the country her husband wanted to lead.

不過最重要的是，她的衣櫥代表著丈夫想要領(lǐng)導的國家。

It was about the melting pot and the establishment; the 1 percent and the accessible. There was something in her closet for everyone, yet she was beholden to no designer — free of any specific allegiance to, or association with, a brand. She worked at a remove, through her aide Meredith Koop, and no designers contacted for this article said they knew when the clothes she bought would be worn (if they were for personal use she did buy them, though often at a discount; if they were for state occasions, they were donated by the designer and archived, either at the National Archives or a museum). They were not told in advance, and they found out at the same time everyone else did. It was a business relationship, not a personal one.

它關(guān)乎大熔爐和建制勢力;關(guān)乎1%的和廉價的。她的衣櫥包含給所有人穿的衣服，但她不受制于任何設(shè)計師——不忠誠于某個品牌或與某個品牌聯(lián)系在一起。她通過助手梅雷迪思·科普(Meredith Koop)保持距離，為本文接受采訪的設(shè)計師都表示，他們都不知道她買的服裝將在何時穿著(如果是為私人使用，她的確會買下它們，雖然往往是以優(yōu)惠價;如果是為國事場合，它們由設(shè)計師贈送，并被國家檔案館或博物館收藏)。他們不會預(yù)先得到通知，只能和其他人同時看到服裝的亮相時刻。這是一種商務(wù)關(guān)系，而非個人關(guān)系。

Will it continue? To a certain extent both Samantha Cameron, wife of former British Prime Minister David Cameron, and the Duchess of Cambridge have taken a page from Obama’s wardrobe book, swinging from high to low, working with a variety of London Fashion Week designers, and Sophie Grégoire Trudeau has done so in Canada. But according to Yermack, who looked into the market response to both the Duchess of Cambridge and Carla Bruni Sarkozy, when she was first lady of France, “they had nowhere near the same effect.”

這會繼續(xù)下去嗎?在一定程度上，前英國首相戴維·卡梅倫(David Cameron)的妻子薩曼莎·卡梅倫(Samantha Cameron)和劍橋公爵夫人(Duchess of Cambridge)都效仿奧巴馬的服裝選擇方式，從高端到低端，與倫敦時裝周的多位設(shè)計師合作，加拿大第一夫人索菲·格雷瓜爾·特魯多(Sophie Grégoire Trudeau)也是如此。但是據(jù)耶麥克稱——他曾研究過劍橋公爵夫人和前法國第一夫人卡拉·布呂尼-薩科齊(Carla Bruni-Sarkozy)的市場反應(yīng)——“她們絕沒有收到同樣的效果。”

It may be because the point of what Obama wore was never simply that it was good to mix up your wardrobe among a group of designers, but rather that clothes were most resonant when they were an expression of commitment to an idea, or an ideal, that had resonance. And maybe it shouldn’t really matter if anyone else in her position adopts the same approach. Each administration writes its own catechism, after all. Whether we follow is up to us.

也許是因為，奧巴馬著裝的要點從來都不僅是用一群設(shè)計師的服裝填充衣櫥，而是用服裝來表達能引起共鳴的觀點或理念——那是服裝最能引起共鳴的時刻。也許，其他和她處于相同位置的人是否采取同樣的方式真的不重要。畢竟，每屆政府都有自己的理念。是否追隨則取決于我們。