2016年服裝外文翻譯--中國(guó)清朝中、晚期的云領(lǐng)和袖帶，商業(yè)刺繡及時(shí)尚配件（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　中文2260字,1300英文單詞，7600英文字符</p><p>　　文獻(xiàn)出處：Silberstein R. Cloud Collars and Sleeve Bands: Commercial Embroidery and the Fashionable Accessory in Mid-to-Late Qing China[J]. Fashion Theory the Journal

2、of Dress Body & Culture, 2016:1-34.</p><p>　　Cloud Collars and Sleeve Bands: Commercial Embroidery and the Fashionable Accessory in Mid-to-Late Qing China</p><p>　　Rachel Silberstein</p&g

3、t;<p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　This paper explores how the growth of commercialized textile production entwined with fashionable consumption to stimulate new styles in Chinese women’s dr

4、ess during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Focusing on the development of Suzhou’s embroidery industry, the paper demonstrates the shift towards the embroidered accessory during this period and discusses how pro

5、duction systems delineated the possibilities of fashionable dress. Combining analysis of embroidered objects with vernacular </p><p>　　KEYWORDS: Chinese historical fashion, embroidery, commercialization, bor

6、ders and trimmings</p><p>　　For many centuries, Western thinking held that historical Chinese dress was static, absent of fashion impulse. French academic Gilles Lipovetsky was following a well-trodden path

7、when he asserted that, “in China women’s dress underwent no real transformation between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries” (1994, 19). However, scholarship of recent decades has challenged this claim that Chinese

8、society was so stable and conservative as to lack the desire for change and novelty that enabled the </p><p>　　The Controversiality of Chinese Fashion</p><p>　　Scholarship on issues of histo

9、rical Chinese fashion has tended to cluster around two temporal junctures: the early seventeenth century when the Ming dynasty (1368?1644) was supplanted by the Qing dynasty (1644?1911) (Wu 1999; Lin 1999; Dau

10、ncey 2003), and the fall of the Qing and early Republic period of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Zamperini 2001). There are obvious reasons for this focus: both the beginning and end of the Qing

11、 were times of political t</p><p>　　Commercialization of textile handicrafts is not a topic that has received much attention from dress historians, yet it had important ramifications for fashion. While fashi

12、on may be argued to be a social behavior responding to socio-cultural conditions like urbanization, population fluctuations, and the inability or disinclination of authorities to administer sumptuary regulations, its exi

13、stence is predicated upon what sociologist Joanne Ent-whistle calls “particular relations of production and c</p><p>　　It is a system of dress found in societies where social mobility is possible; it has its

14、 own particular relations of production and consumption, again found in a particular society; it is characterized by logic of regular and systematic change (Entwhistle 2000, 43–48).</p><p>　　In contrast to

15、the considerable research into the social functions of fashion in early modern Chinese society—the deployment of fashionable dress to challenge social hierarchies and establish notions of modernity—the apparent lack of i

16、nterest in commerce and production may be argued to have contributed to the degree of imprecision with which the Qing fashion sys- tem has been characterized, and the continued dispute over its existence.</p><

17、p>　　Those scholars who define fashion as a historical phenomenon and theory as specific to early modern Europe have necessarily rejected the possibility of other types of fashion occurring in other types of societies

18、and cultures (Entwhistle 2000). Thus China, along with all other cultures outside of Western Europe between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries, has been classified with one of a number of terms: “anti-fashion,”“folk

19、 dress,” “traditional dress,” fixed dress”; systems of dress in whi</p><p>　　Even aside from the question of sources and perspective, there are additional issues. It is problematic to define fashion as a the

20、oretical framework (thus allowing its application to all those contexts fulfilling that frame- work), yet also to restrict it to a specific society at a specific time and place (Entwhistle 2000, 44, 47–48). Nor do the co

21、mponents used to define fashion offer much clarity. Consider, for example, the problem of distinguishing between “change” and “fashion”—at what point </p><p>　　中國(guó)清朝中、晚期的云領(lǐng)和袖帶，商業(yè)刺繡及時(shí)尚配件</p><p>　　

22、作者：雷切爾?西爾伯斯坦</p><p><b>　　摘要</b></p><p>　　本文探討十八、十九世紀(jì)，商業(yè)紡織品生產(chǎn)的增長(zhǎng)是如何與時(shí)尚消費(fèi)品纏繞在一起，刺激中國(guó)女裝新款式的誕生。本文著眼于蘇州刺繡業(yè)的發(fā)展，論證在此期間刺繡向繡花配件的轉(zhuǎn)變，并討論生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)是如何界定時(shí)裝的可能性。綜合分析刺繡的對(duì)象及仔細(xì)描繪該行業(yè)增長(zhǎng)的民俗和商業(yè)文本，本文不僅在服裝樣式上考慮商

23、業(yè)化的影響，而且在穿著并制作這些時(shí)尚配件的女性上考慮這一點(diǎn)，借此與當(dāng)代文化思潮相連。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：中國(guó)歷史時(shí)尚，刺繡，商業(yè)化，邊框和裝飾</p><p>　　許多世紀(jì)以來(lái)，西方思想認(rèn)為歷史上中國(guó)服飾是靜態(tài)的，缺乏時(shí)尚的沖勁。法國(guó)的學(xué)術(shù)吉爾斯?利波維茨基追隨一條鋪好的老路，他堅(jiān)稱：“中國(guó)女裝在十七世紀(jì)和十九世紀(jì)間沒(méi)有真正的變革?！比欢?，最近數(shù)十年的學(xué)術(shù)研究質(zhì)疑這種說(shuō)法，中國(guó)社

24、會(huì)是如此的穩(wěn)定、保守，由于缺乏改變和新奇的渴望，致使近代歐洲時(shí)尚興起（Ko2003;費(fèi)南2008)，現(xiàn)在有越來(lái)越多的關(guān)于歷史上中國(guó)時(shí)裝的文獻(xiàn)（陳2016)。盡管取得了這些進(jìn)展，這一話題仍存在爭(zhēng)議，許多問(wèn)題仍然沒(méi)有答案，特別是關(guān)于近代早期商業(yè)化生產(chǎn)和時(shí)尚消費(fèi)之間的關(guān)系方面。紡織工藝品的商業(yè)化是如何沖擊清朝（1644-1911)時(shí)裝呢？商業(yè)化生產(chǎn)的服裝和配件用品，這一產(chǎn)業(yè)的提升為婦女作為生產(chǎn)者和消費(fèi)者提供了什么樣的機(jī)會(huì)？本文通過(guò)調(diào)查十九世紀(jì)

25、中國(guó)時(shí)尚中心一一蘇州刺繡業(yè)，探討這些問(wèn)題。綜合分析刺繡的物體及詳細(xì)描述該行業(yè)增長(zhǎng)的民俗和商業(yè)文本，我認(rèn)為這些變化的影響不僅在于服裝的花色新穎品種多樣，而且對(duì)于近代早期婦女參與時(shí)尚業(yè)的方式產(chǎn)生影響。</p><p><b>　　中國(guó)時(shí)裝的爭(zhēng)議性</b></p><p>　　學(xué)者們對(duì)于歷史上中國(guó)時(shí)尚這一議題傾向于圍繞著兩個(gè)時(shí)間節(jié)點(diǎn)：十七世紀(jì)初，明朝（1368-1644年）

26、被清朝(1644-1911)取代（吳1999年，林1999，當(dāng)西2003)，以及十九世紀(jì)末、20世紀(jì)初清朝沒(méi)落、早期民國(guó)時(shí)期（曾佩琳2001)。關(guān)注這兩個(gè)時(shí)期的原因很明顯：清明的開(kāi)端和結(jié)束時(shí)都是政治動(dòng)蕩、社會(huì)動(dòng)亂的時(shí)期一一在這“社會(huì)不穩(wěn)定”的過(guò)渡背景下，時(shí)尚趨向于蓬勃發(fā)展（坎農(nóng)1998,25—29)。事實(shí)上，除了費(fèi)南關(guān)于揚(yáng)州時(shí)裝的重要研究之外（2008,52—67)，研究人員己經(jīng)取消了對(duì)清朝的研究。盡管如此，十八，十九世紀(jì)提出了他們自己

27、的革命類型，從16世紀(jì)中期到18世紀(jì)晚期結(jié)束，在大量新大陸白銀涌入刺激下，商品經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)達(dá)，大量農(nóng)戶被帶入市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)中。清代是中國(guó)人口增長(zhǎng)、社會(huì)流動(dòng)、城市化穩(wěn)定和商人階層增長(zhǎng)的時(shí)期一一著名的中國(guó)歷史學(xué)家威廉?羅曾提出，“清朝中葉時(shí)期，它是可能是世界上最商業(yè)化的國(guó)家”（2009年，122頁(yè)）。清朝中期到晚期的劃分標(biāo)志有兩點(diǎn)：經(jīng)濟(jì)作物糧、棉、絲的跨區(qū)域銷售快速增長(zhǎng)；工藝品生產(chǎn)的快速增長(zhǎng)，伴隨著制造商和消費(fèi)者的增長(zhǎng)，這可以從市場(chǎng)、商店和行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)的穩(wěn)

28、定形成中得到明證，特別</p><p>　　服裝歷史學(xué)家沒(méi)有過(guò)多關(guān)注紡織手工藝品的商品化，然而它對(duì)時(shí)尚有重大影響。雖然時(shí)尚可能被認(rèn)為是一種社會(huì)行為，回應(yīng)諸如城市化、人口波動(dòng)等社會(huì)文化條件，以及當(dāng)局無(wú)力或不愿管理奢侈法規(guī)，但它的存在取決于社會(huì)學(xué)家喬安在她對(duì)時(shí)尚的有用定義中所說(shuō)的“生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)的特定關(guān)系”:</p><p>　　它是在社會(huì)流動(dòng)中發(fā)現(xiàn)的一種服裝制度；它有自己獨(dú)特的生產(chǎn)和消費(fèi)關(guān)系，再

29、次在特定社會(huì)中發(fā)現(xiàn)；它的特點(diǎn)是經(jīng)常性和系統(tǒng)性的變化(恩外斯特 2000，43-48)。</p><p>　　與早期中國(guó)社會(huì)時(shí)尚的社會(huì)功能——時(shí)尚服裝的部署，以挑戰(zhàn)社會(huì)等級(jí)制度和建立現(xiàn)代性觀念——相比之下，可能有人主張對(duì)商業(yè)和生產(chǎn)缺乏興趣，這導(dǎo)致了清代時(shí)裝體系的特點(diǎn)的不精確性，以及對(duì)其存在的持續(xù)爭(zhēng)論。</p><p>　　那些把時(shí)尚定義為特定于早期現(xiàn)代歐洲的歷史現(xiàn)象和理論的學(xué)者，必然拒絕其他

30、類型的社會(huì)和文化中發(fā)生的其他類型的時(shí)尚(恩外斯特2000)。因此，中國(guó)以及第十四世紀(jì)至十八世紀(jì)西歐以外的所有其他文化，已被歸類為“反時(shí)尚”、“民間服飾”、“傳統(tǒng)服裝”、“固定服裝”等。任何變化都如此緩慢的服裝系統(tǒng)，甚至連穿著者自己也難以察覺(jué)。費(fèi)拉勒對(duì)這一立場(chǎng)的充分論證，加入了對(duì)早期現(xiàn)代歐洲和時(shí)尚之間占有欲關(guān)系的批評(píng)的不斷增加。正如她所觀察到的，從歷史上來(lái)說(shuō)，拒絕中國(guó)時(shí)尚是基于18世紀(jì)西方游客對(duì)中國(guó)的有限觀點(diǎn)，其訴求與中國(guó)社會(huì)某些部門對(duì)時(shí)

31、尚的明顯關(guān)切鮮明對(duì)比(費(fèi)拉勒 2008,19-23)。顯然，利用來(lái)自內(nèi)部觀察員的經(jīng)驗(yàn)證據(jù)，而不是西方來(lái)訪者的重新定性證據(jù)。西方來(lái)訪者的解釋是根據(jù)"他們描述他們所看到的" (2008，9)的術(shù)語(yǔ)來(lái)確定的。但是這些限制的觀點(diǎn)不僅僅是一個(gè)歷史現(xiàn)象，它們繼續(xù)影響今天的學(xué)術(shù)。例如，最近一項(xiàng)關(guān)于印度、日本和中國(guó)時(shí)尚文獻(xiàn)的調(diào)查利用了西方策展人撰寫的關(guān)于帝國(guó)和官方服裝主導(dǎo)的中國(guó)服裝系列的二次研究(貝爾凡蒂2008)。這些受管制服裝形

32、式在這些博物館研究中占主導(dǎo)地位，限制了它們?yōu)檫@一歷史時(shí)尚的比較調(diào)查作出</p><p>　　除了來(lái)源和觀點(diǎn)的問(wèn)題外，還有其他問(wèn)題。將時(shí)尚定義為理論框架（從而允許其應(yīng)用于實(shí)現(xiàn)該框架的所有環(huán)境）也是將其限制在特定時(shí)間和地點(diǎn)的特定社會(huì)是有問(wèn)題的（恩外斯特2000,44,47-48 ）。用于定義時(shí)尚的組件也不太清晰。例如，考慮區(qū)分“變化”和“時(shí)尚”的問(wèn)題——在什么意義上的風(fēng)格變化迅速構(gòu)成了“規(guī)則和系統(tǒng)變化的內(nèi)在邏輯”？產(chǎn)