原創翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.483267.live 翻譯:八大山人 轉載請注明出處



Flying solo is in -- in a serious way. A New York Times Q&A with Eric Kilnenberg, NYU sociology professor and author of the new book "Going Solo," leads with the facts:
In 1950, 22 percent of American adults were single. Now that number is almost 50 percent. One in seven adults lives alone. Half of all Manhattan residences are one-person dwellings.

咱們來認真地談一下單身的問題吧。在《紐約時報》的問答內容里,Eric Kilnenberg(紐約大學的社會學教授,新書《單身吧》的作者)列了下面的一些事實:
1950年,22%的美國成年人是單身的?,F在,這個數據幾乎接近50%。1/7的成年人獨自居住。曼哈頓有一半的住宅是單身公寓。

Kilnenberg has done his research. He spent a decade studying the phenomenon while working on his book, and he has all kinds of good explanations for those numbers. There's less stigma than there once was around being single. People crave privacy and personal space -- tough to preserve when you're sharing a bathroom.

Kilnenberg對此做了研究。他在寫書過程中,花了十來年研究這種現象,對于這些數據,他做了各種解讀。單身已不像以前那樣讓人感覺恥辱,人們渴望擁有隱私和個人空間――假如跟別人共享一個浴室的話,這些就難以保證了。

In another piece published several weeks ago, Kilnenberg wrote:

幾個星期前,Kilnenberg在他另一篇出版的文章中寫道:

Living alone comports with modern values. It promotes freedom, personal control and self-realization -- all prized aspects of contemporary life.

單身生活符合現代的價值觀,促進了自由、個人管理和自我實現的發展――這些,被看作是現代生活中很寶貴的方面。

And Kilnenberg's not the only one digging in. Melanie Kurtin enumerated what keeps her from committing here and Dominique Browning did so here, while Kate Bolick's much-discussed piece in The Atlantic, "All the Single Ladies," began with a simple confession:

Kilnenber不是唯一一個對此進行深入研究的人。Melanie Kurtin列舉了她從事這個研究的原因,而Dominique Browning亦對此做了研究,Kate Bolick在《大西洋月刊》有大量討論,她的《單身女士們》,以一段簡單的告白開始:



Too many options applies to commitment of the romantic sort, sure, but also to jobs and where we should live and what kind of life we should have. Passion or paycheck? Security or freedom? Long hair or short? High heels or hiking boots?

當然,對于浪漫,有太多的選項可以承擔責任,但還有對于工作,對于居住,對于我們應該擁有的生活。選擇激情還是薪水?安全還是自由?長發還是短發?高跟鞋還是登山鞋?

Deciding, by definition, means "to kill." Choosing one thing means you're killing the possibility of having the other. And when we're raised on the idea that anything's possible -- and every option is available -- we see choosing anything as settling. And, of course, it is -- it's settling for something less than everything.

“做決定”其實就是“扼殺”。選擇一樣東西,意味著你扼殺了另一樣東西的可能性。當我們想到任何事情的可能性時――每種選項都是可能的――我們把選擇任何事情看作是一定的。當然,只是一些,并非所有。

When you decide to take one path, there's a risk of missing out on something -- something we often imagine to be glorious, the proverbial greener grass -- waiting for us at the end of another. As Hannah, a woman we profiled in Undecided, put it:

當你決定選擇一條路時,就有風險要錯失其它的一些東西,一些我們常常想象得很美好的東西,在路的另一頭等著我們的――譬如一個叫漢娜的女人。

The grass is always greener. Like, do I want to move to San Francisco? Colorado? South America? Will life be any better in any of those places? Probably not. But it might be, so there's that risk that I'm taking by not moving.

例如,我要搬去舊金山,科羅拉多,還是南美?如果在其它地方,生活會不會更好?可能并不是,但有可能是,因此,有風險,我還是不搬了。