“全副武裝”的梅拉尼婭,準備爲何而戰?

And so we come to the end of what has been the longest and most comprehensive viewing of Melania Trump playing the role of first lady since her husband’s administration began: nine days, five countries, more than a dozen outfits, all of them photographed and recorded (and exclaimed over) for the historical record.

這似乎是我們最長、最全面地一次檢視梅拉尼婭·特朗普(Melania Trump)自丈夫上任以來，如何扮演第一夫人的角色：總共歷時九天，訪問了五個國家，換了十幾套衣服，全程都進行了拍照和錄像（並引發驚呼）留作歷史紀錄，現在這種檢視結束了。

“Melania did not wear a veil in Saudi Arabia!” “Melania did wear a veil to the Vatican!” “Melania changes outfits during flight!”

“梅拉尼婭在沙特阿拉伯沒有戴頭巾！”“梅拉尼婭到梵蒂岡戴了頭巾！”“梅拉尼婭在飛行途中換了服裝！”

Does it really matter?

這真的有關係嗎？

Of course. Because Mrs. Trump has been, up to now, a cipher cloistered in a gilded New York penthouse but is about to take her place in the East Wing (at least according to her team) as the United States’ official hostess. And because, as a representative of the country and the Trump administration on the world stage, this was her clearest statement yet about how she will manage that position.

當然有關係。因爲此前，梅拉尼婭一直是藏匿在紐約一個鍍金閣樓裏的神祕人物，但是她馬上就要作爲美國官方的女主人入主白宮東翼了（至少她的團隊是這麼說的）。而且，作爲一個國家以及特朗普政府在世界舞臺上的代表，她將如何在這個位置上發揮作用，服裝就是她最清楚的聲明。

It just happened that, since Mrs. Trump did not say much as she accompanied her husband from Saudi Arabia through Israel to Italy, Brussels and Sicily, it was largely made through her clothes.

恰巧，由於梅拉尼婭在陪同丈夫從沙特阿拉伯，經過以色列，再到意大利、布魯塞爾和西西里島的行程中並沒有說多少話，她的聲明基本上都是通過衣着表達出來的。

That’s why what she wore received so much more attention than what Ivanka Trump wore (the fascinator at the Western Wall and the weirdly bridal black tulle veil at the Vatican aside).

這就是爲什麼她的穿着比伊萬卡·特朗普(Ivanka Trump)的穿着吸引了更多注意力的原因（她在哭牆穿得很迷人，在梵蒂岡戴着奇怪的新娘式黑色薄紗頭巾）。

Add up the Stella McCartney black jumpsuit, the Michael Kors gingham coat dress, the Ralph Lauren khaki shirtdress, the taupe Maison Ullens suit and the myriad Dolce & Gabbana cocktail laces, that brand’s gambler’s trouser suit and botanical day coat, and what do you have?

加上Stella McCartney黑色連身褲、Michael Kors方格布外套連衣裙、Ralph Lauren卡其色襯衫、Maison Ullens灰褐色西裝，以及大量的Dolce＆Gabbana雞尾酒蕾絲——同品牌的賭徒衣褲套裝和花卉外套，你能看出什麼？

Ambivalence and armor. They were the defining trends of the trip.

模棱兩可和裝甲感。這趟行程的性質也是如此。

For every moment when Mrs. Trump seemed to engage with the historical precedent of her job — which largely involves humanizing the president by being the approachable, accessible half of the equation, and participating cheerfully in the spousal exercises of dressing, dining and hospital visiting — there was another in which she seemed to reject it. Kind of the way she seemed to reject most public displays of affection with her husband until the final leg of the trip. (See the hand-swatting maneuver performed after landing at Ben-Gurion International Airport in Israel, and similar evasive tactics.)

梅拉尼婭每一次試圖完成第一夫人的傳統差事——主要是賦予總統人性，方法是展示這個等式中平易近人、親切的另一半，愉快地參加梳妝、餐飲、參觀醫院的夫人團活動——似乎就會拒絕另一個這樣的活動。就像直到旅程的最後一站之前，她似乎都拒絕公開展示與丈夫的感情一樣（參見在以色列本古裏安國際機場降落後，她打開總統的手的做法，以及類似的迴避方式）。

She acknowledged, for example, the sartorial protocols of the countries she visited. In Saudi Arabia, she was modest — even the Dolce & Gabbana white trouser suit and black shirt, while with a modern edge, was fully covered. In Vatican City, she went dark. In the resort town of Taormina in Sicily, springlike.

例如，她遵從了這些國家的服飾禮儀。在沙特阿拉伯，她的衣着端莊——Dolce＆Gabbana白色長褲西裝和黑色襯衫，雖然設計時髦，但也完全覆蓋了皮膚。在梵蒂岡城，她穿着深色服裝。在西西里島的度假小城陶爾米納，她的服飾洋溢着春天的氣息。

After landing at the King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, she materialized on the steps of Air Force One in that black jumpsuit, whose Wonder Woman gold Saint Laurent belt, flowing hemline, long sleeves and notch neck made everyone think: abaya! Later she swept into dinner wearing a caped magenta Reem Acra gown with a jeweled neckline, like a high fashion Scheherazade.

空軍一號在沙特阿拉伯利雅得哈立德國王國際機場降落後，她從機艙中走出，穿着黑色連身衣，戴着“神奇女俠”金色聖羅蘭(Saint Laurent)腰帶，飄動的下襬、長袖和衣領凹口讓每個人心裏想：阿拉伯長袍！後來吃晚餐時，她穿了一件洋紅色的Reem Acra斗篷長袍，領口用珠寶裝飾，像是山魯佐德式高端時裝。

Like many of her Western predecessors, she went veil-less in Saudi Arabia, but bent to Vatican tradition by wearing a lace veil to meet the pope. This apparent discrepancy in attitude got a lot of people very worked up, but it was fully in line with the policies of those who had gone before. (See: Michelle Obama, veil-less in Saudi Arabia in 2015, veiled at the Vatican in 2009.)

與之前的很多西方第一夫人一樣，她在沙特阿拉伯沒有戴頭巾，卻迎合了梵蒂岡的傳統，戴了一頂維多利亞式的蕾絲頭巾去見教皇。這種貌似不同的態度讓很多人都激動起來，但實際上完全符合之前的政策（見：米歇爾·奧巴馬2015年在沙特阿拉伯沒有戴頭巾，2009年在梵蒂岡戴頭巾。）

And her embrace of the high-end, and refusal to go through the motions of adopting the occasional accessible item, was fully in line with her husband’s gold-toned dollar-sign spiel. Forget espadrilles or T-shirts; the Dolce & Gabbana floral coat cost an unapologetic $51,500.

她擁抱高端服飾，拒絕採納偶爾親民服飾的建議，這和她丈夫談金論錢的講話完全一致。忘記帆布鞋或T恤衫吧；她穿的Dolce＆Gabbana花卉外套價格高達51500美元。

But then she rejected the traditional game of fashion diplomacy in which first ladies have been engaged since Jacqueline Kennedy, eschewing any pressure either to use her public appearances to promote homegrown talent, or to follow more recent strategy and support designers from the host country, the better to demonstrate friendly intentions.

但後來，她拒絕了自傑奎琳·肯尼迪(Jacqueline Kennedy)以來第一夫人的傳統時尚外交遊戲，避開所有壓力，既不利用自己的公共形象宣傳本土時裝，也不遵循最近的策略——爲東道國的時裝設計師提供宣傳，更好地展示友好的意圖。

She didn’t ask one designer, like Hervé Pierre, who created her inauguration dress as well as the leather skirt she wore to depart Washington, to help her assemble her wardrobe. She didn’t underscore her own international story. She spread her endorsements — but only kind of, wearing multiple looks from Mr. Kors and a high percentage from Dolce & Gabbana as well as an assortment of other names. Yes, she wore American designers, and yes, she started to look like a Sicilian widow while in Italy, and wore the Belgian label Maison Ullens in Brussels. (And, according to Vogue, which pretty breathlessly chronicled this trip, she even worked with the latter on her look, proving it was an entirely conscious choice.)

她沒有請專門的設計師幫助她處理服裝事務，哪怕是爲她提供就職典禮服裝，以及她離開華盛頓時所穿皮裙的埃爾維·皮埃爾(Hervé Pierre)。她沒有強調自己的國際化故事。她傳播的是她認可的東西——但這只是在某種程度上，因爲她穿Michael Kors或者 Dolce＆Gabbana等品牌的時候還是偏多。是的，她也穿美國設計師的品牌；是的，她在意大利的時候看起來像一個西西里遺孀；在布魯塞爾穿着比利時的品牌Maison Ullens（密切緊跟這次行程的時尚雜誌《Vogue》說，她甚至與後者一起研究自己的造型，證明這完全是一個有意做出的選擇）。

But then she undermined the point by wearing Dolce & Gabbana and the British label Roksanda in Israel, and more Dolce in Brussels. (Dolce, which she also wore for her official portrait, is seeming like her go-to brand, a relationship that has upset some of the designers’ Instagram fans.) That meant there was no consistent pattern behind the origin stories of what she chose when.

但隨後，她又削弱了這種印象，在以色列穿着Dolce＆Gabbana和英國品牌Roksanda，並在布魯塞爾再次穿着Dolce（她在官方肖像中也穿着Dolce，看起來這像是她的心水品牌，這種關係已經讓該品牌的一些Instagram粉絲感到不安）。這意味着，她在什麼時候選擇什麼服飾上並沒有一個連貫的模式。

If anything seemed to unite the sartorial choices the first lady made, at least during the day, it was a certain rigidity of line, monochrome palette and militaristic mien. She favored sharp power shoulders, single-breasted jackets with wide cinched belts and big square buckles, straight skirts and a lot of buttons. Mostly buttoned up. Hemlines were not too short, and the only skin really exposed was on her arms (also a bit of shoulder in Brussels for evening).

如果說梅拉尼婭在服裝選擇上有什麼做法具有連貫性的話，那麼至少是她在白天穿着的服裝，都具有線條感，採用單色調，帶有軍裝式的硬朗。她喜歡肩膀線條筆挺有力、帶寬腰帶和大方皮帶扣的單排扣外套，直裙，以及許多的鈕釦。大部分時候所有鈕釦都會扣上，裙襬不會太短，唯一真正露出一點皮膚的地方就是手臂（在布魯塞爾，晚上還露出一點點肩）。

It’s not an accident that the Michael Kors white suit she wore in Israel looked almost identical to the Maison Ullens taupe suit she wore in Belgium: tight, belted, undecorated. These aren’t clothes designed (in all senses of that word) to charm; they are designed for security. Though the veil debate and the floral froufrou got the most attention, it was her battened-down, ready-for-battle styles that left the lasting impression.

她在以色列穿的Michael Kors白色西裝看起來和她在比利時穿的Maison Ullens灰褐色西裝幾乎一模一樣，這並不是個意外。這兩套西裝都是修身款式，有腰帶，沒有裝飾。它們不是設計（從這個詞的所有層面上說）用來展現魅力的；它們是爲安全而設計的。雖然關於頭巾的爭論和花卉外套引發了最多的關注，但是她那果斷、準備作戰的風格給人留下了更持久的印象。

And raised the unavoidable question: For what battle, exactly, is she preparing? Theories have been floated: her husband’s critics; the prying eyes of the outside world; even her own marriage. Maybe it’s the much vaunted revolution the president was fond of saying he led; maybe she, too, is fighting for his agenda.

這就提出了一個不可避免的問題：她在爲什麼樣的戰鬥做準備？各種說法都有：批評她丈夫的人；外界的窺探；甚至她自己的婚姻。也許是總統喜歡吹噓自己所領導的那場革命。也許她也正在爲他的議程而奮鬥。

Or maybe it’s just a signal that she is prepared to take her place on the home front.

或許這只是一個信號，表示她準備好了在大後方擔當起自己的職責。