IJ study archive

春风专访｜金翻译家奖俞冰夏：80后斜杠青年与华莱士的相遇

source

TL;DR

A 2024-04-27 Simplified-Chinese profile-interview of 俞冰夏 (Yu Bingxia), the translator of the first Chinese Infinite Jest (无尽的玩笑 / Wujin de wanxiao, 世纪文景 Shiji Wenjing / Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2023), by reporter 方涛 (Fang Tao) for 潮新闻 (Chao News, the Qianjiang Evening News group's digital client) and carried on Tencent/QQ News. The occasion: Yu had just won the 金翻译家奖 (Golden Translator Award) at the 12th 春风悦读榜 (Chunfeng Reading List) book awards; the interview was done at the Mephisto Bookstore in Shanghai before the ceremony. This is the Chinese translator-primary — the counterpart, for the first Asian edition, of the Blumenbach / Nesi / Kerline / Galindo / Kozak translator-interviews the archive already holds. Yu, a self-described «斜杠青年» (slash-youth / multi-hyphenate — gloss ours) and «难度爱好者» (difficulty-lover — gloss ours), took the commission around 2011 while running a Bolaño-fan bookstore («2666图书馆», the 2666 Library) and translated the novel in the pre-dawn hours (0-6 a.m.) over four years, part of a 12-year acquisition-to-publication arc. Her headline reading: «读华莱士很有快感， 但翻译华莱士有时候是种精神摧残» (reading Wallace is a real thrill, but translating Wallace is sometimes a kind of spiritual torment — gloss ours) — he «写不出一句 坏句子» (cannot write a single bad sentence — gloss ours), a feat she likens to sinking every three-pointer. Substantive Wallace/IJ readings, all a working translator's asides and graded conservatively below: the endnotes as a purposeful anti-linear prank / conscious sabotage in the Eco–Barth–Queneau lineage; the Eschaton game as adolescents' petty private grudges swamping all strategy, its «小裁判» (little referee) going insane «有点类似上帝发疯了» (something like God going insane — gloss ours); the character-web as a Deleuzian «块茎化» (rhizomatization — gloss ours) / neural network rather than a flat relationship map; the Hamlet and Karamazov correspondences reported as reader common ground but personally disclaimed as postmodern random sampling; Wallace as founder of the «新真诚派» (New Sincerity — gloss ours) and author of E Unibus Pluram (her title: «合一为众»); IJ as squarely within the American postmodern tradition of DeLillo, Gaddis, Barth; a rejection of the Ulysses comparison (Joyce and Wallace unalike in temperament); and her thesis that Wallace's true subject is not addiction but loneliness — «孤独其实是追求上瘾追求沉迷真正的原因» (loneliness is really the true cause of the pursuit of addiction and immersion — gloss ours) — with the samizdat Entertainment now literalized in everyone's smartphone. No paired-passage translation criticism of her own rendering (she quotes no extended passage of the Chinese IJ); the only crux contacts are translator's-eye sightings, all graded conservatively.

Key claims

The frame: a slash-youth, a difficulty-lover, and how the commission came

  • How she took it on. Yu frames the job as youthful daring: «可能是只在20多岁 时候才有力气做的事情，也是只在20多岁的时候才有勇气做的事情» (something one has the energy for, and the courage for, only in one's twenties — gloss ours) — adding that this only sounds like self-praise and is «恰恰相反» (exactly the opposite — gloss ours). Around 2011 she and friends opened a small Shanghai bookshop named «2666图书馆» (the 2666 Library — gloss ours) out of Bolaño fandom; through the Shiji Wenjing editor 陈欢欢 (Chen Huanhuan), met while Shiji Wenjing was bringing out Bolaño's 2666 in Chinese, the possibility of translating IJ «作为一种可能性呈现在我面前» (presented itself to me as a possibility — gloss ours).
  • A standard slash-youth. The profile (reporter's voice) catalogues her many hats — media worker, art, novel translation, book reviews, her own fiction, a bookshop — a «标准的斜杠青年» (a standard slash-youth / multi-hyphenate — gloss ours) and a friend-famous «难度爱好者» (difficulty-lover — gloss ours): «不想 尝试太简单的事，于是就接下了翻译这样一本书» (I didn't want to try things that were too easy, so I took on translating a book like this — gloss ours).
  • The nocturnal method. She worked a media day-job and translated IJ in the scattered late-night hours, «一般在凌晨0-6点» (usually between 0 and 6 a.m. — gloss ours), over four years — the same night-work compulsion the German (KiWi) and Polish (W.A.B.) translators describe (see Cross-references).
  • Not, by her own account, a professional translator. She has translated horse-racing news, algorithm patents, and once interpreted for a drug dealer in an American prison; she calls herself a professional media person but «从来不认为 自己是职业翻译» (never considered myself a professional translator — gloss ours), because she never really made money at it and did it «为了学习» (in order to learn — gloss ours). She half-jokes she may have «巴托比综合症» (Bartleby's syndrome — gloss ours), her own writing stalled for years.

The reading of Wallace: a grammar-obsessive whose every sentence lands

  • Thrill to read, torment to translate. «读华莱士很有快感，但翻译华莱士有时候是种 精神摧残» (reading Wallace is a real thrill, but translating Wallace is sometimes a kind of spiritual torment — gloss ours), «尤其对自己也有文学追求的人来说» (especially for someone with literary ambitions of their own — gloss ours); «你会发现他写不出 一句坏句子» (you find he cannot write a single bad sentence — gloss ours), a thing as hard, she says, «像比如说三分球百发百中一样难» (as sinking every last three-pointer — gloss ours).
  • A grammar clean-freak, against the grain of Chinese. She names the deepest problem: «华莱士是个语法洁癖» (Wallace is a grammar clean-freak — gloss ours), and «欣赏华莱士也是欣赏他强迫症的语法» (to admire Wallace is to admire his obsessive-compulsive grammar — gloss ours) — but Chinese has few grammatical constraints and resists the clause-nesting long sentence, which «使得整件事变得有点 荒谬» (makes the whole thing a bit absurd — gloss ours). She rejects the 信达雅 (faithfulness-fluency-elegance) orthodoxy and its «反对翻译腔» (anti-translationese) stance as destructive to Western syntax; her own Chinese is often criticized as full of «翻译腔» (translationese — gloss ours). An aside: Wallace's control of transition words is «登峰造极» (consummate — gloss ours) — his sentences look breathless yet «非常符合呼吸规律» (perfectly obey the rhythm of breathing — gloss ours).
  • No relationship diagram needed. Asked whether she used character maps, she says no: «《无尽的玩笑》的人物关系并不复杂» (the character relationships in IJ are not complicated — gloss ours) — the many characters exist «符号化» (symbolically), to express ideas, not to drive plot, unlike a relationship-novel such as Dream of the Red Chamber. One need only know Hal Incandenza has two elder brothers and two parents and some tennis-academy peers; Don Gately is in a halfway house with recovery-and-crime companions; and two agents, a Canadian and an American, sit on an Arizona mountain «讨论乱七八糟的通俗哲学问题» (discussing all manner of pop-philosophy — gloss ours).
  • A rhizome, not a flat map. Her structural figure: the random inter-connection of people's mental states forms «你也可以叫做神经网络、意识网络的东西» (something you could also call a neural network, a consciousness network — gloss ours) that is «文学或者人类思想的本质» (the essence of literature or of human thought — gloss ours), «接近德勒兹的“块茎化”概念» (close to Deleuze's concept of rhizomatization — gloss ours) — a barb follows that AI companies would do well to read postmodern fiction, though «一个AI华莱士» (an AI Wallace — gloss ours) would be of no use to them.

The endnotes as purposeful anti-narrative sabotage

  • A narrative-breaking device, by design. «尾注作为一种插入或中断性质文本更是纯粹 打破叙事的存在» (the endnotes, as an inserting or interrupting kind of text, are all the more a purely narrative-breaking presence — gloss ours). She places the device in a postmodern lineage: Eco said he put chapters unrelated to the plot into Foucault's Pendulum «主要是为了让读者读得慢一点» (mainly to make the reader read a little slower — gloss ours), to manufacture tedium and remind the reader this is not a page-every-page popular novel; likewise the metafiction of John Barth and Raymond Queneau. Her verdict: «此类后现代叙事都是反线性叙事的恶作剧，是一种 有目的，有意识地搞破坏行为» (this kind of postmodern narrative is all an anti-linear-narrative prank, a purposeful and conscious act of sabotage — gloss ours).

Loneliness, not addiction, is the real subject — and the Entertainment is now our phones

  • The thesis. Every era is an age of addiction, she says; «华莱士真正的兴趣不是 上瘾，而是孤独» (Wallace's true interest is not addiction but loneliness — gloss ours), because «孤独其实是追求上瘾追求沉迷真正的原因» (loneliness is really the true cause of the pursuit of addiction and immersion — gloss ours). She reads Wallace's own recovery-group involvement (the depressive episode that took him out of Harvard; he attended even without a severe addiction) as a first experience of «第一次被无条件接受» (being unconditionally accepted for the first time — gloss ours) — the same thing Gately, Joelle van Dyne, and the Ennet House misfits find: that their pain is «并非独一无二或者积重难返» (not unique or beyond repair — gloss ours), that «有很多其他人也在承受同样的痛苦» (many others are bearing the same pain — gloss ours), and only in that discovery do they «第一次试图走出自己的“牢笼”» (for the first time try to walk out of their own "cage" — gloss ours; the scare-quoted 牢笼 is the source's own mark). She adds her own acquaintances' recovery-group experience matched the book exactly.
  • IJ was over-optimistic. «这还是90年代的叙事，《无尽的玩笑》从某种意义上是过分乐观的» (this is still a 1990s narrative; IJ is in a sense over-optimistic — gloss ours): today the boundary between the human «精神（psyche）» and the psyche of the device in one's hand has blurred; one can quit alcohol or drugs but almost never knows «哪个app改变了自己的精神状态» (which app changed one's own mental state — gloss ours). «现在我们每个人手里现在都拿着华莱士写的，让人娱乐至死的那盘“无尽的玩笑”录像带， 生死难辨» (now every one of us holds in our hands the Infinite Jest cartridge Wallace wrote, the one that entertains people to death, alive-or-dead hard to tell — gloss ours; the repeated 现在...现在 is cite-as-written). Her five-year-old calls the phone-walkers who bump into walls «僵尸» (zombies — gloss ours), and she believes «“人”这个自然物种在走向灭绝» (the natural species man is heading toward extinction — gloss ours) — «以后的“人”不再能被叫做所谓的homo sapiens» (the man of the future can no longer be called homo sapiens — gloss ours).
  • The Ellis in-joke (consumerism answer). She recently read Bret Easton Ellis's American Psycho and suspects the whole Subsidized-Time conceit and the gratuitous brand-name insertions may be «在嘲笑埃利斯» (mocking Ellis — gloss ours), an in-joke of the era's literary circle — Wallace wrote a famous piece against Ellis's «小时代风» (minimalist brat-pack style — gloss ours), the two «有点死对头的感觉» (something of sworn enemies — gloss ours). Wallace's consumerism argument, she says, is simple: pursuing material life only makes people lonely and alienates real feeling.

Gen X, the New Sincerity, and E Unibus Pluram

  • Wallace as Gen X kin to China's post-80s. She reads Wallace (a Gen X figure) as sharing much with China's 80后 (post-80s) generation: latchkey kids of emotionally cold, upwardly-mobile parents, who learned the world «从电视上» (from the television — gloss ours), lonely, craving «‘真’的东西——不是‘善’和‘美’» (the true — not the good or the beautiful — gloss ours). Gen X distrusts authority and success, protects its childhood-wounded hearts through irony: «他们喜欢的是开玩笑，玩反讽，用修辞手法保护自己受了童年创伤的心灵» (what they like is joking, playing irony, using rhetorical devices to protect their childhood-traumatized hearts — gloss ours) — Chandler / Matthew Perry from Friends the type. Their zeitgeist finds everything hypocritical and filtered «带滤镜的» (filter-laden — gloss ours) ugly.
  • The New Sincerity manifesto. «华莱士是所谓“新真诚派”的开创者» (Wallace is the founder of the so-called New Sincerity — gloss ours); he wrote «一篇著名的文章叫 《合一为众》（把美国国徽上的格言倒过来）» (a famous essay called He-yi-wei-zhong / united into the many — the motto on the US seal reversed — gloss ours; her rendering of E Unibus Pluram, E Pluribus Unum inverted) — a kind of manifesto that «其实并没想打倒任何东西» (does not actually want to topple anything — gloss ours), «反而挺鸡汤的» (is rather chicken-soup / feel-good — gloss ours), only trying to solve loneliness. Wallace's dense layered meaning, once digested, reveals «他耗尽 了一切才勉强找出来的活下去的理由» (the reason to keep living that he barely found by exhausting everything — gloss ours).

IJ inside the American postmodern tradition; NOT a Great American Novel; NOT Ulysses

  • Squarely postmodern. Asked whether IJ belongs to American postmodernism: «肯定是的。《无尽的玩笑》是美国后现代文学传统之下的作品» (certainly. IJ is a work under the American postmodern literary tradition — gloss ours), not a school unto itself. «华莱士从唐·德里罗、威廉姆·加迪斯、约翰·巴斯等作家那里吸取了很多经验» (Wallace drew much experience from writers like DeLillo, Gaddis, and Barth — gloss ours), and was intensely conscious of carrying the American postmodern tradition forward. She distinguishes IJ from the burden-free Great American Novel (On the Road, The Catcher in the Rye): IJ is «美国后现代这个类型当中的重要作品» (an important work within the American postmodern genre — gloss ours), not a great novel in that other sense.
  • Not Ulysses. On the perennial IJ/Ulysses comparison she demurs: «我觉得 乔伊斯和华莱士性格上没有什么相像之处» (I don't think Joyce and Wallace resemble each other at all in temperament — gloss ours) — Wallace a self-consuming introvert («自耗的I人», a self-consuming I-person — gloss ours), Joyce a genuinely happy drunk; Joyce and Italo Svevo wrote heartfelt modernist urban love-novels, whereas «《无尽的玩笑》相比之下绝对是后现代噩梦» (IJ by comparison is absolutely a postmodern nightmare — gloss ours).
  • A once-only cultural phenomenon. Like Nirvana's Nevermind («没关系», her gloss — gloss ours), IJ «只可能在某时某地出现» (could only appear at a certain time and place — gloss ours); to understand America's fin-de-siècle mood you cannot get around it; more importantly it is a prescient anatomy of the contemporary psyche that «能帮助当代人理解自己的处境» (can help people today understand their own situation — gloss ours).

The Hamlet and Karamazov correspondences — reported, then disclaimed

  • The Hamlet mapping. «哈尔对应哈姆雷特，母亲艾薇儿对应格特鲁德，查尔斯对应克劳狄乌斯， 《无尽的玩笑》是在重写《哈姆雷特》，是一个恋母的故事» (Hal corresponds to Hamlet, mother Avril to Gertrude, Charles to Claudius; IJ is a rewriting of Hamlet, an Oedipal story — gloss ours) — she grants this «说得也不无道理，从读者的角度» (is not without merit, from the reader's angle — gloss ours). The title itself: «”无尽的玩笑“这个 词组本身是从《哈姆雷特》里一句很普通的话里随机采样出来的» (the phrase Infinite Jest itself was randomly sampled from a very ordinary line in Hamlet — gloss ours; the reversed quotation marks ”…“ are cite-as-written), like the Velvet Underground taking its name from an obscure pulp book.
  • The Karamazov mapping, and the disclaimer. Some hold that «《无尽的玩笑》里 因坎旦萨三兄弟对应卡拉马佐夫三兄弟» (in IJ the three Incandenza brothers correspond to the three Karamazov brothers — gloss ours), «也一样很说得通» (equally makes sense — gloss ours); but «我自己并不认为他在重写莎士比亚或者陀思妥耶夫斯基» (I myself do not think he is rewriting Shakespeare or Dostoevsky — gloss ours), only «一种后现代作家惯用的文学史采样伎俩，很多时候很随机» (a postmodern writer's habitual literary-history sampling trick, often quite random — gloss ours).

The Eschaton game, JOI's films, and the sprint-a-marathon method

  • The Eschaton reading. The «末世» (Eschaton / end-times) game passage is «描写非常精细» (very finely written — gloss ours), narrated in an adolescent's voice, maximalist but making a simple point: a group of teenagers play a simulated world war, and «最后你发现一切战争...背后却是一个个心胸狭隘，涉世未深的赌气 青少年，私人恩怨主导一切» (in the end you find that behind all war ... are petty, callow, sulking adolescents, private grievances governing everything — gloss ours); grand optimal solutions and advanced math «一文不值» (are worth nothing — gloss ours) before this. «华莱士的“末世”游戏玩到最后投入程度最高的小裁判发疯了，有点 类似上帝发疯了的意思» (in Wallace's Eschaton game the most-invested little referee ends up going insane, something like the sense of God going insane — gloss ours).
  • JOI's films as sampled avant-garde cinema. She studied experimental film herself, and the experimental-film director Hollis Frampton — whom Wallace clearly drew on for James Incandenza's filmography — worked for years at her own film school. James's films relate «非常直接» (very directly — gloss ours) to Frampton works like Zorns Lemma and the Hapax Legomena seven-part cycle, and others (Stan Brakhage, Paul Sharits) have counterparts in IJ, «但他好比是在采样，肯定 不是一对一的关系» (but it is like sampling, certainly not a one-to-one mapping — gloss ours). She frames American experimental film, postmodern fiction, Fluxus, and punk as one aesthetic camp valuing destructiveness and «带meta-前缀的创作» (creation with the meta- prefix — gloss ours).
  • Sprinting a marathon. To the line that Wallace ran a marathon at sprint pace, she assents: «是的，这是比较贴合他写作的描述» (yes, that fits his writing rather well — gloss ours), adding that such geniuses «耗尽自己的速度也会更快» (also burn through themselves faster — gloss ours).

The closing reader's-guide plot summary (Yu's voice)

  • Asked for advice to first-time readers, she gives a jacket-style synopsis: «一个 名叫哈尔·因坎旦萨的网球加学术天才男孩终于精神崩溃» (a tennis-and-academic prodigy boy named Hal Incandenza finally suffers a mental breakdown — gloss ours), wanting to be seen for his inner life and not as a label; through Hal we meet emotion-numbing eldest brother Orin, the multiply-disabled but spiritually limpid second brother Mario, the cold serially-unfaithful multiple-clean-freak mother Avril, and «把 自己的脑袋毫厘不差塞进微波炉引爆自杀的物理学家/电影导演父亲詹姆斯» (the physicist / film-director father James, who fits his own head precisely into a microwave and blows himself up — gloss ours; the ASCII slash 物理学家/电影导演 is cite-as-written), plus Joelle van Dyne, «史上最漂亮的女孩» (the prettiest girl of all time — gloss ours), disfigured in an ambiguous accident and entering Ennet House for addiction, where she meets ex-addict, now-staffer Don Gately, «一位身材魁梧，长着正方形脑袋» (a burly, square-headed man — gloss ours) of the Boston underclass. She closes thanking 潮新闻 and 《钱江晚报》 (Qianjiang Evening News) and wishing readers joy of the book.

Theories & evidence

(This is a translator PROFILE-INTERVIEW, not a study of the finished novel. Its Wallace/IJ observations are a working translator's asides — often vivid and argued, but delivered in passing; grades are honest to what she argues, and every contact is a sighting graded conservatively. The richest material — the translation-craft phenomenology, the Gen-X / loneliness / device-addiction cultural reading, the Ellis feud, the Nirvana analogy — has NO home slug and is NOT folded.)

CONNECTION: the endnote apparatus as a purposeful anti-linear device — deliberate reader-slowing sabotage in the Eco/Barth/Queneau lineage

  • Crux: endnotes-function (adjacency: endnotes-structure)
  • Stance: mentions (leaning — an argued functional account)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] The device: «尾注作为一种插入或中断性质文本更是纯粹打破叙事的存在» (the endnotes, as an inserting or interrupting kind of text, are all the more a purely narrative-breaking presence — gloss ours). [the structure/character-info answer]
    • [J] The lineage + purpose: Eco's unrelated Foucault's Pendulum chapters «主要是为了让读者读得慢一点» (mainly to make the reader read a little slower — gloss ours); Barth's and Queneau's metafiction; «此类后现代叙事都是反线性叙事的恶作剧，是一种 有目的，有意识地搞破坏行为» (this kind of postmodern narrative is all an anti-linear prank, a purposeful and conscious act of sabotage — gloss ours). [same answer]
  • Notes: Stronger than a bare sighting — she answers a question about the endnotes with a THEORY of their function (deliberate reader-slowing, anti-linear sabotage in a named postmodern lineage), which is precisely the crux's question (what the endnote apparatus is for). Graded mentions (leaning) by the conservative reading — it is a one-answer aside, not a sustained argument — but it is the note's strongest contact, and it rhymes directly with the cluster's endnote testimony (Nesi's encyclopedia-lookup anecdote; Kozak's overflow account; the Russian dystopia note's endnotes-function endorses). A later weighing may promote it; from the Chinese desk.

CONNECTION: the Eschaton set-piece as adolescent private grudge swamping strategy — the little referee's God-like madness

  • Crux: eschaton-function
  • Stance: mentions (leaning — an argued reading of the scene's meaning)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] The meaning: teenagers play «一个模拟世界大战的游戏» (a game simulating a world war — gloss ours), and «背后却是一个个心胸狭隘，涉世未深的赌气青少年，私人恩怨主导一切» (behind it are petty, callow, sulking adolescents, private grievances governing everything — gloss ours); grand strategy and «高级数学公式» (advanced mathematical formulas — gloss ours) are «一文不值» (worth nothing — gloss ours) before this.
    • [J] The end-state: «华莱士的“末世”游戏玩到最后投入程度最高的小裁判发疯了，有点类似上帝 发疯了的意思» (in Wallace's Eschaton game the most-invested little referee ends up going insane, something like the sense of God going insane — gloss ours). [the 末世-game meaning answer]
  • Notes: An argued reading of what the Eschaton passage does — that its maximalist war-game unmasks petty private grievance as the real driver of war, the highest-invested «小裁判» (little referee — Otis P. Lord in the novel; she does not name him) going God-like mad. Contacts eschaton-function (what the scene is for) rather than eschaton-math-error (she treats the advanced math only as something rendered worthless, not as a planted error). Sighting, graded conservatively.

CONNECTION: the Hamlet correspondence (Hal/Hamlet, Avril/Gertrude, Charles/Claudius) and the title's Hamlet provenance — reported as reader common ground, personally disclaimed

  • Crux: hamlet-frame
  • Stance: mentions
  • Evidence:
    • [J] The mapping: «哈尔对应哈姆雷特，母亲艾薇儿对应格特鲁德，查尔斯对应克劳狄乌斯， 《无尽的玩笑》是在重写《哈姆雷特》，是一个恋母的故事» (Hal→Hamlet, Avril→Gertrude, Charles→Claudius; IJ is rewriting Hamlet, an Oedipal story — gloss ours), granted «不无道理，从读者的角度» (not without merit, from the reader's angle — gloss ours).
    • [J] The title provenance: «”无尽的玩笑“这个词组本身是从《哈姆雷特》里一句很普通的话里 随机采样出来的» (the phrase Infinite Jest was randomly sampled from a very ordinary line in Hamlet — gloss ours; reversed marks cite-as-written).
    • [J] The disclaimer: «我自己并不认为他在重写莎士比亚或者陀思妥耶夫斯基» (I myself do not think he is rewriting Shakespeare or Dostoevsky — gloss ours), only a postmodern «文学史采样伎俩» (literary-history sampling trick — gloss ours). [the Hamlet-source answer + the postmodernism answer]
  • Notes: A mentions: she lays out the standard Hal/Hamlet correspondence and the title's 5.1-adjacent provenance as reader common ground, then explicitly DECLINES to argue Hamlet organizes the novel (the crux's actual question), reading the borrowing as random postmodern sampling. New non-English evidence that the title's Hamlet source and the character mapping are common ground in Chinese reception; a translator's skeptical stance on the organizing-intertext claim. A sighting. (Rhymes with Kozak's hamlet-frame mentions, which likewise invokes Hamlet only for the title.)

CONNECTION: the three Incandenza brothers ↔ the three Karamazov brothers — reported, then disclaimed

  • Crux: karamazov-frame
  • Stance: mentions
  • Evidence:
    • [J] «《无尽的玩笑》里因坎旦萨三兄弟对应卡拉马佐夫三兄弟» (in IJ the three Incandenza brothers correspond to the three Karamazov brothers — gloss ours), «也一样很说得通» (equally makes sense — gloss ours), coupled with the same disclaimer that Wallace is not rewriting Dostoevsky. [the Hamlet-source answer]
  • Notes: A thin mentions: the Incandenza↔Karamazov triad is reported as a reading that makes sense, then set aside as random postmodern sampling. She argues no mind/body/soul assignment (the crux's substance). Sighting only.

CONNECTION: IJ as a work of the American postmodern tradition — DeLillo, Gaddis, Barth as sources; Wallace's strong literary-history consciousness

  • Crux: delillo-influence · gaddis-influence · barth-influence (and eup-connection / New Sincerity, below)
  • Stance: mentions (each)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] «华莱士从唐·德里罗、威廉姆·加迪斯、约翰·巴斯等作家那里吸取了很多经验» (Wallace drew much experience from writers like DeLillo, Gaddis, and Barth — gloss ours), and «非常在意把美国后现代小说的传统传承下去» (cared intensely about carrying the American postmodern-fiction tradition forward — gloss ours). [the postmodernism-category answer]
    • [J] Barth (and Donald Barthelme) also «在我学习实验电影的那所学校教过书» (taught at the same school where I studied experimental film — gloss ours). [the film-structure answer]
  • Notes: Bare influence mentions — Wallace named as heir to DeLillo/Gaddis/ Barth within a self-conscious American postmodern lineage. No argued single-source reading. Sightings of influence lines the archive already tracks.

CONNECTION: Wallace as founder of the New Sincerity and author of E Unibus Pluram (合一为众) — a loneliness-solving manifesto

  • Crux: eup-connection
  • Stance: mentions
  • Evidence:
    • [J] «华莱士是所谓“新真诚派”的开创者» (Wallace is the founder of the so-called New Sincerity — gloss ours); his famous essay «《合一为众》（把美国国徽上的格言倒过来）» (He-yi-wei-zhong / the US-seal motto reversed — gloss ours; her rendering of E Unibus Pluram), a manifesto that «其实并没想打倒任何东西...只是在设法解决孤独这个 问题» (does not actually want to topple anything ... only tries to solve the problem of loneliness — gloss ours). [the Gen-X answer]
  • Notes: A mentions: she names E Unibus Pluram (by her Chinese title) and crowns Wallace the New Sincerity's founder, reading the essay as an anti-loneliness manifesto — but she does NOT argue IJ as the execution of EUP's program (the crux's substance); the essay is invoked to characterize Wallace's generational project. A New-Sincerity naming datum from the Chinese desk — a naming datum only.

CONNECTION: the character-web as a Deleuzian rhizome / consciousness-network rather than a flat relationship map

  • Crux: annular-structure (macro-shape) — thin adjacency
  • Stance: mentions (thin)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] The many characters are «符号化» (symbolic), the novel developing not on a flat plane but «往其上下纵轴发展» (along its vertical axis — gloss ours); their random mental-state interconnection is «你也可以叫做神经网络、意识网络的东西» (something you could also call a neural network, a consciousness network — gloss ours), «接近德勒兹的“块茎化”概念» (close to Deleuze's concept of rhizomatization — gloss ours). [the character-map answer]
  • Notes: A thin mentions and an imperfect fit: her figure for the novel's macro-shape is a rhizomatic depth-network (Deleuze), not the ring / Sierpinski gasket / dead-center design the crux's English anchors argue. Logged as a structural-figure sighting adjacent to annular-structure; the rhizome reading itself matches no standing question in the archive.

CONNECTION: walking out of one's own «牢笼» (cage) — the recovery-group discovery of shared pain

  • Crux: cage-self-built — thin adjacency
  • Stance: mentions (thin)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] The Ennet House misfits first discover their trouble is «并非独一无二或者积重难返» (not unique or beyond repair — gloss ours), that «他们发现有很多其他人也在承受同样的痛苦» (many others are bearing the same pain — gloss ours) — and only thus do they «第一次试图走出自己的“牢笼”» (for the first time try to walk out of their own "cage" — gloss ours; the scare-quoted 牢笼 is the source's own mark). [the recovery-group answer]
  • Notes: A thin adjacency sighting. Yu's cage figure is the private mental prison escaped through recovery-group mutual acceptance — the escape half of the image, not the crux's substance (that the cage is self-built and its inmate comes to love it). Her scare quotes suggest she is reaching for the novel's own cage vocabulary. A sighting only.

CONNECTION: a rejection of the IJ/Ulysses comparison

  • Crux: ulysses-frame
  • Stance: mentions (negative)
  • Evidence:
    • [J] «我觉得乔伊斯和华莱士性格上没有什么相像之处» (I don't think Joyce and Wallace resemble each other at all in temperament — gloss ours); Joyce/Svevo wrote modernist urban love-novels whereas «《无尽的玩笑》相比之下绝对是后现代噩梦» (IJ by comparison is absolutely a postmodern nightmare — gloss ours). [the Ulysses comparison answer]
  • Notes: A mentions recorded for the negative: asked the standard IJ/Ulysses question, the Chinese translator DECLINES the comparison on temperamental/period grounds (modernist Joyce vs. postmodern-nightmare Wallace). Evidence that the comparison is a live prompt even in Chinese reception, and one translator's dissent from it. ulysses-frame is a folded slug; this is a sighting for the record, not a fold-worthy argument.

NON-CRUX (outside the archive's questions): the translation-craft phenomenology; the Gen-X / loneliness / device-addiction cultural reading; the Ellis feud; the Nirvana analogy

  • Crux: (no home slug — translation craft / reception / cultural-aesthetics)
  • Stance: n/a
  • Evidence / substance: the pre-dawn four-year night method and the grammar-clean-freak-vs-Chinese-syntax problem; the thesis that loneliness (not addiction) is Wallace's real subject and that the samizdat Entertainment is now literalized in the smartphone («让人娱乐至死的...录像带»); the Gen-X-as-latchkey-kids reading and its kinship with China's post-80s; the American Psycho / Bret Easton Ellis in-joke and feud; the Nirvana-Nevermind once-only-cultural-phenomenon analogy; the JOI-films-as-sampled-Frampton/Brakhage/Sharits observation.
  • Notes: The densest and most original material in the interview, and none of it has a home slug — the same do-not-coin finding every landed non-English note reached. NOT a fold; NOT a coinage. Preserved in Key claims / Themes / Notable passages for the reader surface.

Themes

Translation as a difficulty-lover's craft (the four-year pre-dawn night method; the grammar-clean-freak original against the low-constraint, clause-nesting-averse target language; her rejection of the 信达雅 / anti-translationese orthodoxy; the self-taught not a professional translator who translated to learn); the reading of Wallace as the writer who cannot write a bad sentence, a consummate handler of transition words whose breathless sentences obey the rhythm of breath; the character-web as a Deleuzian rhizome / consciousness-network with no need of a relationship map; the endnotes as purposeful anti-linear sabotage in the Eco/Barth/Queneau lineage; loneliness (not addiction) as Wallace's real subject, recovery groups as the site of first unconditional acceptance, and the samizdat Entertainment literalized in the smartphone (which app changed my mental state); the Gen-X reading (latchkey kids, ironic self-protection, the true over the good and beautiful) and its kinship with China's post-80s generation; Wallace as founder of the New Sincerity and author of E Unibus Pluram (合一为众) as an anti-loneliness manifesto; IJ inside the American postmodern tradition (DeLillo/Gaddis/Barth), NOT a burden-free Great American Novel, and NOT Ulysses; the Eschaton game as petty adolescent grievance unmasking war, its little referee going God-like mad; JOI's films as sampled avant-garde cinema (Hollis Frampton's Zorns Lemma / Hapax Legomena, Brakhage, Sharits); the Bret Easton Ellis / American Psycho in-joke and feud; the Nirvana-Nevermind once-only-cultural-phenomenon analogy; and the translation-history datum itself — the FIRST Chinese Infinite Jest (Shiji Wenjing, 2023), a 12-year acquisition-to-publication arc, honored with the 2024 Golden Translator Award.

Cross-references

  • The translator-testimony cluster — blumenbach-trashpool-2011, nesi-minimaetmoralia-intervista, kerline-vice-2015, galindo-graca-infinita-historia-pessoal-2018, kozak-dwutygodnik-2017 — the German, Italian, French, Brazilian-Portuguese and Polish translator-primaries on rendering Wallace's registers and syntax. Yu Bingxia is the Chinese desk and the first Asian-edition voice: her pre-dawn four-year night-work echoes Kozak's nocturnal compulsion and Blumenbach's years-long grind, while her specific problem — Wallace's clause-nesting, OCD-clean English grammar against a Chinese that resists the nested long sentence — is the Sinophone counterpart to the syntax-rebreaking problems Kerline (French) and Blumenbach (German) describe. Direct rhyme on the endnotes: her purposeful, conscious sabotage account sits beside Nesi's encyclopedia-lookup anecdote, Kozak's overflow account, and the Russian dystopia note's endnotes-function endorses — a five-language chorus on what the apparatus is for.
  • The Russian cluster — dystopia-polyarinov-obsuzhdaya-2018 and its siblings — shares this note's late-arrival framing (Russia 2018, China 2023) and the puzzle-structure emphasis; the Deleuzian-rhizome figure here is the Chinese counterpart to the Russian pair's architecture / haunted-house with its own entry points reading of the macro-shape.
  • news247-kaltsas-2026 / mokita-blumenbach-passage-2017 — the Greek (imminent 2026) and German passage-comparison siblings; like Kaltsas's Greek and the late Polish/Dutch editions, the Chinese edition is a document of a language that came late to Infinite Jest. Where mokita walks specific renderings against the original, Yu (like Kozak) instead gives the translator's phenomenology — the two are the how-it-is-made and how-it-reads faces of the same craft.
  • esposito-ij-around-the-world — the cross-language reception round-up; the Chinese edition (Shiji Wenjing, 2023) is the first-Asian-edition pin on the who-has-it-yet map, dated here from inside the translator's own account.
  • The Chinese sibling (landed). The 2023 澎湃 / The Paper launch-event recap — thepaper-wujin-wanxiao-2023 — is the archive's other first-Chinese source (its panelists are the novelists Lu Nei and Zouzou — not, as an earlier account had it, the scholar Dan Hansong). This profile is the translator-primary (the making-of); the launch recap is the reception frame — the two faces of the Chinese edition.

Notable passages

Yu Bingxia's words unless marked [R] (reporter 方涛 / 潮新闻), [C] (Chinese-edition cover copy), [W] (back-translated Wallace — paraphrase-only), [T] (back-translated Walter Kirn — paraphrase-only), or [D] (novel-in-translation — Chinese 无尽的玩笑 renderings). Chinese is the verbatim anchor; the English in parentheses is our gloss (paraphrase). The source's own scare-quote wrapper is the curly double pair “ … ” (reproduced byte-true inside the spans, including the ONE reversed pair ”…“ at line 164); this note's own wrapper is the guillemet « … » (byte-ABSENT from the source), so the source's own “ ” survive with no wrapper collision.

  • Yu (thrill vs. torment): «读华莱士很有快感，但翻译华莱士有时候是种精神摧残» (reading Wallace is a real thrill, but translating Wallace is sometimes a kind of spiritual torment — gloss ours); «你会发现他写不出一句坏句子» (you find he cannot write a single bad sentence — gloss ours), «像比如说三分球百发百中一样难» (as hard as sinking every three-pointer — gloss ours).
  • Yu (a life chopped to mush): «被人间琐事剁成糊状，不成正形» (chopped into mush by life's trivialities, out of proper shape — gloss ours), translating «一般在凌晨0-6点» (usually between 0 and 6 a.m. — gloss ours).
  • Yu (real identity): «我认为我真正的身份是个文学爱好者» (I think my real identity is that of a literature lover — gloss ours); «我可能患上了所谓的“巴托比综合症”» (I may have contracted what's called Bartleby's syndrome — gloss ours).
  • Yu (grammar clean-freak): «华莱士是个语法洁癖» (Wallace is a grammar clean-freak — gloss ours); «欣赏华莱士也是欣赏他强迫症的语法» (to admire Wallace is to admire his obsessive-compulsive grammar — gloss ours).
  • Yu (no relationship map): «《无尽的玩笑》的人物关系并不复杂» (the character relationships in IJ are not complicated — gloss ours).
  • Yu (the rhizome): «你也可以叫做神经网络、意识网络的东西» (something you could also call a neural network, a consciousness network — gloss ours), «接近德勒兹的“块茎化”概念» (close to Deleuze's concept of rhizomatization — gloss ours).
  • Yu (endnotes as sabotage): «尾注作为一种插入或中断性质文本更是纯粹打破叙事的存在» (the endnotes, as an inserting or interrupting kind of text, are all the more a purely narrative-breaking presence — gloss ours); «此类后现代叙事都是反线性叙事的恶作剧» (this kind of postmodern narrative is all an anti-linear-narrative prank — gloss ours).
  • Yu (loneliness, not addiction): «华莱士真正的兴趣不是上瘾，而是孤独» (Wallace's true interest is not addiction but loneliness — gloss ours); «孤独其实是追求上瘾追求沉迷真正的 原因» (loneliness is really the true cause of the pursuit of addiction and immersion — gloss ours).
  • Yu (out of the cage): «他们发现有很多其他人也在承受同样的痛苦» (they discover many others are bearing the same pain — gloss ours), and only thus do they «第一次试图走出自己的“牢笼”» (for the first time try to walk out of their own "cage" — gloss ours; the scare-quoted 牢笼 is the source's own mark).
  • Yu (the Entertainment is now our phones): «现在我们每个人手里现在都拿着华莱士写的，让人 娱乐至死的那盘“无尽的玩笑”录像带，生死难辨» (now every one of us holds the Infinite Jest cartridge Wallace wrote that entertains people to death, alive-or-dead hard to tell — gloss ours; the repeated 现在...现在 is cite-as-written); «以后的“人”不再能被叫做所谓的 homo sapiens» (the man of the future can no longer be called homo sapiens — gloss ours; Latin run homo sapiens cite-as-written).
  • Yu (Gen-X irony): «他们喜欢的是开玩笑，玩反讽，用修辞手法保护自己受了童年创伤的心灵» (what they like is joking, playing irony, using rhetorical devices to protect their childhood-traumatized hearts — gloss ours).
  • Yu (New Sincerity / EUP): «华莱士是所谓“新真诚派”的开创者» (Wallace is the founder of the so-called New Sincerity — gloss ours), author of «《合一为众》（把美国国徽上的格言 倒过来）» (He-yi-wei-zhong, the US-seal motto reversed — gloss ours; = E Unibus Pluram).
  • Yu (not Ulysses): «我觉得乔伊斯和华莱士性格上没有什么相像之处» (I don't think Joyce and Wallace resemble each other at all in temperament — gloss ours); «《无尽的玩笑》相比之下 绝对是后现代噩梦» (IJ by comparison is absolutely a postmodern nightmare — gloss ours).
  • Yu (Hamlet mapping + title): «哈尔对应哈姆雷特，母亲艾薇儿对应格特鲁德，查尔斯对应克劳狄乌斯， 《无尽的玩笑》是在重写《哈姆雷特》，是一个恋母的故事» (Hal→Hamlet, Avril→Gertrude, Charles→ Claudius; IJ is rewriting Hamlet, an Oedipal story — gloss ours); «”无尽的玩笑“这个 词组本身是从《哈姆雷特》里一句很普通的话里随机采样出来的» (the phrase Infinite Jest itself was randomly sampled from a very ordinary line in Hamlet — gloss ours; reversed marks ”…“ cite-as-written).
  • Yu (Karamazov + disclaimer): «《无尽的玩笑》里因坎旦萨三兄弟对应卡拉马佐夫三兄弟» (in IJ the three Incandenza brothers correspond to the three Karamazov brothers — gloss ours); «我自己并不认为他在重写莎士比亚或者陀思妥耶夫斯基» (I myself do not think he is rewriting Shakespeare or Dostoevsky — gloss ours).
  • Yu (postmodern tradition): «《无尽的玩笑》是美国后现代文学传统之下的作品» (IJ is a work under the American postmodern literary tradition — gloss ours); «华莱士从唐·德里罗、 威廉姆·加迪斯、约翰·巴斯等作家那里吸取了很多经验» (Wallace drew much experience from writers like DeLillo, Gaddis, and Barth — gloss ours).
  • Yu (Eschaton): «一群青少年在一起玩一个模拟世界大战的游戏» (a group of teenagers together play a game simulating a world war — gloss ours); «华莱士的“末世”游戏玩到最后投入程度最高的 小裁判发疯了，有点类似上帝发疯了的意思» (in Wallace's Eschaton game the most-invested little referee ends up going insane, something like the sense of God going insane — gloss ours).
  • Yu (plot summary — James's suicide): «把自己的脑袋毫厘不差塞进微波炉引爆自杀的物理学家/ 电影导演父亲詹姆斯» (the physicist / film-director father James, who fits his own head precisely into a microwave and blows himself up — gloss ours; ASCII slash cite-as-written).
  • [R] Reporter (the 12-year arc): «从确定引进到最终出版《无尽的玩笑》整整用了12年时间， 仅整体编校工作用了7年» (from acquiring the rights to final publication IJ took a full 12 years, the overall editing alone taking 7 — gloss ours). [see Accuracy notes]
  • [R] Reporter (the counts): «1138页的全书共有267个人物、388个尾注» (the 1138-page book has in all 267 characters and 388 endnotes — gloss ours). [see Accuracy notes]
  • [R] Reporter (25 languages, 10 translations): «它在全球售出25种语言版权，至今仅有10种 语言译本» (it has sold rights in 25 languages worldwide, with translations in only 10 to date — gloss ours). [see Accuracy notes]
  • [R] Reporter (the postcard campaign): «4000张明信片犹如一池躁动不安的鲇鱼» (4000 postcards like a pond of restless catfish — gloss ours) — the profile's image for Little, Brown's pre-publication mailing.
  • [C] Cover copy (the Chinese edition's reading guide): «你需要好的体力，本书重达1500g； 好的脑力，本书出现了267个人物；一副墨镜，小心被作者耀眼才华灼伤» (you need good physical strength — the book weighs 1500g; good mental strength — it has 267 characters; a pair of sunglasses — beware being scorched by the author's dazzling talent — gloss ours). The publisher (世纪文景) marketing copy, quoted by the reporter — NOT the novel.
  • [W] Back-translated Wallace (paraphrase-only; English original RESOLVED): a line Yu calls «华莱士那句著名的» (Wallace's famous line — gloss ours) — «所有人最共同的特征是 他们私底下都认为自己与众不同» (everyone's most common trait is that they privately believe themselves to be different — gloss ours). This renders a line from the novel itself — the Ennet House list, IJ p. 205: "That everybody is identical in their secret unspoken belief that way deep down they are different from everyone else." Her Chinese compresses the paradox-frame (most-common trait, for identical in their secret unspoken belief); quote Wallace only from the English original, never from this rendering.
  • [W] Back-translated Wallace (paraphrase-only; NO exact English original located): the reporter attributes «华莱士曾表示» (Wallace once stated — gloss ours) — «如果我们的生活是 碎片化的，那么小说应该也是» (if our lives are fragmented, then the novel should be too — gloss ours). No Wallace statement of this credo is on record here; the nearest locus is the 1993 McCaffery interview, where Wallace attributes exactly this program to Faulkner and Joyce ("Their idea was, well, experience is vastly more dislocated and fragmentary … and so they'll show you this") and pivots away from it toward his own "desire to make something pretty." See Accuracy notes; not Wallace verbatim in any language.
  • [T] Back-translated Walter Kirn (paraphrase-only): the reporter renders the New York-magazine blurb of «沃尔特·基恩» (Walter Kirn — gloss ours) — «明年的图书奖已经 有主。奖牌和奖状现在可以被托管了...竞争已经被清除» (next year's book awards already have their winner; the medals and certificates can be held in escrow now ... the competition has been eliminated — gloss ours). This source's Chinese rendering of Kirn's English, not Kirn verbatim.
  • [D] Novel-in-translation (Chinese 无尽的玩笑, quotable byte-true as printed Chinese, NEVER as Wallace's English): the Subsidized-Time year-names — «“皇堡之年” “美国乡村奶制品之年”“得伴成人纸尿裤之年”“小包装德芙巧克力棒之年”» (Year of the Whopper / Year of Dairy Products from the American Heartland / Year of the Depend Adult Undergarment / Year of the Trial-Size Dove Bar — gloss ours). The English year-names are the novel's own; quote them only from the English text.

Accuracy notes

Cite-as-written throughout (orthography and typography preserved as printed; line numbers reference the local txt).

  • This is a PROFILE-INTERVIEW; nothing of the Chinese IJ text is quoted at length. Yu discusses and paraphrases the novel extensively but quotes no extended passage of her own published rendering. The only novel-in-translation tokens quoted are the Subsidized-Time year-names (line 98-99) and short character-name renderings.
  • The reversed quotation pair at line 164 (cite-as-written). The phrase Infinite Jest is wrapped ”无尽的玩笑“ — closing curly double U+201D as the OPENER and opening curly double U+201C as the CLOSER, the reverse of the source's normal “…” usage. A source typographic reversal, reproduced byte-true. (Overall the file has 44 × U+201C and 40 × U+201D — an imbalance driven (seat-12 correction) by two source loci printing “…“ with a doubled open mark — raw L132 最佳“成功“年龄 and raw L181 俞冰夏：“末世“游戏 — plus this reversal; see byte-facts.)
  • Reporter's book-facts (line 82-83, cover copy line 12). «1138页...267个人物、388个 尾注» and the cover's «267个人物»: the 388-endnote figure is standard/correct; 267 characters is the publisher's cover-blurb count (character totals vary by count method across the scholarship — cf. the Sam Potts map); 1138 pages is the Chinese simplified edition's page count (the US Little, Brown hardcover runs 1079 pp.). Reproduced as the source states them.
  • 25 languages sold, only 10 translated (line 53-54). A reporter's/reception figure as of early 2024; reproduced as stated (the archive's other non-English notes give varying live counts — treat as a 2024 snapshot, not a fixed fact).
  • 12 years / 7 years editing (line 39, echoed line 13). The reporter's framing of the acquisition-to-publication arc; Yu dates her own involvement to ~2011 and the Chinese edition appeared 2023 (a ~12-year span). Reproduced as stated.
  • «特尔-布朗出版社» (line 17). The Chinese renders Wallace's US publisher; the standard rendering of Little, Brown is 利特尔·布朗 — the source's «特尔-布朗» drops the 利. Cite-as-written; the publisher is Little, Brown.
  • The interviewer's premise that Wallace studied in Harvard's experimental film department (line 146-147). A reporter's framing in the question; Wallace attended Harvard's philosophy PhD program (briefly, 1989) — there is no experimental film department study on record. Yu's ANSWER pivots to her OWN experimental-film study (where Hollis Frampton had worked); the film-department claim is the reporter's, not Yu's. Cite-as-written; flagged as a likely reporter error.
  • «从哈佛退学» (line 113). Yu says Wallace withdrew from Harvard amid a depressive episode and began attending anonymous-recovery meetings; the biographical record has him hospitalized and leaving the Harvard philosophy program (1989). Reproduced as stated (a translator's aside, roughly accurate).
  • Back-translated Wallace / Kirn are NOT Wallace/Kirn verbatim (register). The two [W] spans (lines 126, 145) and the [T] Walter Kirn span (lines 18-19) are Chinese renderings of English originals; they are quotable ONLY as this source's Chinese, glossed in paraphrase. NEVER present them as Wallace's or Kirn's English words. The English side of each resolves as follows:
    • Line 126 — RESOLVED to the novel. Yu's «华莱士那句著名的» line renders IJ p. 205 (the Ennet House list): "That everybody is identical in their secret unspoken belief that way deep down they are different from everyone else." Her Chinese compresses the frame (最共同的特征, most-common trait, where the original turns on identical in their secret unspoken belief) — a faithful gist with the paradox flattened. Wallace's English is quotable from the novel; her Chinese only from this source.
    • Line 145 — NOT located as Wallace's own statement; partial anchor documented. The reporter's credo (if our lives are fragmented, then the novel should be too — gloss ours) has no located Wallace original. Nearest anchor: the 1993 McCaffery interview (Review of Contemporary Fiction; Burn's Conversations reprint), where Wallace describes fragmented-experience mimesis as Faulkner's and Joyce's program ("Their idea was, well, experience is vastly more dislocated and fragmentary, scrambled, jumbled … and so they'll show you this") and pivots to his own "desire to make something pretty." The question's flat attribution of the credo to Wallace overstates the held record; treated as the reporter's paraphrase-attribution, reproduced as stated.
  • Duchamp's eight years (line 47-49). Yu's aside that Marcel Duchamp's Large Glass (a pane of glass with some things in it) took eight years of serious work, contrasted with his urinal-type readymades. A biographical illustration; reproduced as stated.
  • Names rendered in Chinese (novel-in-translation / this-source renderings). Hal Incandenza 哈尔·因坎旦萨, Orin 奥林, Mario 马里奥, Avril 艾薇儿, James 詹姆斯, Charles 查尔斯 (= Charles Tavis, the Claudius figure), Joelle van Dyne 乔艾尔·范·戴恩, Don Gately 唐· 盖特利, Ennet House 恩内特之家. Reproduced as printed; these are the edition's / this source's renderings, not Wallace's English.