Longreads Best of 2013 Postscript: Janet Reitman on Her Rolling Stone Cover Story, 'Jahar's World'
## Jahar’s World
## 贾哈尔的世界
Janet Reitman | Rolling Stone | July 2013 | 45 minutes (11,415 words)
珍妮特·雷特曼 |滚石 | 2013 年 7 月 | 45 分钟（11,415 字）
Janet Reitman is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone.
珍妮特·雷特曼 (Janet Reitman) 是《滚石》杂志的特约编辑。
I was completely unprepared for the response to “Jahar’s World,” which was published in mid-July as a Rolling Stone cover story.
我对《贾哈尔的世界》的反应完全没有准备，该书于 7 月中旬作为滚石杂志封面故事发表。
The piece tells the story of accused Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev, a hip-hop loving, hoodie-wearing, pot smoking 20-year-old from Cambridge, Mass., who is accused of committing the worst act of terrorism on US soil since 9/11.
这篇文章讲述了被指控的波士顿爆炸案嫌疑人焦哈尔·察尔纳耶夫 (Dzhokhar“Jahar”Tsarnaev) 的故事，他是一位来自马萨诸塞州剑桥市的 20 岁热爱嘻哈、穿着连帽衫、吸食大麻的年轻人，被指控在美国领土上实施了自 9/11 以来最严重的恐怖主义行为。
As a character, Jahar was hugely compelling: utterly likable, extremely “normal,” the kid who could have been your dorm mate, or your high school crush, or the stoner down the hall—which he was, to many people.
作为一个角色，贾哈尔非常引人注目：非常讨人喜欢，极其“正常”，这个孩子可能是你的室友，或者你高中的暗恋对象，或者是大厅里的瘾君子——对很多人来说，他就是这样。
He was also, apparently, capable of murder.
显然，他也有谋杀的能力。
I was fascinated by this dichotomy, the absolute normalcy and absolute monstrousness within a single human being, and spent several months exploring it.
我对这种二分法很着迷，一个人身上的绝对正常和绝对怪异，并花了几个月的时间来探索它。
My editors also explored it in the choice of that issue’s cover image: an undoctored self-portrait of a gorgeous young man accused of committing an absolutely abhorrent crime.
我的编辑们还在选择该期封面图片时对此进行了探讨：一个被指控犯有绝对令人发指的罪行的漂亮年轻人的未经修饰的自画像。
I think we all hoped the story would be read and talked about, which is what every magazine writer and editor wants.
我想我们都希望这个故事能够被阅读和谈论，这是每个杂志作家和编辑都希望的。
What happened was this: Within minutes of my piece being published and posted online, Twitter exploded, followed by a deluge of hate mail sent to the magazine and to me, directly, by people who were furious we had given Tsarnaev that kind of attention.
事情是这样的：在我的文章发表并发布到网上的几分钟内，Twitter 就爆炸了，随后大量的仇恨邮件直接发送给该杂志和我，这些人对我们给予察尔纳耶夫的这种关注感到愤怒。
I was attacked for not caring about victims—even though I, myself, lived through the 9/11 attack on New York City, where I live and where a high school friend of mine died in one of those towers.
我因不关心受害者而受到攻击——尽管我本人经历过纽约市的 9/11 袭击，我居住在那里，我的一位高中朋友在其中一座塔楼中丧生。
I received hundreds of emails attacking not my journalism, but me, as a human being.
我收到了数百封电子邮件，这些电子邮件不是攻击我的新闻工作，而是攻击我这个人。
On Twitter, one person said I deserved to be raped and killed because of this story, and someone else took it upon himself to hunt down and then post my cell phone number, which resulted in a few dozen scary texts and anonymous calls.
在推特上，有人说我因为这个故事而应该被强奸和杀害，还有人主动追捕并发布了我的手机号码，结果收到了几十条可怕的短信和匿名电话。
I received death threats against myself, and even against my dog.
我收到了针对自己的死亡威胁，甚至针对我的狗的威胁。
One person wrote me several days in a row saying that he hoped that I, and my entire family, would be killed in a terrorist attack.
有人连续几天给我写信，说他希望我和我的全家在恐怖袭击中丧生。
For the record, I believe that Rolling Stone did not, as we were accused, “glamorize” a terrorist.
根据记录，我相信《滚石》杂志并没有像我们被指控的那样“美化”恐怖分子。
We did a very serious story about one, and by putting his face on the cover, we challenged our readers to look him in the face.
我们做了一个关于其中一个人的非常严肃的故事，并通过把他的脸放在封面上，我们挑战我们的读者看着他的脸。
This was not, as many believed, an air-brushed or otherwise touched up photograph.
正如许多人所认为的那样，这并不是一张经过喷枪或其他修饰的照片。
It was the raw selfie.
这是原始的自拍照。
The photo invited the reader to look at this kid, in all of his beauty, frankly, and when they did that, it made a lot of people extremely uncomfortable, and to be honest, I thought that was great.
这张照片邀请读者坦白地看看这个孩子的美丽，当他们这样做时，这让很多人感到非常不舒服，说实话，我认为这很棒。
I thought our cover was fantastic and did exactly what great covers are supposed to do, which is to make people think, read, and discuss.
我认为我们的封面非常棒，并且完全做到了优秀封面应该做的事情，那就是让人们思考、阅读和讨论。
But the outrage it caused was so over-the-top, it not only took me completely by surprise, but made me think very hard about what has happened to our country in the twelve years since 9/11.
但它引起的愤怒是如此过分，不仅让我完全惊讶，而且让我认真思考自 9/11 以来的十二年里我们的国家所发生的事情。
Because of this story, Rolling Stone was actually banned—boycotted—by chain stores like Wal-Mart, across the country.
由于这个故事，《滚石》实际上在全国范围内被沃尔玛等连锁店禁止——抵制。
They did this on “principle.” What principle?
他们这样做是有“原则”的。什么原则？
That “knowing our enemies” is somehow wrong?
“了解我们的敌人”这句话有错吗？
That one of the biggest stories of the year does not belong on a magazine cover simply because the subject, a so-called “bad guy,” is also handsome?
年度最大的故事之一不应该仅仅因为主题（所谓的“坏人”）也很帅而出现在杂志封面上？
Or is it that by covering him at all, giving his story some form of meaning, we were being un-American?
或者说，通过报道他、赋予他的故事某种形式的意义，我们就显得不那么美国人了？
Since 2001, American journalism has been consumed with so-called “War on Terror” coverage, and yet, with a few notable exceptions, much of it hasn’t bothered to examine just who these supposed terrorists are.
自 2001 年以来，美国新闻界一直热衷于所谓的“反恐战争”报道，然而，除了一些明显的例外，大部分新闻都懒得去调查这些所谓的恐怖分子到底是谁。
Why is that?
这是为什么？
Because we don’t really care?
因为我们并不真正关心？
Or, because we might discover, as I did, that the terrorists are not what we expect?
或者，因为我们可能会像我一样发现恐怖分子并不是我们所期望的那样？
It really worries me that as a country we have not only “othered” the so-called terrorists, we’ve refused to grant them humanity.
令我真正担心的是，作为一个国家，我们不仅“排斥”所谓的恐怖分子，而且拒绝给予他们人性。
And I think what my story, and our cover, proved is that in some cases, these amorphous “bad guys” look and act, and in many cases are, just like the rest of us.
我认为我的故事和我们的封面所证明的是，在某些情况下，这些无形的“坏人”的外表和行为，而且在许多情况下，就像我们其他人一样。
That Jahar Tsanaraev was, by every single account, a very average boy who did a very terrible thing, is not something to reject or be afraid of.
贾哈尔·察纳拉耶夫（Jahar Tsanaraev），无论从哪个角度来看，都是一个非常普通的男孩，却做了一件非常可怕的事情，这并不是什么值得拒绝或害怕的事情。
It’s something to learn from.
这是值得学习的。
That is why we write about the terrorists, it’s why these stories matter.
这就是为什么我们写恐怖分子，这就是为什么这些故事很重要。