"Translators Struggle to Prove Their Academic Bona Fides"

[Robert Chandler]

Dear all,

Yes, it is a good article, but I still feel there is something in all this
that I do not understand.

I am aware that translators tend to get relatively little recognition, but
Mr Anderson is saying more than that.  He is saying that work in the field
of translation not only goes unrecognized but that it counts (or has, in the
past ??, counted) AGAINST one.

I was also struck by the headline of a recent long article in the Guardian
about a new complete edition of Van Gogh's Letters.  The letters have been
translated, over a period of several years, by five translators and from two
languages - both French and Dutch.  This article, which dwelt on matters to
do with the production of the book (there are a lot of illustrations, etc,)
did not say a word about the fact that the letters were translated.  More
than that: it was titled, VAN GOGH IN HIS OWN WORDS!!

Is there some deep, largely unconscious, sense of shame about the need for
translation?  Are we still all ashamed of what happened with the Tower of
Babel?

I wonder also if we should be thinking about the fact that Mercury/Hermes is
a patron of tricksters and thieves as well as of hermeneutics of all kinds,
presumably including translators.  Is this a reason why we distrust
translators?

Naïve questions can often be telling.  I was recently asked after a talk,
'But why IS it sometimes impossible to translate something?'  Perhaps most
people really do not want to think about the fact that languages really do
differ from each other in important ways.

I am groping...  Does anyone else have any thoughts about all this?

Vsego dobrogo,

Robert


His story about translating THE TRIAL under a pseudonym

After Mr. Anderson, a Kafka scholar, got a job as an assistant professor at
Columbia, he recalls in an e-mail message, "I was offered the chance to
translate Kafka's The Trial and was about to submit a sample when my chair
got word of it and advised me, rightly, I think, not to do this until I
finished my book and got tenure. Which I did." He published a translation of
Thomas Bernhard's novel The Loser  while still untenured‹but under a
pseudonym ("Jack Dawson," which according to Mr. Anderson is a pun on
Kafka's Czech name and means "son of Kafka"). "We had a celebratory lunch
after I got tenure at Columbia, and I told the story and got a good laugh,"
Mr. Anderson says. "But it's a real issue, and I think my chair gave me
excellent advice."

He adds a qualifier that goes beyond institutional pragmatism: "Although I
think translation is important and valid, it's worth noting that translation
can take people away from criticism and theoretical thinking of an original
sort. My chair was also telling me, Finish the book, don't lose sight of
that." When you're translating, you already have a text to work with,
"whereas writing your own book can often be more taxing, since you don't
know where it needs to go."




> Hurray for the article, and thank you Steve and Lynn!
> I have written three research books, translated one from English into Russian,
> and co-translated at least two (judging by the degree of collaboration) from
> Russian into English, with Robert. The translation work has required more
> research and academic dedication than the strict-research one--not less. After
> all, in translation, we have to address all the textual problems, and some
> extra-textual--not merely those we feel like choosing for our personal
> interest. Yet where is the recognition?
> Olga Meerson.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------