RSS

#12 Dec 21 - Gender ＆ Translation

張貼者： NTNU GITI BLOG on 2009年10月27日 星期二
標籤：
#12 Dec 21 Emily Apter, The Translation Zone : A New Comparative Literature

4 意見:

明哲 提到...

根據Emily Apter的分析，翻譯行為可以從戰爭(種族)衝突、國際政治、後殖民論述、多元文化主義等多重角度切入討論。史可為鑑，翻譯與個人的國族認同(national identity)畢竟無法切割。廿世紀初葉從Spitzer、Auerbach到Said等人陸續提出的普世人文主義及俗世人文主義漸漸修正了傳統的世界文學觀，呼籲比較文學界揚棄以歐洲為中心的文化本位主義。這一點跟近年來中國與伊斯蘭勢力(911之後長期把持文化霸權的歐美強國不得不正視伊斯蘭文化勢力)的興起也頗能呼應。我很喜歡Spivak提出的「星球性」（planetarity）概念，她建議我們想像自己是星球的臣民（planetary subjects），而不是全球的代理人（global agents）。這樣一來，自我(self)與他者(other)之間的藩籬才能夠逐步撤退
，接納他者融入自我的一部份。位於東西文化交匯點的土耳其在本書的論述中就是一個絕佳範例。本土文化與外來文化必須交融並蓄，好比以地球為文化母體，跳脫有限的跨國主義與多元文化主義的弊病(少數族裔雖然能見度提升，最終仍須向主流文化低頭，在獲得主流文化的認可下，才可能成為一股有影響力的文化勢力，但無論如何還是被框限在該族裔的文化空間裡)，並且拋棄日漸資本主義化的假普世價值。翻譯作為一種文化交流的手段，很可惜仍然無法擺脫全球化的市場經濟選擇。強勢語言(文化霸權)依舊主導他想與哪些弱勢語言「交流」，並藉由翻譯開創一個看似百花齊放的多元文化世界。在這種悲觀的氣氛中，譯者肩負的任務究竟為何？

2009年12月19日 下午6:35
加真 提到...

The mentality of pseudo-translators is quite intriguing to me. What are they thinking when they are writing, translating, or pseudo-translating (no single word can describe this activity)? I think, there is always an origin when it comes to the activity of translation. It could be a “temporary” origin or an “imagined” origin. Why is the “imagined” origin so crucial for pseudo-translators? What is the main difference between writing an imaginary work and writing an imaginary work which is believed to be someone else’s. Clearly, for these pseudo-translators, the pleasure in being an author and in being a pseudo-translator is quite different. There must be some kind of excitement in pretending being someone else. But as a writer, you also need to pretend to be the characters of your own invention. Could it be possible that as a writer, your sympathy with the characters is diminished by the fact that you need to be a detached author, while such sympathy can be more authentic and natural if you are the creator of the translator that is the author him/herself. So complicating….

Is pseudo-translation a hoax or the Benjaminian afterlife of the “imagined” origin?
Maybe only writers can be pseudo-translators. I have not yet heard of any translators being pseudo-translators. If there is a poet’s license, is there a “translator’s license?” Is “translator’s license” a license for translators, or is it also a license for writers/poets?

PS. I still think the author’s association of genetics and textual reproduction sooooooo far-fetched, especially his genetic interpretation of Rexroth’s philosophy of writing in page 221-222. Not convinced.

2009年12月20日 上午8:43
加真 提到...

"her"

2009年12月20日 上午8:44
素勳 提到...

Translation Zone is a book covering a lot of interesting topics. Beginning with a “deliberate” mistranslation that leads to the war between Germany and French in Chapter One, it throws out concepts like the war of languages, endangered languages, linguistic ecology, translation zone as war zone, the hybridity of English v.s English as Lange Franca. It talks about comparative literature, European humanism (Spitzer’s not-unproblematic love of Turkish in comparison to Auberbach’s self-isolation in Chapter 3), pseudotranslation(Chapter 14), digital translation (DNA code as an translation… or Victor Hugo transcoded as kind of literary DNY in Sandover’s poem…) Also, the two seemingly opposing principles—“Nothing is translatable” and “Everything is translatable” –consistently emerge as poles of translation theory as the author professed in the introduction. It’s also interesting to see how Benjamin’s works ( e.g. “the Task of Translator”) has enlightening the translation studies and was quoted and re/interpreted again and again…

Of all these grand topics, I guess the pseudotranslation of Peirre Louys’s Les Chansons de Bilitis in 1894 and Rexroth’s Marochiko’s hoax are mostly related to the topic of Gender and Translation. To avoid censorship may be one of the reasons why Louys would express feminine same-sex love in the name of translation. But could there be more than that? In his letter to his brother, he declared that his intention is to liberate the expression of lesbian desire from the shackles the femme fatale stereotype, and he “respectfully” dedicated the Chansons to “the young women of future society.” Interesting! In comparison, Rexoth’s Marichiko poems have made use of the stereotype of Japanese Women-- and probably helped to fix it? In Chinese literature, it is quite often that men would write poems in women’s persona. Can westerners only do that in translation—yet in a “erotic” or “liberating” way?

2009年12月20日 上午10:46

張貼留言