Blog Post 8 by Drew

Discussions of identity in translation are very tricky!

I think there’s some merit to the idea that, in service of the work, whoever can translate it best should be the translator. That said, identities and life experience will probably contribute to who ends up being the best equipped translator. More often than not, I imagine the two selection mindsets would reach the same conclusion.

Also, I’m interested in how we’re addressing these questions as they pertain to translation, and if that manner of discussion diverges from how we talk about writing in general. Do the same “rules” apply? If we’re thinking about translation as a generative, embodied practice, perhaps they should. But if we’re thinking about translation as a linguistic, technical craft, then maybe they shouldn’t?

Amanda Gorman is an interesting case, partially because her work seems (in my opinion) more successful when we view it as spoken word performance rather than on-the-page poems (and yes, the potential ironies within that statement given poetry’s origins in oral tradition do occur to me, haha). So that may invite even more complications than literary translation already bears. It was surprising to me that the international backlash surrounding Marieke Lucas Rijneveld’s selection as translator arose despite the fact that it was Gorman who had selected them.

Neat that Iowa is doing a Literary Translation BA program!

The “One day my mum claimed she wasn’t fluent in any of the four languages she speaks and I haven’t stopped thinking about it since” quote was powerful to me, too. It’s abundantly clear from the perspectives shared that we (as a society) need to be intentional about removing the barriers which prevent translators with marginalized identities from receiving the work opportunities, prizes, fellowships, and acclaim they deserve.

Homi Bhabha’s notion of a third space (“a space between identities, nations and cultures where cultural exchange takes place, an ideal site in which to manoeuvre cultural criticism”) was thought-provoking, and I wonder if his perspective would shift at all in today’s cultural/sociopolitical landscape.