In Nabokov’s Letters to the American translator, the friendship of the author Nabokov and the translator Pertzoff was a great example of collaboration of the translation process. Nabokov’s requirements were reasonable and understandable to some extent. Nabokov wanted a literal translation of his work from Pertzoff and proofread the outcome and shaped it in line with his ideas. The translator played a prominent role since Pertzoff brought the Russian into English and they embellished it together afterwards. At this point, I disagree with Nabokov. The translator should be able to bring their ideas into the target text. Proofreading and editing the target text/translation/outcome should be the last step before publishing the work. In this case, Pertzoff was manipulated and did not have the opportunity to be free in means of word choice and translating the sense of the source text. Even though the translator had constraints, both the author Nabokov and the translator Pertzoff were satisfied with the outcome. Additionally, reading the letter contributed to my understanding of the innerworkings and dialogues that take place between the author and translator. As I’ve mentioned, the translator Pertzoff was under control and watched over. This authoritative approach may affect the quality of the translation and the translating experience of the translator. In this sense, the authority of the author should be handled. In Isabelle Vanderschelden’s article on Authority in Literary Translation: Collaborating with the Author, there were particular and interesting examples for the relationship of the author and translator. Some authors, for example, Brink states that the target text belongs to the translator. Whereas, Isaac Bashevis Singer states that the translators can always make mistakes and they need to be watched over. There are two opposite sides of the authority in the literary translation field. After examining various examples and translation cases, the translator should reach out to the author to seek help or assistance throughout the process. Even though, some translators feel more confident when the author is (more) involved in the translation process since, they take action in line with the author and get rid of the sense of responsibility towards both the source and target text. For example, as Albert Bensoussan points out, ‘’ Translators work better when the author is not present. They certainly need to hear his/her voice, but they undoubtedly feel embarrassed by his/her presence because they are then relegated to a secondary position.’’ As a translator, I agree with this statement. The translator should be able to capture the meaning by their own since they are the ones that mediate between languages and bring over the intended message/meaning of the source text. To sum up, the relationship between the translator and author should be specified and the translation process should take place accordingly to avoid manipulation.

Ece Celikkol