“Isn’t it – to say the least – a missed opportunity to [have hired] Marieke Lucas Rijneveld for this job? They are white, nonbinary, have no experience in this field, but according to Meulenhoff are still the ‘dream translator’?”
I am stuck on this statement by Janice Deul. The statement, and other statements opposing Rijneveld, hinges on their race rather than gender. However, I wonder what implicit biases against Rijneveld's identity as a nonbinary translator lit a match in their critics' criticism of their "whiteness." Generally, white men don't face this kind of criticism, and I wonder how much more acceptable it would be for Rijneveld to translate Gorman if they were a man. A white man is far from a woman of color, but he is respected and admired. What implicit biases are playing a role here?
Gorman herself chose Rijneveld as her translator, into dutch. Are people denying her ability to choose the best translator? What biases are people judging her decision on?
I think these are questions we should ask ourselves, and ask critics. It's easy to criticize marginalized groups, and hide it as a kind of protection. I don't know if implicit bias applies to this instance of translation, but it's something that the articles don't discuss.
- Hanan Akbari
No comments:
Post a Comment