In this reading, one topic that stuck out to me was finding a balance between loyalty and necessary improvement. I felt that Seidensticker in a way was contradicting himself in saying that while translators have no business improving a work they are translating, the author's errors and imperfections are something that need to be fixed for the readers' sake. I felt like maybe if translators were to remain consistent in following Seidensticker's philosophy, it would make more sense to include the error as they are a part of the work and the author's essence. Of course, translators can just ask the authors of the works they are translating, but many are not alive. Then It's a constant struggle trying to determine where loyalty ends.
I also liked how Seidensticker talked about how translating Japanese is a constant process of making little decisions. As translators, hours could be spent going over minute details trying to decide the best way to translate something, but in the end, no matter how much time is spent on it, it will never be perfect. In my translations, in the first text, my mindset was far different from the one I have now. I find myself trying to stay loyal to the author while maintaining the rhythm of western dialogue/narration. In text 1, I was very intent upon translating everything to the letter and only making exceptions when word order truly threw off the rhythm of the translation.
I feel that there is a way to carry over the voice of the author without improving it. Thinking hard about the voice and theme, person, intention of the passages helped me do that in this more recent translation.
Ariel
No comments:
Post a Comment