3/1 Readings

 Having had the chance to meet with Tracy and Ersi before the talk, I was really glad to have to chance to get to learn more about the types of experiences that led Tracy to become a translator, and the pair were even kind enough to answer questions I had, although some of them had to be relegated to the actual talk itself. Particularly the sort of communication and how the pair work together on translations is something that I've always wanted to learn about, and I did appreciate learning how to get started on contacting a starting a project with an author. What stood out for me was also how their views on translation were different from those that Tracy had, somewhat, and that gave me a bit to think about. 

Regarding the readings however, I noticed that the paywalled article was written by Tim Parks. and as usual his comments on the language of the translation were very detailed and persuasive. I noticed that I'm not the only one who feels like he makes several unwarranted jabs at the translator herself, but I can appreciate the depth of his commentary. His points that some phrases and sentences are at odds with the voice of the narrator are at odds is obviously quite insightful, but probably divert from what will likely be the main point of discussion; which is what I think about the "scandal" itself. 

I personally am of the same mind as Charse Yun, who wrote that the point is somewhat moot in his LA Times article. Because it is, because regardless of what was done to the original text in translation, the people who read it are incredibly unlikely to read a different translation of something they've already read, the people who are upset about the translation likely wouldn't read it either, so who would a new translation be written for? One of the articles states that English readers have been betrayed, but about what? From the LA Times article, while there were significant liberties taken, it's not as if the text was rewritten completely, and while there are errors here and there, some things added here and there, would a newer, more "faithful" translation even be different enough from Smith's translation that an average reader would deliberately go out of their way to read it? 

But at the same time I also don't really care for how Smith writes about the experience; but that's more of a personal issue with that article. She skirts around what I think is the most unforgivable thing she did, making simple mistakes, but clearly the author herself is happy with the translation, and it isn't as if I haven't made thousands of simple mistakes myself. Ultimately what I feel like has happened has happened, and there's nothing anyone can do about it to change what was published and read, and what version of The Vegetarian people will read in the future. 

Steven