MInipulation and Refraction

Question 1

What claims is Hermans making on behalf of his colleagues, the Manipulists?

Answer 1

1. Translation is neglected by literary scholars

• What we consider ‘national literature’ is often put on a pedestal. They are celebrated as expressions of their author’s artistic geniuses, untouchable. Translation is doomed from the start cause it will be the same genius work of art.

2. Translation is of low prestige

• Translation, parody, children’s literature etc are not seen as ‘high-quality’ literature

3. Translation as an underdog

• Translation is second-hand and second-rate. Taking the supremacy of the original for granted from the
  start, the study of translation then serves merely to demonstrate the original’s outstanding qualities by highlighting the errors and inadequacies of any number of translations of it

4. Boring the readers

• holding the original up as an absolute standard becomes repetitive and predictable.

5. Unproductive results

Translators are not giving themselves a favor by repeatedly asking the same unproductive questions like ‘What is a translation?’ ‘is it possible?’ ‘what makes it good?’

Question 2

The system and manipulation

Answer 2

In Bezug auf der Polysystem, Hermans thinks:

From the point of view of the target literature, all translation implies a
degree of manipulation of the source text for a certain purpose.

Question 3

Andre Lefevere

Answer 3

Lefevere developed the idea of translation as a form of rewriting, which means that any text produced on the basis of another has the intention of adapting that other text to a certain ideology or to a certain poetics, and usually to both

Question 4

What Lefevere points out

Answer 4

1. non-professional readers (so the majority) have always read rewritten texts because they did not have access to the original
2. Rewritten texts have had a huge impact on the world (Bible translations zB)
3. Rewriting should be studies

Question 5

Is that just a way of complicating things or is it in any way enriching?

Answer 5

The metaphor may be a bit complicated, because rewriting is typically something associated with correcting, paraphrasing, or writing again.

A better metaphor could be, perhaps refraction — it shows a plethera of different colours that were hidden but were there; it brings something out in the text.

Still, the metaphor is enriching, because:

a) highlights the translator’s role as an active agent in the translation process

b) values the translator’s creative and interpretive skills

c) facilitates cultural exchange

d) encourages innovation in literature. Rewriting can be inspiring

e) acknowledges power dynamics, how translation is influenced by ideological, political and institutional factors.

Question 6

Lefevere: reasons for rewriting;

Answer 6

• ideological — conforming to/rebelling against the dominant ideology
• poetological — conforming to or rebelling against the domimant poetics

Question 7

Lefevere: forms of rewriting

Answer 7

Forms of rewriting:

• translation
• anthologisation
• historiography
• criticism
• editing

Question 8

Forms of patronage:

Answer 8

1. Professionals within literary system

• critics, reviewers, teachers, translators (decide on poetics and ideology of TTs)

2. Patronage outside literary system

• the king, the government, publishers, the media, the party, institutions (can further/hinder the reading and rewriting of works)

3. The dominant poetics

• literary devices — the range of genres, symbols, leitmotifs, prototypical situations and characters
• the concept of the role of literature (the relation of literature to the social system; elevating some works to the status of ‘classics’; rejecting others)

Question 9

Differentiated/undifferentiated patronage

Answer 9

Literary systems can be controlled by a patronage that is either differentiated or undifferentiated

Differentiated - in societies where the control over translation is divided among several different entities or groups. Various power centers coexist and contribute to the shaping of cultural and literary norms.

Undifferentiated - the control over translations is consolidated in the hands of a single dominant patron or a closely aligned group of patrons. This could be a powerful ruling class, a single political party, a religious institution, or a monopolistic publishing industry. In such contexts, translations are likely to be more uniform, reflecting the dominant ideology,