The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

https://libertiesjournal.com/articles...

I was a bit surprised by his take (and don't think I agree with it), but it seemed an interesting thing to share here.

I’m not sure I agree with the author when he says that embracing translated literature is a way of turning our back on our own patrimony, one that he suggests we no longer even know. Reading works in translation doesn’t mean we necessarily reject our own country’s writers.

I think many read translated lit to expand their world, to learn about other cultures, and to avail themselves of good to great works of literature. For all of his laying out of arguments against translation into English, the publishing world estimates something like 3 to 5 percent of books published in the U.S. are works in translation, so I’m not sure where the threat lies. And he ignores translations into other languages.

I do agree with him that languages drip with cultural significance and it is very difficult to make your way into another language to read and understand a text in the way that a native reader would. He implies, I think, that translations strip all of the cultural nuance out of the work in question. I’m not sure that’s always the case.

He also suggests that translations nearly border on cultural appropriation. Funny, I’ve heard that argument used against language learners trying to acquire languages they weren’t born speaking, so it seems there are no good options for us.

I do agree that he has a point when he cautions against a desire to write for an international audience, with a goal to be, eventually, translated into English. But not all writers do that. Look at Jhumpa Lahiri, who for now has turned away from English so that she can concentrate on writing in Italian because she feels a strong affinity, a great love for the Italian language. (Ok, she’s now translating her own work into English, but she seems to be following her own artistic compulsion).

For better or worse, we live in an age of globalization, and I’m grateful for well translated works that allow me to read writers I wouldn’t have access to otherwise.

Benjamin Moser we have discussed before. His evisceration of A Little Art, which provoked a strong response, and the issues around his Lispector biography and his claimed role in her translation (which he again boasts about here). I will add this article to the charge sheet!

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/20/bo...

https://www.lareviewofbooks.org/artic...

From a UK perspective this looks like a literary endorsement of the “citizens of nowhere” accusation, and we know where that led.

Thank you for the context, Paul! I had no idea that this actually fits in with his general character.

Well to be fair his general character is to ask hard questions, to be provocative etc*.

I can see what he is getting at in parts of his argument and it is more balanced that the headlines make out.

But let's say my reaction to this is different if say Jennifer Croft or Frank Wynne had written an article questioning the value of translation.

[* the Lispector stuff though doesn't sound great - to seemingly take credit for other people's translations that he edited]

If his taking credit for someone else’s work has hurt his reputation and he is not getting translation work this might be a case of sour grapes.