Isabel Gomez: Cannibalism, Translationship and more

Cannibal translation also shed light on the controversial topic of reading translation as translation. In its concept, translation is never finished, nor is there the correct translation. Before attending this workshop, I always assumed translation should be invisible, at least the process of translation. I have read 60% of the text in my life through translation, yet every time talking about a translated novel, for example, I neglected the fact that it has been translated and talked about it as if I read the original text. Gomez’s concept of “toothmarks,” the traces left of translation, is fascinating because she considers them beautiful instead of flawed. “We have yet to learn to read translation as translation and go into translation with suspicion,” Gomez critiques.


The relationship that a writer and translator share through the process of cannibalism translation is also remarkable. Gomez put a name for it, “translationship”,  a reciprocal collaboration to create something new rather than create an exact copy of the original. Through this process, writers and translators' thoughts collide as they pursue mutual literary influence in their creative input. An example of this is Octavio Paz and Haroldo de Campo, as they placed both of their names for writers of the translation book. “Translation is rooting itself and unrooting itself,” Gomez’s paradox is rather a truth. The literary change itself rapidly through cannibalism, yet roots itself deep in its core.


Another aspect I found really interesting is the Spanish and Portuguese translation. These two languages are so similar in many ways, but so different. If the translation version is doing its regular translation, there will be no progress made. Gomez shared her favorite epigraph of a Bassist’s job in a group of musicians is to prevent other people from playing what they thought they were going to play. The key to translating Spanish to Portuguese or vice versa is to “find the solution beyond the obvious.” Only this way can the translation avoid the trap of being similar.


There are so many different approaches to translation. Near the end of the lecture, Gomez addressed the difference in transsay (Hector Olea) and thick translation (Kwame Anthony Appiah). The former trusts the reader to fill in the gaps in untranslated text, and the latter adds notes to fill in the information. She also addressed transcreation different from translation, “the reproduction where aesthetic information prioritizes”. After a great lecture, her insightful question in the end left me thinking: do writers own their work or is capitalist society made us think they own their work. Even though I currently don’t have the answer to that question, but there is one thing that I am certain of: writing and translating as a process is so beautiful.

-Kerry

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yasmine Seale

Yasmine Seale's lecture

Report on Megan McDowell