Marieke Lucas Rijneveld quits as translator of Amanda Gorman's poems after criticism of using a white translator
- Thread starter Corswandt
- Start date
peter_d
Reader
I haven't really made up my mind about this issue, but it's certain that it has heated up the discussion on inclusion and everything related to it. Timing is very unfortunate because it's two weeks before the elections in The Netherlands, and this will play into the hands of right wing extremist politicians such as Geert Wilders.
Just one thing I wanted to mention. I wonder if the point of Gorman herself having chosen Rijneveld as a translator is given a bit too much weight. When there is a potential gold mine on the market, publishing houses engage in a fierce competition for the translation rights. This is not limited to who offers the highest amount of money. Each publisher presents an elaborate bid which includes such things as marketing strategy, distribution, options for collaboration in case of future publications, translators and what have you. It seems that Meulenhoff, the publisher who ended up winning the translation rights for Gorman's poem presented the best bid, based on the strategy that they also invest big time in Gorman's other publication, a children's book. Rijneveld was the translator that was part of Meulenhoff's marketing strategy, because everything that Rijneveld touches turns into gold (commercially speaking). So the question is, was there much choice for Gorman and her team.
So what I gather from social media is that the blame is shifting to the publisher. Again, not sure what to think of it. Should they have been more sensitive? They have come forward with a mea culpa, which on its turn led to a lot of rage: 'never give in!' 'if someone would say that a black translator cannot translate the work of a white author it would be called rascism, but the other way around it's called inclusion'. That type of arguments. In other words lots of polarization, which I belief was not the message of Gorman's poem.
Rijneveld, in the meantime, has announced that she will publish a poem about the whole matter on Saturday. I'm curious if it's going to be translated, and if so, by who?
(I know I'm using 'she'. Meulenhoff her publisher constantly refers to Rijneveld as she and her, which I assume is with her consent and I can't get used to using the plural in this context, 'they published a poem', Rijneveld is only one individual as far as I know. Isn't 'they' used more in a context where the person is unidentified so that it is also unknown if they are male or female?)
Just one thing I wanted to mention. I wonder if the point of Gorman herself having chosen Rijneveld as a translator is given a bit too much weight. When there is a potential gold mine on the market, publishing houses engage in a fierce competition for the translation rights. This is not limited to who offers the highest amount of money. Each publisher presents an elaborate bid which includes such things as marketing strategy, distribution, options for collaboration in case of future publications, translators and what have you. It seems that Meulenhoff, the publisher who ended up winning the translation rights for Gorman's poem presented the best bid, based on the strategy that they also invest big time in Gorman's other publication, a children's book. Rijneveld was the translator that was part of Meulenhoff's marketing strategy, because everything that Rijneveld touches turns into gold (commercially speaking). So the question is, was there much choice for Gorman and her team.
So what I gather from social media is that the blame is shifting to the publisher. Again, not sure what to think of it. Should they have been more sensitive? They have come forward with a mea culpa, which on its turn led to a lot of rage: 'never give in!' 'if someone would say that a black translator cannot translate the work of a white author it would be called rascism, but the other way around it's called inclusion'. That type of arguments. In other words lots of polarization, which I belief was not the message of Gorman's poem.
Rijneveld, in the meantime, has announced that she will publish a poem about the whole matter on Saturday. I'm curious if it's going to be translated, and if so, by who?
(I know I'm using 'she'. Meulenhoff her publisher constantly refers to Rijneveld as she and her, which I assume is with her consent and I can't get used to using the plural in this context, 'they published a poem', Rijneveld is only one individual as far as I know. Isn't 'they' used more in a context where the person is unidentified so that it is also unknown if they are male or female?)
beelzebubble
Member
/\ " Just one thing I wanted to mention. I wonder if the point of Gorman herself having chosen Rijneveld as a translator is given a bit too much weight. When there is a potential gold mine on the market." I also assumed that they were chosen to translate Gorman's poem because they were a recent Booker prize winner for a first novel.
"They have come forward with a mea culpa, which on its turn led to a lot of rage: 'never give in!' 'if someone would say that a black translator cannot translate the work of a white author it would be called rascism, but the other way around it's called inclusion'." When you are other it is assumed that your point of view is nuanced in ways that someone of the dominant race/sex/gender/culture would not necessarily see or understand. So it is not quite the same thing even though people will call it racism/sexism etc.
"Rijneveld, in the meantime, has announced that she will publish a poem about the whole matter on Saturday. I'm curious if it's going to be translated, and if so, by who?" I hope it will be translated into English I would be interested in their response.
"Rijneveld is only one individual as far as I know. Isn't 'they' used more in a context where the person is unidentified so that it is also unknown if they are male or female?" From what I understand from an interview I read, Rijneveld considers themselves binary at this time i.e. both genders. I am not used to using these pronouns either but I thought I would make the effort.
"They have come forward with a mea culpa, which on its turn led to a lot of rage: 'never give in!' 'if someone would say that a black translator cannot translate the work of a white author it would be called rascism, but the other way around it's called inclusion'." When you are other it is assumed that your point of view is nuanced in ways that someone of the dominant race/sex/gender/culture would not necessarily see or understand. So it is not quite the same thing even though people will call it racism/sexism etc.
"Rijneveld, in the meantime, has announced that she will publish a poem about the whole matter on Saturday. I'm curious if it's going to be translated, and if so, by who?" I hope it will be translated into English I would be interested in their response.
"Rijneveld is only one individual as far as I know. Isn't 'they' used more in a context where the person is unidentified so that it is also unknown if they are male or female?" From what I understand from an interview I read, Rijneveld considers themselves binary at this time i.e. both genders. I am not used to using these pronouns either but I thought I would make the effort.
Last edited:
Leemo
Well-known member
Surely nothing would have prevented Gorman from saying to Meulenhoff something to the effect of:" I want to choose you but I want a black translator instead of Rijneveld. " I can't imagine Meulenhoff would have made Rijneveld a mandatory part of any offer, Gorman's books will make money regardless of who translates them.
peter_d
Reader
In Rijneveld's own words: "My heart and mind are still filled with the events of the past few days. I don't think that silence is the right response, but I can't reply to everyone either. The best way to express my thoughts and feelings and to respond to what has been said is to write a poem. It will appear in the newspaper next Saturday. Poetry unites, reconciles and heals."
Liam
Administrator
Enter Andrew Marvell with his latest poem "The Character of Holland" in hand:
*hold my beer!*
?
Last edited:
nagisa
Spiky member
*Non*-binary in fact, there neither gender. Deul's opinion piece uses "hen" instead of hij (he) or zij (she); in English, gender-variant people deal with this in a variety of ways, from new pronouns (ze, e, ve...), but they seems to be gaining traction. Its use as a singular pronoun is attested back to the 14th century, though admittedly for cases where the gender of the person being talked about is unknown. It does take some getting used to (I made the mistake at the beginning of the thread!)
peter_d
Reader
Don't know if the link works like this, but here's the poem published by Marieke Lucas Rijneveld about the translation upheaval.
beelzebubble
Member
/\ Well that's telling the naysayers in the most gracious way possible.
I must say that Gorman’s poetry overall is pretty terrible. Are those representative of Rijneveld's writing? That poem in response is awful, too.
It would probably be the most ideal if Gorman were to just release some kind of statement stating unequivocally whom she wants as her translator. Doesn’t she have Twitter? It will take five minutes.
It would probably be the most ideal if Gorman were to just release some kind of statement stating unequivocally whom she wants as her translator. Doesn’t she have Twitter? It will take five minutes.
Last edited:
Corswandt
FAFO
'Not suitable': Catalan translator for Amanda Gorman poem removed
Victor Obiols told he had wrong ‘profile’, the second case after Dutch writer resigned from same role
www.theguardian.com
nagisa
Spiky member
uncaring: reflections on the politics of literary translation
by canan marasligil
www.readmyworld.nl
Bartleby
Moderator
“But if I cannot translate a poet because she is a woman, young, black, an American of the 21st century, neither can I translate Homer because I am not a Greek of the eighth century BC. Or could not have translated Shakespeare because I am not a 16th-century Englishman.”'Not suitable': Catalan translator for Amanda Gorman poem removed
Victor Obiols told he had wrong ‘profile’, the second case after Dutch writer resigned from same role
It should go without saying...
tiganeasca
Moderator
uncaring: reflections on the politics of literary translation
by canan marasligil
Interesting and thoughtful essay, Adrien; thank you for posting the link. The author, a translator, writes that “...when an opportunity arises to publish a work that tackles the black experience, it is of immense importance to go out and find a translator from the existing pool of talented black voices within the target language. In a context like this one, ignoring this option is choosing to not care.”
Although there is much in the essay I otherwise find compelling (I agree with much of what she says especially about the possibility (likelihood) that this was purely a venal business decision), I disagree with this premise. Why is the “black experience” so much more more important than any other? This is what this writer is implicitly urging on the sole apparent grounds that the black experience is unique. I agree that it is. Of course it is. But so is every other experience. What is so sui generis about the black experience that it demands a black translator—as if all black experience is the same? Indeed, Amanda Gorman's experience is likely to be substantially different from that of her own (single) mother.
The writer is claiming that the black experience is so much more unique than any other experience that it requires a black person to serve as intermediary. As I suggested a moment ago, black experience is--like all human experience--enormously varied and distinct. That a black writer might have a black translator is no guarantee that the translator’s experience will be the same as the writer’s. Indeed, making blackness a requirement belittles the black experience, suggesting implicitly that there is a single "black experience." There are few enough good translators as it is; to now impose the additional requirements that the translator not only be a good translator, but also be young. And female. And familiar with the spoken word tradition. (Does that diminish the work of any translator of Homer who is not an academic specialist in the oral tradition, specifically the Greek oral tradition?) And share a background (as if that were even remotely possible). And this. And that.
But I return to my point: why is the black experience unique? Why is the indelible--dare I say “unique”--experience of war, for example, any less demanding? Can someone who didn't experience war really truly understand what a writer, writing about that experience, went through? Why is the experience of living, say, through the Stalinist (or Red Guard) purges, any less demanding? Why is the Hispanic experience, or the immigrant Hmong (or any other), experience any less deserving of an “understanding” translator? Or a translator who has a similar background (whatever on earth that might be)? What, in short, is so incredibly, remarkably unique about the black experience that it should be treated different than any other experience? All experience is unique. There is no one—no one—on earth who can bring the same background to a translation that an author brings to her work.
I am sympathetic to the need for a sensitive translator, for a nuanced understanding of the text. But that is true for any text. Requiring a similarly situated translator, claiming that only such a translator can do justice to or understand what the writer is saying strikes me as not only shortsighted but, indeed, offensive and lacking a true understanding of human experience.
Last edited:
Leemo
Well-known member
uncaring: reflections on the politics of literary translation
by canan marasligil
There's a lot of words in that piece, but as far as I can see no mention of the fact that Gorman herself approved the selection of Rijneveld as translator? Why should Gorman be free from any responsibility of this supposed poor choice of translator when she had the power to decline Rijneveld in favour of a black translator if she so wished?
Salixacaena
Active member
Yeah, a piece I read back when this happened basically said the publishers gave Gorman a list of choices and she specifically chose Rijneveld.
The logic being used here is absurd. You never hear these kinds of things for the plethora of Asian authors being translated by white people.
And while I’m sure there may be some, I’m having trouble imagining there are really that many (if any) black translators working on English to Dutch translations (let alone at the level of fame the chosen author/translator has). It seems to me that a huge point of picking Rijneveld would have been because they just won the Booker and are thus very marketable and well known.
Last edited: