In Defense of Mimicry | The Poetry Foundation

poetryfoundation.org · 5,614 words · saved by 1 readers

Translators are told over and over that they have to maintain fidelity, that they should not be unfaithful, that they should not take liberties with the original text. Reviews of translated books seldom even mention the translator—unless the translator has made what the reviewer considers an error. In such cases, the reviewer will criticize the translator for lacking “fidelity” to the original, or simply for lacking competence. The reviewer establishes mastery by casting doubt on the translator’s. The translator becomes visible by making errors, by allowing noise into the transformation of the text. However, if translators hew too closely to the original, they are liable to be dismissed as mere mimics. They have, as it were, lost their individuality, originality, and agency. Translators must never depart from some idealized version of fidelity to the original, but they also must not appear to follow it too closely. In the former case, the translator lacks competence and mastery; in the

1. Translators are told over and over that they have to maintain fidelity, that they should not be unfaithful, that they should not take liberties with the original text. Reviews of translated books seldom even mention the translator—unless the translator has made what the reviewer considers an error. In such cases, the reviewer will criticize the translator for lacking “fidelity” to the original, or simply for lacking competence. The reviewer establishes mastery by casting doubt on the translator’s. The translator becomes visible by making errors, by allowing noise into the transformation of

In Defense of Mimicry | The Poetry Foundation

related reading