Cathy Hirano

 While this article invoked much of the same ideas as the previous two assignments, I think something that was more clear in Cathy Hirano’s text was cultural divisions and the attempts to bridge that gap. I enjoyed how she explained this divide, but the fact that this problem is fixed based on the purpose of the translation stood out more. With the example in the article, the author’s main intention was to make the story more accessible to those of other languages. This inherently gave the translator more leeway to make changes to facilitate understanding instead of remaining truly faithful to the original text. It becomes a balance between understanding and faithfulness, which I would argue the latter would probably stem from pride in one’s work than any reason to translate. 

I thought this was an interesting idea, in combination with Hirano’s words of “the author is always right”. Whether or not the translator has a “better” translation, or at least a translation more easily understood in a new culture, does not matter. It is up to the author’s intent on the translation, and the limits they would go to in order for others to be introduced to their work. And even then, it’s a gamble on whether their new readers both understand and enjoy the translated work. 

Avi