Siedensticker & Translation

 I think Siedensticker made a lot of good points about varying concerns we've begun to discuss in class about translation. The most difficult of these may possibly be the tolerance for ambiguity in literature. Japanese literature has a much higher tolerance for saying as little as possible to convey a meaning. English, on the other hand, HATES this. Siedensticker mentioned especially how the average editor is not a fan of keeping it vague. So how do you stay true to the source text when you are urged to explain away all of the nuance of the original? Siedensticker talks more about how Japanese people will complain about his translations for this very reason. How it's not a "good" translation because it is not exact. But he makes a good point as well; there comes a time when the translator has to decide whether or not to protect the literal translation or protect the rhythm of the text. And it usually works best if the translator themselves trusts their gut. "Which way sounds the best?"

I've also been concerned about being responsible for translating a famous/ culturally significant work. Something that a large group is passionate about. It is nearly impossible to make a translation that every single person will be happy with. But there are people who will pick it apart. That's usually why I try to stay as close as I can to what the text actually says. Recently, with the in-class translations, I try to translate it literally first, then comb through it and swap things for a more natural read. But it's still scary to present it for everyone to judge.

Melissa