Interpersonal and Professional Relationships in Translating Poetry

Abstract

Translating poetry involves multiple actors, each with their own special expertise. Even when a ‘solo’ translator does most or all of the translating, bringing translations to readers means working in a team along with funders, editors and/or publishers, etc. This team operates within a network of wider professional relationships.

The article focuses mainly on relations between ‘translating agents’, who work on the translated text. ‘Text helpers’ assist a solo translator by answering queries about the source poems, advising on target-language wording, or both. When the source poet acts as a text helper, her/his involvement ranges from ‘hands-off ’, via ‘fruitful dialogue’ (where she/he answers queries and spots errors, but leaves the translator to find solutions), to partially or wholly taking over the translating process.

In ‘collaborative (co-)translating’, two or more people translate jointly, ideally working face-to-face in real time. They may both have full solotranslating skills, but jointly revise their drafts. Or a target-language poet who does not know the source language (a ‘target poet’) may work with the source poet. Alternatively, a target poet may collaborate with a ‘language advisor’, an expert in the source language and culture. The ‘poettrio’ configuration involves the source poet, a language advisor, and a target poet. Unfortunately, publicity and book covers often credit only the target poet as the translator, with others only mentioned in notes, if at all.

Dialogue is a key enabler of these interactions. This involves constructive discussions about translating, but also establishing roles and responsibilities, and ensuring that participants remain included in conversations. Conversely, tensions arise when participants feel that others have breached role boundaries, or failed to keep them informed by interpreting talk in the other language. Power hierarchies (between source poet and translator, and between target poet and language advisor) are a reality that participants need to work with. Loyalty (particularly of other translating agents towards the source poet) and mutual trust help reinforce good will and enable productive dialogue. Affective responses also play a key role in the success or otherwise of translating partnerships.

Data for this article are drawn largely from published sources plus the author’s own experience as a poetry translator.