•  
  •  
 

Multicultural Shakespeare: Translation, Appropriation and Performance

Abstract

This article examines the subjective aesthetic criteria used to assess two Finnish translations of Hamlet, one by Eeva-Liisa Manner (1981) and the other by Matti Rossi (2013), both accomplished translators for the stage. A survey consisting of one general question (“Briefly describe your idea of how Shakespeare translation should sound in Finnish, and what you think are the qualities of a good Shakespeare translation”) and five text extracts was distributed on paper and electronically, generating 50 responses. For the extracts, respondents were asked whether one or the other translation most closely dorresponded to their idea of what a Shakespeare translation should sound like and why, along with questions on whether they would prefer to see or read one or the other. The results show that there are no strong shared expectancy norms in Finland regarding Shakespeare translation. Manner was generally felt to be more concise and poetic, while Rossi was praised for his exquisite use of modern Finnish. Respondents agreed that rhythm was an important criterion, but disagreed on what sorts of rhythms they preferred. Translation of the “to be or not to be” speech raised the most passions, with many strongly preferring Manner’s more traditional translation. The results suggest that Shakespeare scholars would do well to take variations in expectancy norms into account when assessing and analysing Shakespeare in translation.

Keywords

Shakespeare reception, translation, drama translation, Hamlet, Shakespeare in Finland, Matti Rossi, Eeva-Liisa Manner

References

Aaltonen, Sirkku. “Retranslation in the Finnish Theater.” Traducao, Retraducao e adaptacao 1.11 (2003): 141-159.

Chesterman, Andrew. Memes of Translation. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1997.

Chesterman, Andrew. “Norms of the Future?” Ian Kemble, ed. Translation Norms: What is “Normal” in the Translation Profession? Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth: School of Languages and Area Studies, 2005. 1-9.

Gallimore, Daniel. “Shakespeare’s History Plays in Japan.” Hoenselaars, Ton. Shakespeare’s History Plays: Performance, Translation and Adaptation in Britain and Abroad. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 92-107.

Gallimore, Daniel. “Tsubouchi Shōyō and the Beauty of Shakespeare Translation in 1900s Japan.” Multicultural Shakespeare: Translation, Appropriation and Performance. 13 (2016): 69-85.

Hardwick, Lorna. “Playing Around Cultural Faultlines.” Chantler, Carla Dente and Ashley. Translation Practices: Through Language to Culture. Amsterdam: Brill Academic Publishers, 2009. 167-183.

Huang, Alexander C.Y. “Shakespeare and Translation.” Mark Thornton Burnett, Adrian Streete and Ramon Wray, eds. Edinburgh Companion to Shakespeare and the Arts. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011. 68-87.

Johnston, David. “Metaphor and Metonymy: the Translator-Practitioner’s Visibility.” Roger Baines, Cristina Marinetti, and Manuela Pergeghella, eds. Staging and Performing Translation: Text and Theater Practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 11-30.

Keinänen, Nely. “Canons and Heroes: The Reception of the Complete Works Translation Project in Finland, 2002-13” Multicultural Shakespeare, volume 16.1 (2017): 109-125.

Koskinen, Kaisa and Outi Paloposki. Sata Kirjaa, Tuhat Suomennosta: Kaunokirjallisuuden Uudelleenkääntäminen. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, 2015.

Leppihalme, Ritva. “Foreignizing Strategies in Drama Translation.” Andrew Chesterman, Natividad Gallardo San Salvador, Yves Gambier, eds. Translation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1998. 153-62.

Manner, Eeva-Liisa, translator. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Helsinki: WSOY, 1998.

Martin, Alice. “Macbethista Hamletiin: Kymmenen Vuoden Oppismisprosessi” [From Macbeth to Hamlet: A Ten-Year Learning Process]. Synteesi 1-2/2016 (volume 35): 71-81.

Munday, Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies, 2nd edition. London: Routledge, 2008.

Puurtinen, Tiina. “Two Translations in Comparison: A Study on Readability.” Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja and Stephen Condit, eds. Kielitieteellisiä Tutkimuksia, Studies in Languages. Joensuu: University of Joensuu, 1989. 87-111.

Rissanen, Matti. Ollako vai eikö olla? Kenen käännös? Kas siinä pulma [To be or not to be? Whose Translation? That is the Question]. Helsinki: Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change in English (Varieng), University of Helsinki, 2013. electronic. .

Rossi, Matti, translator. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Helsinki: WSOY, 2013.

Ruokonen, Minna. “Target Readers’ Expectations and Reality: Conformity or Conflict?” Pekka Kujamäki et al, eds. Beyond Borders: Translations Moving Languages, Literatures and Culture. Berlin: Frank & Tunne, 2011. 73-100.

Siponkoski, Nestori. Translation under Negotiation: The Textual Interplay of Translators and Editors in Contemporary Finnish Shakespeare Translation. Vaasa: University of Vaasa, 2014.

Venuti, Lawrence. “Retranslations: The Creation of Value.” Bucknell Review 47.1 (2004): 25-38.

First Page

23

Last Page

42

Language

eng

Share

COinS