Literary Representation And Power Play In Translations Of Lao She’s Works

In the history of modern Chinese literature, Lao She is one of the Chinese writers whose works have been translated most widely in the West as well as in China. English versions of Lao She’s works made their debut in1944, when five of Lao She’s short stories were translated into English in the United States. From then on, a great many translations of Lao She’s works have come out in the past half a century. From this translational activity there can be seen many peculiar and complex phenomena, the most prominent of which are that Lao She himself has intervened in translating his own works into English in the West and that China has retrieved two of Lao She’s lost original via backtranslation. Studies on translations of Lao She’s works are legion, but most of them are sporadic rather than comprehensive and systematic. To change this situation, this dissertation, from the theoretical perspective taken since the "power turn" in Translation Studies, intends to carry out a relatively comprehensive and systematic study on translations of Lao She’s works produced in both the West and China during the past half century (1944-1999), covering all English versions and two Chinese backtranslations. For the convenience of analysis, the past half-century is divided into two translation periods, i.e. the earlier translation period (1944-1966) and the later translation period (1966-1999), with the year of Lao She’s death as the demarcation line. Meanwhile, the broad context under which translations of Lao She’s works have been produced is divided into two power systems, i.e. the Western power system and the Chinese power system.The study has adopted both conceptual and empirical research. While probing into relevant literature on Translation Studies as well as other fields of social science, the conceptual research has conducted some logical arguments to form a theoretical basis for the empirical research thereafter, i.e. the study on translations of Lao She’s works. The empirical research has employed historical or archive studies as well as case studies to make an objective observation on translations of Lao She’s works. Historical or archive studies have explored, analyzed, and interpreted the then historical and political environment in which translations of Lao She’s works were produced, the translator’s remarks available, and the existing comments made by the editor, the critic, and the author. Case studies have carefully analyzed some typical translated texts by means of textual comparison while carrying out a macroscopic investigation on translations of Lao She’s works produced during the two translation periods (the earlier translation period and the later translation period) and under the two power systems (the Western power system and the Chinese power system).Chapters1and2, carrying out the conceptual research, have brought about two main results:1. In relevant English literature on Translation Studies, the concept "power in translation" has remained a vague expression which, together with other factors, has caused some Chinese translation studies scholars to misinterpret it as "all forces that control and sway translational activities" and reify it as patronage, political institutions, ideology, and so on. Following deconstructionism in seeking for stability of meaning, the research has rectified this misinterpretation, contending that Foucault’s schema of struggle-repression for the analysis of power can provide a stable scope to form a correct understanding of "power in translation" and a sufficient explanation of various translational phenomena related to power.2. The research has made clear that ontologically translation should be seen as a form of partial representation. Attributing translation’s partiality to power play, it has probed into how "the vehicles of power", i.e. such indispensable human factors in the translation chain as the publisher, the editor, the translator, the author, the reader, the critic, and so on, make power circulate in accordance with the broad social, economic, ideological and poetological context. Based on all the logical arguments, it has then put forward a theoretical assumption, reckoning that there must be a dynamic interaction between translation’s representation and power play.Chapters3to6have conducted the empirical research by investigating translations of Lao She’s works produced in the West and China from1944to1999. Centering round two aspects, i.e. Lao She’s works selected for translation and translation strategies adopted in translating those selected works, the investigation has resulted in some findings, which can be summarized into three main points:1. As a result of power play, literary representation of Lao She’s works under either the Western system or the Chinese power system is more or less contingent upon the broad political and ideological context. Literary representation of Lao She’s works in China, as compared with that in the West, is more subject to political and ideological effects. Nevertheless, political and ideological effects on translation are always limited, which is most obviously manifested in the fact that under both power systems literary representation of Lao She’s works eventually leans towards "literature for literature’s sake" rather than "literature for political and ideological use". This is due to the fact that political and ideological context cannot be brought into play by any single power player at will. That is to say, political and ideological effects on translation’s representation would be restricted by the power play between such actors as the publisher, the editor, the translator, the author, the reader, the critic, and so on.2. Literary representation of Lao She’s works in the West during the early translation period has accumulated the author Lao She’s influence in the translation chain, which during the later translation period subverts the setup of power play of the earlier translation period under both the Western power system and the Chinese power system. As a result of the subversion, literary representation of Lao She’s works during the later translation period, from the works selected to the major translation strategy adopted, is greatly different from or in sharp contrast to that during the earlier translation period.3. Inconsistencies, i.e. peculiarities that do not tally with the general translational phenomena, have been found in literary representation of Lao She’s works under both power systems. All the inconsistencies have shown the complexity of translation, but most importantly, they have demonstrated how translation’s representation would be greatly influenced by power play-any change of any human factor’s exerting power in the translation chain would cause particular inconsistencies in specific translations and specific translation strategies.In a word, the present study on translations of Lao She’s works have generally demonstrated the dynamic interaction between translation’s representation and power play. Lastly, this dissertation has touched upon two challenges that might be posed to the present study. One challenge concerns whether it has brought about scientific, convincing findings and revelations without applying the corpus-based methodology to the analysis of so many translated texts. Another challenge is that it has presented only a narrow vision on the broad context under which Lao She’s works have been translated, for it has neglected translations of other Chinese literary works when investigating translations of Lao She’s works. Acknowledging that good perspectives for similar research projects in the near future could be drawn from the two possible challenges, the present author has defended what this dissertation has done.