On "Creative Treason" In David Hawkes' Translation Of HongLouMeng: From The Perspective Of Cultural Studies

Fidelity, like a totem for numerous translators, has been exerting powerful influence over literary translation. Though the criterion for literary translation started with fidelity to the source text meaning, and even has gone as far as to abusive fidelity, all these are grounded on the false assumption that translation is a simple language transfer under an ideal condition. However, in the actual practice of translation, in particular literary translation, treason has become an unavoidable essential feature. Translation is a cross-language and cross-culture communication full of contradictions, especially in the light of literary translation, literary translation is often considered as an imitation as well as creation. Inspired by cultural studies that came into being in the 1960s, translation studies have begun to take its"cultural turn"by the end of the 1970s. The"cultural turn"of translation studies signifies that translation studies have broken through traditional linguistic and aesthetic paradigms and gained a new dimension and perspective. Translation studies have become the introspection of culture to some extent. Cultural Studies approach to literary translation is a descriptive research, which means that the focus of this kind of study is not on the comparison of source and target texts or the compliance of translated texts with translation criteria, but on the historical and socio-cultural contexts in which specific translated texts came into being. And then through the analysis of the roles these translated texts have played in the target culture, the difference and collision between source and target cultures and the kind of distortion in the process of literary translation can be revealed.Enlightened by this Cultural Studies approach to literary translation, and borrowing the concept of"creative treason"from comparative literature, the author attempts to interpret creative treason in David Hawkes'translation process. The main forms of creative treason in literary translation, such as substitution, deletion, amplification and paraphrase, will be given more priority than any other forms in this thesis. In this thesis, culture is the main concern, culture and cultural factors manipulating creative treason are of greatest priority. Along with a number of examples concerning ancient Chinese culture from David Hawkes'English translation of the classical Chinese work HongLoumeng, the roots of different kinds of creative treason in literary translation will be analyzed from the following two aspects, first in terms of the target culture readers, such as the consideration for the target culture readership or the translation purpose; second, in terms of the target culture ideology, the author expounds on how ideology interferes in the translation process. It also takes target culture poetics and patronage factors into consideration.The analysis generates the following conclusions:Firstly, influenced by the target culture factors, during his translation process of HongLouMeng, Hawkes flexibly employs specific means of adaptation creatively to achieve specific goals under specific circumstances though it will result in objective deviation of the translated text from the original to different degrees. Viewed from this perspective, the focus of creative treason has shifted from the treasonous phenomenon to the translator's creative employment of means of adaptation in the translation process.Secondly, Hawkes not only works under two linguistic systems but also in two different cultural contexts. Under the influence of the target cultural factors, his adaptation is manipulated by the target culture readers, ideology, poetics, patronage, etc. In order to make an objective, scientific and holistic evaluation of literary translation, the author of this thesis argues that not only the role of translator and receptor but also those cultural constraints should be taken into consideration in the theoretical system of literary translation criticism.Thirdly, the way the translators understand their culture is one of the factors that influence the way in which they translate. When manipulated by the understanding that Western culture is more superior to Eastern culture, David Hawkes concentrates on the culture of his own language and overlooks the one in the source language. He conforms to the cultural norms of the target culture and carries out the cultural violence and imperialism which are imposed by Anglo-American strong power through creative treason.Fourthly, Hawkes'rendering of HongLouMeng excessively caters to the horizons of expectations of the target culture readers, and he has failed to realize that the target culture readers'horizon of expectations is so divergent from that of the source. Therefore, the target culture readers'impression and reception of the cultural elements are hampered, thus are different from that of the source culture readers.Fifthly, by studying various treasonous phenomenon in Hawkes'translation, the motivation of him in his translation practice can be predicted and those factors which contribute to treasonous translation can be revealed; not only the collisions and distortions between the communication of the Eastern and Western cultures but also the misunderstanding and misinterpretation between them can be demonstrated; literary translator's status gets improved and their subjectivity in the translation process can be revealed; a deeper insight into the translation activity can be gained and much interest for cultural studies can be stimulated.