Translators make decisions that have an enormous impact on how texts arrive in linguistic contexts beyond the language they were written in. Especially in literary translation, many of these decisions are related to questions of aesthetics and style. But these are also, as our macht.sprache. project is making increasingly clear, decisions with political undertow and ramifications. The translator’s note is often a moment that allows translators to communicate to their readers the considerations that went into their decision-making.
So many texts on the subject of world literature at some point indicate Goethe’s coining of Weltliteratur in 1827 as its origin story. This is to start the conversation within a European framing. But one could choose another point of departure. For instance: In 1907, Rabindranath Tagore, an enormously respected figure of Bengali literature, was asked to give a lecture on comparative literature. He chose instead to speak on vishwa sahitya.
In light of our translation project, case.sensitive., we’ve had cause to think once more about the relationships between different languages, and how these work in regard to power.
Although Black German history goes back several hundred years, it is often difficult to reconstruct, and the life stories of individuals – such as that of August Sabac el Cher, the administrator of silver in the Prinz-Albrecht-Palais – remain incomplete. Art can fill gaps or at least make them visible in an effective way.
With his faith in the beauty of cultural hybridity, Édouard Glissant became one of the most influential postcolonial theorists. In dystopian times, his philosophy of relation gives rise to hope.
Many people who find their cultural activities increasingly moving into the realm of the virtual might find themselves working more and more with translation tools. Yet these tools, and the translations they offer, tend to suffer from biases embedded into their making.
