Criteria for evaluating literary translation. Seminar (2008)

Although literary translations are often evaluated (for the purposes of grants, prizes, literary criticism, etc.), the criteria used in these evaluations are rarely defined. ItzulBaita therefore organized a seminar to address the need for specific criteria to be used in the specialized criticism of literary translations.

The seminar was organized in two parts: first, a report on the criteria that are currently in use, followed by a round table discussion with translators who often review and evaluate literary translations.

The seminar took place in San Sebastian on June 13, with the following participants: Speaker: translator Manu Lopez Gaseni; Round Table Participants: literary critic Mikel Aierbe, and translators Bakartxo Arrizabalaga, Inma Errea, Mikel Garmendia and Ander Irizar; Moderator: translator Itziar Otegi.

Summary of the seminar

The following is a brief summary of the conclusions reached in the seminar:

Modes of criticism

• The critical commentary on literary works translated into Basque consists almost entirely of plot summary for the purpose of guiding potential readers and promoting awareness of works in translation. Specialized criticism of translation is rarely seen.
• The works selected for commentary are primarily new releases, but the critic is generally free to choose the works he or she wishes to review. With respect to content, the critic generally presents his or her impression of the work, supporting his or her view with literary arguments. The commentary is shaped to a large extent by the views of its intended audience. Furthermore, the critic takes his or her personal reading of the work as a point of departure. It has often been noted that the translator brings a special reading to the work; thus, translators could make an interesting contribution to the criticism of literary works.

Visibility of translation

• There is little agreement on whether or not it should be mentioned in a commentary or review that the work in question is a translation nor, if it is mentioned, on how that information should be handled. In summary reviews, it is not absolutely necessary to compare the translation with the original work, though it would be helpful. This possibility is limited, however, by constraints of time, resources and ability.
• The seminar participants consider there to be an urgent need to fill the void in specialized criticism. However, tools and resources, both material and conceptual, are lacking to accomplish this; also needed are greater collaboration among the many fields related to literary production in Basque, and appropriate forums in which to develop the needed tools and resources and to foster the needed collaboration. Panels of judges, for example, feel these lacks in trying to carry out their mandate. As a result, they base their judgments primarily on intuition.

Criteria

• The seminar discussion failed to identify the specific criteria that are used in literary commentary and the evaluation of literary translation in general. In the opinion of the participants, rather than a set list of criteria, it would be more useful to have a list of categories to take into consideration in evaluating a literary translation.
• Finally, the participants believe it would be beneficial to establish a forum in which to develop the relationship between writers and translators, given that the contributions from both sides are likely to be highly enriching.

Manu Lopez Gaseni's report and a summary of the discussion were published in the journal SENEZ.

This seminar was partly funded by CEDRO.