In 2008, the Finnish National Theatre produced the Lebanese/Canadian playwright Wajdi Mouawad’s tragic play Incendies in Finnish. The advertisements, newspaper pre-reviews and reviews named Reita Lounatvuori, a well-known Finnish theatre translator, as the author of the translation. However, several other people were also involved in the translation process before Mouawad’s text reached the stage. In my article, I offer an empirical study of the process of translation of Incendies into Finnish to argue that translations in the theatre are not objects of art but products of art worlds, bearing the fingerprints of many subjectivities. To support my argument, I draw on Actor-Network Theory, as recently developed in the context of translation sociology (Buzelin 2007, 2005; Bogic 2010), and on Performance Studies, following Richard Schechner’s articulation of the concept of performance (Schechner 2013). I apply these models to the specific context of the theatre, the specific genre of drama, and the process of translating one play. This interdisciplinary exploratory study argues for the relevance of Schechner’s analytical model, and more broadly of Performance Studies, to the analysis of interlingual translation processes.
Translated playtexts on stage can very rarely be attributed to an individual translator. All theatre practitioners are involved, to some degree, in the rewriting of a text for a particular production. What varies is not the extent to which they are involved, but the power they exercise during the process (Aaltonen 2000: 38–41; Espasa 2000). While the roles played by directors, dramaturgs, and actors during collaborative translation (Baines et al. 2010) and the economic constraints of such collaborations (Aaltonen 2007; Aaltonen 2000: 88–89; Bennett 1997: 125) have been acknowledged by scholarship in theatre and translation studies, the [ p. 386 ]contribution of various subjectivities in the production of translation networks has only recently been taken under closer scrutiny. The discovery of the work of Bruno Latour and its potential for the study of both human and non-human actors has made possible the unveiling of multiple subjectivities in the manufacture of translations. In the twenty-first century, Latour’s actor-network theory (ANT) has gained a firm foothold in Translation Studies (TS), and a number of scholars (Buzelin 2005, 2006, 2007, 2012; Wolf and Fukari 2007; Hekkanen 2009; Risku and Dickinson 2009; Kung 2009; Milton and Bandia 2009; Bogic 2010; Abdallah 2012 and forthcoming; Siponkoskiin progress, etc.) have begun to explore the role played by invisible actors in the translation process.
2000Time-sharing on Stage. Drama Translation in Theatre and Society. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
2007 “Space and Place in Theatrical Contact Zones. How to Find Audiencesfor Untapped Reservoirs of Contemporary Drama from Small Cultures.” In ACT 15. Teatro e Tradução: Palcos de Encontro, ed. by Maria João Brilhante, e Manuela Carvalho, 53–75. Porto: Campo das Letras.
(ed.) 2010Matkalippu maailmalle (A Ticket to the World). Helsinki: Like Kustanus.
2012Translators in Production Networks. Reflections on Agency, Quality and Ethics. Dissertations in Education, Humanities and Theology No 21. Joensuu: University of Eastern Finland.
Forthcoming. “The Interface between Bourdieu's Habitus and Latour's Agency: The Work Trajectories of Two Finnish Translators.” In Remapping ‘Habitus’ in Translation Studies ed. by Gisela VorderobermeierAmsterdam/New YorkRodopi
Baines, Roger, Cristina Marinetti, and Manuela Perteghella
(eds)2011Staging and Performing Translation. Text and Theatre Practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2006 “Independent Publisher in the Networks of Translation.” TTR 19 (1): 135–173.
2007 “Translations ‘in the making’.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation, ed. by Michaela Wolf, and Alexandra Fukari, 135–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carbonell Cortés, Ovidi
2006 “Misquoted Others. Locating Newness and Authority in Cultural Translation.” In Translating Others 1, ed. by Theo Hermans, 43–63. Manchester: St. Jerome.
2000 “Performability in Translation: Speakability? Playability? Or just Saleability?” In Moving Target. Theatre Translation and Cultural Relocation, ed. by Carole-Anne Upton, 49–64. Manchester: St. Jerome.
1973The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays by Glifford Geertz. New York: Basic Books Publishers.
2009 “Fields, Networks and Finnish Prose: A Comparison of Bourdieusian Field Theory and Actor-Network Theory in Translation Sociology.” In Selected Papers of the [ p. 406 ]CETRA Research Seminar in Translation Studies 2008, ed. by Dries De Crom. Available at http://www.arts.kuleuven.be/cetra/papers/files/hekkanen.pdf (Accessed: 08/06/2013).
2003bIncendies. Version revised after the prémière.
1977 “Forms and Functions of Nonverbal Communication in the Novel: A New Perspective of the Author-Character-Reader Relationship.” Semiotica 21 (3/4): 295–337.
Risku, Hanna, and Angela Dickinson
2009 “Translators as Networkers: The Role of Virtual Communities.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication Studies 42: 49–70.
Rose, Margaret, and Cristina Marinetti
2010 “The Translator as Cultural Promoter: Or How Renato Gabrielli's Qualcosa Trilla Went on the Road as Mobile Thriller.” In Staging and Performing Translation. Text and Theatre Practice, ed. by Roger Baines, Cristina Marinetti, and Manuela Perteghella, 39–154. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2002Performance Studies. An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.
2013Performance Studies. An Introduction. 3rd edition. London: Routledge.