The drama of translation – Beit Berl’s study day on translation in theatre

 

[Woman and shadow*]

Strangely enough, I most enjoy lectures that are in those areas of which I know very little and in which I have no intention in entering. It is fascinating to discover the magic of the unknown. This week, I had the pleasure of attending a study day organized by the translation faculty of Beit Berl College, headed by Judith Rubanovsky-Paz, for its current and past students. The program was entitled “Translation in the spotlight” and discussed translation of theatre. Several leading translators in the field, including in sign language, shared their wisdom. Among the many pearls offered, I especially appreciated the insights regarding the place, plus figurative and literal, of written translation in theatre, the need for periodic retranslation and the art of translating classic plays.

Tami Rubin, an established and recognized theatre translator, brought out the conflict between the requirement and disturbance of translation during a performance. On the one hand, given the monolingual nature of the performer as compared to the multilingual nature of the audience, surtitles, as they are called when placed above the stage, allow the entire audience to fully follow the action and reduce the language barrier to enjoyment. On the other hand, the traditional practice of running translations above or even to the side of the stage requires the audience to constantly switch its attention from the action to the translation, a sometimes difficult and tiring maneuver. She noted that a few productions have integrated the translation into the background of the scene, allowing the viewer to read the translation and follow the action simultaneously. She remarked that such an arrangement requires the set designer to consider translation when planning the background. The talk brought out the difficult of integrating translation into performance.

Eli Bijaoui, an award-winning theatre translator, discussed the need for periodical retranslations of classics, including Molière and Shakespeare, in order to properly reflect their content. He noted that these playwrights, notwithstanding their current status as pantheons, wrote theatre to be understood and appreciated by all the people of their time, i.e., in a language grasped to one degree or another by the entire audience. In other words, they did not write in the language of the elite. He gave the example of Romeo speaking to his friends, who are hassling him for spending too much time with Juliet. His language is slangish and crude as is typical of young males in a such a situation. Eli argues that retaining the slang of even 10 years ago causes the text to lose its earthiness, an essential part of its content. He notes that the translation should not go overboard on slang but still should transfer the tone of the conversation. Thus, classic translations, regardless of their quality, are not written in stone but should flow like water for their time.

In regards to the actual text, Eli distinguished form from word choice. On the one hand, notwithstanding the challenge, the translation of texts written in specific meters, such as the comedies of Molière or the , should retain that or a similar structure in order to remain loyal to the spirit of the original, taking into account the fact that the actors must speak the text. On the other hand, the translator can and should adopt the choice of idiom, example or joke such that the audience reacts as the playwright intended, e.g., laughter or sadness. Clearly, an image or reference alien to most people viewing the play will not translate the intention of the original. He gave us wonderful examples from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet and Molière’s Ecole des femmes of how he translated the original text in to Hebrew. It was a brief but fascinating glimpse of the challenge and joy of successful theatre translation.

Lee Dan, a sign language translator also active in theatre, noted that the translator must be transparent, i.e., invisible to the audience, and  explained that it is a difficult task. In other words, the purpose of the theatre translation, especially since the text is spoken and not written, is to facilitate understanding, not complicate it. Thus, even more than technical translation, theatre translations is truly an art and worthy of great appreciation. In transmitting that message, the Beit Berl study day showed great light on that subject.

* Picture captions allow the blind to fully access the Internet.

Picture credit: 

Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/vic_b-6314823/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=5864279">press 👍 and ⭐</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=5864279">Pixabay</a>

Vraisemblant theatre

Since the age of movies and television, theatre has found itself at a disadvantage. Regardless of the expense and effort, it simply cannot compete with those media in terms of realism or special effects. This inability has let to extensive use of minimal, symbolic sets, which would seem to make theatre less effective than other forms, including books. Not only that, attending a play is an immediate experience that requires commitment to arrive at a specific time and does not allow the convenience of taking a break at your convenience. In fact, the starkness and strictness of theatre would seem to make it an increasingly less effective medium for presenting a drama, especially in the light of the short attention span of modern audiences.

The truth is the often the opposite. By definition stripped of peripherals, the drama is portrayed in its cleanest, most intense form. No amazing visual affects distract the audience from the plot. Moreover, the viewers, trapped in their seat, cannot easily walk away from the emotions and situations. They are forced to ride the waves of the story all the way to its happy, bittersweet or even tragic end. There is no shutting the book, pressing the pause button or switching to another channel. The theatre-goer must go through to the end.  Granted, in particular bad cases, people leave either during the break or even during the performance itself.  However, this behavior is still significantly less prevalent than in other forms of performance media. Thus, the seeming weaknesses of theatres, its simplicity and immediateness, make it the most powerful way of presenting a drama.

As an example, my wife and I just saw the Hebrew version of the Kite Runner, based on a book by Khaled Hosseini, as presented by the Gesher Theatre in Israel. The story is intense and painful, even violent.  If I had previously read the book, I may even have chosen not to see the drama as I was very tired that night. Not only that, the plot, both morally and emotionally, was very disturbing. The play challenged basic ideas about right and wrong and showed how complex they are to apply in real life, especially in a tribal society and even more so during war. The symbolic scenery, representing the various venues of the play, not only did not distract from this story but even enhanced it as it showed the grayness and starkness of the external world of the drama.  If I had started to watch this on television or read the book, I have no doubt I would have switched channels or put the book aside for another time. Instead, I was obliged to experience the story without escape or interruption. The result was a total vicarious pleasure, i.e., I had the privilege of glimpsing and, to a certain degree, gaining an understanding of Afghan society as it was portrayed. Both my wife and I left wowed, even emotionally drained. That is what good theatre can do.

If I prefer theatre to movies, it is for these reasons. The strength of a play is in its story and characters, not the special effects or the physical action scenes. Moreover, I may not always enjoy the experience but I am forced to go through it. Alas, not all theatre is powerful nor do all audiences seek such intensity. However, at its best, seeing a play at the theatre is as close to the real story as we can get. It is, as the French would say, vraisemblance, true likeness.