In The New York Times Benjamin Moser pleads for more attention and support for literature in translation in (the embarrassingly titled -- come on, NYT, really ?) Found in Translation.
Moser specifically blames: "the increasing global dominance of English" for the obscurity of foreign literature.
It seems a bit of a circular argument to me -- and while it's understandable he harps on Clarice Lispector (he wrote a biography of her, and has been instrumental -- including via retranslations of her work -- in fostering an impressive Lispector-in-English revival) she surely wasn't that obscure in the first place, even in English (several of her works were available -- I have novels of hers first published in translation in 1986 and 1988) but especially elsewhere (meaning also: not just in Brazil).
Moser suggests:
Some of his examples also are somewhat underwhelming: sure, Jonathan Franzen published a translation of Spring Awakening -- but it was something he did at college and just polished up a little (also: it's not like that piece hasn't been translated before ...). And while I admire the work of the Elizabeth Kostova Foundation it seems a bit of an exaggeration to suggest here was the final necessary piece and: "Thanks to Ms. Kostova, contemporary Bulgarian writers have a chance at being known internationally". Quite a few have been translated into continental European languages -- foremost among them German -- and have been doing just fine, 'internationally' (as long as one accepts that means: not necessarily in the US/UK ...).
Getting translated into English is still, of course, the holy literary grail: it is the most-desired and most useful transmission language, but French and German seem to still hold their own in the spreading-the-authors'-words department; indeed, audiences there (and elsewhere) seem more receptive to the foreign, and I often wonder whether it wouldn't be wiser for national literary organizations to try harder in those markets, rather than putting all their eggs in the still dubious and fickle English-language market.
Moser specifically blames: "the increasing global dominance of English" for the obscurity of foreign literature.
It seems a bit of a circular argument to me -- and while it's understandable he harps on Clarice Lispector (he wrote a biography of her, and has been instrumental -- including via retranslations of her work -- in fostering an impressive Lispector-in-English revival) she surely wasn't that obscure in the first place, even in English (several of her works were available -- I have novels of hers first published in translation in 1986 and 1988) but especially elsewhere (meaning also: not just in Brazil).
Moser suggests:
For every Karl Ove Knausgaard or Elena Ferrante, who are translated almost as soon as they appear in Norwegian or Italian, there are many Lispectors.But surely the real problem is the many, many great writers who are not available in any form in English. (You can quibble, or outright dismiss the early Lispector translations, but at least it was possible, even as an American reader, to get a sense of the author almost three decades ago.)
Some of his examples also are somewhat underwhelming: sure, Jonathan Franzen published a translation of Spring Awakening -- but it was something he did at college and just polished up a little (also: it's not like that piece hasn't been translated before ...). And while I admire the work of the Elizabeth Kostova Foundation it seems a bit of an exaggeration to suggest here was the final necessary piece and: "Thanks to Ms. Kostova, contemporary Bulgarian writers have a chance at being known internationally". Quite a few have been translated into continental European languages -- foremost among them German -- and have been doing just fine, 'internationally' (as long as one accepts that means: not necessarily in the US/UK ...).
Getting translated into English is still, of course, the holy literary grail: it is the most-desired and most useful transmission language, but French and German seem to still hold their own in the spreading-the-authors'-words department; indeed, audiences there (and elsewhere) seem more receptive to the foreign, and I often wonder whether it wouldn't be wiser for national literary organizations to try harder in those markets, rather than putting all their eggs in the still dubious and fickle English-language market.