Translated by Phoebe Bay Carter. He wasn’t sure that he actually hated his father. His childhood certainly hadn’t been easy. The fact that his father worked nights and slept days gave them little chance to develop a normal relationship. Add to that the father’s nerves, and his disproportionately violent responses to what were usually trivial infractions committed by the son, and we’ll find that if the son did not in fact hate his father, he most certainly did not love him. No feelings of affection towards his father were to be found in the son’s heart. If they had once existed, they had surely leaked out during those punishing days when the son found himself, suddenly and unexpectedly, bearing the whole family on his shoulders. However, let us not forget that this family considers itself a traditional, conservative, Moroccan family from the North. And there, you will always find respect for the father in the heart of his son, even if it is motivated by a sense of duty and nothing more.
I like the idea of a glossary. Bouazizi was not familiar to me. Also, I'd rather have a reference point in the book, instead of having to break off reading to google facts to tie together.
I'm thinking that one of the great advantages of online publication (as opposed to traditional printed text) is the ability to embed the footnote or glossary entry in the text as a hyperlink (or some other technical tool I'm not familiar with). The reader can choose to click or hover over the term when ready, without being distracted by the presence of a note at the bottom of the page or having to flip to a glossary at the end of the book. These could later be compiled into a glossary in the print book. Doing this would provide a lot of flexibility in the meantime, and reader responses as you continue weekly chapters could help gauge whether there are too many or too few of these, which is always challenging for the translator once she's decided to include any notes (rather than avoid them at all cost).
Yes, I really like this idea! I ended up using a footnote, not a hyperlink, in today's chapter, but want to experiment in the future, and will be curious to hear readers' feedback.
This is such a crucial question in translation and one I've thought about a lot... I am an overexplainer in real life, so part of me leans towards providing as much information as possible. However, I also think that one of the best parts of reading literature in translation is the work it forces me as a reader to do; it is also so fun as a reader to come across an indirect reference and realize that I'm "in on the joke." Thank you to you and Caroline for sharing the quote from Samah Selim. It's a crucial point not to "dumb down" texts or do too much work to accommodate an unfamiliar reader. I think in this case, the reference to self-immolation and the name Bouazizi gives the reader enough information to find the Wikipedia page and understand the reference. And even if they don't, the passage still makes sense. More to Selim's point, I think that leaving the name unexplained makes a statement that Bouazizi should have the same instant recognition we expect from similar figures in US/European events. For example, we wouldn't think that George Floyd's name needs an explanation, so why should Bouazizi's?
To answer your more general questions, I always find myself looking up the names of specific locations in a book. I love to use literature as a way to explore a new city, so I'll go on Google Maps and try to find specific areas referenced. While it might not be relevant to this story, I wonder if including maps at the beginning/end of translated novels would be a helpful addition for readers.
Thank you for these thoughts, Calvin! I definitely relate to the particular pleasure of catching an indirect reference. And it's a poignant comparison you make between the comparative legibility of Bouazizi and George Floyd. Though I wonder if that point gets lost without an explanation? I think for curious readers who are prompted to do some research, it will register, but I wonder if a footnote gives more of chance for that moment of, "Huh. Why didn't I know who this was? Why did I not hear about these events, and need a footnote?"
I like the idea of a glossary. Bouazizi was not familiar to me. Also, I'd rather have a reference point in the book, instead of having to break off reading to google facts to tie together.
Yes that's a good point, thank you Khalida!
I'm thinking that one of the great advantages of online publication (as opposed to traditional printed text) is the ability to embed the footnote or glossary entry in the text as a hyperlink (or some other technical tool I'm not familiar with). The reader can choose to click or hover over the term when ready, without being distracted by the presence of a note at the bottom of the page or having to flip to a glossary at the end of the book. These could later be compiled into a glossary in the print book. Doing this would provide a lot of flexibility in the meantime, and reader responses as you continue weekly chapters could help gauge whether there are too many or too few of these, which is always challenging for the translator once she's decided to include any notes (rather than avoid them at all cost).
Yes, I really like this idea! I ended up using a footnote, not a hyperlink, in today's chapter, but want to experiment in the future, and will be curious to hear readers' feedback.
This is such a crucial question in translation and one I've thought about a lot... I am an overexplainer in real life, so part of me leans towards providing as much information as possible. However, I also think that one of the best parts of reading literature in translation is the work it forces me as a reader to do; it is also so fun as a reader to come across an indirect reference and realize that I'm "in on the joke." Thank you to you and Caroline for sharing the quote from Samah Selim. It's a crucial point not to "dumb down" texts or do too much work to accommodate an unfamiliar reader. I think in this case, the reference to self-immolation and the name Bouazizi gives the reader enough information to find the Wikipedia page and understand the reference. And even if they don't, the passage still makes sense. More to Selim's point, I think that leaving the name unexplained makes a statement that Bouazizi should have the same instant recognition we expect from similar figures in US/European events. For example, we wouldn't think that George Floyd's name needs an explanation, so why should Bouazizi's?
To answer your more general questions, I always find myself looking up the names of specific locations in a book. I love to use literature as a way to explore a new city, so I'll go on Google Maps and try to find specific areas referenced. While it might not be relevant to this story, I wonder if including maps at the beginning/end of translated novels would be a helpful addition for readers.
Thank you for these thoughts, Calvin! I definitely relate to the particular pleasure of catching an indirect reference. And it's a poignant comparison you make between the comparative legibility of Bouazizi and George Floyd. Though I wonder if that point gets lost without an explanation? I think for curious readers who are prompted to do some research, it will register, but I wonder if a footnote gives more of chance for that moment of, "Huh. Why didn't I know who this was? Why did I not hear about these events, and need a footnote?"