Session Title

False Friends: "Translation," "Adaptation," or "Creative Interpretation" of the Medieval Text?

Sponsoring Organization(s)

eth press

Organizer Name

Chris Piuma, David Hadbawnik

Organizer Affiliation

Univ. of Toronto, Univ. at Buffalo

Presider Name

David Hadbawnik

Paper Title 1

The Nonce Taxonomies of Translation and Mary Jo Bang's Inferno

Presenter 1 Name

Lisa Ampleman

Presenter 1 Affiliation

Univ. of Cincinnati

Paper Title 2

The Well of Anachronism: Experimental Translation, Medievalism, and Gender in Contemporary Poetics

Presenter 2 Name

Shannon Maguire

Presenter 2 Affiliation

Wilfrid Laurier Univ.

Paper Title 3

Return to Sender: Re-Flemishing Chaucer's Flemish Tales in Verhalen voor Canterbury

Presenter 3 Name

Jonathan Hsy

Presenter 3 Affiliation

George Washington Univ.

Paper Title 4

"The harlot is talkative and wandering": Conduct Literature, Medbh McGuckian, and the Postcolonial Subject

Presenter 4 Name

Katharine W. Jager

Presenter 4 Affiliation

Univ. of Houston-Downtown

Start Date

15-5-2015 10:00 AM

Session Location

Schneider 2355

Description

Thomas Meyer’s Beowulf (2012, but written in the 1970s) has garnered praise from academic circles, including a positive review in the October 2013 issue of Speculum, and from poetry circles, with comments on and excerpts from the text appearing in Jacket2. Yet one review calls it an “adaptation” and another takes issue with Meyer’s “capricious and arbitrary” poetic license. More recently, as Jonathan Hsy and Candace Barrington relate in a forthcoming article, Patience Agbabi’s The Canterbury Copy (2014) “troubles standard distinctions between appropriation, translation, and interpretation.” Nevertheless, they also argue that, by reworking The Canterbury Tales with immigrant-pilgrims drawn from her own experience in London, Agbabi’s approach forces the reader to confront anew some of the language and translation problems of the original poem. This suggests that an overemphasis on the categories of translation vs. adaptation, academic vs. creative, might provide barriers to interacting with and thinking about medieval poems. This panel will ask critical questions around these barriers: What makes something a translation, something else not? Why do we care, and what does that caring mean? How can we think beyond such categories to arrive at deeper truths that medievalist reworkings might disclose?

Chris Piuma and David Hadbawnik

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
May 15th, 10:00 AM

False Friends: "Translation," "Adaptation," or "Creative Interpretation" of the Medieval Text?

Schneider 2355

Thomas Meyer’s Beowulf (2012, but written in the 1970s) has garnered praise from academic circles, including a positive review in the October 2013 issue of Speculum, and from poetry circles, with comments on and excerpts from the text appearing in Jacket2. Yet one review calls it an “adaptation” and another takes issue with Meyer’s “capricious and arbitrary” poetic license. More recently, as Jonathan Hsy and Candace Barrington relate in a forthcoming article, Patience Agbabi’s The Canterbury Copy (2014) “troubles standard distinctions between appropriation, translation, and interpretation.” Nevertheless, they also argue that, by reworking The Canterbury Tales with immigrant-pilgrims drawn from her own experience in London, Agbabi’s approach forces the reader to confront anew some of the language and translation problems of the original poem. This suggests that an overemphasis on the categories of translation vs. adaptation, academic vs. creative, might provide barriers to interacting with and thinking about medieval poems. This panel will ask critical questions around these barriers: What makes something a translation, something else not? Why do we care, and what does that caring mean? How can we think beyond such categories to arrive at deeper truths that medievalist reworkings might disclose?

Chris Piuma and David Hadbawnik