[KS] Korean lost in translation

[Brother Anthony]

JooBai Lee's recent interesting mailing touched on a number of major topics, and it would not be possible
to respond at length to all of them. However, a few comments might be in order.

He began by referring to a previous writer's complaint about the 'scarcity and quality of translations of
Korean literature and history' for classroom use, and I have heard this complaint echoed in a number of
places. Regarding translations of literature, the Columbia Anthologies that have now (at last) begun to
appear seem destined to provide the obvious solution. Especially when the modern fiction volume is
published. The Modern Poetry volume came out this year. Speaking generally, I would say that a very
considerable amount has been translated but often it has been published in obscure journals that even a
major American university library may well not have, or is now out of print. I believe that KLTI is making
a variety of texts available online, which may be bad for copyright but is potentially good for readers. As
for quality, it is sure that there is no such thing as a perfect translation but I know too well that there
are those who too readily affirm that no translations are any good (except their own of course). It might
also be the case that texts being used in language teaching may have to be far more 'literal' than is
normal in literary translation, where the goal is to produce a text that is adapted to the needs and
expectations of readers in the target culture. Failure to understand the freedom normally afforded to the
literary translator into English underlies certain hostile, 'nit-picking' responses to such translations by
Korean reviewers eager to pinpoint any deviation from a purely 'word for word' version and unwilling to
give any credit for fine work. Also, Korean literary works of historical significance, needed for classroom
use, are often not going to attract general readers. I will not develop on the virtual impossibility of
finding a publisher for translations from Korean in the English-speaking world. At the same time, I might
point out that Homa & Sekey are perplexed by the poor sales of the Korean titles that they have very
bravely published and Cornell EAS have virtually given up publishing translations. If people teaching
Korean literature in the US do not include the books from such series in their reading lists, who is going
to want to publish more? This is a major problem.

As for the idea of using Korean translations of modern Western literature in the classroom, I must advise
caution since it is notorious that these are not made by qualified or careful people. A friend of mine,
working in the Korea Herald and accustomed to bilingual work, started to read the current most popular
translated novel, found it incomprehensible and on consulting the English realized that 'every paragraph
contained at least one major error.' The translators did not know everyday western culture or colloquial
English.

I will say nothing about the '100 books in 300 days' project, but I believe that those working in Korean
Studies overseas need to negociate with the funding agencies to ensure that proper funding is available for
the translation of major primary sources (historical documents etc) and academic studies (as opposed to
literary texts). Of course, most Korean academic studies are written from a Korean point of view for a
Korean readership and are often not comprehensible unless intelligently adapted, as was done in French for
a survey of pre-modern Korean literature for example. I believe that this work needs a separate funding
program. KLTI amd Daesan focus mainly on literature, for nobel reasons perhaps.

Enough

Brother Anthony (An Sonjae)
Sogang University, Seoul
http://www.sogang.ac.kr/~anthony