Resistance at two levels
Cronin thinks of resistance working at two levels especially in the postcolonial context. These are what he terms “resistance at the level of positionality” and “resistance at the level of text” (39).
What Cronin means by resistance at the level of positionality is the strategy adoptedby translators by virtue of their “general position in networks of power and influence” (39). The role of a translator is often defined by his/her class, race or gender. But these are very fluid categorizations that are liable to change. For instance, a translator whobelonged to the aristocratic elite in 19th century India would have been expected to be with the ruling class, but there was no guarantee that her sympathies were not with the downtrodden. Thus the translator is / was not a trusted personality, especially in the colonial context. Imperial rule demanded knowledge of the local language which could be provided only by the locals, who could not trusted as to which side they were really on.One exception to this is the case of Rev. James Long the British missionary who is believed to have translated Dinabandhu Mitra’s Nildarpan in 19th century Bengal. The play with its depiction of the plight of indigo farmers under colonial rule was a scathing indictment of the British. Although Long denied his involvement in the translation, he was prosecuted for his alleged act of sedition. Cronin stresses that it is important to know the lives of translators to have an idea of what actually motivates their strategies of subversive translation.
|
