Transcreation

The concepts of rewriting and adaptation actually lead us to the question of how creative and original the translator can be. This has been the perennial dilemma that translators have faced since this activity began, and the solutions offered had also been many – word-for-word, sense-for-sense or completely free translations. In this context we have to examine another concept called ‘transcreation’ propounded by the famous writer, translator and publisher P. Lal. It might be wrong to attribute the coinage of this term to Lal, as the definition given by Wiktionary for this term is “an adaptation of a creative work into another language or culture” (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transcreation). The concept is clear from the given definition – it means that the translator is free to recreate in her own terms the original work of art.

Lal explains why he would call a translation an act of transcreation. In the Preface to his translation of Shakuntala, he discusses the challenges that the modern translator of an ancient text like Kalidasa’s Abhijnanasakuntalam. would face. While readers who are familiar with Sanskrit would find “a clean, bracing ethics” in the text, “to English readers the scenes and incidents which best embody the ethics can appear incongruous and even farcical if a translator goes about his job ignorantly or condescendingly” (4). He argues that the translator has no choice but to “edit, reconcile and transmute” if he has to convey the text in the best manner possible to a contemporary reader (5). In this act of transcreation, he might wander away from the text but this will be a true translation as it captures the essence of the original. In fact, Lal is known for his transcreations not only of ancient Sanskrit drama but also of the epic Mahabharata.