The Feminist Theory: Theoretical Framework
Scholars such as Luise von Flotow (1997) and Sherry Simon (1996) argue that the feminist movement has powerfully influenced the practice of translation. Its biggest contribution was to identify and draw attention to certain gender-related issues. The feminist theory of translation, for instance, critiques the concepts which undermine the role of both women and translations in literary practice (Chamberlain 1998). They too are concerned with the recovery of lost female writers’ works. Usually, those translated works are accompanied by prefaces and commentaries that inform readers how patriarchal values had previously deliberately limited its publication (von Flotow 1997:30). Moreover, as von Flotow (1997:14) contends, feminist thought has had an impact on the choice of translated texts; the increased interest in feminism has resulted in a greater demand for the translation of experimental female writing. The term ‘female writing’ immediately evokes the name of Hélène Cixous (Cixous, Clément and Wing, 1986, Cixous, Cohen and Cohen, 1976) and her concept of écriture feminine [feminine writing] . Her two essays - “The Newly Born Woman ”, co-authored with Catherine Clément, and “The Laugh of the Medusa ”- theorise some aspects related to this type of writing. She defines it as a sort of bisexual writing, not in the sense of being neuter, but rather one in which neither of the halves is repressed (Conley c1991:51). Its source of inspiration is the female body, objectified and defamed in a patriarchal world. Inevitably, this requires the creation of a new language equipped with new forms and meanings. As von Flotow (1997:17) shows, feminist translators have become particularly interested in this area. They tackle the censored anatomical vocabulary and try to find or create such language that would address women’s erotic needs. In the practice of translation, such innovative writing has further implications. A translator frequently faces difficulties related to word choice, gender forms, and the presence of neologisms.
Feminist theory also evokes issues of grammatical gender marking. In this, they follow the ideas already noted by such scholars as Roman Jacobson (2012). In “On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation ”, Jacobson (2012:130) shows that in the language of art, poetry and mythology, grammatical gender may acquire a symbolic meaning. This may pose a problem in translation because two different language systems may have different gender for the same word. For feminist theorists, however, this idea of gender-marking in language has, after all, an ideological importance. In this respect, it is worth mentioning the technical aspects of constructing the biological sex of the characters within the text. Monika Fludernik distinguishes two ways of doing it: explicit in forms of, for instance, “(pro)nominal expressions”, and implicit through, for instance, “the paraphernalia of our gendered culture (shirt vs. blouse)” (Fludernik 1999:154)..
Taking these motives into consideration, the value of the feminist approach arises. I do not think there exists either a female or male approach of translating and I am not alone in this. Anna Bednarczyk (2006:33) also criticises feminist theory, calling it an artificial creation whose value has been overstated because many of those aspects concern translation studies in general. For instance, gender-marking and translating neologisms are problems that face any translator regardless of whether they are male or female. On the other hand, creating an erotic language that is supposed to appeal to the opposite sex may be an issue, because as Jacques Derrida says, “it is impossible to know what the other [sex] feels” (Royer 1991:84). In contrast, Zbigniew Białas (2006:55) doubts any gender-related differences regarding erotic language. He questions in what way male erotic language should be spicier than female. Nevertheless, most of the problems emphasised by feminist theoreticians concern another matter, namely cultural awareness.
In the 1990s, translation theorist Susan Bassnett (2007:13) drew attention to the role of extra-textual factors, such as culture, in translation practice. Although she does not contest that translation is, after all, a linguistic transfer, she notices that those aspects related to a language only account for some part of this process. Factors such as social context, cultural convention, the subjectivity of the translator, and the particular historical time when the translation takes place also participate in this act. This is in line with another translation theorist, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (2012:312), who also sees translation as a process more complex than a mere equivalence transfer. In her essay, “The Politics of Translation ” (Spivak 2012:312), she states that she is aware that a translator is a free-acting individual with the ability to make a choice. Notwithstanding the freedom, a translator still has a responsibility towards the original text, which is paying careful attention to both rhetoric (form) and logic (content) of the original and, in the case of the feminist translator, to trace any gender-related issues in the language used. (Spivak 2012:313). The last claim of Spivak is controversial as it encourages an ideological approach to translation. As such, it may lead to text manipulation, which I will prove later in the text was the case with Polish translation of “A Room’s of One’s Own ”.
Basnett (2007:19) argues that by comparing the original with the translated text we may note the strategies implemented by a translator and see what role each text takes in their literary systems. This comparison should also reveal the translator as an individual, his views, and his ideology. In constructing the methodological tools, she uses concepts from the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu, which I also use in analysing the chosen texts. In this essay, I apply only three of his concepts, which are as follows: habitus, unconsciously acquired norms guiding human behaviour; capital , the material, cultural, intellectual, and social assets; and illusio , motivations stimulating people’s activity (Navarro 2006:16, Ighillieri 2005:134-137).