Translating Trump
Rob Zaretsky at the LA Review of Books talks to a French translator about what it’s like translating Trump. They start with Obama. Translating him was a joy. Trump is…different.
Well, as I said, you have to be able to get into someone’s mind in order to translate his speech and reformulate it into your own language. Trump is not easy to translate, first of all, because, most of the time, when he speaks he seems not to know quite where he’s going. In my essay, I took the example of the interview he gave to The New York Times. He seems to hang onto a word in the question, or to a word that pops into his mind, repeating it over and over again. He shapes his thought around it and, sometimes, succeeds in giving part of an answer — often the same answer: namely, that he won the election. Trump seems to go from point A (the question) to point B (himself, most of the time) with no real logic. It’s as if he had thematic clouds in his head that he would pick from with no need of a logical thread to link them.
Indeed. I too have been reading him closely, and yes that is what he does. Remember the answers from the Times – Bild interview? A question about his view of the UK – a reply about his golf course. A question about his heroes – a reply about how awesome he is. Random and narcissistic at once.
But here’s the other problem with Trump: even once you’ve understood his point (or lack thereof), you must still express it in your own language. You realize, at that moment, that you have written something very unpleasant to read. Trump’s vocabulary is limited, his syntax is broken; he repeats the same phrases over and over, forcing the translator to follow suit. If she does not, she betrays the spirit of the original piece. The translator has to translate the content and the style. So that is what I do, and reading Trump in French, which is a very structured and logical language, reveals the poor quality of his language and, consequently, of his thought.
It’s very unpleasant to read in English too. It’s especially unpleasant in light of his new job. That brain-dead tweet about Martin Luther King for instance: nothing but “great” and “very very.” It’s horrifying that that is succeeding Obama.
Does this mean that Trump poses an ethical as well as linguistic challenge to the translator?
As a translator of political discourse, you also have the duty to write readable texts: so what am I to do? Translate Trump as he speaks, and let French readers struggle with whatever content there is? (Not to mention the fact that I will be judged on the vocabulary I choose — sometimes the translator is blamed for the poor quality of a piece.) Or keep the content, but smooth out the style, so that it is a little bit more intelligible, leading non-English speakers to believe that Trump is an ordinary politician who speaks properly — when this is obviously not the case?
No, not that second one. Absolutely not. He must never be translated into Less Stupid.
The problem with Trumpspeak is that, the moment you point out his limited vocabulary, his rambling, his incoherence, you become branded as a “coastal elite” – as if there is something wrong with speaking one’s own language correctly. Obama managed to both make soaring speeches with correct syntax and multisyllabic words, and make himself understood. It’s really not that difficult. But if you don’t have the vocabulary to begin with…well, that’s something else.
Bush 43 didn’t have a very good vocabulary, but at least he had the sense to have speechwriters. Whenever he went off the range, it was all garbled and strange, but when he stuck to script, he could come out with coherent sentences. I’m sure Trump has speechwriters, too, but sooner or later, it all comes out sounding like…Trump. And he is just all blurts and blasts, without anything beyond the occasional bumpersticker slogan.
What an interesting problem! One that never occured to me.
There must be shallow narcissists all over the world — maybe translators should find and listen to a local specimen or two, and use their speech patterns as a broad template.
Any translation that results in a finished product that is easier on the ears, more coherent or even sane gives Trump more credit than he deserves. Those of us who wonder how the fuck he ever got elected in the first place have the correct measure of the man. Translations that convey his staggering poverty of thought will be authentic; whether they cause readers/listeners to want to beat themselves into unconciousness is beside the point (or exactly the point…)
I wonder if he’ll prepare an inauguration speech for himself or if someone else will do it for him. It will be easy enough to spot the difference. If it sounds at all good , thoughtful or reflective, it was someone else.
From what I have heard, Not Bruce, he usually has a speech prepared for him by someone else, but he quickly departs from the script and says whatever comes into his mind…oh, look, a squirrel…lock her up…grab ’em by the pussy…