Silvia Cobelo Supervisor: Maria Augusta da Costa Vieira Limit date: 01-01-2015

Topics in the Sociology of Translation FFLCH- USP April, 30th 2013

 Introduction Brief Project History Object and Central Research Question Corpus Methodology Problems, doubts, concerns... The Romantic approach

 MA dissertation about the history of the translations of Don Quixote published in Brazil, from 1942 to 2009. Since our local archives are not complete, I had to adapt the methodology found in Williams & Chesterman and, especially, Pym to get sufficient data to produce translators biographies and a catalog. My final dissertation also presents an overview of the publishing companies, publishers and other people involved, such as paratext authors and critics and interviews with four of the translators.

During my research, I started to find several adaptations of Don Quixote, and organized a catalog, collecting data such as author (or adapter), publishing company, year, edition, number of pages, illustrations and artist. I started with the recurrence of some titles, its republication since the first edition until today and the phenomena of readaptation ( new versions from the same matrix) .

 The central object of my thesis is to unfold the publishing history of the various versions of DON QUIXOTE and learn more about the adapters, to collect data on those involved and their respective power and authority with regard to these publications, and to understand the construction of literary fame of DON QUIXOTE and its interrelation with Cervantes rewritings. central research question: The major aim of the thesis is to find out which interpretation prevailed in Brazilian adaptations.

 From a catalog of 50 adaptations, 10 works were selected, within the following criteria: Not a translation Written in prose For public with more than 10 years old Republished more than five times (XX) or three times (XXI)

XIX - XX
JANSEN, Carlos. D. Quixote de La Mancha First edition 1886. LOBATO, Monteiro. Dom Quixote das crianas First edition 1936 LESSA, Orgenes. Dom Quixote First edition 1971 ANGELI, Jos. Dom Quixote - First edition 1985

XXI
CARRASCO, Walcyr. Dom Quixote - First edition 2002 GULLAR, Ferreira. Dom Quixote de La Mancha First edition 2002 RIOS, Rosana. Dom Quixote First edition 2005 CHIANCA, Leonardo. Dom Quixote - First edition 2005 MACHADO, Ana Maria. O Cavaleiro do Sonho. As aventuras e desventuras de Dom Quixote de La Mancha - First edition 2005. PINTO, Fabio Bortolazzo. Dom Quixote. Primeira edio 2008

 HISTORIOGRAPHY: Since the Brazilian national archives are not complete, I had to adapt, as I had done for my M.A. dissertation, the methodology found in Williams & Chesterman (2002) and Anthony Pym (1998, 2010) to get sufficient data to produce a catalog and translators biographies. To deal with the metatext (Genette, 2009) survey, I will search newspaper and magazine archives as well as book review blogs. A data sheet will summarize the analytical information for each adaptation as follows: 1- Publishing data. 2- Paratexts. 3- Number and kind of illustrations. 5- Index (chapters title).

ADAPTATION ANALYSIS: I have prepared a list for help me compare each adaptation, but making it clear that this is a research project, of course, there will be changes along the way: 1- Description of the main characters - Don Quixote, Sancho Panza and Dulcinea. 2- Language: direct / indirect speech, sanchesco verbiage (proverbs and linguistic prevarications), vulgar words, and romantic keywords) and in the paratexts and metatexts (Genette). 3- Grotesque (eschatology, whores, sex, attack of the monks). 4- Relationship between Don Quixote & Sancho Panza (Cobelo, 2009, Urbina, 1999, among others). 5- Pseudo translation and apocryphal DON QUIXOTE (Benengeli, Avellaneda). 6- Key Episodes Keywords: Beginning of the book (Somewhere in La Mancha ...), episode of Batanes, Don Quixote caged, enchanted Dulcinea, episode Dukes and Barataria, defeat against the Knight of the White Moon, and Don Quixotes death scene.

 Can I use TS methodology to study adaptations? Passive & Active Readaptations: Anthony Pym (1998:82) began the debate by proposing two types of retranslation. The retranslations diachronic, synchronic as well as, but detached by geopolitical issues or dialect, situations where there is little or no rivalry (or knowledge) between one version and another, are designated passive retranslations. The translations that coexist in the same timeline, cultural and geographical are active retranslations.

PROBLEM: Although I agree with the criticism that new editions of an old translation tend to reinforce its validity, I am reluctant to accept the assertion that retranslation work is done in a contrary motion, challenging and/or demeaning the first versions of a given work. It is not what I have found in the case of translations of DON QUIXOTE, and I do believe it will also be the case for their adaptations, something that I hope to answer at the end of my research.

 Significant numbers of versions and reprints of old translations and adaptations seem to be related to the high demand and well-accepted nature within the culture of arrival. Usually essays on retranslation raise the same question as that which emerged when I began my research: why adapt a book that has been already translated and how do these new works differ from previous ones? (Koskinen, 2003). Among the reasons listed by Gambier (1994:414-416) to re-translate a text that has already been translated, I found many questions with which I had been dealing. Hutcheon (2006) has raised similar questions: Which texts are chosen? Why is a book adapted more than once? How and by whom are they rewritten? When and how often are they rewritten? Who publishes? What influences these rewritings? Gralar (2009:236), after presenting several studies discussing the decline of the authority says *...] retranslation is a function of the dynamics of the target context, rather than a response to any inherent properties of the source text. PROBLEM: My object of study prevents me from accepting fully the above view, since according to Edward Riley (2002:38); one of the reasons for the acclaimed perennial success of DON QUIXOTE should be in the text itself. Anthony Close (1998 & 2006), a critic that provides an excellent overview of the authors who have influenced the reading of Quixote since its publication in 1605, explains that allowing different interpretations, often resulting in opposing readings, the book would have absorbed a wide variety of readers and admirers during its four centuries in existence.

The romantic interpretation of DON QUIXOTE has predominated since the early nineteenth century, and despite efforts made by contemporary critics, the book is still seen more as tragedy than a comedy. The novels main character is usually assumed to be an idealized image of a dreamer.

 Andr Lefevere (1992) also forces us to rethink the so-called intrinsic value of a literary work, which he believes has less importance than it is granted, emphasizing the importance of rewriting the literary evolution, and the need for more studies on the topic. When someone claims to have read a book, it usually means this person has an image, a conception of the story. Their point of view is usually based on some passages, selected through anthologies, or other texts that rewrite the work. These rewritings are mainly responsible for the image of a writer, a work, a period, a genre, and often an entire literature. These images are very powerful, and can reach more people than the source works, and a good example is DON QUIXOTE.
Lefevere points to the path towards which my investigations on Cervantine rewritings has moved when he concludes that manipulation of texts is more evident in translated texts, suggesting the possibility of a comparative analysis, the collation of the text of departure with the texts manipulated. From my point of view, it shows, quite clearly, that adaptations as a whole have been very influential in establishing the reputation of a writer and his work, something that is central to my research on the adaptations of Don Quixote and the feedback of literary fame. As seen in my results, the rewriters also become famous (especially the most republished), with some help from their DON QUIXOTES versions.

How do you they feel about the following statement? If a writer is no longer rewritten, his or her work will be forgotten Lefevere (1992:110).

MAIN REFERENCES
CLOSE, Anthony. Interpretaciones del Quijote. In: CERVANTES, Miguel. Don Quijote de la Mancha. Miguel de Cervantes. Francisco Rico (ed.). Barcelona: Ed. Crtica, 2001. _________. The Romantic Approach to Don Quixote: A Critical History of the RomanticTradition in Quixote Criticism. Cambridge University Press, 2010. __________. Don Quijote, Felipe II y la tecnologa de la escritura. Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America, Bloomington, Indiana, v. 1. n. 29, 2009, p. 197-207. Disponvel em: <http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/cervante/csa/artics09/BotelloS09.pdf>. Acesso em: 04 jan. 2013. GAMBIER, Yves. La retraduction, retour et dtour. Meta: Journal des traducteurs, v. 39 n.3, p. 413-417, 1994. GENETTE, Grard. Paratextos Editoriais. Traduo lvaro Faleiros. Cotia SP: Atli Editorial, 2009. GRALAR, ehnaz Tahir. Retranslation. In: BAKER, Mona e SALDANHA, Gabriela (eds.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. 3a ed. Abingdon, Oxon & New York: Routledge, 2009, p. 233-236. KOSKINEN, Kaisa. Retranslations in the age of digital reproduction. Cadernos de Traduo, v. 1, n. 11, p. 19-38, 2003. LEFEVERE, Andr. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge, 1992. __________. Why waste our time on rewrites? The trouble with interpretation and the role of rewriting in an alternative paradigm. In: HERMANS, Theo (ed). The manipulation of literature: Studies in Literary Translation. Londres & Sidney: Croom Helm, 1985, p. 215-243. __________. Translation/history/culture: a sourcebook. London, NY: Routledge, 1992. __________. Mother Courage's Cucumbers: Text, System and Refraction in a Theory of Literature. In: VENUTI, Lawrence (ed.). The Translation Studies Reader. London & New York: Routledge, 2005, p. 239-255. RILEY, Edward C. La singularidad de la fama de don Quijote. Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America, 22.1, 2002. _________. La rara invencin: Estudios sobre Cervantes y su posteridad. Barcelona: Editorial Critica, 2001. PYM, Anthony. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome, 1998. __________. Humanizing Translation History. Hermes, Aarhus, DE, n. 42, p. 23-48, 2009. VIEIRA, Maria Augusta da Costa. O Dito pelo No-Dito. So Paulo: Edusp, 1998. __________ . Apresentao de D. Quixote. In: CERVANTES, Miguel. O engenhoso cavaleiro D. Quixote de la Mancha. Traduo Sergio Molina. So Paulo: Editora 34, 2002. __________ (org.). Dom Quixote: A letra e os caminhos. So Paulo: Edusp, 2006. _________. A narrativa engenhosa de Miguel de Cervantes. So Paulo: Edusp, 2012. WILLIAMS, Jenny; CHESTERMAN, Andrew. The Map. A beginners guide to doing research in Translation Studies . Manchester: St. Jerome, 2002.

Silvia Cobelo FFLCH-USP silvia.cobelo@usp.br