Before you read Miguel Street, watch this short video and respond with a comment below. This gives you a little context about what makes this book of stories a "postcolonial" text, and how colonialism left a lasting legacy on the literature of its former colonies.
Be sure to see the reading & questions for Miguel Street in the post below this one!
YHelm:
ReplyDeleteAlthough writing in a native language would be liberating, I would still write in English. As a writer, I would want to be able to reach as many people as possible with my work. Most of the population understands English, so I would continue to use it. I do not view it as treachery. It would be practical to continue using English since it is the common language used in schools and businesses.
Good response--and a very important point: writing in the language of the marketplace, which would be either English, Spanish, or French depending on your country, is important. Otherwise, it would be hard to get read or known. So many writers chose the colonizer's language simply to make a living. Many people who spoke indigenous languages were illiterate, so wouldn't read novels in the first place!
DeleteNot choosing to write in English I'm sure had its repercussions, like the possibility of being punished for choosing to do so, or not even being able to be published. Writing in your native language, like in India, you wouldn't have as many people be able to read it but if it was in English it would be able to be more universal. Perhaps there could be a secret society book club or something where the novels could be transcribed into the naive language but also more well known in English. I don't think that it would be cowardace to publish something in your own language, because of the ideal of holding onto that history of the language and its meaning of the culture that is in the words. There are many phrases in different languages that are similar to ones we have in English, but sometimes the way they say it makes it a lot more beautiful.
ReplyDeleteYes, good points; as with Yolanda's comment, sometimes the marketplace dictates the language. How else would you get read and make a living? But how difficult would it be to write about your culture without your own language, always thinking about what had to be translated for an English audience? How much would you have to leave out? Change? Or ignore? And as you suggest, there are some ideas and phrases that simply don't work in the English language--or not the same way, at least.
DeleteI'm doing some research on endangered languages for another class at the moment and so I just recently read an article on the topic by Alison Wellford, "Breaking the Circle: Women Writing in Endangered Languages". It is concerned with the idea of writing in an endangered language (some of the examples in the article include Basque and Irish) as an act of resistance to culture/language dominance and the patriarchy. Even today the decision to write in an endangered (or minority) language is a heavy one.
ReplyDeleteSo, with that in mind, I'd like to think I'd choose to write in the "native" language of whichever colonized country I lived in, if it was available to me. This is as an act of resistance, for one thing, and also because I'm not sure it needs to be quite the black-and-white issue we make it out to be. To use an imperfect example (since, as you mentioned, adoption of Western forms and norms in Japan does not have the same significance as it does in former colonies), I'm thinking of the Japanese author, Haruki Murakami, who writes in Japanese and whose works are translated into many other languages. There are other ways that work can reach the broader world, although it's certainly possible that Murakami's situation is unique thanks to his unusual success as an author.
Great response--the only way to resist a former power is to reject its mindset, and not take for granted the history and supremacy of its people. Language is a direct and powerful way to do that, since, as Ngugi wa Thiong'o says, langauge is another people's history and when you speak it, you speak their history and their culture. However, the only problem is if there is no native language to return to, as in the case of many cultures whose traditions have been wiped out after centuries of colonization. In some cases, going backward would be more artificial than simply keeping what you have.
DeleteCarla Torres: While I would find it interesting to write a book solely in Spanish, I would choose to write a book in English. There would be more of an advantage with writing it in English for numerous reasons. One being that if it was written in English, the translation would not be thrown off and it would be word for word. I would also want other people to be able to understand it more easily. Lastly English is a universal language and it can be easily understood by many. I think that many writers use English because like I mentioned before it can be easily understood by many. I don't think this is an act of treachery or cowardice because I think it is easily understood.
ReplyDeleteYes, great response...since it is a universal language, it would be easier to connect with global readers this way, and to raise awareness of your culture and its plight. It's kind of like social media: if something doesn't happen on social media today, does it really happen in the minds of those who follow? In the same way, if something isn't written in English, who knows about it? And a translation as you suggest can be precise and misconstrued by someone who doesn't know your culture as well as you do.
DeleteWhen I first read this question, I thought that I would certainly write in my "native" language. Unfortunately, as everyone has pointed out, this would reduce the amount of people able to comprehend my writing. This gap of understanding would certainly affect the impact of my writing. Despite the negative impact of writing in a language that is not as widely understood as English, I think I would still make an effort to use my mother tongue.
ReplyDeleteColonizers always believe that their way is best. This mentality has reduced cultures into mere whispers of what they once were. Writing in a language that could eventually be completely lost is important. English will always be globally studied, but the impact that a book could make by refusing to conform to colonial influence is more important than having global acceptance.
As an alternative to writing completely in a "native" tongue, I think it would be really interesting to write a novel or work in a blended tongue: some English and some of whatever my country's original dialogue might be spoken in. Books like The Awakening and All the Pretty Horses use Creole slang and Spanish terminology, respectively. The appeals to language that these books employ are powerful and place a different context and perspective on the writing.
The benefits of writing in English are numerous: global understanding, support and study from the colonizers, and better chances of being used in schools and business situations. These benefits do not minimize the importance of maintaining cultural authenticity.
Great points here--there's no really clearcut or even 'good' option. You lose something either way. However, Rushdie suggests that English is an "Indian" language, meaning that it has been reshaped and adapted by the language and thought patterns of South Asian speakers. In that case, it is no longer English as it once was, just as assimilation changes the racial dynamics of both cultures. Naipaul does this to many degrees: he writes in British English but captures the dialect of the island, making it sound strange and exotic to many readers (phrases like, "I'll be an educated man in three four years"). In this way, the culture survives but can still be heard by people who have never been there or would ever see/hear these people.
DeletePaul Harris:
ReplyDeleteIf I were writing in the early days of my country, I'd like to believe I would insist on writing in English. Something I've been learning in another class I'm taking is that language is a reflection of one's culture and how that language continues to change mirrors the evolving culture you live in; as such, if English was a growing language where I was, I'd choose to write in English to allow the growing culture of my environment to flourish. Where this mindset might fail is instances where I've alienated those who don't speak English, instead contributing to the general dislike of the English language; furthermore, if my choosing of English does fail, I could be ostracized from society for straying away from the "accepted" language, although I don't think such a thing should happen. There are countries around the world that house dozens of languages spoken by their citizens. Deciding to write in English to encourage a growing cultural, linguistic revolution. I don't see the act of doing this to be a replacement of the traditionally used language, but an effort to encourage linguistic diversity and the growing of dialects.
Yes, as you suggest, just speaking English doesn't have to kill your own culture--no one speaks a single English. We speak a different English than the English, or the Australians, or as it's spoken in India, etc. It adapts to the local culture and we re-write it according to our own culture and references. So that could be a way of taking back the language and our culture. And one danger is that if you insist on using an ancestral tongue, you can write yourself into a ghetto of thought that no one visits or reads. You could essentially further the process of destruction in this way. A better way might be to write in adapted English but slip in some of your language, too. Maybe.
DeleteCallie Farley:
ReplyDeleteIf I were a writer in the early day's of my country, England, I guess I would have no choice but to write in English. I mean, the sentiment wouldn't be the same to me unless I wrote in Old English or Celtic, however, I agree with Yolanda that I would be able to reach more people by writing in English. I don't think that it's cowardice or anything to write in English over your native language but I always think it's cool when people write in English but then write "slang" in their native language. I think that it adds a deeper and more rich element to writing.
Yes, we can look at this in Britain...as Middle English took over, many older languages and styles of writing were becoming eradicated. We see this in the 13th century, where Chaucer is writing The Canterbury Tales in what becomes modern English, whereas in Chester (well northwest of London), you have the "Pearl Poet" writing Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in a regional Middle English which sounds a little more like Old English. They are resisting the changes and trying to hold fast to their own way of speaking and writing poetry. Ultimately, though, this fails...so when you see language changing, it's hard to decide what to do, and who to write for. Sadly, most days Sir Gawain is read in translation, while The Canterbury Tales can still be read (with some footnotes) in the original.
DeleteThis is a really tough question. If I wrote a novel only in Spanish, then I would only reach Spanish speakers. If I were to write a novel in English, then I would reach more readers because like Carla said, English is now a universal language. I feel like if I wrote a novel in Spanish and it was translated to English, it would lose some elements. Maybe it wouldn't be as emotional in English or maybe some sentences would not mean the same. In Botchan I was able to understand most of the novel, but there were some parts that didn't click because I am not from Japan. I feel like many readers would feel that way if the novel I wrote was translated. With that being said, I would choose to write a novel in Spanish. There isn't that many books that are written in Spanish. Most of them are in English and are just translated into Spanish. I feel like reading something authentic is just what Spanish readers need. It would give many spanish writers hope in that they can be writers as well.
ReplyDeleteYes, great points...and this is a struggle for many writers in our own country who are bilingual in Spanish and English. They come from communities that speak Spanish almost exclusively, but many of those communities won't read novels--the novel audience is still predominately English speaking. Even in Mexico, where many writers also speak and write English, they have to make a choice. While there is a substantial Mexican publishing industry, writing in Spanish will still limit their book to their own borders, and you can only hope someone will notice it and translate it into English to give it a second life. So wouldn't it be easier just to write it in English yourself? Then, maybe, you can translate it back into Spanish yourself? But that's like writing two books...and that's a lot of effort and time!
DeleteCody Baggerly
ReplyDeleteIdeally, I like to believe that I would write in my Native language. As someone who lives in a mostly Native American household now, I can see and understand the importance of a Native language and the identity it can foster in children, when they’re are taught about it. However, in the reality of the situation, I believe I would end up choosing to write in English. I say this because, even now, I write with the intention and the hope that my writings teach others about an aspect of society or culture that they’re not familiar with or that they know nothing about. I believe this could only be achieved by writing in a language that is more open to the masses. I would do this in the hopes that others, in places removed from my own, would gain a deeper understanding of myself and my culture through my stories. That being said, if an quality English translation was guaranteed to accompany my writing, then my Native language would be my ideal route so that the language would be represented in one form and the culture carried to the world via the other.
Yes, you want to maintain your identity (for you AND your people), but a book is meant to be read, and the less people who can read it, the more you're wasting your time. Translation is an issue with more marginalized languages, since who can do it properly? And they won't do it for free (since it takes a LOT of time). At a certain point, it's simply more economical to write it yourself in English...even at the risk of creating more English literature and less of your own.
DeleteKurstyn Young:
ReplyDeleteIf I were to write a novel, I would write in my Native language. I have read many different books over different genres over the years, and even if I branch out of my comfort zone, if I like the voice, I like the book. To me, the voice is always one of the most important things. If I were to write in English, I wouldn't have the same voice as I would in my Native language. Yes, it might be a disadvantage, but to those who were able to read it, it would mean more to them. It would make my story more meaningful to me and the readers. Many people probably wrote in English because it was such an influential language with farther reach, but in some cases it might have created a barrier. I wouldn't condone people for writing in English, because it might just be what they need to start their career. It might have even been seen as more of a scientific and more intelligent language, so I wouldn't blame people, but I wouldn't follow suit.
Yes, voice is essential for writers, and imagine if native speakers never read works with their own voice...never heard a protagonist speaking their tongue? Can a translation really capture that? To some extent, but never quite fully. You need a body of literature behind your language to bring the culture back to life, and to keep it vitally alive. Translations alone wouldn't do that, nor would writing in English. So it might be a necessary choice to make, even if a sacrificial one...the person writing would almost certainly be unknown to most of the world and might never have a true writing career in their lifetime. That's a lot to ask of someone who writes to be read (and would like to be paid to write!).
DeleteFor me, choosing what language to write in would depend on what I was I trying to accomplish as a writer. If I was trying to be the most famous author I could be then I would write in English, but if I was simply writing for pleasure or to inspire the people around me then I would write in my Native tongue. The advantages to writing in English would bet the ability for your work to spread across the world and not limiting yourself to your surroundings. The disadvantages would probably be having to write in a language that does not come as naturally to you as your native language. I think so many people decided to write in English or French saw that everyone who was coming to colonize a certain area was of English or French decent and put two and two together and realized English and French must be a pretty dominant language. I do not think that writing outside your native tongue is treachery per say, but I could see how a culture could feel betrayed.
ReplyDeleteI believe that if I were a writer in the early days, then I would write my book in my native language first. The advantage of this would be that the history, culture, and meaning behind the words would be retained. I think that if I were to start out writing books in a different language, then the book would lose the meaning that I had intended it to have. Perhaps I could study English and its history to the point that I felt like I could rewrite the book in English without losing anything. (I would not merely translate it into English since a lot would probably be lost in translation.) So, I guess that my answer is technically that I would write in both languages. I would go ahead and rewrite it in English as well in order to gain a larger audience. I know that if I didn't do so, then my work wouldn't reach as many people as I would like for it to.
ReplyDeleteI think that many writers chose English over their native languages to establish a writing career because English was a more widely used language than their own, and they wanted their work to be understood and enjoyed by as many people as possible. And a larger audience means a higher chance of a good career.
I don't think that writing in English instead of one's native language is an act of "treachery" or "cowardice." It's not as if they're renouncing their native culture by doing so. They're merely using the language as a bridge that will enable their work to be connected to audiences of other cultures besides their own.
Yes, the trick here is that most postcolonial nations don't know their native languages...they DO know English, French, etc. It's what they were forced to learn for generations and have grown up with. So it's not as simple as refusing to learn a new language--it would be like deciding to learn (and to write) in a completely new, old language. The danger of that is that you can't express yourself as well, and also, who would read it? And as you suggest, in African nations, there are so many languages to choose from...so what should African writers write in? If you choose 'your' language, it might be understood by only a small minority, and totally alien to even other African speakers. So in that case, English might be a nice compromise to unite everyone in the area.
ReplyDeleteI feel like if I were writing in the early days and had choice to choose what language to write in I would choose English just as so many others had. This is because it would be so widely accepted during that time that I feel I would benefit more from writing in that language and that my writing would be more accepted. Obviously the disadvantage of this choice would be that my native language and culture would suffer from moving away from it. However, I do not feel that this would be an act of treachery or cowardice. Although I can see why many would feel that way. I feel that it would be more a matter of personal preference and sacrifice on each writer.
ReplyDeleteAmily Clary: I bet I would write in the English language rather than my native tongue. The advantage to this would be that more people of authority could read it. This would allow me to be more well known by people who could boost my content as well as help me to be accepted as a true writer. The disadvantage would be the feeling of abandoning my culture and my people. If they did not know how to read English they would be left out from the things I wrote. I assume this is the same reasoning that people had for writing in English to establish their careers as well. In order to be noticed, the people in power have to be able to relate with the one writing it. I do not believe that it is cowardice, sometimes to get further in life, one must make sacrifices.
ReplyDelete