Translation Awards Judges' Report

By Brother Anthony, Jung Ha-yun, Min Eun-kyung

Brother Anthony, professor emeritus at Sogang University

Jung Ha-yun, professor at Ewha Womans University

Min Eun-kyung, professor at Seoul National University

First of all, we were very pleasantly surprised by the large number of entries we received this year. The dwindling number of poetry translations in recent years had recently made us fear that fewer people were reading Korean poetry and attempting the difficult task of rendering it into English. This year, however, the number of poetry translations was almost equal to that of fiction translations. We had a bumper crop and this rich harvest is welcome news indeed.

Some years, we find it regrettably easy to weed out the weak translations. The quality of the English language is the usual giveaway: entries showing grammatical mistakes, weak sentence structure, and flat tone make it unfortunately easy for us to set them aside.

This year, though, the standard of English was generally very high. Most of the entries were very readable, evidently prepared by native or near-native writers of English. This meant that we had to compare the translations with the originals very carefully to check their accuracy. We had to listen more attentively to the quality of the voice speaking in the translation. Was the tone right? Did the translation manage to capture the literary style of the original? Was the translation capable of standing on its own right as a literary work? These were the kinds of questions we asked as we read through this year’s high-quality translations.

Poetry

Although we ended up spending more time perusing this year’s highly competent translations, it was not difficult for us to reach a consensus. In the poetry category, the translations of poems by Hwang In-suk and Ham Min-bok were the most convincing. Whereas many of the poetry translations read prosaically, these translations had found inventive solutions to deal with those elements in the originals that were most recalcitrant to translation.

Korean poetry abounds in syntactic leaps. Indeed, sometimes it is even unclear what the subject of the sentence is. Lines often break off in mid-sentence. Punctuation is sparse. Thus, every translator of such an original needs to offer a strong interpretation. Good translators offer interesting and powerful interpretations of poems.

In this sense, we felt that the translator of Ham Min-bok’s poems had worked harder with the originals and showed more promise as an inventive interpreter of challenging literary texts. The translations of Ham are readable and interesting; they show literary flair; they are poems in their own right.

However, in the rush to make meaning out of the thorniest parts of Ham’s poetry, the translator sometimes smoothes out lines that are challenging or adds information to make the translation more readable. This can be a questionable strategy. In one poem about a conversation that takes place between the poet and a younger relative about going going fishingg for mullet (the vocation of fishing?), the translator even misidentifies the speakers. So, at the level of accuracy, these translations show a lot of room for improvement.

In awarding the Grand Prize in poetry to this translator, we want to acknowledge his/her promise as a translator while also reminding him/her that in translating a poem one should never assume (one should be wary about making assumptions?). Our reading can also be a misreading. For this reason, the translator should proceed slowly and skeptically rather than rush forward to create meaning.

Fiction

Our shortlist in the fiction category was similarly quite short. The main reason for this was that, even though the translations were generally done in good English, they did not stand convincingly on their own as literary works.

In the end we debated the merits of four translations that both read well and showed literary talent: “Roadkill” by Yun Ko-eun, “Xin chao, Xin chao” by Choi Eun-young, “As You Know, Mom” by Chun Woon-young and “Then What Do We Sing” by “Pak Sol-moe.”

All of these translations were competent and interesting. However, we felt that “Roadkill” needed better literary control; in contrast, “As You Know, Mom” was a persuasive literary work in its own right but, when compared with the original, showed grave errors in accuracy. This left us with ““Xin chao, Xin chao” and “Then What Do We Sing.” Because these were both highly accurate translations, we singled out the one that offered a better literary experience. We felt that the translator of “Then What Do We Sing” was better at rendering the personal voice of the speaker in a distinctive manner.

Our congratulations go to the Grand Prize and Commendation Prize winners, as well as all the translators who made the short-list. We also wish to acknowledge all the translators who submitted high-quality entries and encourage everybody to continue to revise and improve their translations. We hope that the Korean authors and poets whose works have been translated, together with their publishers, thay have chosen to translate will respond positively when asked to give permission to publish the completed translations, together with their publishers. It is often more difficult to find a publisher than it is to translate.

It is clear to us that a new generation of translators has emerged: a well-read, highly competent, creative generation eager to share Korean literature with the world. And now that major Korean writers are finding increasing recognition around the world, we believe that this new generation of translators has a very bright future. Thank you for all your good work. Let us march on.