Literature in translation

The study of literature in translation bears as many benefits as it does drawbacks, and in my own life I have come to find that one can only judge the matter, on the basis of its impact on their own life, be it positive or negative.

At the very onset an obvious argument for translated work would be that it allows for the spreading of ideas, allowing people who would otherwise have no access to a story or work, to have access to it.

Literature has long served as a medium for radical innovation and growth, and it this sentiment that gave way to expressions such as the pen being mightier than the sword. If the literature of a single people can lead to a paradigm shift in society how much more the combined insight of all the world’s authors, past and present.

What’s more such exposure allows for a fresh appreciation and perspective on life, as readers are enabled to view life through the eyes of a different people, culture, race and creed.

That being said it is in this convenience and all inclusiveness that problems begin to arise. Languages are highly diverse in their execution and form, and for this reason how could one expect to accurately translate a text written in Khmer, a language with 74 letters, to a language such as English, which only has 26 letters. Countless details would be undoubtedly lost in the process, whole words and phrases, and the original meaning of the text would be forever different to that of the translated work.

It is for this reason that translated works can be seen as false emulations, parodies if you will that water down the tenor and essence of their original works.

Be that as it may, I am of the belief that something is better than nothing, and even if literate in translation does provides insights that were not intended by the author, they still provide content that would otherwise be nonexistent.

Practice Paper 1

Written in 1922 and 2007 respectively, Text A an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and Text B a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, present conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean over the past century. In keeping with the cultural norms of their time, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience-affluent members of western society-both articles lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream. This argument is made all the more apparent when cross-examining these texts under the lens’ of audience, purpose and mood. 

The message of any text is molded and shaped around the qualities of its target audience. For this reason one might recognize that the target audiences’ of both texts share a number of similarities: they are of the same socio-economic standing and their interest in the Caribbean is founded in matters of their own self-gain. Text A, addresses it’s audience in plain fashion, the use of ostentatious statements such as ‘only first class passenger carried,’ establish them as wealthy members of the middle class. The reason for this detail is founded in the article’s emphasis on value, despite promoting itself as an exclusive offer. Statements such as ‘reduced rates,’ and ‘cost you no more than your annual vocation,’ make it clear that the text targets members of the working class and not those of the highest echelons of 20th century society. Text B’s identifies it’s target audience in a similar fashion, it’s subject matter and placement within the business section of the Miami Herald, reveals its audience to also be members of the middle class, aware of their capability to invest abroad. Despite these commonalities, on the grounds of material possession, one might note that the audiences of both tests are divided by a gap of nearly 100 years. For this reason, one might assume that the audience of Text B is more informed on the consequences of globalization, their knowledge of the Caribbean surpassing just that of geographical location and weather. That being said, though the audience of Text B may seem more globally minded than their post WW1 counterparts, their underlying need to gratify their own desires-even if it’s at the expense of another-still persists all these years later.

            As one might suspect, an advertisement and newspaper article do undoubtedly differ in regards to their intended purposes, one aiming to promote a product, while the other strives to relay information about important events.  An advertisement for the Great White Fleet, Text A employs imagery and manipulative claims, to convince its audience of their need to retreat to the Caribbean for their next break. Marketing the region under the guise of ‘cool’ weather and affordable travel, the text draws attention solely to the region’s physical properties and merits, rather than that of its inhabitants. No matter how Text B contends to convey this message, bringing to light the complications western expansion has wrought on Caribbean society. Playing upon the pathos of its audience, the text reveals how foreign investment has transformed a once languid haven for the ‘poor’, to nothing more than prime ‘oceanfront real-estate,’ for wealthy American investors. While Text A presents the matter of American expansion into the Caribbean in a superficially attractive and acceptable light, Text B calls attention to the depravity of the industry. The use of a first person account relays the extent to which speculators are prepared to go to, willing to use ‘any means necessary’ to earn that extra buck, even if it means tearing down the homes of hundreds of impoverished islanders.

All these elements culminate in the lasting impression the audiences of both texts are left with. While Text A delivers on its exotic and lighthearted mood through the use of geographical references and informal jargon, making mention of destinations such as Jamaica and Havana, and referring to the Great white fleet as “the coolest ships afloat,” Text B evokes a far more reflective and emotional tenor. The Text is able to achieve this by playing upon the emotions and pathos of its audience. As mentioned before the text’s employment of first person accounts, most notably the plight of Jimenez and his son-in-law Santos, work to elicit the intended sympathetic response from the article’s readers. What’s more while Text A’s use of bold fonts and ship- related imagery, make good on it’s intended purpose of convincing holiday to venture to the Caribbean, Text B’s sentimental accounts and succinct structure, being divided into 9 concise paragraphs, effectively convey the relevance and severity of it’s message. When placed together both text’s, though polar in their intended messages, provide a rounded outlook on the sybaritic ideal that is the American dream and its repercussions, not only an individual but global scale.

In closing Text A, an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and Text B, a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, provide conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean. Nonetheless in keeping with the social norms of their times, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience, the wealthy western middle class, both texts lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream.

Written Task 2 Introduction

Written in 1922 and 2007 respectively, ‘The Great White Fleet,’ an advertisement by the United Fruit Company Steamship Service, and ‘Squatters take on Developments,’ a business article written by Benjamin Shores for the Miami Herald, present conflicting views on America’s expansion into the Caribbean over the past century. In keeping with the cultural norms of their time, and by playing to the idiosyncrasies of their target audience-affluent members of western society-both articles lay bear the wanton desire of self-indulgence that has come to define the American dream. This argument is made all the more apparent when cross-examining these texts under the lens’ of audience, context and mood. 

Is deception just as bad as telling an outright lie?

The statement that “Deception is just as bad as telling an outright lie,” bears a number of social implications, in that it exists within what I like to call, the grey spectrum of morality. What this means is that whether it is in fact right or wrong wholly depends on the context in which it is used.  That being said, within the realms of media and communication, I am of the belief that deception no matter its magnitude is as bad as telling an outright lie. To lie, is to present an intentionally false statement with the motive of presenting someone a skewed version of reality so that you might advance your own intentions. For this reason deception falls within the same category of falsehood; though it might seemingly misconstrue the truth to a lesser extent, a lie is a lie, no matter how big or how small. What’s more, as countless government cover-ups would attest to, when found out deceptions can prove to me be most unpleasant. Relationships are built upon trust, be it between a married couple or a government and it’s people. When one of these parties deceives the other, regardless of their motives or incentives, the foundation on which their relationship was founded, truth is fractured, and is some cases completely severed. On this basis of this argument, one might see how deception is just as bad as telling an outright lie, the ends being just the same. A Real world out working of this perspective would be that of the Bush administration dealing’s with global media during the Iraqi conflict. In an effort to sway public opinion and boost support for the war, the Bush admiration resorted to manipulation of the truth, and deception in order to accomplish their objectives. Though this worked for a time, the truth was eventually uncovered, and the say of the world’s foremost power was forever undermined, bringing into question the ideals and principles of the entire western world. Lying and deception offer only a short-term remedy to any crisis and are never worth the fallout they bring about, rather as the writer of John suggests we should opt for the truth, for it is by this quality that all people are free.

Media Bias and Ideology Rewrite

This pastiche is a rewriting of the BBC article “Sinai plane crash: 'External influence' caused crash,” published on November 2nd (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34697416).

This revision serves to heighten the speculation surrounding the Sinai plane crash, and lend credence to the belief that external forces brought down flight KGL9268. 

Russian airline Metrojet claims 'external impact' brought down commercial airliner in volatile Sinai Peninsula

Following Saturday’s catastrophic plane crash, a senior airline official revealed that an "external influence" was the to blame for the loss of all the 224 passengers onboard MetroJet flight 9268.

An investigation launched by aviation investigates; using data from the aircraft's two "black boxes" has yet to determine the true blackguards.

A Kremlin spokesmen has warned against speculation as to the possible causes of the crash, urging searchers "to refrain from drawing conclusions" at this stage of the probe.

"We cannot exclude any version. The investigation is only beginning. We do not know yet what its main focus will be," he told the BBC.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has described the crash as an "enormous tragedy" and expressed his condolences to the families of the victims.

At a news conference in Moscow, the deputy director of Metrojet, Alexander Smirnov, told reporters that the cause of Saturday's crash, "could only have been a mechanical impact on the plane" in the air. "There is no such combination of failures of systems which could have led to the plane disintegrating in the air," he added.

When pressed for more details about what could have caused the impact, Smirnov insisted that he was not at liberty to discuss any more details…

Amidst the growing speculation another airline official acknowledged that there had been previous damage to the plane's tail in 2001 during takeoff.

But he said that the damage had been repaired, and was not thought to be a factor in the crash.

However, the widow of the plane's co-pilot told Russian TV her husband had complained about the aircraft's technical condition.

The Airbus 321 lost speed and started descending rapidly, and the crew made no attempt to get in contact and report about the situation on board, Mr Smirnov added.

The bodies of 144 of those killed in the crash have been flown back to the Russian city of St Petersburg, where the plane had been headed from the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.

A second flight with the remaining 80 bodies is expected to arrive in St Petersburg on Monday evening.

The plane was carrying 224 passengers, including 25 children.

Timeline: the final hours of flight KGL9268

05:58 Egyptian time (03:58 GMT): Flight leaves Sharm el-Sheikh, a statement from the Egyptian cabinet says

06:14 Egyptian time (04:14 GMT): Plane fails to make scheduled contact with air traffic control based in Larnaca, Cyprus, according to Sergei Izdolsky, an official with Russia's air transport agency

06:17 Egyptian time, approx (04:17 GMT): Plane comes down over the Sinai Peninsula, according to Airbus

11:12 Egyptian time (09:12 GMT): Flight had been due to land in St Petersburg's Pulkovo airport

Lady Lazarus

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8q_4Ch02lwbSm9xdW05SkE5R2M/view?usp=sharing

Passion

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8q_4Ch02lwbSnp3cjRsQ09aT1E/view?usp=sharing