Abstract
It is a common practice for translators to make deletions or additions in a literary work due to personal cultural bias or to avoid embarrassing their countrymen with immoral or obscene images and ideas. This paper questions the role of translation as a critical approach and decries this source text “improvement” as a mistranslation and silencing of the authorial voice. An incorrect translation, rather than being a means of bringing two cultures together, does a disservice to comparative studies and harm to the author and his cultural idiosyncrasies. In addressing distortions arising from cultural and moral bias in Arab translations of Shakespeare's Sonnet 18, the paper discusses how Bakri Al- Azzam introduced an oriental undertone, silenced Shakespeare's voice, changed the speaker's gender, and transformed Shakespeare into an Arab classic poet—all to align the sonnet with the cultural outlook of Arabs at the expense of Shakespeare's identity, culture, and Western aesthetics.
Highlights
The main objective of this paper is not to describe the death and "identity crisis" the discipline of comparative literature has constantly confronted ever since the term was coined. The study finds it necessary to offer a sketch of the current status of comparative literature as well as an overview of the elements that contributed to its current crisis
The overarching concern of the present study, is to address the question of whether translation can be a vital discipline in contributing to the future of comparative literature—in crossing the boundaries of languages and cultures and in manipulating the fame and reputation of an author
It is sufficient for my purposes to point out that there is currently little agreement regarding the future status of the discipline and that the response to this controversy is materialized in a torrent of paradigms, all trying to offer possible solutions to the problem; as a result, a rich body of work has emerged in response to the death and profound crisis in comparative literature
Summary
The main objective of this paper is not to describe the death and "identity crisis" the discipline of comparative literature has constantly confronted ever since the term was coined. Its main purpose is to arbitrate the dominant trends of and approaches to the future role of comparative literature and examine whether translation can endow the discipline with an "afterlife," one with better status and greater self-confidence. It is sufficient for my purposes to point out that there is currently little agreement regarding the future status of the discipline and that the response to this controversy is materialized in a torrent of paradigms, all trying to offer possible solutions to the problem; as a result, a rich body of work has emerged in response to the death and profound crisis in comparative literature
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
