Translation and rewriting of Joseph Conrad's works in Republican China : tradition and modernity, progress and decadence = 民國時期約瑟夫·康拉德的譯介與改寫研究 :「傳統」與「現代」、「進步」與「頹廢」的吊詭

Abstract

Joseph Conrad (1857-1924) is regarded as one of the greatest English-language writers. His works explore humanity and morality in the context of imperialism and colonialism. As a masterful storyteller, Conrad is well known for his striking narrative style – antinomic, subjective, ambiguous, and sometimes even fractured – which marks him as a distinct modernist. However, when Conrad’s works were first introduced and translated into Chinese during the Republican era in the 1920s, his modernism was extensively rewritten. His morally contradictory characters were rendered as unitarily positive in the Chinese translation, portrayed as being progressive, patriotic, and heroic, and the divergent and obscure narratives became coherent and straightforward. In this thesis, I conduct an in-depth analysis on the rewriting of Conrad’s works. I explore the social and cultural contexts that led to the rewriting, and analyze the revelations regarding the mindsets of Chinese intellectuals during that period. Using André Lefevere’s translation theory to approach this topic, I focus on the three main participant groups involved in the translation process: the patron, the translators, and the literary critics. By first examining their diaries, letters, and publications throughout this period, I seek to reveal the participants’ literary views and ideological tendencies to understand the reasons behind the rewriting. Through textual analysis, I explore the rewriting in detail as well as the changes to the original themes and styles of the novels. Furthermore, I disucss two paradoxes that are reflected in the rewriting and their implications in the context of the May Fourth period. The findings show that it is the patron Hu Shih who initiated the translation project for Conrad’s work. During the May Fourth period, Hu was driven by a strong desire to save China from the existential crisis through literature. To fulfil this goal, he made considerable deliberations to select the novels to be translated, choose translators, and lay down a regulation framework for the translation program. The translators then faithfully executed and extended the translational plan launched by Hu. They moralized, historicized, and Confucianized the characters in Conrad’s novels, reimaging the author as one who was deeply concerned about social reality and national crisis. Similarly, the critics introduced Conrad as a Romantic realist and highlighted his rebellious spirit as well as pursuit of reforms and progress, which aligns with the rewriting by the patron and translators in collectively transforming Conrad from a modernist into a realist. From the analysis, I find two key paradoxes in participants’ practices. Firstly, while both the patron and translators were westernized elites, they resorted to traditional Confucian values to interpret and rewrite the modernist elements in Conrad’s novels. Secondly, even though the literary critics emphasized Conrad’s positive and enterprising spirit, they uncovered his underlying sentimentality and decadence at the same time. By applying the concept of transcultural paradox put forward by Hsiao-yen Peng, I demonstrate that the first paradox implies a reversion by Chinese intellectuals towards traditions and collectivism after a long history of admiration for Western culture. Noting that Conrad’s critics during this period were mainly left-wing intellectuals, the second paradox, by contrast, underscores the emotional needs as an individual despite the overwhelming social movement towards progressiveness and collectivism. Together, the two paradoxes shed light on the different thoughts and choices regarding individualism and collectivism of Chinese intellectuals during the May Fourth period. Through the lens of translation, this thesis is able to observe the competing values and attitudes of Chinese intellectuals in the tumultuous society of modern China, implying not only passive response, but also self-transformation and innovation by the intellectuals when encountering Western culture.