Read on Twitter
I've been doing a close reading of Hanan alShaykh's The Story of Zahra against the original and I am APPALLED by some of these translation choices... the number of times the term "make love" is erroneously used is shocking. 1/6
Leaving aside that the term doesn't exist as such in Arabic and the word alShaykh uses most often in the original is أضاجعها which translates to "copulate with", Peter Ford applies "make love" to the most bizarre situations! 2/6
After Zahra has a nervous fit & is unresponsive & motionless in bed, her husband decides this is a good time to fuck her. The translation again is "make love"?!!??
There's a reason alShaykh chose such a sterile, clinical term to convey what is a rape. 3/6
There's a reason alShaykh chose such a sterile, clinical term to convey what is a rape. 3/6
The original Arabic demonstrates how he views sex as something he does TO something rather than WITH someONE. It's disappointing (but unsurprising) that such nuance is lost on a male translator. There's no differentiation in how he renders Zahra's sexual activity... 4/6
It's all "make love" no matter the circumstance and/or her degree of willingness.
Consent is not the absence of a No. It is the presence of a Yes.
This should not be hard to understand. 5/6
Consent is not the absence of a No. It is the presence of a Yes.
This should not be hard to understand. 5/6
This is also why we need more women translating women... 6/6
