I first
read the Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle in September 2011. At the
time, I was studying abroad in Argentina, in part to improve my Spanish skills,
so I read the Spanish original instead of seeking out a translation. In January
2012, I reread the Sixth Declaration as an assigned reading for my study abroad
program. Once again, I opted for the Spanish original. It was not until
February 2012, in Oventic, Chiapas, Mexico, that I read the English version of
the Sixth Declaration.
Our
study abroad group, composed of U.S. residents, sat around a table to do a
group reading of a section of the Sixth Declaration. I was no translation
expert, but it did not take an expert to tell that the “translator” had taken
some serious liberties in reinterpreting the document. Words and phrases that
were inconvenient to translate were simply left out of the English version.
Commas were added where once there were none, and periods were added where once
there were commas. And anecdotes which had been told in present tense were
changed to past tense.
When I
decided to make my own translation of the Sixth Declaration, I took a closer
look at the existing English version. The version of the Sixth Declaration
found on many websites—including Enlace Zapatista, the official website for
Zapatista communiqués—is translated by someone who is only ever cited as
“irlandesa,” which is Spanish for “Irish woman.” After a close look at the
Irlandesa Version, I found that the defects were far greater than I had earlier
imagined.
At best,
a poor translation of a political communiqué will convey the same facts and
data as the original. For the most part, the Irlandesa Version does this.
However, there are some places in the Irlandesa Version where even this low
standard is not met. The phrase “pensamos hacer,” which means “we intend to do” appears as “we are thinking about doing” in the Irlandesa Version. Other examples include nada que nadie dice (mistranslated as
“no one says anything” instead of “nothing that anyone says”) and de izquierda (mistranslated as “of the
left” instead of “left-wing;” the phrase, “of the left” in Spanish is “de la izquierda”).
The
Sixth Declaration is a document of great importance in Mexican history and in
social movement literature. As such, it deserves a translation that effectively
relays the facts as well as one that preserves the meaning contained within its
unique writing style.
I am
strongly opposed to arbitrary changes in tense and other “translation”
practices used in the Irlandesa Version. Irlandesa has taken the Sixth
Declaration—a document that powerfully communicates an intense sense of
urgency—and turned it into a coldly rational description of past events and
future plans. So much has changed that I personally would not consider the
Irlandesa Version to be a translation. Much of the information was relayed into
an English version, but so much was lost that it reflects irlandesa’s vision
for what the Sixth Declaration should be as much as it reflects the authors’
vision.
In this
translation, I have made every effort to preserve and interpret all possible
dimensions of the original. I have preserved original punctuation to the
maximum extent possible, translated every word for which there exists a
functional translation, preserved original tense usage, translated the
subjunctive mood accordingly and the indicative mood accordingly, and searched
not for the most convenient translation but rather the one that best reflects
the Spanish word or phrase.
If an anecdote
is told in present tense, I have translated it to English in present tense.
Regardless of whether or not the events in question occurred in times past, a
narration in the present tense gives the story an emotional weight and live
importance. A narration in the past tense cannot provide the reader with the
same experience, and should not be considered an acceptable translation.
In this
translation, you will notice certain key differences from the Irlandesa Version
and other translations of Zapatista declarations, most notably the translation
of “mal gobierno.” As with the English adjective “good,” the Spanish adjective
“malo” can be used to convey either a superficial quality (good ice cream) or
to convey a moral character (a good person). For example, while “mal” is most
often translated as “bad,” the translation to Spanish of “good and evil” is “el
bien y el mal.” A reading in Spanish of the Sixth Declaration leaves no doubt
in the reader’s mind that the phrase “mal gobierno” is making reference to a government
of despicable moral character rather than one which merely is frustrating or
ineffective. Thus, I find “bad government” to be an inadequate translation,
since it immediately invokes images of inefficiency and burdensome bureaucracy
rather than moral wrong. In its place, I have opted for the translation, “evil
government.”
I have
checked, double-checked, and triple-checked this translation to ensure that it
is the best that I am capable of producing. If something is strangely-phrased
in my translation, it is because it is strangely-phrased in the Spanish
original. The Sixth Declaration is not an instruction manual and as such should
not be translated merely to interpret the facts, but rather should be
translated to tell also the stories and narratives that lie within its unique
literary style.
I hope
that you enjoy reading this translation as much as I have enjoyed writing it. I
also hope that the Irlandesa Version serves as a warning on how much meaning
can be lost in a botched translation attempt. I ask that every bilingual
critically examine any translation they come across before passing it on to
others, providing appropriate warning when deficiencies are present.
My
translation should be no exception to this high level of scrutiny. I, Henry Gales,
am the sole translator of this Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle, and am
responsible for any errors found within. If you have any questions or notice any
mistranslated words or phrases, feel free to contact me by email: hrgales91@gmail.com.
Enjoy.
Henry
Gales
June 23,
2013
