post-colonial_translation

post-colonial_translation post-colonial_translation

12.01.2015 Views

Cixous, Lispector and fidelity 155 1979b) clearly show: ‘To make a smile beam just once on a beloved mouth, to make a clarice smile rise one time, like the light burst of an instant picked from eternity’ (p. 74); ‘It’s a matter of an unveiling, clariseeing: a seeing that passes through the frames and toils that clothe the towns’ (ibid.); ‘Where does the clarice radiance lead us – Outside. Outside of the walls’ (p. 102); ‘How to call forth claricely: it’s a long and passionate work for all the senses’ (p. 104). If authority is ultimately a form of writing, as we can conclude with Felman (1982, p. 8), in the textual affair that has brought Cixous and Lispector together, it is Cixous who has had the upper hand, it is Cixous who gets to keep a ‘proper’, authorial name and who has had the (also academic) power to create authority and to write it her own way. Ultimately, in this plot it is Cixous who is ‘the subject presumed to know’, particularly for those who are blindly devoted to her texts and who have transformed her into the author (and the authority) that she is today within the broad area of cultural studies. In her readings of Lispector, Cixous’s feminine approach to evade the violence of translation and the mediation of patriarchal language turns out to be just another instance of the same relationship between subject and object that she so vehemently rejects. To use one of her most recurrent metaphors, we could say that in Cixous’s handling of Lispector’s work the translation process that takes place is radically transformative, as if the ‘apple’ in Lispector’s texts had been thoroughly transformed into an ‘orange’ – or, more precisely, into an Oran-je – which betrays a reading which is first and foremost a rewriting shaped by specific interests. It is not, however, a mere instance of ‘miscommunication’, as Anna Klobucka puts it (Klobucka 1994, p. 48), nor of a ‘mistranslation’, as Sharon Willis might call it (Willis 1992). In this context, the notions of ‘mistranslation’ or ‘miscommunication’ might imply that one could read Lispector without intervening in her work, that a reading could actually avoid transference and capture her supposedly original apple, as Cixous herself set out to do. However, even though any act of reading necessarily implies appropriation and the double bind of transference, what is peculiar about Cixous’s readings of Lispector is the circumstances which have brought together an influential, academically powerful reader and an author who had hardly been read outside the limits of her marginal context and language. One could ponder, for instance, on the fact that Cixous does not turn Kafka’s or Joyce’s proper names into common nouns as she does with Lispector’s, or, to put it another way, one could consider that, since

156 Rosemary Arrojo Kafka and Joyce are undoubtedly recognized as internationally canonical writers, it would not be feasible to completely ignore their long-established authority as writers, or the authority of the readership that has been developed around it. In this sense, the structure which Cixous’s power and influence have been able to weave in her relationship with Lispector’s texts can also remind us of another well-known narrative. We might say that Cixous’s ‘discovery’ of Lispector’s work, which coincidentally took place on an anniversary of Columbus’s ‘discovery’ of the new continent, also repeats the basic strategies and reasoning of the European conquest of America. First of all, as in the so-called ‘discovery’ of America, Cixous’s encounter with Lispector’s work is a ‘discovery’ between quotation marks, a ‘discovery’ that is also an invasion, a taking-over which has to ignore, disregard or even destroy whatever was already there. Secondly, it is a ‘discovery’ which is also a transformation and, of course, a renaming that is done primarily in the interest of those who are in a position to undertake such an ambitious enterprise. From this perspective, we could say that Cixous’s reading of Lispector is also a form of ‘colonization’, in which whatever or whoever is subject to foreign domination not only has to adopt the interests of the colonizer but also comes under the latter’s complete control. As the main scenes of the encounter between Cixous and Lispector illustrate the impossibility of treating otherness ‘delicately, with the tips of the words’, or with ‘extreme fidelity’, particularly in asymmetrical contexts, this is a lesson which we can appropriately find in Lispector herself. In one of her most impressive, complex narratives, A Paixão segundo G.H. (1964), we are invited to follow the narrator G.H.’s tortured reflection on herself and the human condition the morning after her maid leaves her post. A middle-class, sophisticated, financially independent sculptor, G.H. lives ‘in cleanliness’ and in ‘semi-luxury’ in an elegant, spacious penthouse, from where ‘one can overpower a city’. As the narrative begins, we find her dressed in white, having breakfast, and planning to visit the maid’s room – something she had not done in the six months the woman had worked for her – in order to make sure that everything is in order before the new maid arrives. It is in this small room – ‘the portrait of an empty stomach’, ‘the opposite’ of that which she created in her own home, conveniently separated from the main living area and close to the service entrance, and which has the ‘double function’ of squeezing in the maid’s skimpy bed and her mistress’s discarded ‘rags, old suitcases, old newspapers’ – that Lispector’s G.H.

156 Rosemary Arrojo<br />

Kafka and Joyce are undoubtedly recognized as internationally<br />

canonical writers, it would not be feasible to completely ignore their<br />

long-established authority as writers, or the authority of the readership<br />

that has been developed around it.<br />

In this sense, the structure which Cixous’s power and influence have<br />

been able to weave in her relationship with Lispector’s texts can also<br />

remind us of another well-known narrative. We might say that Cixous’s<br />

‘discovery’ of Lispector’s work, which coincidentally took place on an<br />

anniversary of Columbus’s ‘discovery’ of the new continent, also repeats<br />

the basic strategies and reasoning of the European conquest of America.<br />

First of all, as in the so-called ‘discovery’ of America, Cixous’s encounter<br />

with Lispector’s work is a ‘discovery’ between quotation marks, a<br />

‘discovery’ that is also an invasion, a taking-over which has to ignore,<br />

disregard or even destroy whatever was already there. Secondly, it is a<br />

‘discovery’ which is also a transformation and, of course, a renaming<br />

that is done primarily in the interest of those who are in a position to<br />

undertake such an ambitious enterprise. From this perspective, we could<br />

say that Cixous’s reading of Lispector is also a form of ‘colonization’,<br />

in which whatever or whoever is subject to foreign domination not only<br />

has to adopt the interests of the colonizer but also comes under the latter’s<br />

complete control.<br />

As the main scenes of the encounter between Cixous and Lispector<br />

illustrate the impossibility of treating otherness ‘delicately, with the<br />

tips of the words’, or with ‘extreme fidelity’, particularly in asymmetrical<br />

contexts, this is a lesson which we can appropriately find in Lispector<br />

herself. In one of her most impressive, complex narratives, A Paixão<br />

segundo G.H. (1964), we are invited to follow the narrator G.H.’s<br />

tortured reflection on herself and the human condition the morning<br />

after her maid leaves her <strong>post</strong>. A middle-class, sophisticated, financially<br />

independent sculptor, G.H. lives ‘in cleanliness’ and in ‘semi-luxury’ in<br />

an elegant, spacious penthouse, from where ‘one can overpower a city’.<br />

As the narrative begins, we find her dressed in white, having breakfast,<br />

and planning to visit the maid’s room – something she had not done in<br />

the six months the woman had worked for her – in order to make sure<br />

that everything is in order before the new maid arrives. It is in this small<br />

room – ‘the portrait of an empty stomach’, ‘the opposite’ of that which<br />

she created in her own home, conveniently separated from the main<br />

living area and close to the service entrance, and which has the ‘double<br />

function’ of squeezing in the maid’s skimpy bed and her mistress’s<br />

discarded ‘rags, old suitcases, old newspapers’ – that Lispector’s G.H.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!