The Chinese Translation of Russian Literature: Three Studies (review)

This meticulously researched and well-documented book by Mark Gamsa presents a discursive examination of the nature and impact of the translation of Russian literature into Chinese by focusing on three extended cases studies, reviewing and synthesizing a rich wealth of social, historical, political, and ideological contextual material surrounding the Chinese translations of the three Russian writers, Savinkov, Artsybashev, and Andreev. This vast, multifaceted study is thick with scholarly apparati, including, among other things, an annex and glossary, and demonstrates scholarly rigor and critical thinking. The period Gamsa covers was an exciting one, when there was a bustling of translation of foreign literature into Chinese. Around 1933 a series of what would be hard-fought debates on the subject of translation was spawned that a number of illustrious literary figures took part in. As for the structural design of the book, Gamsa states that "the work of the three writers could be coherently approached within the framework of one study" as is often the case in both Russian and Chinese literary practice: both Russian and Chinese literary critics tend to group these writers together in one study (9). Although the author does not spell out what exactly constitutes the framework, he has made a comprehensive effort to address various aspects of translation including "the technique of translation," "the ideology of translation," and "the channels of translation," with reception and influence of the works by the three Russian writers being the central concern of the book.

The book is accessibly written for a broad readership, making many hitherto little-known materials available in English for the first time. The author demonstrates that translation exerted an important influence on the creative writing of Chinese translators, such as Lu Xun, Mao Dun, and Ba Jin. However, it is more than a comparative influence study; it also often functions as a companion to the related literary works by providing plot summaries and offers a careful study of the impact of reading Russian literature and how translation was perceived in China, which is accompanied by massive footnotes that furnish further background information. Somewhat sensitive to the real necessity of this research, Gamsa raises the question "how significant is the place of these authors in the history of Russian literature, and is it enough to justify research into their translation and reception in China?" (9) These are, in effect, two separate questions. Their literary status in Russian is one thing and their translation and reception in China quite another. Gamsa goes on to justify at some length the study of the three Russian writers in Chinese translation by considering how they were related to one another (36–37). The argument is convincingly supported by painstaking analysis and documentation that uncovers the generic determinants relevant to the particular context of the three cases.

The discussion of translation is particularly pertinent in this study, for Gamsa is interested in how the Chinese translations influenced and determined the reception of the works. Gamsa notes that there was an overwhelming desire to introduce to China reliably translated texts, but in spite of its relative geographical proximity to Russia, knowledge of Russian was not widespread in China at the time. So by and large, Russian texts were indirectly translated into Chinese via intermediary English, Japanese, and German translations. Speaking of Artsybashev, for example, Gamsa writes: "A considerable portion of this Russian writer's translations into Chinese were thus accomplished from texts twice (and possible thrice) removed from the original." (205). Gamsa speculates that when Zhou Zuoren translated Andreev's short story "Ben-Tovit," he "relied on Mori Ogai's Japanese translation … from the German" (239). It was this multiple removal that aroused considerable anxiety about fidelity or lack of it.

Likewise, Gamsa observes that Zheng Zhengduo translated The Pale Horse by Savinkov from English and administers a large dose of translation criticism that is preceded by a detailed analysis of the English translation, which is seen as "homogeneous, with no attempt made to...