This period was a time of great change as the country became propelled towards British standards. Ireland’s identity was being reshaped in much the same way that Friel’s Ireland of the 1980s (the time of the play’s first performance) was being restructured and redefined after bursts of sectarian violence and an ongoing instability. Friel’s theatrical company “Field Day”, co-founded with the actor Stephen Rea, was established with the intent of expressing a literary movement which “set out to redefine Irish cultural identity.”
Place names disappeared overnight in favour of unfamiliar ‘standardised’ British replacements; and traditional institutions such as the hedge schools were outlawed in order to make way for the new national schools. The Irish language was vigorously discouraged, described by Catholic politician Daniel O’Connell as “a barrier to modern progress.” Irish culture was being deracinated by every means, leaving a country detached from its history.
The British colonisation presents a perfect context for the theme of identity as the country is forced to assume a blankness upon which its new identity can be rewritten. The post-colonial critic, Simon Ryan said of the implications of colonial map making, “They create and manipulate reality as much as they record it."
As the old place names become pushed into irrelevancy, the history of the town is simultaneously erased. It can be said that the place names contain within them links to the past and memories that therefore build up the identity of a community, as was the case with “Tobair Bhrian”. However, it can similarly be argued that names make little difference, as Owen says after hours of being mistakenly named Roland, “Owen - Roland - what the hell. It’s only a name. It’s the same me, isn’t it?” Hugh also states, “it is not the literal past, the ‘facts’ of history, that shape us, but the images of the past embodied in language… we must never cease renewing these images because once we do, we fossilise.” Here we see the way in which Hugh thinks the past should be translated to the present, through personal experience intertwined with language that expresses us.
There are many different ways in which the theme of translation appears in the play. The most obvious of these would be the literal translations made by Hugh and Jimmy Jack in their Latin and Greek exchanges, the Anglicising of the place names, and Owen’s role of interpreter to the British soldiers.
The more complex implications of translation become apparent through Owen’s first interpreting task while introducing the soldiers. Lancey states that the operation of mapping the land has been undertaken so that “the military authorities will be equipped with up-to-date and accurate information on every corner of the Empire.” In his translation, Owen omits the word ‘Empire’, instead delivering a half truth, “the job is being done by soldiers because they are skilled in this work.” Here we see the nuances of meaning that evolve through translation; Owen is able to deliver words that loosely resemble those directed at him, but by neglecting the real essence of Lancey’s statement, he is in effect losing the true meaning. This is also a good example of how wording can be used as a political tool useful in the softening of a statements impact.
The play not only concerns itself with the act of translating words simply from one language to another; but the complexity involved that surrounds the issue of semantics. The way in which words are translated is an interesting linguistic concern; one must ask, what is it that we are translating? It is not just words that are there to be translated, but the history, memories and emotions behind them. This matter arises when Owen and Yolland are to Anglicise “Tobair Bhriain”, a place that gained its name due to a centuries old story about a man who drowned in the local well; “what do we do with a name like that?” Literal translations are often insufficient, “I suppose we could anglicise it to Bunowen; but somehow that’s neither fish nor flesh.” Therefore; the idea of translation not only concerns itself with literal translations, but also the concept of translating an identity through history.
Translation is mainly a term associated with communication. Through highlighting the flaws in translating, Friel is also highlighting the failures of lingual communication. When agreeing to teach Maire English, Hugh says, “I will provide you with the available words and the available grammar. But will that help you to interpret between privacies?” Friel points out that there are many cultural and personal significances embodied within language that fall through the gaps of translation, “English, I suggested, couldn’t really express us”; therefore the most effective form of communication is implied to occur beyond language. While trying to translate Bun na hAbhan into English, literally meaning the mouth of the river, Yolland argues that it should be “left alone” as “there’s no English equivalent for a sound like that”. He recognises therefore that the ‘music’ of the Irish name has an untranslatable quality which should be preserved.
Bibliography:
http://www.qub.ac.uk/english/imperial/ireland/trans.htm
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~dpm5h/meche.html
Oxford English Dictionary definition.
. Simon Ryan, "Inscribing Emptiness: Cartography, Exploration and the Construction of Australia,"
