'Translations depicts the cultural take over of Ireland by the British Empire, yet it cannot be said to be simply pro-Irish.' Consider this comment

The character of Manus is rather more complicated than that of Hugh and our perception of him changes as the play develops.  During the play Manus refuses to apply for a job at the international school his father applied for because he felt that he ‘couldn’t go up against him’. This enforces Manus’ loyalty towards his father and perhaps is an indication of Irish faithfulness compared to English disloyalty; disloyalty which is seen when Yolland explains that his father got him a job but he ‘missed the boat’ and, not being able to return home and face him, joined the army. Yolland also shows disloyalty to his own country and language when he decides that ‘there is no English equivalent’ for a sound like Bun na hAbhann’ and wishes to live in Ireland because it is ‘heavenly’. As an audience, we find ourselves praising Yolland and respecting him for his capacity to embrace other cultures. We also respect Manus for his sense of duty and loyalty towards Ireland. Friel plays with our emotions in this way making us hypocritical as we admire certain characters for the opposite reason that we admire others. It is interesting to note that the characters Friel wants us to admire are the ones who have a passionate love for Ireland; could this be a definite pro-Irish element of the play?

In Irish drama, in the twentieth century, the stage-Englishman was developed as a counter to the stage Irish man. This stereotype took on two forms, both of which are found in ‘Translations’. There is the cold, brutal Englishman that has no sentimental feelings for Ireland (Lancey). And then there is the enthusiastic devotee of anything Irish who sees Ireland as an exotic and romantic place (Yolland). When Yolland’s love for Ireland and the ‘remarkable community’ of Baille Beag becomes apparent he asks Owen ‘Do you think I could live here?’ This sentimental behaviour towards Ireland shows a great contrast between his character and Lancey’s. Yolland is also the one character in the play that tries to explain why he feels that changing the names is somehow ‘sinister’ and he is ‘concerned about [his] part in it’. Owen also only realises what is happening to his country through Yolland’s words, therefore Yolland symbolises a kind of bridge that guides Owen back to his own culture.

Owen’s realisation of what is happening to his own country makes him progress as a character and become more amiable. However, I think that Friel has decided that Owen must be disliked at first, seeming pretentious and arrogant, as though he has adopted various stereotypes from the English. One example of this is found when he explains ‘My job is to translate the quaint, archaic tongue you people persist in speaking’. He begins to understand how disruptive the English soldiers are being and takes Manus’ role when he is kind to Sarah by telling her ‘it will come back to you’, referring to her speech. He also abandons the one thing that he thought was precious during the whole play; the naming book. At the end he explains to his father ‘It’s only a catalogue of names’, referring to the naming book. Friel again creates confusion for the audience, this time about how to interpret the character of Owen. We ask has Owen betrayed his own culture, or is he embracing another culture as Yolland does? If it is betrayal, is this the fault of the English? For these questions Friel provides no answers, he invites us to use our own judgements and perceptions to interpret these characters.

Friel uses Yolland, once again, to represent the attempt of joining two cultures together by his relationship with Maire. However, this joining is doomed to fail just like the couple’s relationship is as, even though Maire and Yolland celebrate what they love about each other’s cultures, thus ignoring their differences, there is still a failure to communicate. This can be seen when Yolland and Maire are having a ‘conversation’ with each other, even though neither speaks the others language, and Yolland explains ‘I’m not going to leave here’, while Maire pleads ‘Take me away with you George’. This represents the inability for all the characters to communicate which results in the supposed death of Yolland. This English soldier is therefore seen as a victim and his questionable murderer appears to be the Irish Manus; although Friel leaves us to decide this for ourselves.