Image

HOT OFF THE PRESS…..

HOT OFF THE PRESS.....

Le Film Français on our continuing campaign

A No Peanuts! Statement of Principles

🐵 No Peanuts! for Translators

Read the No Peanuts! Statement of Principles in Estonian, Spanish, Turkish, Romanian, or Russian.

The No Peanuts! Movement supports professional translators and interpreters in demanding and receiving a fair and honest living from their work.

No Peanuts! means refusing to believe that translators are powerless. No Peanuts! means rejecting the notion that translators must kowtow to so-called “market demand” as if we had no ability to create our own markets. No Peanuts! means insisting that we need not live in fear or accept exploitation in exchange for the right to earn a living in our chosen field.

Here’s how you can participate in the No Peanuts! Movement!

1. Resist lowering your rates.No Peanuts! starts and ends with this fundamental principle. It may seem naive to say so, but the truth is actually quite simple: If every single one of us insisted on being paid…

View original post 604 more words

Link

QUALITY IN TRANSLATION

An interesting statement from the QUALITY IN TRANSLATION campaign

Campaign Statement

The goal of the campaign is to raise awareness amongst translation buyers that translation is not a commodity and translators are not pegs on a board. Despite the fact that language plays such a critical role in how we interact with the world, surprisingly few people understand what is required to deliver a “good” translation; a translation that strives to express the same thoughts and impressions as the original text; a translation that strives to pass as if originally written in the target language.

Few appreciate the years of study and effort spent by translators gaining the necessary proficiency not only in one or more foreign languages but also in their own language. On top of this, translators need to spend years building up expertise in particular fields such as legal or financial translation, getting to grips with the most arcane legal terminology or becoming thoroughly familiar with IFRS or other accounting standards. It is only when this cocktail of linguistic expertise and practical know-how is mixed that there is any chance of producing a translation that will achieve the goal of producing quality.

So what is quality? We simply define it as striving for the “best possible translation” in a particular context. In practice this means ensuring the involvement of translators with a high level of experience in a particular field, whether to carry out the translation or to review the work of a less experienced colleague.

So should we decline under-priced or rushed projects? Very few people get to work under ideal conditions all the time but in the translation world there is an increasing trend towards lower prices and faster turnarounds. Both negatively impact quality. It is thus better to decline any job that won’t allow the translator to carry out the necessary review passes. A month later nobody will remember the constraints but the poor quality will be there for all to see.

We’re not asking you to buy anything, donate money or register. All we ask is that you spread the message in whatever way you can. The campaign is wholly about the message, nothing else. Success is simply raising people’s awareness.

 

Agencies and companies displaying the Quality in Translation logo commit to:

1) Striving for the best possible translation every time
2) Only accepting assignments that allow them to strive for this goal
3) Declining assignments at prices that undercut this goal
4) Only working with professional translators translating into their native language
5) Only handing assignments to translators specialised in the particular field
6) Constantly striving to improve translators through constructive feedback and ongoing training
7) Actively raising the awareness of buyers about the goals of the “Quality in Translation” campaign

Subtitling on the radio

The BBC ran an interview today with ASIF! member Sionann O’Neill and director Dominik Moll.

You can hear it by clicking here. Interview starts at 41:58.

Touche pas à mon sous-titreur !

Comments from the directors who signed the petition in support of a fair rate for subtitlers…

“Un traducteur ne travaille pas “à la chaîne”. Il est une véritable interface culturelle entre notre patrimoine et le reste du monde. À ceux qui veulent forfaitiser leur travail, je propose d’ouvrir un dictionnaire et d’y découvrir l’autre sens du mot “forfait” : “Faute grave, sortant de l’ordinaire, commise de façon audacieuse, et paraissant plus monstrueuse du fait de la qualité de son auteur”. Continuons comme ça et bientôt ce sera Google qui sous-titrera nos films.”

René Manzor

 

“J’ai pour chaque film l’obsession de la traduction juste, si importante pour rendre compte avec précision et finesse les dialogues de nos films. C’est le premier acte de respect que l’on doit à ceux qui sont filmés. Selon le budget du film, j’ai pu à chaque fois négocier de gré à gré avec le traducteur que je désirais. Cette relation est très importante pour la qualité du travail. Nous savons bien où conduit ces tentatives constantes de paupériser le travail et d’affaiblir leur capacité à se consacrer à fond à leur travail. Il en résulte une baisse de qualité et l’affadissement in fine de l’oeuvre, sans parler même des questions éthiques que posent forcément toute tentative de traduction. Ce n’est pas innocent de traduire. A tous les échelons de nos métiers, nous sommes confrontés aux mêmes tentatives qui ne tiennent pas compte de la spécificité de ce qu’est et doit rester le cinéma. Un travail artisanal qui a besoin à toutes les étapes de sa fabrication de l’engagement personnel de chacun des métiers auxquels il fait appel. Vous avez raison de résister. Merci à vous.”

JP Duret

 

“Réduire les coûts est toujours une solution de facilité. Il faut au contraire investir dans la créativité à tous les niveaux, c’est la seule chance d’augmenter le niveau artistique de la production française, et d’espérer conquérir des marchés internationaux.”

Bénureau Didier

 

“Mes trois films ont été traduits par la même personne, en qui j’ai désormais toute confiance. Comme tous les autres membres de l’équipe d’un film, je pense qu’il participe artistiquement au résultat, et je tiens à sa sensibilité. Je ne voudrais pas perdre cette relation de confiance.”

Eleonore Faucher

 

“Les traducteurs sont des auteurs au service d’autres auteurs. C’est une corporation indispensable à l’outil cinématographique. La sacrifier au noms de pratiques commerciales est dangereux pour nos films.”

Lorraine Lévy

 

“La traduction de sous-titres est un métier qui demande doigté, sensibilité et savoir-faire. C’est au réalisateur et au producteur de choisir à qui ils veulent confier la traduction, de la même manière qu’ils choisissent les autres collaborateurs qui participent à la fabrication d’un film.”

Dominik Moll

 

“Un bon film mal traduit devient un film quelconque. Ne laissons pas nos film se faire traduire au rabais.”

Patrice Leconte

 

“Mon traducteur est le garant de ma singularité. En tant que tel, je me battrai toujours auprès de mes interlocuteurs pour le choisir et le garder à mes côtés.”

Arnaud des Pallières

 

“Sur un projet qui doit vivre à l’international, le choix du traducteur est primordial et c’est la qualité de son travail qui fait bien souvent la différence.”

Stéphane Durand

 

“La compétence n’est plus reconnue et c’est dommage pour notre société à la dérive, ceci explique cela, peut-être…”

Joël Farges

 

“Un traducteur c’est un allié hyper important, un collaborateur précieux, ça ne s’échange pas “comme un kleenex. La traduction c’est la parole, l’âme du film…”

Catherine Corsini

 

“Les sous-titreurs sont des artistes à part entière, des traducteurs, des écrivains. S’ils disparaissent, si leur travail est méprisé et bradé, c’est tout le rayonnement à l’étranger de la culture cinématographique française qui sera atteint.”

Coline Serreau

 

“Touche pas à mon sous titreur! il a un métier, un savoir faire unique, comme moi c’est un artisan, il transporte les mots et une part du sens de mon film a travers le monde.”

Jan Kounen

 

“Traduction, adaptation, moment essentiel de la mise au monde d’un film. Bonheur d’avoir à nos côtés des artisans formidables. Colère de voir leur travail bafoué.”

Michel Spinosa

 

“La traduction et le sous titrage, font partie intégrante de l’écriture cinématographique. Absolument et définitivement. Adapter et transmettre la langue d’un film est un métier, une qualité qui ne s’improvise et ne se brade pas !”

Hélier Cisterne

 

“Mes films ont tous été primés dans leur version anglaise… qu’en eût-il-été sans la qualité des traducteurs ?”

Fabienne Rousso-Lenoir

 

“Il suffit de voir la pauvreté des sous-titres que l’on trouve aujourd’hui sur internet pour mesurer l’importance de faire appel à de “vrais” traducteurs pour nos projets artistiques… De tout coeur avec vous dans ce combat.”

Benoit Cohen

 

“Les films portent une parole. Toujours. Les mots doivent être justes ou c’est toute la richesse et la singularité des personnages qui se perdent. A quoi bon montrer les films ailleurs que dans les pays francophones si c’est pour les montrer amputés. Si seul le coût compte, autant s’en remettre à REVERSO !”

Lucas Belvaux

 

“Le sous-titrage est encore une écriture, l’ultime, même… Ce n’est pas qu’un truc technique de labo !”

Vincent Garenq

 

“De tout coeur et dans toutes les langues – bien traduites – avec vous !”

Philippe Ros

 

“Ils sont le relais indispensables entre les auteurs et les spectateurs du monde entier. Leur travail est précieux et ne doit en aucun cas être négligé !”

Foirest

Link

The value of subtitles…

The value of subtitles…

Photo

Marie-Lorna Vaconsin and Pierre Bénézit in the film “Oppressed Majority.” CreditEléonore Pourriat

PARIS — The main character is a harried parent just trying to slog through the routine of the day: dropping off the toddler at day care, picking up the mail, running errands.

But in “Oppressed Majority” (“Majorité Opprimée”), a provocative short film by the French screenwriter and director Eléonore Pourriat, the parent doing the chores is a man, and all the gender roles are reversed, creating a world in which men confront what it would be like to face the daily indignities, compromises and risks that women often face because of their appearance, second-class status in the workplace and gender bias.

The 11-minute film was originally released online four years ago to little notice. In February, Ms. Pourriat added English subtitles, and viewership on YouTube took off, attracting nearly 8.5 million hits within less than a month of its release. With the new attention came the conversation about sexism that Ms. Pourriat (pronounced poo-ree-AH) had hoped to provoke when she first released the film.

The comments ranged from Twitter messages like “Watch this film” or “Try doubting sexism after watching this video” to longer discussions on news and feminist sites. The Guardian featured it on its Women’s Blog, where it prompted talk about what women should do about everyday sexism. “What’s happened to my film is fantastic,” Ms. Pourriat said. “I don’t know if it’s just the subject or the buzz.”

One question that neither Ms. Pourriat nor French social critics have a clear answer for is why “Oppressed Majority” seems to have had so much more resonance outside France. For the first three years that the film was posted in French, it had only about 20,000 views. Now, after widespread attention on mostly English-language social media, that number has reached 700,000, still far less than the 8.96 million views, and counting, of the version with English subtitles.

Although several French social critics said that they thought the subject matter was one that French audiences generally were open to, they noted that other films on sexism have done far better here. One explanation offered by French feminists is that the film is uncompromising and fearless in confronting French attitudes toward gender and ethnicity. The film unfolds in a series of brief vignettes that follow a frumpy house husband, named Pierre. They are in part parody: Women jog past him bare-chested. But then the film takes on a menacing turn. The man is accosted and molested by an armed gang of young women. When he goes to the police station, it is almost entirely staffed by women. The female officer hearing his account of the attack interrupts the interview to send her young male assistant for coffee; as he leaves, she comments on how attractive the assistant looks in his new jeans. When Pierre, humiliated at having to describe the attack, finishes explaining how the women accosted him and how one of them bit his penis, the policewoman looks at him skeptically and says: “It’s absurd. Broad daylight, and there were no witnesses?”

At the end, his wife comes to pick him up, but she is late because she’s been at a business meeting. “Oppressed Majority” is Ms. Pourriat’s first short film; she previously worked as a screenwriter and actress, often with her husband, Benoit Cohen, who is also a filmmaker.

“I was raised with the idea that men and women were equal,” said Ms. Pourriat, 42, who considers the work of the New Zealand director Jane Campion as an inspiration. “And when I grew up, I saw that they weren’t, even if there are laws saying they are.

“When I issued the film in 2010 and said I was a feminist, people would look at me as if there was no point to this, as if it was not the most important thing to fight about and to talk about. In France, nothing was in danger.”

“Today there’s been a debate about gay marriage, about abortion,” she continued, “and this makes people more conscious and engaged.”

While the response to the film abroad has been mostly positive, as shown in the comments and the growing number of viewers. The still relatively small number of French viewers and their more skeptical critiques, Ms. Pourriat argues, is another sign of how deeply sexism remains embedded in French society.

Many French feminists do see the film as an incisive commentary. Michèle Horlaville, a member of La Barbe, a group that advocates for more women in public life, said in an interview that France was “a country of male domination,” adding, “It is a Latin country, and there’s a lot to be done when it comes to gender.”

She said that the movie may have struck people as violent because of its bluntness and its direct “appeal to conscience,” forcing men to put themselves in women’s shoes. “The struggle for social rights for women does not always go with the struggle for human rights. We are the country that does not speak of ‘human rights’ but of ‘the rights of man,’ ” Ms. Horlaville said.

The film has found plenty of critics in France, both male and female. “The gender inversion was interesting and unusual, but I was not enthusiastic about the movie,” Eric Fasson, a sociologist in Paris, said by telephone. “It ridicules men.”

Mr. Fasson said he did not like a scene in which the French couple’s babysitter, a Muslim man, is shown dressed as a woman wearing an abbaya and hijab at the request of the babysitter’s wife. Mr. Fasson objected to the depiction of Muslim women as subservient. “It’s a cliché about veiled women,” he said. “They aren’t necessarily submissive and stupid.”

But Ms. Pourriat’s point, or one of them, is that gender trumps religious faith and ethnicity.

Some women in France disagreed with their male counterparts and said they liked that scene but objected to others. Michèle Fitoussi, a French writer and former columnist for Elle magazine, found fault with the way the man was depicted as “a victim of everyone.”

“It’s too much,” she said.

Ms. Fitoussi also suggested that although it has become acceptable for women to act like men at work, to be bosses, even to become the president of France, the opposite is not true of men. “We do not feel comfortable with the idea of a man feminizing himself,” she said.

Beyond the political, Ms. Pourriat said she had a personal motivation for making the film as well: As the mother of a 15-year-old daughter (she also has a 13-year-old son), she said, she is all too aware of the vulnerability of adolescent girls to male peer pressure.

“I can see that in her generation boys try to impose their point of view on girls,” she said.