Blog IV: Thoughts on Friel's Translations and Communication

The play Translations is, in my eyes, one of the best examples of post-colonial writing in that it addresses both the needs of natives to expresses the injustice of the imperial system to their specific situation as well as the expression of the larger flaws of imperialism as a whole. It is both a microcosm and a universal, something that speaks to the cultural experience of the Irish and the cultural experiences of all colonized communities.

The way Friel does this is by focusing on a specific aspect of the human experience: language. Language is inextricably linked to the identity of the culture and the individual, and it is the foundation of communication. Communication begets understanding and progress when it is used properly and respected, and the veneration of a culture's language gives pride to the country.

Friel utilizes breakdown in communication between individuals to explain the greater cultural communication breakdown of the imperial system:

There is a breakdown in communication between Manus and Sarah, a shy village girl who barely speaks and who thus has been labeled as a mute -- however, the compassion and intelligence of Manus transcends this breakdown as he helps teach Sarah to speak. This displays the benevolent side of imperialism, in which the gap between two cultures is bridged (hybridity or creolization).

There is a breakdown in communication between Manus and Maire, but this concerns the matters of the heart more than any issue of pedagogy: the audience is clued in to the relationship between the two, and their dialogue suggests something romantic or that at least hints at a romantic future. However, their lack of communication about their future plans -- will Manus take a job? Will he find a place of his own? Will Maire move to America? -- leads to their ultimate disconnect, as Maire abandons their relationship for a different kind of miscommunication. This is symbolic of the communication breakdown between imperial and colonial cultures, as demonstrated in the relationships between the British and Irish in Friel's play.

In one case, this relationship is positive, but signifies a negative result for Irish culture. Maire's attraction to Yolland displays a renunciation of her cultural heritage and identity in favor of modernity and the imperial ways. She also claims that she wants to go to America for a better life, and this leaving is yet another factor to symbolize the modern Irish character -- one who cares not for the preservation of culture or the maintenance of a national identity, but merely for the profits of modernity and progress. One day she declares in the classroom of Master Hugh that she wants to learn English; she is giving into the adoption of the colonial language, and although it is not because of the pressure of the colonial power, it is still the end result that the British Empire wants for Ireland.

In the case of modern-day Ireland, although Gaelic is not widely spoken, and despite the stamping-out efforts of their former colonial occupiers, there is still a love of the language. Reform programs have been put in place in some elementary schools to reeducate Irish children in the language of their forefathers, and summer programs are often installed in rural areas to teach youth Gaelic. The trend, however, is not a rabid one, and many citizens still need convincing that the preservation of Gaelic is important to Irish culture. But almost every city in Ireland continues to print road signs in both English and Gaelic, and in the more remote areas Gaelic is prevalent, making for often difficult navigation through the countryside.

This, I just realized links directly to the theme and action of Friel's Translations: British troops and surveyors tromping around the Irish countryside, changing all of the Gaelic names to English ones. When one sees bilingual road signs, one does not first think of the original name or the cultural place-history derived from language. As English-speakers in a modern world, we assume everything to be translated for us already.

There has always been a dreamlike appeal to the use of language in Ireland -- the oral histories, the storytelling songs and fairytales are, I think, a way for the culture to set apart its language as something magical, something more special than the typical English of the imperial power, for instance. A analysis of the play by critic Seamus Deane describes it as a critical portrait of the cultural atmosphere of Northern Ireland in the 19702-80s (The play went public in 1980.), but also as an "enchantive fictive account of the Irish experience of British colonialism."

Thus, it links to Ireland's past -- the linguistic heritage, the oppression of the British Empire, the formation and decimation of a cultural identity -- with the atmosphere of present-day Ireland. The country and the language still suffer from the aggression of British imperialism, but there are still some who have not given up on Gaelic. Friel's Translations displays this, and it is this clash between the past and the present that makes for a very interesting interpretation.