Audience Engagement on Twitter: the Rijneveld Translation Controversy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Audience Engagement on Twitter: The Rijneveld Translation Controversy Laura Gurwin Master of Art: Media and Communication: Culture, Collaborative Media, and Creative Industries Master’s Thesis, One-year Master | 15 Credits | Year: 2021 Supervisor: Signe Ivask Examiner: Alessandro Nani Examination date: June 1, 2021 Grade Awarded: A Word count: 14,686 ABSTRACT Much research exists on cancel culture and cultural gatekeeping. However, there is little research on more recent examples of cancel culture stemming from the Netherlands. The current study sought to examine how active Twitter users have responded to what I have titled, the Rijneveld translation controversy on Twitter. This controversy involves questions of racism or reverse racism after a Dutch White translator, Marieke Lucas Rijneveld, reversed their decision to translate works of the African-American writer, Amanda Gorman after receiving much backlash from the public. This was followed by debates on Twitter causing an uproar. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the different issue- frames tweeted about by active Twitter users through a qualitative content analysis. In order to inquire into the opinions addressed at various stages of the controversy, tweets were collected over the course of three different time periods. A general observation was that a majority of Twitter users were upset by the pushback Rijneveld received and even regarded the situation as an example of “reverse racism” and radical wokeism. Moreover, several different actors/stakeholders were targeted or “called-out” by the “Twitter mob,” including the Dutch journalist, Janice Deul who led part of the pushback against Rijneveld. These issues are substantially less about the art and craft of translation and reflect a broader societal issue that Twitter users felt a need to address through this controversy. Keywords: Qualitative Content Analysis, Twitter, Cancel Culture, Wokeism, Reverse Racism, Scandal, Public Opinion 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ....................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ........................................................................................ 3 List of Figures .............................................................................................. 5 List of Tables ............................................................................................... 5 List of Diagrams .......................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 6 2. Context .................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Black Lives Matter Protests and Dutch Colonial History ............................... 10 2.2 Twitter Affordances ...................................................................................... 12 2.3 Twitter Use in the Netherlands ..................................................................... 15 3. Previous Research ................................................................................. 15 3.1 Twitter: Audiences, Engagement & Counter-Public Narratives .................... 16 3.2 Cancel Culture & Cultural Gatekeeping ........................................................ 18 4. Theoretical framework .......................................................................... 22 5. Methods ................................................................................................. 26 4.1 Content Analysis .......................................................................................... 26 4.2 Data Collection & Sampling Method ............................................................ 28 4.3 Developing a Codebook ................................................................................. 31 4.4 Research Paradigms ..................................................................................... 32 4.5 Ethical Considerations .................................................................................. 34 3 5. Analysis of Results & Key Findings ....................................................... 36 5.1 First period: Rijneveld first announces the translations job .......................... 38 5.3 Second Period: Rijneveld reverses their decision ........................................... 40 5.4 Third Period: one month later ...................................................................... 43 5.5 Status Dissonance Theory ............................................................................. 45 5.6 Trivialization Theory .................................................................................... 47 5.6 Scandal-reform cycle & Social Theory of Scandal ......................................... 48 6. Concluding Discussion .......................................................................... 51 References ................................................................................................. 56 Appendix: Codebook ................................................................................. 68 4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Overview of Twitter Users’ Opinions (Over the Course of All Three Periods) Figure 2. Overview of Twitter Users’ Opinions between February 23rd – 25th Figure 3. Overview of Twitter Users’ Opinions between February 26th– 28th Figure 4. Overview of Twitter Users’ Opinions between March 23rd – May 3rd LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Overview of Data Extraction Periods, their Corresponding Events and Sample Size Table 2. Coding Process LIST OF DIAGRAMS Diagram 1. “Ingredients of basic scandal” and “Some elements of more complex scandals” (Thompson, 2005) Diagram 2. “Scandal-Reform Cycle” (Sass & Crosbie, 2013) Diagram 3. A Re-modeled Scandal-Reform Cycle based off of diagrams by Sass and Crosbie (2013) and Thompson (2005) Diagram 4. Re-modeled scandal-reform cycle applied to Rijneveld controversy 5 1. INTRODUCTION The young African-American writer, and activist Amanda Gorman wrote the renowned poem The Hill We Climb which she recited at Joseph Biden's 2021 presidential inauguration ceremony. This poem was written specifically for this event, with the message of unity and progress concerning social justice and division in the United States (Gorman, 2021). The poem refers to a hill that symbolizes the current political and racial climate of the nation. It will take time to reach the top of the hill, meaning that establishing unity among people will be challenging. However, it is by no means unachievable (Poll, 2021). Moreover, she asks readers to reflect upon America's history and how although there is hope for a better, more unified future, no one can escape the past (Poll, 2021). This poem has resonated with many people, and to allow audiences to connect with this work, it has been and continues to be translated into different languages, Dutch being one. On February 23rd of this year, Marieke Rijneveld, a young non-binary1 Dutch author who received the International Booker Prize, took to social media, including Twitter, to announce that they would be the one to translate Gorman's The Hill We Climb into Dutch (Harrison, 2021). Soon after, Rijneveld received backlash from journalists such as Janice Deul and other social media users. Many were upset that the translation job was not given to a Black Dutch author (Deul, 2021). Over weeks, what was meant to be joyous and positive news became a controversy that had offended many people. It was argued that a Black author would better understand the deep meanings and context behind Gorman's words. As a result of the uproar, Rijneveld reversed their decision. Rijneveld wrote a poem expressing their sentiments and the reasons behind their decision which they shared on social media. It is essential to clarify that they were not forced to quit; instead, Rijneveld felt they were no longer an appropriate 1 Rijneveld’s preferred pronoun is “they”. 6 candidate. Since this new decision was made, growing numbers of people have expressed their opinions about this dispute on Twitter. People's perceptions of what makes a translation strong are essential to better grasp why various arguments have been made on social media. Some translators find that translating "is an attempt to bridge beyond identity, beyond cultures, bringing someone, something that is very different from us into our ecosystem" (Bhanoo, 2021, para. 1). In saying this, it can be argued that great art is universal in the sense that it is often relatable or can resonate with many, regardless of one's background or circumstances. Others find comfort and reassurance in hiring a person who "conveys the ‘untranslatables’” or, simply put, someone who has genuinely experienced something similar (Bhanoo, 2021, para. 17). Therefore, this issue must be considered relative in that it is very personal to each writer. Similarly, views of social media users vary and these responses are the very ones that can significantly influence the types of writers who are chosen to translate not only Gorman's work but the works of countless others. Rijneveld’s publisher, Meulenhoff had suggested the young author as a translator to Gorman who quickly agreed. Although Rijneveld and Gorman’s backgrounds and life experiences were very different, Rijneveld claims to have a strong understanding of what division feels like in their experience as a non- binary individual (Flood, 2021). Nevertheless, many other people disagreed