Masarykova univerzita Filozofická fakulta

Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky

Magisterská diplomová práce

Pavel Peléšek Pavel

2017 Pavel Peléšek

20

17 17

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of English and American Studies

English-language Translation

Pavel Peléšek

Fan-Made and Professional Translation Criticism of Science Fiction Master’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Ing. Mgr. Jiří Rambousek, Ph.D.

2017

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

…………………………………………….. Author’s signature

I would like to thank my supervisor Ing. Mgr. Jiří Rambousek, Ph.D. for his patience and his helpful suggestions, the librarians at the Moravian Library for their hard work carrying 27 years’ worth of magazines back and forth, and my friend Anna for saying this thesis is actually enjoyable to read.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 6 1.1 Methodology ...... 9 2. Theoretical background ...... 12 2.1 Definitions of Science-Fiction ...... 12 2.2 Science-Fiction in Czech Context ...... 16 2.3 Fans and Fandom ...... 17 2.3.1 Fandom ...... 19 2.4 Local Fandom...... 20 2.5 Translation Criticism and SF ...... 22 2.5.1 Defining Translation Criticism ...... 24 2.5.2 Professional and Amateur ...... 25 2.6 Criteria of Translation Criticism ...... 27 2.6.1 Linguistic Components by Reiss ...... 28 2.6.2 Extra-Linguistic Components by Reiss ...... 28 2.6.3 Source- and Target-Oriented Criticism ...... 29 2.7 Sources of Criticism ...... 30 2.7.1 Magazines ...... 32 2.7.2 Web-Based Sources ...... 34 3. Analysis of Primary Sources of Criticism ...... 36 3.1 Analysis of Printed Sources ...... 36 3.1.1 Vivisektor ...... 36 3.1.2 Hvězdný tamtam ...... 45 3.1.3 Knihomorna ...... 48 3.2 Analysis of Web-Based Sources ...... 51 3.2.1 Literary Web Pages ...... 51 3.2.2 Discussion Forums ...... 54 3.2.3 SF Web Pages ...... 62 3.2.4 Personal Blogs ...... 67 4. Results of the Analysis ...... 69 5. Conclusion ...... 73 6. References ...... 77 6.1 Primary Sources of Criticism ...... 77 Printed Sources ...... 77 Internet Sources ...... 77 6.2 Secondary Sources ...... 79 Unsuitable Primary Sources of Criticism ...... 81 Resumé ...... 82 Resumé in Czech ...... 83

1. Introduction

Science-fiction is a literary genre that has drawn attention of many readers throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. With advances in science and technology providing more topics to write about, science fiction has become one of the most popular genres among the public. The fans come from the ranks of both academically and scientifically educated people familiar with the terminology often employed in the books and films, and the general, casual readership fascinated by the hardly-imaginable scientific marvels.

While there are many active writers all over the world, readers in the

Czechoslovak and later Czech and Slovak republics have always wished to have access to stories published outside of their own country. And with the language barrier denying many of them the pleasure of reading books in more than one or two languages, translations of this genre soon proved desirable and even necessary. But not all the results of the translators’ work are always perfect – there is rarely a mistake missed by the avid and critical readership for long.

A dissatisfied reader is prone to expressing his or her opinion in whatever way he or she finds available. These outlets can be different media with varying degree of publicity, ranging from letters sent to the book’s publisher, reviews in a magazine, to a more contemporary approach – commenting on an internet forum. There he or she can share thoughts with like-minded peers and also receive feedback from other members of the community.

Fans of science-fiction of Czechoslovakia in the latter half of the 20th century and later in its two successive states, Czech Republic and Slovakia, proved to be a good example of critical readerships. At first, they had to make do with only a limited range of

6 western authors, due to the political situation. But with the downfall of the Communist regime, the market opened for the rest of the science-fiction production.

Following the weakening of the Communist influence in the late 1980s, several magazines focusing on science-fiction, such as Ikarie and Interkom, started being published. They also contained a section dedicated to fan comments and reviews, some of which dealt with the quality of the translations of novels, short stories, and films that were made accessible to the community. With the emergence of the Internet many web pages appeared, made by both fans themselves and professional translators or publishers focusing on science-fiction. These comments and reviews were sometimes so extensive and demonstrating such insight that it could be argued that they approached the quality of professional translation criticism.

This trend, however, does seem to have faded in recent years. Most science- fiction-related internet forums have not seen much, if any, activity since 2014. Some of the science-fiction magazines have either reduced the frequency of publishing or stopped being published in the physical form altogether, instead having resorted to only being published online (again, if at all). Since this effectively makes fan-based criticism a phenomenon in decline, it enables to a certain extent a historical overview of this topic.

This thesis will focus on the reviews of the products of the translators’ labour. The main goal will be to compile a comprehensive overview of the ways Czechoslovak and later Czech and Slovak professionals and fans of science-fiction reacted to the translations of their favourite genre since its rise in popularity in the 1960s until the decline in popularity of this phenomenon in the 2010s. It will demonstrate the methods used in the process, the media that were utilised for this purpose, and while doing so, compile a comparative sub-study of the quality and scope of professional criticism of science-fiction literature, and of its fan-based counterparts. Most academic studies have so far focused

7 on the translations themselves and on the comparison of quality of its two distinct categories: fan-produced and professional. Many comparable diploma theses that have been elaborated so far focus on the comparison of quality of fan-based and professional translations from a wide range of genres and even media, including localisation of videogames, film subtitling, etc.

One such thesis was elaborated in 2016 by Hana Šimečková, who has offered a concise and detailed description of translations of foreign science-fiction into Czech and

Slovak. Her analysis of the local fandom focuses mainly on the translators and on the fans’ reception of them and their work, not on the way the fans criticise the quality of the translations the translators produced. Further research into other ways fandom influences produced translations is thus possible. This thesis aims to partially help fill the gap with an insight into another aspect of fan activity, and thus to act as a follow-up study.

The main reason for the choice of this topic is the observation shared by both the author and the supervisor of this thesis that the activity of fans of this genre has decreased considerably over the last five years and no longer appears to be apparent in the media published in this field. The choice was also partially due to the author’s affinity for fictional technologies of fantastic worlds, from which stems an interest in the terminology as pictured by the books’ authors and mediated by the translators. Second reason is the author’s interest in translations of science-fiction and his curiosity as to what the terminology precisely meant, one shared with the numerous fans of this genre on whose work this thesis will focus.

In this thesis, the shortened term referring to science-fiction as “sci-fi” will not be used since some scholars and authors – for example Harlan Ellison and Ondřej Neff

(1955: 35) – see it as denoting a separate genre of lower reputation and less intellectual value than science-fiction proper, or even as a derogatory term for science-fiction itself.

8

Another popular shortening, the initialism SF, is often used among Czechoslovak (and later Czech) fans of this genre, as well as among academics and theorists such as Antonín

K. K. Kudláč. This abbreviation does not carry any notable negative connotation and is, for this and the former reason, more appropriate for the use in this context.

Another issue in nomenclature is the nationality and country of origin. The phenomenon of fan-made criticism has origins in Czechoslovakia but has continued well past the Velvet Revolution and the country’s division into the Czech Republic and

Slovakia. The cooperation between the two resulting countries, however, hasn’t stopped and many aspects are still shared between the fandoms: fans from Slovakia often contribute to Czech periodicals or internet forums, Czech translations are often exported to Slovakia, or sometimes fans compare Czech and Slovak translations of a novel. Since this thesis is written in the Czech Republic, one of the two countries, in this thesis, where possible, the word “local” will be used to signify “pertaining to both the Czech Republic and Slovakia, or to former Czechoslovakia”.

1.1 Methodology

First of all, it is necessary to clearly delineate the genre of science fiction, or SF.

This will be done on the basis of definitions provided by authors within the Czechoslovak

SF scene itself: Ondřej Neff and Jaroslav Olša in their Encyclopaedia of Science-fiction

Literature, and Antonín K. K. Kudláč’s Anatomy of the Feeling of Wonder. Previous definitions of this genre, such as in Tzvetan Todorov’s The Fantastic and Rosemary

Jackson’s Fantasy: The Literature of Subversion, will also be taken into account. Their relevance, however, is limited due to their age and greater focus on other subgenres of the fantastic literature apart from SF.

9

The methodology employed to evaluate the examples of translation criticism will combine diachronic and synchronic analysis. Fan-based translation criticism will be studied using a compilation of a historical overview, combined with comparative approach with professional criticism. Theoretical background will be formulated using publications dealing with translation criticism by Katharina Reiss, Juliane House, and

Jitka Zehnalová, and by implementing relations introduced in theses dealing with reception of translations in general, and SF translations in particular, such as a 2016 diploma thesis by Hana Šimečková. Articles about fan-based translations will be added to form a complete picture of the fans’ involvement in their favourite genre.

Secondly, an overview will be made focusing on the phenomenon of fan-made translation criticism itself and will offer a comprehensive insight into its history, the forms, ways and means it employed, and the media it appeared in. Thirdly, a corpus of translation reviews will be compiled, based on physical printed sources, as well as internet sources. These will then be analysed and the two groups of translation criticism, professional and fan-based, will be identified. With the support of a theoretical background derived from the secondary sources, common topics, perspectives, and elements that are criticised will be compared regarding the level of insight and competence of the critic Where a fan critic has written a review, a professional one (if available) will be aligned for comparison and to verify whether a professional has found similar objective flaws. This objectivity is required since subjective opinions are highly individual and based on personal preferences, and they bring very little insight into the level of “professionality” of the critic.

In this part, special attention will be paid to the way the critics deal with the consistency of the translations of terminology. The reason for this choice of focus is the fact mentioned above that many fans dedicate their time to speculations about the

10 peculiarities of technology and science presented in the books, and invest considerable time and effort to uncovering the mechanisms that progress the story forward. This shared passion should, therefore, be apparent also in the potential emphasis on terminology in the criticism of their favourite genre.

11

2. Theoretical background

The term “science fiction”, as Adamovič sees it (1995b: 2), denotes literature of fiction that employs a scientifically supported set of tropes. The name itself was coined by Hugo Gernsback in 1929 (Macek 2006: 20) and it describes what needs to be handled as a specific genre – one of the most widely read genres among general populace. The fact that the genre is based on scientific theories, which are often obscure to a common layman, however, has attracted a substantial number of fans that have academic education. These so-called “aca-fans” are then prone to forming theories about their favourite genre and try to define many aspects of it formally. According to Kudláč, fans were the exclusive source of reflexions on this topic and publishers of relevant periodicals until around World War II (2016: 35). For this reason, a dauntingly large amount of definitions of what exactly science-fiction is has emerged over the decades of the genre’s popularity. In order to avoid ambiguity, it is necessary to reconcile these definitions and adopt a unified stance.

2.1 Definitions of Science-Fiction

According to one of the earliest theories on this topic was introduced in 1970 by

Tzvetan Todorov in his The Fantastic (originally in French, 1975 translated into English).

In this book, he defines the literature of the fantastic as one based on hesitation between whether what the story tells the reader can be real and happen in the real world, or whether it is unreal and the reality itself has changed. The works of fiction can then be divided into three groups according to whether the hesitation is maintained, and the reader never discovers the truth (the pure fantastic), whether the hesitation is explained rationally (the

12 uncanny), or whether the supernatural element is embraced as a part of this new or altered reality (the marvellous) (1975: 25).

He further classifies SF as a subgenre of scientific marvellous: It presents elements impossible in the real world seemingly rationally, but through fictional laws of science or real ones bent or exploited using materials or forces not recognised by science of this day.

Todorov also expresses his dismay that there is little to no hesitation in SF, which instead chooses to introduce the “unreal” elements at the very beginning and tries to make them feel as natural to the reader as possible (1975: 172).

This theory has seen much criticism since its introduction mainly because of its limited scope (Lem 1974), but mostly due to not being translated well and, in fact, focusing principally on a separate subgenre of a fantastic tale that is not interchangeable with the whole of fantastic literature (Dědinová 2015). It does, however, introduce the fantastic element as something worthy of further academic studies, and sets SF as an integral part of the fantastic. This is reiterated by Rosemary Jackson, who agrees on

Todorov’s setting of SF as a part of the marvellous. She also states that “As a critical term, ‘fantasy’ has been applied rather indiscriminately to any literature which does not give priority to realistic representation: myths, legends, folk and fairy tales, utopian allegories, dream visions, surrealist texts, science fiction, horror stories, all presenting realms ‘other’ than the human” (2003: 13,14). This chaos is perceived also among local literary theorists, such as Adamovič or Dědinová, the latter of which acknowledges it by stating:

Defining the fantastic is not an easy task and faces several obstacles. First of them is the fact that the fantastic is a vast and diverse collection of texts where each and every attempt at delimitation is necessarily followed by an omission of certain aspects at the expense of others that the author chose as their points of reference. It is thus easy to fall within one of two extremes: either the definition is so general that it allows to consider almost anything as belonging into the term

13

of the fantastic, or it focuses on features typical of a certain range of fantastic works of fiction and fails to cover the texts whose core lies elsewhere (2015:30, translation mine)1.

As a result of this uncertainty of definition Macek presents an extremely general delineation of SF – the texts that belong to SF are considered SF mainly because the fans see them as such. Thus, the community defines the genre by itself (Macek 2006: 23).

Kudláč is also aware of the unmanageable number of perspectives on the fantastic literature. He thus simplifies the scope of his interest on popular fantastic literature. This subgroup of popular literature, according to him, includes as the most relevant forms science-fiction, fantasy and fantastic horror stories (2016: 13).

Out of these three representatives only SF is of interest for this thesis. As

Šimečková states, the fantastic horror genre has attracted a significantly smaller following, and the occurrence of translated works in the Czech Republic is marginal in comparison with SF&F (2016: 10-11). There is also considerably little terminology to take into account since a typical horror story usually does not focus on scientific theories, technological marvels or exotic worlds. Fantasy, on the other hand, is rich in terminology but it is so foreign (fictional languages, magic, exotic names), that its translation is often impossible and, therefore, cannot be evaluated. These two categories are, therefore, not taken into consideration, even though fantasy has amassed a considerable number of fans who partake in criticism.

1 Definovat fantastiku je úkol nesnadný a naráží hned na několik problémů. Prvním z nich je skutečnost, že fantastika představuje mohutný a rozmanitý soubor textů, u kterého je každý pokus o ohraničení nutně doprovázen vynecháním ně - kterých aspektů na úkor těch, které si autor definice vybral za záchytné body. Je tedy snadné upadnout do jednoho ze dvou extrémů: buďto je definice natolik obecná, že dovoluje uvažovat pod pojmem fantastiky takřka o čemkoli 17, nebo se soustředí na rysy typické pro určitý okruh fantastických děl a nepokrývá již texty, jejichž jádro leží jinde. 14

Kudláč presents also a definition of SF by James Gunn. Gunn sees as the main principle of the fantastic literature “the sense of wonder and change”. It can also be called

“a literature of discontinuity” because it breaks away from the everyday experience. Its characters experience events different from this reality, or experience “normal” events but react to them differently (Kudláč 2016: 14). Gunn also sees a difference between SF and fantasy in the fact that “the former works with our world and its laws of nature, thus it is ‘a literature of change’, whereas fantasy does not, so it is ‘a literature of difference’”

(Kudláč 2016: 14).

Adamovič in his Introduction to SF deals with this situation by introducing a rather subjective definition based on what elements are used in the work of fiction (1995b:

2). There is a number of plot devices, settings, story elements and props typical of what the common reader would perceive as SF: inventions, robots, extra-terrestrial life forms, the future, experiments, global disaster, etc. If the work of fiction contains these elements, it can be said that it belongs to SF. This definition was in fact originally postulated by

Neff in his “Something is different” (1981). It supports and elaborates on Gunn’s definition (Kudláč 2016: 14). Further mentioning it in their Encyclopaedia, Neff and Olša describe SF as being:

a part of fantastic literature taking place in a reality not yet experienced by humans – be it future or present (or sometimes the past), where “something is different”. This “something different” is usually an invention, an encounter with another life form, unusual human abilities, an experiment not made yet, an event of global importance not taken place yet (a catastrophe, a new world war) et cetera. (1995: 32 Translation mine)

The resulting definition also partially amends the rift between the “classic” interpretation of science-fiction as being futuristic, and the fan-accepted “fact” that future is not the only time frame for an SF story. This was apparent for example on the case of

15 the Star Wars saga, which would not be considered SF because of the opening phrase

“Long time ago in a galaxy far, far away”, which would set it in the past, whereas the spaceships, beam weapons and interplanetary travel would be a clear sign to any fan that this is indeed SF. The facts that the story is based on fantasy tropes, and that the Force gives the story a deep spiritual element, are a matter for a different research.

As far as the aforementioned Neff’s definition is concerned, Kudláč states it has had a significant impact on local fantastic literature theories and is still relevant today

(2016: 53). Adamovič in his Dictionary also cites this theory of there being “something different” (1995a: 6). For this reason, this is the definition that will be taken into account for the purpose of this thesis.

2.2 Science-Fiction in Czech Context

The most important period in the history of SF in Czechoslovakia and the Czech

Republic was the 80s and 90s, and more specifically, the year 1989. Until 1989 SF had been overlooked both academically and authorially. There were very little works of fiction published in Czechoslovakia and those that were published were scarce and in isolation, or outright imported from the Soviet Union. Those western books that made it into the Eastern Block were translated by fans and copied and distributed by fans themselves as samizdat.

Kudláč states that the Communist era marked a notable lack of diverse critical thinking as well. He presents only three theoretical monographs about SF (by Miroslava

Genčiová, Dušan Slobodník and Ondřej Neff), the first two of which have been heavily marked by the prejudice and political requirements so typical of that era, Neff to a lesser extent due to him being a fan of SF. Nevertheless, they pioneered SF in local context as

16 a full-fledged genre, not only pertaining to literature for children, and worthy of academic studies, in a way resembling Todorov.

After 1989, the political pressure dropped and there was no need to fear the regime’s repercussions for publishing undesirable publications. The number of authors grew and a growing number of books were also imported from the west each year. The new freedom of press also gave room to a number of fan associations, conventions and, most importantly and relevantly for this thesis, magazines about science-fiction.

Current trends in SF as seen by Kudláč (2016: 66-72) are marked by a shift in almost every aspect. Where the prevalent form in the past was a short story, due to the ease of transferring an idea to paper in this shorter form, and often published in magazines or in collections of short stories, nowadays the most frequent works published are novels or series of novels. Younger authors are trying their luck in publishing the fruits of their labour, whereas older authors stopped publishing and have resorted to a role of a “wise sage”, presiding associations, publishing houses or writing academic articles.

2.3 Fans and Fandom

The origins of the term “fan” can be etymologically traced to Latin, specifically to the word fanaticus, a devotee or a temple servant (Šimečková 2016: 14). This word subsequently created the contemporary form fanatic which was later abbreviated into what is known and used today. In the mind of a contemporary person, this parent word carries a greatly negative connotation thanks to religious and sports fanatics. This negative connotation is carried over to those described as fans as well, due to the said groups’ bad reputation, but also due to the media image of fans (especially SF and fantasy

17 fans) as eccentric, socially isolationist people with unusual fashion sense, taste in music and/or idiosyncratic language.

According to Neff and Olša’s Encyclopaedia, the fans indeed tended for a long time to isolate themselves from the mainstream culture, describing their fandom as a

“voluntary ghetto” (1995: 464). Adamovič also points out in his essay “Bída a lesk fanouškovství” (The Misery and Splendour of Fandom), published in the magazine

Ikarie, that among similarly eccentric enthusiasts one may feel more comfortable and fit in more easily (2003: 34). This would be a compelling reason to associate with one’s peers than participate in the outside world society. Further in the same article he lists five notable features he found in a fan, that he thinks are neglected among fandom theorists and should be taken into account in further research:

- Creation of one’s own meanings in commercial culture products and active work with them - Deviation from rules and politics of professional media - Establishment of social networks in relation to favourite works of fiction, and by extension, of whole parallel social realities. - Non-participation in any discourse about a work of fiction or a genre by official media - Increased interest in the functionalities of a work of fiction or a genre, regardless of whether its parts are substantial or marginal.

It can be seen from these points that he too is aware of the textual focus of fandoms elaborated in the following part, and of the fans’ social isolation. More notably, however, his final point emphasises the fans’ enthusiasm about workings of the fictional worlds, which supports one of the original hypotheses of this thesis – that fans are fond of terminology and systematic analyses of the worlds, and might, therefore, be interested in proper translations of these terms.

18

As far as the media reception of fans is concerned, the contemporary trend is slowly shifting from the negative image of a fan to one shown in a more favourable light.

In his 2008 analysis of Czech newspapers, Milan Pohl sees the reputation of fans in Czech periodicals slowly improving, though some journalists still cling to the idea that being a fan is somehow suspicious, indicative of someone’s degraded mental state, or even pathological (2008: 108-112).

2.3.1 Fandom

Fans worldwide are prone to sharing their experience with each other and with the growing popularity of SF also grew the number of fans associating with each other. This trend was the birth of fandom. According to Neff and Olša, the term “fandom” was coined by an American journalist Hugo Gernsback as a shortening of “Fan Domain”, the name of a column in his magazine Amazing Stories, in the late 1920s (1995: 464). The first clubs of SF enthusiasts were founded in 1929, and in 1930 they began publishing their own, fan-made magazines, so-called “fanzines”.

As it was stated above in the preceding part, fandoms are created with text in mind.

According to Macek, a fandom in this sense can be defined even as a “subculture of text”.

This means that the gathering of fans is centred on a common medium that brings its followers and enthusiasts together (a book, a short story, their fictional world, etc.), around which the majority of common activities revolve and which forms a key part of their and the fandom’s identity (2006: 29).

The fandoms exist and continue to do so only because the original text exists. In turn, the fandoms’ members begin producing new stories and thus supply more texts, and also enhance the text’s and their own theoretical background by publishing research papers, articles and surveys. As it was mentioned before, this connection between fandom

19 and text can even serve as the very definition of the genre the fandom follows: relevant texts are those that the fandom sees as relevant (Macek 2006: 23).

Another feature typical of fandoms is that the fans gathered in them often hold conventions, known in short as “cons”. These are gathering of fans of a certain popular franchise, genre, or medium (e.g. computer games), from a certain region, city, or district, later even expanding their influence on a country-wide and worldwide scale – in 1939 the first world-wide convention, “Worldcon”, was held in New York which first saw around

200 attendees from across the globe.

Technological advancement during the whole of 20th century has brought about new media that were soon adopted by SF authors, most notably television and later computer games. Fans of SF could enjoy new titles in audio-visual and interactive form that drew in numerous new, younger fans who could embrace technology easier than older generations. These new forms gave rise to new fandoms of television series, films, and videogames such as, respectively, Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doom. These fandoms went on to become known even among non-fans, who now became acquainted with names of these groups, such as “trekkies” or “trekkers” used by fans of Star Trek.

2.4 Local Fandom

Fans of SF had been present in Czechoslovakia more or less prominently throughout the Communist era, although due to the regime’s disdain for this genre they had little official (and legal) ways to enjoy their popular works of fiction. Officially, the mass activity that is the Czechoslovak SF fandom has its roots in the year 1979 when a group of students of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University founded their SF fan club “Villoidus”. Kudláč sees the initial impulse to the creation of

20 local fandom in a 1978 article by a writer Ludvík Součka in a magazine Literární měsíčník

(Literature Monthly) called “Přímluva za budoucnost” (An Intercession for the Future).

In it the author calls for the establishment of a fan association, formation of a dedicated edition of SF literature, and publishing of a specialised literary SF magazine.

According to Zbiejczuková (2011: 28) this came true, although not completely.

The birth of SF fandom happened shortly after but the remaining two parts of it could not be fully realised until the 1980s in the form the establishment of specialised publishing houses for SF literature in the former case, and the magazine Ikarie in the latter, though this magazine was not a strictly literary one but in general about all things SF: current events, fan conventions, science breakthroughs, full short stories, and book and film reviews.

Czechoslovak SF fan community also successfully held its first con in April 1982 in Pardubice, later dubbed “Parcon”. This convention featured the granting ceremony of the first literary fandom award for SF authors, Karel Čapek Award (Czechaczek 2015:

16). Czechaczek quotes Rampas, the president of Czechoslovak SF Fandom, that the beginnings of the award “[…] were the product of pure enthusiasm and fan-ness unstained by any conceptions or system” (2015: 17). This convention continues to be held to this day along with many others focused on different domains, media, and franchises, such as

“Festival Fantazie” in Chotěboř, representing virtually every aspect of popular SF, fantasy and horror in all forms and media, or “Trpaslicon” in Prague, which focuses on

British SF, fantasy, and humour, mainly Red Dwarf and Discworld series.

The aforementioned Czechoslovak SF Fandom is an official organisation registered as an independent and individual legal entity that serves as an umbrella association for all the SF fan clubs in the country (Kudláč 2016: 99). It was funded in

21

1990, Zdeněk Rampas being elected as its president “for life”, and it still serves its original purpose as a voluntary association.

Apart from conventions and organising diverse SF fan clubs, the local fandom also took to publishing a wide variety of fan-made magazines, so-called “fanzines”. These were usually produced by a rather small group of people with limited time and resources, in a way resembling the illegal publications described by the term samizdat. These were often dedicated to sharing information about fandom events, conventions, news, awards or other topics related to fan activities. Notable examples include Kočas published in relation to the oldest local convention “Parcon”, or Interkom, one of the largest and most popular fanzines with frequent contributions by famous writers and translators active within the fandom.

Another feature of fandoms is their gradual differentiation into groups according to the medium they follow, as opposed to genre opposition: they are not bothered by whether they like SF, fantasy, or horror, but rather whether it is a book, a film or a television series, or a videogame (Kudláč 2016: 129). A certain elitist approach can also be seen on the relationship between literary fans and audio-visual culture enthusiasts, based on ideas such as that the books were there first and the film came later, or that the books elaborate on the story into much more and finer details, than a film can.

2.5 Translation Criticism and SF

Translation forms an inseparable part of one’s everyday reality. According to

Juliane House (2015: 3), translation builds bridges between two cultures, it serves as a mediator, and the source enriches the target culture and influences it. For this reason, and taking into account the previous regime’s paranoia and hatred towards the cultures of the

22

West, it is understandable that there was a conscious effort to limit the contact with western literature and its translations under the Communist rule in order to limit said culture’s influence on local population’s mind set.

According to Šustrová’s article in Lidové Noviny, translators were often persecuted even retroactively, and their names were redacted from copies of books published years ago (Šustrová 2017). Some of the contemporary translators were denied their pay and others had to have their translations published in secret under a patronage by other, state-approved translators. Despite this censorship, even the common people wanted access to something else than just Soviet writers, so soon they began to look for illegal copies of illegally translated books – samizdat.

This was, for a long time, the only way to read Western SF, which was in high demand at the time due to the era of the “Second” Golden Age of SF taking place after the World War II, most notably in the 50s when the most renowned authors, such as

Arthur C. Clarke or Isaac Asimov began publishing their most acclaimed novels and short stories (Neff & Olša 1995: 35). This format was also one of poor quality in every aspect

– paper, print, binding, and most importantly, translation. Many of these were second- hand translations, from non-original languages such as Polish or German, if the authorities were more lenient in the respective countries to the censorship of the books in question.

One could speculate that this was one of the reasons that fans begun discussing translation quality of science fiction among themselves, and after 1989 also with professionals whose articles finally could be published in mainstream-accessible media.

In the recent years, House claims, the development of international relations, globalization, and technological development has brought about an increased need for translations, mainly from English (2015: 4). This, in turn, results in a higher need of

23 translation criticism in order to keep the quality in check. The following sections will focus on the means of doing so.

2.5.1 Defining Translation Criticism

It is common knowledge that in order to improve one should learn from his or her mistakes. But looking at one’s own work rarely leads to new discoveries. For this reason, it is necessary to let others have a say in the matter. For a translator, having their work reviewed by someone else is not only a source of helpful information about the quality of one’s work, but also a guarantee that many potential mistakes, grammatical or factual, are found and corrected.

Despite the not-so-appealing aspect that is usually the first thing to come to mind at the sound of the word “criticism”, having one’s mistakes revealed can prevent even greater subsequent shame and unfavourable reputation should these imperfections come to light after the particular work has been published and has found its way to the public.

Furthermore, a factual oversight could have great impact on the public. Since one can presume that the general readership is not capable of reading the original text, for reasons of availability or lacking foreign language skills, and thus has no means of realising they have been misinformed.

On the other hand, mentioning the quality of one’s translation can even be inspirational for those interested in the translation process, as well as a form of gratification for the translators themselves. This is demonstrated for example by a comment from a translator Jitka Jindřišková under an internet review of a Norwegian fantasy book Ódinovo dítě (Odin’s child, original Odinsbarn, translation mine, the book has not yet been translated to English) on the literary blog of the book shop Martinus.cz.

Even though this review is not relevant for the subsequent analysis due to the nature of

24 the book and its language, it still demonstrates the influence of translation criticism on the translator. These are but some of the reasons why translation criticism is a recommended part of a translation process.

2.5.2 Professional and Amateur

The distinction between “professionals” and “amateurs” is a very unclear one and leaves a great room for interpretation. Katharina Reiss states that, among other factors, the level of education and language skill should be taken into account, as only a person with knowledge of both the source and target languages is “in a position to compare the translation directly with its original.” (2000: 2-3, 108) Formal education in the English language, literature, or preferably in translation would, indeed, add to the reputation of a person wishing to consider oneself a professional translation critic.

Similarly, a good dominance of one’s mother tongue is indispensable for a proper recognition of mistakes both grammatical and stylistic. Viktor Janiš states in his 2007 interview in Ikarie that it is even more important to be a master of one’s native language than to speak English or any other language one might translate from (Ikarie 5/2007: 42).

Reiss connects these two ideas and claims that in order to produce a relevant and constructive evaluation (and to avoid formulaic and sweeping statements such as “it reads like an original” or simply “the translation is good and fluent”) it is necessary to compare the target text to the source text (2000: 14-15).

It is, however, very difficult to determine the educational background of the person who has written a particular review, especially on the internet where anonymity is one of the most prominent features and the users very rarely reveal anything about themselves. But even in the magazines that usually list their contributors it may be

25 problematic to precisely establish who the critic is, due to the use of pseudonyms or initials.

Another aspect worth considering is the professionality in the traditional meaning of the word: doing something as a craft or an employment. According to Kudláč, however, the definition relying on whether the individual makes a living out of their activity is too simplistic and thus not sufficient in this regard (2016: 147).

Despite the overly general nature of this definition, a possible criterium in drawing the distinction between a professional and an amateur could be derived from it. The difference could be found not in earning one’s living by criticism, but rather in whether the person’s review has been published as a part of a dedicated section in a magazine or on a website associated with either journalists or translation critics, as opposed to a website ran by fans or in a fanzine. The latter two usually state quite clearly that the people in charge are merely fans.

Focusing on the medium also facilitates the differentiation between two major types of professionals dealing with translations of SF: those skilled in translation criticism, and those focusing on literature and cinematography. As Reiss states, literary critics sometimes also dedicate their attention to the quality of translation, but often only comment on how “good” or “bad” the translation is (2000: 2). They tend not to compare the translation to the original, and they generally do not analyse the elements suggested by Reiss, House, and other translation theoreticians that are described in the following chapter.

In order to make use of identifiers available to anyone without violating any critic’s privacy, for the purpose of this thesis the term “professional” will be applied to those reviews published in a magazine, be it printed or electronic, as a part of an established section dedicated to reviews by the members of the magazine’s staff, not by

26 readers. Forum threads, blog posts and other freely submitted articles on the internet will be considered their amateur counterpart made by fans, unless specifically stated otherwise. Professional reviews will then be sorted into groups according to whether the critic places significantly more emphasis on the literary and cinematographic aspects, or whether the attention is roughly equally dedicated to the quality of the translation. The selection of primary sources of criticism will be described in chapter 2.7.

2.6 Criteria of Translation Criticism

In order to produce a good and relevant piece of translation criticism one needs to adhere to a specific set of rules. According to Katharina Reiss, the first step to any attempt at translation criticism should be to establish the text type of the translation in question.

Reiss adopts a fourfold main division of text types: form-focused, content-focused, appeal-focused – also translated as conative in Juliane House’s Translation Quality

Assessment (Reiss 2000: 25, House 2015: 15) – and audiomedial or subsidiary texts. As their names would suggest, these types deal with texts that place emphasis on how they are written (poems, novels, etc.), what is written in them (news, non-fiction, scientific papers, etc.), their ability to persuade (advertising, rhetorical texts and so forth), and those that are not written for the specific purpose of being read but rather performed, sang, etc.

(songs, operas, drama, …).

Since the focus of this thesis is on the reviews of SF works of fiction and on the elements of translation criticism they exhibit, the difference in text types is negligible: it can be either a descriptive or evaluative text, or a combination of both. The form is mostly homogeneous and with little variation in text types. Reiss, however, presents another set

27 of criteria that is of more consequence to the matter at hand: linguistic components and extra-linguistic determinants.

2.6.1 Linguistic Components by Reiss

Reiss in this category lists four types of linguistic features of both the source and target texts that need to be evaluated as a part of the process of translation criticism.

Specifically, these are the semantic, lexical, grammatical, and stylistic elements:

- Semantic elements include context and pragmatic aspects of meaning, polysemy, homonymy, specifications and generalisations, and their influence on the choice of translation equivalents (Reiss 2000: 53) - The analysis of lexical elements focuses on the adequate or inadequate translation of individual words, technical terminology, idioms, false friends, metaphors, etc. (Reiss 2000: 57-58) - Grammatical elements are those that determine a correct and adequate rendition of the source text’s syntactic and morphological features in the target language, not just a literal adoption of the original grammatical structure (Reiss 2000: 60) - Stylistic elements reflect the corresponding use of formal and colloquial language, idiolects and the representation of the author’s language in the target language (Reiss 2000: 63)

2.6.2 Extra-Linguistic Components by Reiss

Once the linguistic components are evaluated, they give the critic a general picture about the linguistic quality of the translation. This result would be completely sufficient for a superficial review, but should the critic want to gain as complete an understanding of the translation as possible, they should attempt to consider also the extra-linguistic determinants that influence the linguistic aspect.

28

Reiss specifies seven factors influencing the translation process, and thus by extension should also influence the criticism: the immediate situation (what register to use, formal or informal language, etc.), the subject matter (proper terminology), the time factor (changes in language use and word meaning through time), the place factor (correct regional variants, dialects, national specifics, but also what is appropriate for the specific location), the audience factor (what the author intended for the audience, cultural references, shared background), the speaker factor (author’s background), and the affective implications (culturally specific emotionally charged language).

2.6.3 Source- and Target-Oriented Criticism

Another approach that is commented on by translation theoreticians is the focus on the target and source texts. As it was mentioned above, Reiss emphasises the importance of comparing the target text with the original source text. If one were to study only the translation as an individual text, or in other words, as its own “original” piece of writing, only deviations from the norm would be apparent, fidelity to the original text could be neither verified nor improved, and any suggestions of a way to remedy said deviations would be arbitrary and likely further deviating from the source text. These shortcomings thus deny any possibility of a truly constructive translation criticism (Reiss

2000: 2-3).

House approves of the idea of comparing target and source texts, and also criticises those approaches to translation studies that downplay the source text’s importance, such as the functionalist “skopos” theory and descriptive translation studies, or the behavioural theory, whose focus on the subjective and emotional reception of the target text may result in the very same general and insufficient statements of the

29 translation being good or bad, as were discussed previously in the section regarding professionality (House 2015: 11-12).

Zehnalová, in turn, is not as strict about the absoluteness of criticism by comparing target and source texts. According to Louise Brunett whose model Zehnalová presents, and to Carol Maier whose observations she quotes, the target-text-focused approach can be successfully used when analysing a text whose importance is temporary and lies in the need to quickly communicate a piece of information across multiple languages and cultures, or when analysing literary translations for their social factors, influence and translation norms. Not, however, when analysing literary texts from a linguistic point of view (Zehnalová 2015: 46).

2.7 Sources of Criticism

In order to elaborate a proper analysis of translation criticism, it is necessary to take into account the type of sources that publish it. The media that are relevant for this thesis have to offer a way for their readership to submit feedback, which in the case of SF means magazines with sections dedicated to fan mail or fan-submitted content, or internet forums, blogs, discussions, and other pages focusing on literature reviews, translation of literature, or SF.

As it was mentioned in chapter 2.5.2, the type of medium reflects the qualifications of critics who publish their reviews there. Printed magazines and – due to the fast development of information technology – online magazines are usually considered respectable and are held to higher standards than internet forums, blogs, and

30 fan-pages. This will be relevant for the subsequent division of results into groups of varying professionality.

The following chapters present a brief overview of the current and recent media offering opportunities to publish one’s review. The main condition for these media is that they must be accessible to the common public, and thus to the fans. This excludes specialised translation journals, since they often require some sort of membership, be it paid or otherwise limited. The focus of the translation criticism must also be related to translations of books, or subtitles or dubbing of an SF film or a television series.

As another large part of the entertainment industry, films and series are also included. The peculiarities of the translation process do not influence the result to the degree that they would require an approach incompatible with translation criticism.

Furthermore, their popularity among the fans is as big as that of SF books, and in some cases even far greater. This means that the commentary on translations is present among the fanbase, at least as far as terminology is concerned. Some of the most famous films and television series include Star Trek and Star Wars, which are rich in specialised terminology and fictional scientific principles that are a suitable topic for discussions.

One more part of the entertainment industry is worth mentioning here: video games. This type of entertainment is increasingly popular across most age groups and it, too, has to be translated to other languages in order to enable access to foreign speakers.

It’s translation process, however, is different and more complicated than that of a book or a television series, relying on regulations and conventional or even prescribed translations of strings of text to ensure that the purpose of individual components is widely and intuitively understood. Its translation criticism would, therefore, be notably more difficult and would need to reflect these regulations and conventions. These

31 challenges were described, for example in Iva Krombholzová’s Bachelor thesis (2014:

15-23), and will thus not be covered in this thesis.

2.7.1 Magazines

As far as SF magazines are considered, local market has never offered a particularly large variety, nor does it at the time of writing of this thesis. As a specialised genre, SF and fantasy as a whole have never managed to attain a mainstream status (save for a few novel and television series) and magazines dealing with them have thus had a limited readership. Macek lists all the officially published SF and fantasy-related magazines up to the year 2000 (2006: 59-120), and out of four magazines dealing with

SF only one – Ikarie – has survived to this day, although in 2010 it had to overcome a change of publisher and its name had to be changed to XB-1 to avoid copyright infringement.

Two other magazines have successfully published more than one issue: Nemesis ran for nearly four years of monthly issues, and The Magazine of Fantasy & Science

Fiction: Czech Edition underwent two cycles: one from 1992 to 1998, and the other from

2006 to 2010. The fourth magazine, called Ramax, published only a single issue before it succumbed to what Macek sees as the main problems SF and fantasy magazines had to face on local market: lenient distributors unwilling to pay for the sold copies, and the publishers subsequent unwillingness to continue, or even a full financial collapse (2006:

116-120).

The Czech Edition of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction as a potential source of professional criticism was examined more closely as well, but it did not provide much material. Its main focus was on publishing translated (and later local) short stories, not on reviews. Even though those were present in the magazine, there was always less

32 than five reviews per issue, sometimes even only one. They were almost exclusively of literary character, and focusing on recommending a good book, rather than commenting on the quality of its translation. In four years of publishing the magazine contained only four reviews talking at least partially about translation quality, and these were not sufficiently informative for reasons described in detail in the following chapters.

Since the only other large SF magazine, Nemesis, proclaimed at its beginning that its focus is going to be mostly on fantasy and Czech literature, with only a marginal part of content having to do with SF, it is of no relevance for this analysis. Ikarie is thus the main printed source of translation criticism of all three categories: fan-made, professional

– literary and cinematographic, and professional – translational. Its sections called

“Vivisektor”, “Knihomorna” and “Hvězdný tamtam” are of particular interest. The first one contains reviews of books by the staff and external reviewers, and the other two are dedicated to fan-submitted translation errors and general letters from fans respectively.

Other periodicals available throughout the decades following the fall of the

Communist regime have appeared, but instead of SF they focused on fantasy, which appealed to younger readership more than SF (Macek 2006: 89). These were for example

Dech draka (Dragon’s Breath) that ended in 2006 or the more recent Pevnost (Fortress), which was not covered in Macek’s list due to its first issue being later than the scope of his list. Nevertheless, it is an influential magazine and continues to publish even at the time of writing of this thesis.

33

Magazine Timeline

2010

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Ikarie Ikarie XB-1 Nemesis F&SF Ramax Dech draka Pevnost

Fig. 1 – A timeline showing in which years were individual magazines published.

2.7.2 Web-Based Sources

Compared to the printed magazines, the internet provides a much wider variety of outlets for aspiring translation critics or fans wishing to discuss their favourite franchise.

Due to the ubiquity of computers connected to the world-wide web it is also much easier for them to publish their evaluations than in physical, printed media. There is no need to transfer one’s thoughts to paper, send them by mail and then wait for the reaction, that is, the next issue of the magazine. Thanks to immediate accessibility for the public, one can receive instantaneous feedback and partake in a discussion from the comfort of their home, and should one wish not to reveal their identity to anybody else, their anonymity is guaranteed. Magazines, on the other hand, do not usually publish anonymous letters.

The variability of web pages as a platform also means that there is a greater range of specialised web pages dedicated to a specific franchise, to translation criticism, to literature in general, or simply personal blogs meant to provide a space to publish one’s thoughts. They can be designed as a discussion forum, facilitating a quick and short- phrased response, or as a place to publish articles several paragraphs long. The number of forms web pages can take means that they provide a more popular platform for fan- based criticism than printed media.

34

Some of the notable web pages dealing with science fiction in general are

FantasyPlanet, which publishes news, articles, reviews, and interviews, and even runs its own discussion forum. Articles also have their own comments section below, where registered users can add their thoughts to the topic and ask questions. Another example of an SF and Fantasy themed web page is Sarden. It features a similar type of content as

FantasyPlanet does, but it is an older web page with origins in the year 2000 as an SF- exclusive section of an online news and information web page Neviditelný pes (Invisible dog), one that was even promoted several times in Ikarie (e.g. Ikarie 4/2007, p. 43).

Web pages focusing on literature are usually not as rich in reviews of SF, though the increasing popularity of the genre among mainstream readers means that this ratio is shifting slowly in its favour. The most influential local literary web pages include iLiteratura.cz, Martinus.cz, and Knihy Dobrovský. Their main content apart from book sales is a blog written by the web pages’ internal literary critics and external reviewers.

These are a professional source of criticism, but as was the case with the aforementioned

SF web pages, there usually is a comment section below the articles for fans.

The third type of web pages featuring fan translation criticism is the fan’s personal blogs. This form of personalised web page is available to anyone and is quite numerous on the internet, so it is impossible to name a single most influential one, or even a few.

Literary and film blogs and SF blogs are one of the most common kinds to be found among local internet domains. Even though social networks such as Facebook or Twitter are overshadowing them in terms of popularity, blogs enable publishing of longer articles that are impossible to publish on Twitter and at least unpopular on Facebook.

Having defined what the aim of this diploma thesis is, what methods are used, and what sources are analysed, the following third chapter focuses on the results of the analysis of said primary sources of criticism.

35

3. Analysis of Primary Sources of Criticism

3.1 Analysis of Printed Sources

For the reasons described in chapter 2.7.1, this analysis focuses solely on reviews published in the magazine Ikarie. The most relevant sections, “Vivisektor” for professional criticism, and “Hvězdný tamtam” and “Knihomorna” for fan-produced content, will be described individually in the following subchapters.

Since the thesis deals with translation criticism in target languages (Czech, and marginally also Slovak), it is difficult to convey precisely the content of each individual criticism and all its constituent points. Where possible, the translation of the objective statements is provided by the author of this thesis after the quotation of the relevant excerpt. Where the content relies on the reader’s knowledge of the target languages, an explanation in English is given to illustrate the critic’s point. Photographs of the relevant pages from the magazine are to be found in the Appendix.

3.1.1 Vivisektor

The richest source of reviews is the section called “Vivisektor”. It is predominately dedicated to professional reviews, written by the members of the staff and externally employed journalists and reviewers. There are usually around ten reviews per issue, which – combined with the monthly publishing frequency – results in over 3000 reviews at the time of writing of this thesis. Since the magazine focuses on all three major genres of popular fantastic literature as listed by Kudláč. apart from SF also fantasy and fantastic horror (see chapter 2.1), not all the reviews published here discuss SF books.

36

The number of relevant ones is limited even further by the fact that only a minority of them deal with translation in any way.

The basic structure of the reviews that do regard the quality of translation can be divided into categories of linguistic components as defined by Reiss: Stylistics (regarding the rendition of author’s particular artistic expression, adequacy of target language registry or the appropriateness of the use of dialect, etc.), Grammar, Semantics

(misunderstood original leading to a wrong translation, peculiar choices for the name of the translated novel, etc.), and Terminology.

The category of Grammar is of little importance, since any grammatical mistakes should be corrected in the proofreading phase. It does, however, show a certain picture of the translator’s output, as well as of the quality of the copy editor’s work. The category of lexical elements, as Reiss calls it, can be specified as Terminology in this case, since that is most often the case in SF reviews – the words most often noticed by the critic usually have to do with the correct translation of a technical term, military rank, scientific units and quantities, etc.

However, it becomes apparent very soon that the greatest problems of the combination of literary and translation criticism that Katharina Reiss describes are present here as well. In a large portion of the reviews the judgement of the critic is limited to a mere statement that the translation is as good as was expected of a publishing house of this repute, or on the other hand, that the translator was “sloppy”, and the book “reads very poorly” as a result of that. This high frequency of non-specific criticism demands a specific pair of categories: Statement of Quality, and Statement of Lack of Quality.

37

Ikarie (since 2010 XB-1) - "Vivisektor" Statement Statement of Year Grammar Stylistics Terminology Translation of quality lack of quality Total

1990 1 1 1991 1 1 1 3 1992 2 3 4 1 10 1993 6 4 3 3 1 17 1994 1 5 2 8 1995 2 1 3 1 7 1996 6 12 7 3 6 1 35 1997 1 5 4 4 11 25 1998 3 7 3 3 6 1 23 1999 1 3 2 1 5 12 2000 4 2 1 10 1 18 2001 2 1 1 2 6 12 2002 1 1 2 1 5 2003 1 2 1 4 2004 1 3 1 4 3 1 13 2005 2 3 3 4 12 2006 1 5 6 2007 1 2 1 4 2008 1 1 1 2 5 2009 3 2 2 2 1 1 11 2010 1 1 1 3 2011 1 2 1 4 2012 3 6 9 2013 1 1 2014 1 1 2 2015 1 1 2 2016 1 1 2 Total 30 61 42 33 79 9

Fig. 2 – The number of uses of Reiss’ categories of linguistic components in

reviews in the section “Vivisektor” of the magazine Ikarie

The most frequent category based on Reiss’ criteria is that of stylistics. There are

61 reviews that comment on the book’s style in the target language, and almost every year of the magazine’s publishing has at least one. Some are quite complex for reviews that are limited to around half a page each, and include even examples of the faulty passages,

38 such as in Pavel Kosatík’s review of a book Out of Their Minds by Clifford D. Simak (In

Czech Pryč z jejich myslí, reviewed in Ikarie 11/1992: 57) 2. In it Kosatík complains about the overall lacking Czech rendition, weakened also by the quality of the translation. The translator very often chose general and abstract nouns and unnatural collocations. This is then followed by a set of phrases that, even though they are grammatically correct, feel unnatural and even meaningless. The author clearly understood the original, but his skill in Czech faltered.

The reviews are also not only negative, but also positive, as can be seen on the example of Ivan Adamovič’s review of Neil Stephenson’s Snow Crash (Sníh – Ikarie

8/2000: 53) 3. The translation is roughly as follows:

The Czech edition of the novel is lucky enough that it was taken care of by the respected and experienced translator Tomáš Hrách. He pampered the translation and went so much into detail as to make the lyrics of the rap song actually usable for a rap song in Czech, and even made no mistake in the technical terminology. What bothers me is maybe just that in some places the humour is slightly jovial, whereas the author’s rendition is rather dryer, but maybe this corresponds to the differences between both languages and cultures (translation mine).

From this excerpt it is clear that Adamovič is familiar with the many factors that influence the translation process. He comments on the fact that it is possible to produce a good text in the source language and still deviate from the original by changing the overall

2 Celkově kostrbatý dojem podporuje i kvalita překladu: jeho autor si jako stylista nebyl příl iš jistý a velmi často, měl-li volit konkrétní pojmenování, volil obecná abstrakta. Z desítek nešikovností vybírám namátkou „a pak jsem se pomalu a opatrně rozešel“ (ve smyslu vykročil, str. 22), „řešit na sílu“ (silou, 33), „kuželka světla“ (57), řeka se přede mnou nahrbila (65), „voda se do mne nasávala, ale já přesto nehnutě seděl“ (105), „snažil jsem si vzpomenout“ (112) atd.

3 České vydání románu má štěstí, že se ho ujal uznávaný a zkušený překladatel Tomáš Hrách. S překladem si vyhrál, a to až do takových detail, že text rapové písně se skutečně i v české verzi dá rapově zazpívat, a nedopustil se chyb ani v odborné terminologii. Vadí mi snad jen na některých místech větší míra žoviálnosti v humoru, který je v autorově pojetí poněkud sušší, ale možná to odpovídá rozdílům mezi oběma jazyky a kulturami.

39 tone and style of the work. In this case he goes as far as to acknowledge the influence of cultural background on the native languages of the author and the translator. Another noteworthy achievement is his avoidance of the frequent injustice criticised by many translatologists such as Lawrence Venuti – that translators are rendered invisible by the publishers and reviewers alike – by clearly stating the name of the translator.

The second most frequently used category, and one that is of greatest interest for this analysis, is terminology with 42 cases. As Jakub Marek says in his review of Frank

Herbert’s The Eyes of Heisenberg (Heisenbergovy oči – Ikarie 2/2009: 55) 4, the task of translating terminology is a difficult one, because “complicated scientific terms and made-up processes have to make sense, even though it is ‘just’ SF” (translation mine).

Focus on terminology is also not a domain exclusive to the fans, as was suggested by the original hypothesis of this thesis, since there are clearly reviewers who comment on the technical terms that have been translated unsatisfactorily. An example in case can be found in Jan Šimůnek’s criticism of John Brosnan’s The Sky Lords as translated by Jiří

Emmer (Vládci z nebes – Ikarie 10/1993: 59) 5. Šimůnek remarks that the translation of the term “Sky Lords” does not reach its true potential and is translated as a rather vague and sterile noble rank, instead of the conventionalised biblical term “Pán” as used for

God. This way, he says, the translator could enhance the term with a suitable religious and awe-inspiring value apparently used in the original mainly when the Lords deal with the settlers and aim to evoke in them precisely this feeling of subordination.

4 Čepici smekám nad překladem, jelikož komplikované vědecké termíny a vymyšlené procesy musejí dávat alespoň nějaký smysl, byť je to „jen“ SF, a to se české edici daří.

5 Nemohu si však odpustit jednu připomínku k překladu: Obrovské vzducholodě, občas ztotožňované se svými majiteli, figurují v názvu jako „vládci“, v textu vesměs jako „Nebeští Lordi“. Za vhodnější bych považoval označení „Páni“. Jsem toho názoru, že autor po užil v názvu i textu slovo „Lord“ z biblické angličtiny, používané tam, kde je v českých překladech Bible slovo „Pán“. Toto označení se pak lépe hodí zejména v těch místech románu, kde nositelé tohoto názvu jednají s osadníky a důsledně se v nich snaží vyvolat pocit podřazenosti a posvátné hrůzy. 40

Next on the scale of popularity with 33 mentions is the semantic category. This relates to the measure of how “correct” the translation is, based on how well the translator understood the original. This is one of the two linguistic categories that can be judged with what is close to objective distinction between right and wrong, even though to a lesser extent than Grammar. One of the reviews pointing out objectively wrong translations is Richard Podaný’s review of Lucius Shepard’s Life during Wartime (Ten válečný život – Ikarie 8/1996: 57-58) 6:

This review points out that even though the translation is better than the usual production of the publishing house, the Czech edition is far from perfect. He lists a mistranslation of what is probably an “unraided mound” in the original book, as well as a complete misunderstanding of a creative insertion of the infamous swear word into a name of a character, which is used in derisive way. Podaný expresses his abject horror at the way these two phrases were translated into Czech by mangled phrases that make little sense as they are, even without comparing their meaning to the original. These are said to be just some of dozens of such errors, but overall the reading is bearable.

One of the more elaborate, page-long reviews that sometimes appear as an opening segment of “Vivisektor” called “Kniha pod lupou” (lit. “A book under a magnifying glass”) also dedicates a portion of its space to translation. Ivan Adamovič scrutinises a cyberpunk novel Count Zero by Wiliam Gibson, and mentions several problems encountered frequently during a rushed translation process – not enough

6 Překlad nedosahuje „kvalit“ špičkových koniášských produktů, ale zrovna úchvatný taky není. Například „Nevytěžená hromada“ je ohavná už sama o sobě, když z ní je ale vytažen mayský nefritový pohár, je jasné, že jde o neotevřenou mohylu či hrob. Když si čtenář přečte výraz „David šoustající Mignollu“, zamrazí jej, k jaké bizarní tropické samohaně se to hrdina hodlá uchýlit. Uklidní se, když zjistí, že nejspíš jde o špatný překlad: „David fucking Mignolla“ mělo asi být správně „Ten sráč David Mignolla“. Podobných selhání by se dalo najít několik desítek, ale Pámbu zaplať aspoň za to, že celkový styl je snesitelný a překlad se dá číst.

41 attention to fixed phrases and figures of speech, misread original text resulting in misunderstandings, etc. (Hrabě nula – Ikarie 10/1997: 54) 7.

Adamovič also points out the necessity of consulting the original text to reveal any changes, even though no part of the translated text appears unnatural. This is necessary since some translators make their job easier by omitting some passages or translate too loosely, and the resulting text sometimes has a slightly altered mood, and sometimes the whole chapter loses its original point altogether. The mistaking of coordinate as a verb meaning “to command” and a noun meaning “position”, or mine as

“an ore-bearing underground structure” as opposed to mine as “belonging to me” thus make a significant difference when translating a sentence built around these words.

Grammar is the linguistic category listed by Reiss that is used the least frequently in “Vivisektor”, with 30 recorded uses, which is likely to be caused to some extent by the fact that mistranslations are easier to miss by copy editors than grammatical mistakes in the target language. As mentioned before, Grammar is of least importance to this analysis, but it is one of the first type of problems to be noticed by the critics. A well-argumented criticism involving grammatical mistakes is present for example in a review by Jaroslav

Jiran about Shale Aaron’s book Virtual Death (Virtuální smrt – Ikarie 10/1997: 56-57)8.

7 [Překlad se] nečte špatně a bez srovnání s originálem se zdá být i docela dobrý […] Pohled do originálu ale ukáže bohužel smutnější věci. Překladatelé si svou práci usnadňovali tím, že občas vynechali část věty a některé pasáže přeložili přímo špatně, někdy v nepodstatných detailech (pastries překládány jako vločky), jindy tak, že se změnil význam věty, případně pointa celé kapitoly. Když hrdinka blížící se k orbitální stanici říká, že chce mluvit s „někým z velení“, ve skutečnosti chce mluvit s někým nacházejícím se „v těchto koordinátech“ (at these coordinates). Často je nepochopen vtip výroku. Například místo „Pan Virek je občanem jednoho národa, sestávajícího s pana Vireka“ má být „pan Virek je jediným občanem národa sestávajícího pouze z pana Vireka“, místo nesmyslného „Nemohls nás zachránit oba“ má být „Mohls nám oběma ušetřit spoustu potíží“ (You could’ve saved us both a lot of hassle) a korunu všemu nasazuje věta „Vezměte si třeba Ashpoola, majitele dolů…“, která má znít „Vezměte si třeba starého Ashpoola, byl to můj krajan…“ (countryman of mine) .

8 Poslední ránu knize zasadil velice průměrný překlad. Opět přehršle zbytečných přivlastňovacích zájmen („spustil ruce ke svým kolenům“, „Stamen si propletl prsty svých rukou“, „olízla si své zakrvavené rty“), gramatické hrubky, interpunkce, dokonce i borde l v uvozovkách (často musíte sami dlouze zkoumat, co je a co není přímá řeč). Překladatelčin zoufalý souboj s mateřským jazykem však prohrává jako vždycky zejména čtenář=zákazník. 42

According to Jiran, the translator apparently struggled with nearly all aspects of the target language, including excessive use of possessive pronouns, spelling, punctuation, and a proper arrangement of quotation marks so as to make sense when decoding what is and what is not direct speech. But the ultimate defeated party, Jiran adds, is always the reader.

As far as the non-ideal categories of criticism relying on a mere statement are concerned, it is apparent from the table above that these categories became increasingly more common during the years of the magazine’s publishing (see Fig. 2). On the other hand, the number of reviews that contained a more specific translation criticism dropped substantially. Even journalists as reputable in local context as the previously-mentioned

Ivan Adamovič published reviews that did not go into much detail about the nature of the text as a translation (The Diamond Age, in Czech: Diamantový věk – Ikarie 9/2001: 58)9:

The translator Richard Podaný deserves at least a nomination for the SF translator of the year award for this work alone.

On the other hand, it must be mentioned that there were almost ten times more instances of positive non-specific criticism, that those of a negative one. This positivity would partially justify the lack of details as there is little to write about when the quality of translation is satisfying, short of repeating praise in each individual category. However, providing examples of a particularly praiseworthy solution does not require an extraordinary amount of effort and material to comment on, as proven by Kresta’s review of Neal Asher’s book The Skinner (Stahovač – Ikarie 1/2005: 45)10, where he simply

9 [P]řekladatel Richard Podaný si už jen za toto jediné dílo zaslouží přinej menším nominaci na titul SF překladatel roku.

10 K překladu by mohla stačit dvě slova: Petr Kotrle (čti: překlad vysoké kvality a čtivosti). Ale přeci jen k tomu něco přidám. Kniha je plná mistrně přeložených novotvarů a složenin, takže nezbývá než tentokrát smeknout s ještě větší úklonou, než obvykle.

43 provides information on at least in what word class to look for the particularly well- translated terms – coinages:

It would suffice to comment on the translation with mere two words: Petr Kotrle (i.e. a high-quality translation that reads very well). But I will still add something. The book is full of masterfully-translated coinages and compounds, so there is no other way than to tip my hat with an even deeper bow than usual.

The negative statements are actually fewer in number as time progresses, and ultimately, they are also the least often used method of commenting on the quality of the book’s translation with only 9 uses. The least verbose type is akin to what Šimeček employs in his review of Harry Harrison’s Make Room! Make Room! (Místo, místo! Více místa! – Ikarie 1/1996: 59)11:

When we add the fact that the translation is sloppy, we can but conclude that without this book there will be more Room! on your bookshelf.

Despite being predominately supplied by professionals, interaction with fans is present as well. Since December 1993, “Vivisektor” also hosts a fan chart of books that the readers loved and hated during the last month or two (Ikarie 12/1993: 57).

Furthermore, it once published a pair of reviews submitted by fans as well (Juta by Josef

Pecinovský – Ikarie 11/1991: 57). Both of them were focusing on the same Czech book, therefore no translation quality was mentioned, and no other fan-made review was ever published in this section of the magazine. There were, however, fan-submitted reviews in the following two sections.

11 Přičteme-li k tomu poněkud kostrbatý překlad, pak nelze než uzavřít, že bez této knihy vám zbude v knihovně vítané Místo!

44

3.1.2 Hvězdný tamtam

This section of Ikarie had been one of the original founding ones, appearing in the first issue and staying for years, before it began to fade out, first by being included only irregularly, and ultimately disappearing for good. Since this section deals with all types of letters sent in by the readers, and those are not always related to opinions on books or short stories, there is a very small amount of attention dedicated to the quality of translation in any form.

There are, in fact, only two letters published over the course of 26 years that comply with what is one of the original hypotheses of this thesis: that fans may be able to produce an extensive and well-argumented translation criticism, ideally placing emphasis on terminology. The first one by Jan Vinař (Ikarie 3/1992: 56) is focused predominately on what would classify as Reiss’ category of Semantic components. The author describes some of the mistakes in translation he has found in the translation of

Isaac Asimov’s Second Foundation (in Czech Druhá Nadace)12. He makes it clear, that he knows the book in original, which is something that places him immediately above

12 Rozhodně si paní Drhová po sobě svůj překlad nepřečetla o nic pečlivěji než překl adatelka prvních dvou dílů. Nečetl jsem celou knihu (znám ji v originále); to, co jsem letmo zaznamenal, mi stačilo. Nebudu se tu zabývat chybami, které jsou prostě směšné, jako radost válečného zpravodaje Turbora, že je zase „ve vzduchu“ (v éteru, str. 17 2), anebo otázka Pellease Anthora na str. 195: „Kde máte toho kontrolora…“ (míněn ovladač), ani Darrelova odpověď, že ovládání je „instalováno na místě“ (zablokováno). Soustředím se na chyby (pár z mnoha), které čtenáře skutečně pletou. Str. 72: S Galaxií se nic nestalo. Bail Channis neříká „je po hvězdách celé Galaxie“, ale „při hvězdách…“ Str. 75: Arkadiina „velká babička“ se – jak všichni víme – jmenovala Bayta. Arkadia byla její prababička (great grandmother). Str. 119: Nevím, kolik lidí žilo „na Poštolce V“ a kde to vůbec je. Arkadia mluví o obyvatelstvu Trantoru „za vlády Stannela V.“. Str. 131: „Mobs Riot před nadačním konzulátem“. Čtenář marně pátrá po tom, kdo to byl, pokud neví, že to anglicky znamená „davy protestují“. Str. 175: V bitvě o Quoriston nebyly síly Nadace „o hodně početnější“, ale naopak „o mnoho slabší“ (a přesto zvítězily). Str. 179: Lev Meirus vykládá Stettinovi, že není schopen bojovat, ačkoliv je vojensky v lepší situaci, než Nadace. Neříká tedy „všechna území jsou pro vás nepřátel ská“, ale „stojíte všude na území nepřítele“.

45 many professional reviewers who do not in terms of qualification for translation criticism.

He also differentiates between mistranslations that are “ridiculous” and have little impact on the overall meaning, and those that are essential for the understanding of the situation, such as a difference between “outnumber” and “be outnumbered”, a “great-grandmother” and “a grandmother that is great”, a failure to realise that “Mobs Riot” is a news title regarding civil unrest and not a name, etc. This systematic approach makes his criticism more elaborate than the majority of reviews in “Vivisektor”, even though no other letter analysing semantic components to such degree has been published in Ikarie again.

The other elaborate letter is a Terminology-focused analysis by Jan Vaněk Jr. based on a single mistranslation in Charles L. Fontenay’s short story Escape Velocity

(Úniková rychlost, published in full length in Ikarie 5/1996). It is needless to transcribe the whole letter here, since it can be found in the Appendix (Ikarie 8/1996: 49), and its excessive length can be summarised thus: the translator mistakes the square root of two in a formula used in calculating orbital velocities for a square of two (and repeats this once again further on). Vaněk then continues to list a series of implausible plot devices and entirely wrong presumptions used in the short story that Vaněk proves wrong by definition and by presenting aspects of orbital mechanics that are not taken into account by Fontenay. Ivan Adamovič then adds a commentary confirming that the guilt for the mistake in the formula is indeed the translator’s.

There are other letters that mention translation, such as the one sent to Ikarie by

Lukáš Helcl (Ikarie 10/1995:48)13 regarding Roger Zelazny’s Lord of Light (In Czech

Pán světla), but it succumbs to the same problem as Reiss condemns: the commentary is limited to “I admit the translation could be better…” and thus provides no information on what is wrong or what and how it could be improved. Another point he mentions in his

13 Připouštím, že překlad mohl být lepší, ale takového hodnocení si nezaslouží.

46 letter is his opinion that it is a proof of a low-quality criticism when the critics focus more on the visual appeal of the cover, than on the content.

A similar point criticising the critics can be found in Lubomír Jindra’s letter

(Ikarie 2/1992: 50)14. Apart from a list of illogical plot devices and incongruities found in the book Rambo II by David Morell, comparable to the previously mentioned letter by

Jan Vaněk Jr., he finds it questionable that most contemporary critics do not find the same things wrong with a book as the readers do, and he often sees that the critics like what the readers do not, and vice versa. This point is related to the contrast between fan- and professional-made translation criticism, but is at least debateable and not a subject pertinent to this analysis.

The contributors to “Tamtam” also include professionals, just as “Vivisektor” included fan-made reviews. In Ikarie 1/1992, several letters by writers were published, one of them by Ludmila Freiová, who argued that it is incorrect not to transform surnames of female writers and characters into the Czech female norm ending with “-ová” (1/1992:

58)15. This debate is a constant part of translated culture in Czech, since some claim it is only natural to transform them, while others oppose them saying it sounds unnatural in

Czech and this rule should be changed. In this case the latter is represented by one of the female members of the editorial board in her response to the letter16.

14 V současné době totiž dochází k tomu, že to, co se líbí lidem, se nelíbí kritikovi, a obráceně. Takoví kritici však podle mě nemají žádnou cenu.

15 Stále častěji čtu jména cizích autorek v nepřechýleném tvaru, i v Ikarii (Ursula Le Guin, Alice Sheldon). Nic proti tomu nemám, ba zdá se mi to náležitější. Nicméně podle českých pravidel se cizí ženská jména přechylují (Le Guinová, Sheldonová). A něco jen poněkud příbuzného: neskloňování křestních jmen cizích autorů (povídka Gianluigi Zuddase). Je to chyba, pořád ještě je to chyba. Co takhle povídka Ondřej Neffa?

16 Tažení proti přechylování cizích ženských jmen jsem zahájila záměrně, jso uc si dobře vědoma, že je to proti pravidlům pravopisu. Dokonce sama sobě připomínám Zděňka Nejedlého, který začal psát Husité s velkým H, ačkoli to bylo rovněž proti pravopisným pravidlům – ale on si prostě přál, aby se husité těšili větší úctě. Já jsem zase viděla hrůzu v očích zápaďáků, když viděli v Ikarii třeba „Charnasová“. Definitivně mě zarazil tvar „Tuttlová“ – ne, tohle si Lisa Tuttle od nás nezaslouží! – A tak jsem si řekla: jestliže se tohle pravidlo má někdy změnit, musíme vyvíjet tlak zdola. 47

3.1.3 Knihomorna

This section was originally conceived and compiled by Jaroslav Jiran to highlight the grammatical errors, mistranslations, typographical mistakes and other substandard features of books published on the local market. As he states in his foreword to the first edition, “the prices are rising, yet the quality of translation and editing often falls very much behind the value expressed in Czech Crowns.” (Ikarie 6/1996: 48, translation mine). It was to be supplied mainly by fans, who should send in whatever they find to be of note, and only when there is a lack of fan submissions should the staff fill up the remaining space with what was discovered by them.

The format of submissions was a short one. The information about the book should be included (author, book title, translator, editor, publishing house), the faulty passage – either the full sentence, or only the relevant set of words, accompanied by an optional, albeit preferred, commentary as to what the fan found wrong with it, what it should look like, how they felt about it, or even what it sounded like to them. A certain entertaining quality was often present, either derisive or joking. One such instance can be found in a contribution from the editor’s own archive regarding Stephen Donaldson’s The Gap Into Conflict - The Real Story: “The reader was ruined much sooner by the quality of the translation.” (Ikarie 2/1998: 48)17. In January 1999, an extraordinarily long list of errors made in the book by Brian

Lowry, The Truth is Out There: The Official Guide to The X-Files, translated by Lucie

Pilátová, was submitted to “Knihomorna” by Martin Klemsa, and published in a two- page-long special section “Malý knihomorňácký opravník pafakt X, aneb podivná literatura faktu” (a playfully creative name that translates roughly as “A small corrector of pseudo X facts, or a weird non-fiction literature”).

17 Donaldson: Skutečný příběh. Přel. Kateřina Bártů. Odp. red. neznámý. Classic And: Její hrozný odpor k jeho zvěrských vášním ji zcela ničil (str. 105) Čtenáře ovšem mnohem dřív zničila úroveň překladu

48

It contains over 60 mistakes following the format for the regular submissions.

They are divided according to chapters and consist of the examples of faulty segments and a commentary. They are ranging from misunderstood words, phrases, and faulty grammar to terminology (Ikarie 1/1999: 51-51)18.

There is, for example, a mistake in the distinction between two possessive pronouns that could be translated from “his”. The correct one (“jeho”) would designate

Mulder and the incorrect one (“svou”) would designate Krycek as the one who performs the work. Another mistake enrages Klemsa to the point of writing in capital letters, since this mistake is repeated multiple times in the book and in Klemsa’s list19. It remarks on the confusion between disintegration and gravitational attraction of a black hole. Further, the statement that natural energy can multiply black holes is quite ridiculous to him.

Since it first appeared in June 1996 it was appreciated by fans who kept sending their findings at a steady pace that lasted until the year 2000. That year saw only four issues with enough material to publish: February, May, June, and the last in November.

At that point it was clear that the fans are not sending enough material for the section to continue, even with the support of the staff’s own submissions. In his final foreword, Jiran expresses his chagrin at this state:

“The reason is the typical Czech indolence. I have confirmed this with several of my acquaintances who were missing it and asked about it. From what they said it was clear, that the state of books that are being published has definitely not

18 …záplava světel… (str. 130) Jenom jedno silné světlo, z jednoho zdroje (The original word is probably “Flood light” – Note mine)

Krycek oznámí Mulderovi, že se o svou práci zajímá. (str. 136) Ne o svou, ale o Mulderovu.

19 …stín je jako černá díra, znásobená díky komoře přírodní energií… (str. 181) NENÍ TO ŽÁDNÁ ČERNÁ DÍRA a NENÍ ZNÁSOBENA PŘÍRODNÍ ENERGIÍ! Dyť je to furt dokola. Stín rozkládá a nepřitahuje (což činí černá díra). A o nějakém znásobení černých děr nemůže být ani řeči.

49

reached the state when Knihomorna could afford to vanish, the books are still full of various nonsense and mistakes. […] It is not that you do not send us anything, you just send too little.” (Ikarie 11/2000: 46, translation mine)20

It must be mentioned, however, that despite its popularity with fans,

“Knihomorna” earned a considerably bad reputation among professional translators and journalists (Macek 2006: 79-80), who criticised mainly the exaggerated effort of fans (and also of the editor Jaroslav Jiran himself) to accompany the examples with a commentary as witty and derisive as possible, often crossing the line between criticism and childish insults and meaningless witticisms, and forfeiting constructive criticism for entertainment. This can be seen also from the passages cited above.

Another problem was using the examples with no context, and thus almost impossible to verify for anyone without direct access to the book and to the original, and the unwillingness of the section’s editor to do any changes to prevent such problems.

These objections were expressed for example by translators Michael Bronec, Jan

Kantůrek, and Petr Kotrle, who have published their responses to the misguided criticism in this section in the fandom-focused magazine Interkom (issues 5/1998, 6-7/1998, and

3-4/1999 respectively).

This was the last attempt at a section dedicated to fan-submitted critical material, and at one focusing on regarding translation quality as well. Since the year 2000 only

Vivisektor has continued to analyse books and look for mistakes in them.

20 Důvodem je klasická česká pohodlnost. Potvrdil jsem si to u něko lika známých, kteří ji postrádali a ptali se na ni. Z řeči pak vyplynulo, že stav vydávaných knih rozhodně není na takové úrovni, aby si Knihomorna mohla dovolit „zaniknout“, knihy jsou prý stále všelijakých nesmyslů a chyb plné. […] Ne že byste nepsali vůbec, ale teď píšete hodně málo. 50

3.2 Analysis of Web-Based Sources

Where the printed sources were represented by a single, albeit extensive source of material, spanning 27 years of publishing, the Internet is even more generous as a source of web pages. Their content, however, is so diverse and of such a wide scope – often not only SF, but all genres of literature and cinematography – that only a minority much smaller than in case of Ikarie is relevant.

Due to the immense variety of web pages all over the internet it is virtually impossible to list all of those dedicated to SF, literature, cinematography, translation criticism, etc. For this reason, only several examples of each will be presented in this analysis. They were searched for any submission relevant to this thesis and from these, representatives were chosen and commented on in the following subchapters.

3.2.1 Literary Web Pages

As the name suggests, this category includes web pages that focus on literature in general: book shops and literary critics. These include literary blogs featured at the book shop’s website, since these are not run by independent fans, but by employees. They are also written with a certain norm and ideal objectivity in mind, whereas personal blogs often reflect the blogger’s personality and mood, current trends and other subjective elements. Nevertheless, these are considered not to be professional translation criticism.

The main reason is the purpose and function of the texts, one of the criteria that

Reiss suggests as important to take into account. In other reviews the difference in function is negligible, since they are usually made with the intention of analysing the translation, either what is objectively correct or incorrect, or what the critic subjectively

51 likes or dislikes. With book shop reviews the main purpose is to promote and recommend, ideally without the risk of losing potential customers.

Some of the best-known local book shops include Knihy Dobrovský and Martinus.

Their web pages have a blog with a section dedicated to reviews, in order to inform their customers of the new books and their quality. Dozens of reviews have been published there since their inception, some of them analysing SF books, and some even dedicating a part to translation. There is, however, only one that combines a book belonging to the

SF genre, with the reviewer mentioning translation quality.

A review of Joe Hill’s The Fireman by František Mejstřík at Knihy Dobrovský’s blog is another of the series of literary reviews that comment on translation with a mere single sentence: “Some similes felt unnatural, which could be lost in translation”21

(Translation mine). It is another proof of Reiss’s observation mentioned in chapter 2.5.2, that the combination of literary and translation criticism often results in very brief and unsatisfactory statement of quality or lack thereof.

The counterpart of commercial literary blogs are purely literary web pages. Their submissions are usually objective and done in a professional way. Examples include iLiteratura.cz and Literarni.cz, but the latter focuses more on pure literary criticism, poetry and comics.

The only strictly literary web page containing SF translation criticism is iLiteratura.cz. This web offers a platform for the publishing of literary and translation criticisms by the public, and also enables filtering only of articles tagged “Translation

Criticism”, which is not common among such web pages. The disadvantage of such a web is that its contributors are more focused on the mainstream and “classic” genres of

21 Neseděla mi některá přirovnání, což se mohlo ztratit v překladu. 52 literature: classic novels, psychological novels, theoretical books, etc. SF is represented by a mere one example: a 2010 analysis of Anthony Burgess’s The Clockwork Orange.

As limited as the supply is, this is one of the most elaborate and lengthy work of translation criticism found during the research for this thesis. It is clearly done by a professional, which is supported by the fact that the author, Petr Janák, had this article in its longer and more verbose form published five years prior, in 2005, in a linguistic magazine Jazykovědné aktuality (Linguistic News) compiled by the Czech Linguistic

Association (Janák 2005: 8-25).

Janák calls his original article “The Functionality of Multilingualism in The

Clockwork Orange”22 and in the web article he derives from it, focusing on the ways the specific violent teen slang, Nadsat, is translated in the original 1992 translation, and in the remade 2005 edition. There is a clear difference between the connotations of Russian in English-speaking countries, and in the local, post-soviet area, and also between those and the use of mangled English in the Czech translation. This work is a prime example of a professional translation criticism done with regard to text function, cultural background, and Semantic components of text, which makes it one of the very few texts that fully comply with Reiss’s guidelines for translation critics.

A middle point between a commercial blog and a literary web page is a non- commercial literary blog. This type is represented by Schefikův blog. It is owned by Petr

Schefik Čapek, who writes most of the content himself. It is dedicated to books, comics, board games, and interviews with people involved in this domain. As opposed to personal blogs described below, this web page does not offer an insight into the blogger’s personal life, rather it focuses almost exclusively on literary reviews.

22 „Fungování vícejazyčnosti v Mechanickém pomeranči“ 53

As is the case with the rest of the literary web pages, not even here can one find more than one article related to both SF and translation criticism at the same time. This one focuses on Tommy Donbavand’s novel from the British Doctor Who franchise:

Shroud of Sorrow (Závoj smutku in Czech). Unlike the rest of literary pages, Schefik’s review of this book delves deeper into the book’s translation23:

If anyone was worried about how the translation of this book would do, they can be calm. Tomáš Oakland did a perfect job and thanks to the advice of the Doctor Who FanClub ČR association the fans need not fear any serious problems or deviations from the series. Furthermore, a pleasant surprise is the adaptation of the text itself to local conditions, where for example the names of the songs are translated as Czech folk songs. (Translation mine)

3.2.2 Discussion Forums

This type of web pages represents a space dedicated almost exclusively to fan submissions. A wide variety of forums exist on the internet, the most relevant include single-franchise forums (Doctor Who.cz forum), and multi-franchise forums, or forums focusing on a specific genre (SFF Ring – Fandom of SF and fantasy, with emphasis on television series and films).

The widest scope of all the forums reviewed in the analysis belongs to SFF Ring.

The main page directs visitors to news from the fandom, events, films and television series in general or in particular, literature, internet and computer-related topics, music, or simply random ideas of the users. The series have even their own dedicated sections,

23 Pokud se někdo obával, jak dopadne samotný překlad této knihy, může být v klidu. Tomáš Oakland vše zvládl na jedničku a díky radám sdružení Doctor Who FanClub ČR se fanoušci nemusí bát žádných vážnějších problémů, či odchylkám oproti seriálu. Příjemné je naopak přizpůsobení samotného textu našim poměrům, kdy například názvy písniček jsou přeloženy do českých lidovek.

54 with franchises such as Star Trek, Stargate, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, Grimm,

Fringe, Eureka, etc.

These sections dedicated to each individual series contain discussion threads that sometimes include subtitles and dubbing. The inquiries about subtitles were mostly related to when the next set, made by the web page’s own subtitling team, would be released, but sometimes the team would update their subtitles after new information about a certain topic was further clarified in subsequent episodes, requiring a change in the previous ones.

One such case was the general subtitles thread in the section dedicated to the series

Sanctuary. In it the fans ask if and how the subtitles get changed, when they receive an update to version 1.1 or such after release. A member of the subtitle team, posing under the username Halajda, responds with an example of a particular term used in various contexts throughout the series – Cabalis Nocturnum24.

It is a Latin-based term used in the series to describe a cult of antagonists, and was shortened and adapted to various contexts. In the response the subtitle translator lists three ways in which they have translated the term so far, “Cabalis”, “kabala”, and “sekta”,

24 Možná jste si povšimli, že v titulcích k 1x08 se hodně používalo slovo Cabalis. V zásadě se dá říct, že jsme dospěli k tomu, že když oni v orignále mluví o Cabalis Nocturnum (ať už používají jakýkoliv přídomek), do češtiny to budem překládat třemi variantami podle situace: 1. Cabalis – jednoduše zkrácení názvu, jako byste místo Vláda České republiky použili jen slova vláda. Je to kratší, tudíž se k tomu mluvčí v neformální řeči spíše uchýlí, a pořád všichni chápou o kom se mluví. Práve v titulcích k 1x08 se používalo hlavně Cabalis. Dokud nebude lepší ekvivalent, držel bych se ho. 2. kabala – Toto je provizorní verze, která (jak možná někteří vědí) souvisí spíše s judaismem a se Sanctuary toho mnoho společného nemá. Zmátlo nás, že herci skuteč ně často vyslovují -a na konci, i když podle scénáře tam není. Jelikož si ale nikdo dosud nestěžoval, soudím, že si tohoto scestného překladu málokdo všiml. Každopádně se mu budeme snažit spíše vyhýbat. 3. sekta – toto jsme používali zpočátku. Je to poněkud nepřesné, protože kabala je spíše klika než sekta, ale sekta se v textu a hovoru vyjímá lépe. Protože je ale nepřesné a navíc velmi obecné, budeme od něj postupně upouštět.

Mno... a jelikož jsem to vlastně ještě nikde nezmínil, tak překladatelská poznám ka: Cabalis Nocturnum – doslovně "úklady noci" nebo "politická klika noci". Cabalis v sanctuarské pseudo-latině znamená právě úklady, intriky, politická klika. Na volném překladu do češtiny zatím uvažuji. 55 explaining the difference in perception of each term. This shows a rare example of published translation self-criticism, having analysed one’s own translation, taken into account the broader context and syntax, and changed it in later versions accordingly.

Later in the thread one of the fans under the username Ashlák expresses their uncertainty at a translation of the endearment “Huggy-Bear” as “méďa Mucka” (lit.

Kissy-bear, though using an expressive and rather unconventional term)25. They also suggest an alternative “Méďa Pusík” (a name of a cartoon bear from a local magazine for children) or “Meďánek” (a less unconventional endearment). Another user called Sety replied with their own suggestion “Méďa mazlík” (lit. Cuddly Bear, combination of two purely conventional endearments)26. They, however, think that out of the suggested terms the one used originally in the subtitles is the best.

The official translation of the series’ name Sanctuary used on television is also discussed27. The one chosen by the translation agency SDI Sun Studio – “Svatyně”

(meaning “shrine”) – is not seen as fitting the original as well as the fan term “Útočiště”

(“shelter”) – the eponymous structure in the series is designed to offer shelter. The subtitle translator also mentions that the need of the dubbing to adapt the translation in order to

25 Měl bych malou připomínku k titulkům k první epizodě druhé sezóny. Jak Clara Willovi říká Huggy-Bear tak se mi moc nezdá to méďa Mucka. Nemyslíte, že by bylo lepší třeba Méďa Pusík nebo jenom Meďánek. Víte ono to zní trochu divně.

26 On je to spíš méďa mazlík,jak řekla Clara,ale méďa mucka je podle mě lepší.

27 -Pokud jsem to pochopil, tak s českým dabingem se Sanctuary bude překládat jako Svatyně. Hodlá náš překladtelský tým také začít používat Svatyni nebo zůstat u Útočiště? Útočiště se mi osobně zdá mnohem lepší.

-Tým hodlá zůstat u Útočiště... máme to už za poslední tři měsíce zavedené a navyklé, navíc to v kontextu seriálu dává perfektní smysl, dobře se nám to zarylo do paměti a zní to dobře. Naopak spíše by se mohli v SDI inspirovat u nás... Ne, teď vážně... Celkem mě zajímá, jak si v dabingu poradili se spoustou termínů, ale že bychom předělávali titulky jen proto, že si něco zkrátili o dvě slabiky, aby se jim to vešlo do pusy, to opravdu nehrozí...

56 fit the number of syllables spoken by the actual actor on screen is no reason to change their fan subtitles and divert from the time-tested translation that the fans are used to.

The forum users also delve into terminology and the scientific background of terms, although they do not consider the translation of terms, only the denoted concept.

There is a lengthy discussion in a thread called “loď na dostřel” over the nature of the common SF trope of a space ship not being “in range” of another ship’s weapons, with all users suggesting one explanation over another, ranging from atmospheric interference, plasma burnout, beam dispersion rate etc., but never commenting on the terms’ translation.

The forum has, however, become almost inactive in 2013. The last responses were posted in 2014, both remarking that the forum has, apparently, died completely. Three years later the forum has officially been terminated and its domain abandoned. The only method of access at this point is the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, which has copied most of the forum’s content, but it is not searchable and some pages are not archived at all. This means that most of the information is either difficult or impossible to find.

Similar problem has encountered another fan forum, the one belonging to the SF page FantasyPlanet mentioned below. Its domain is still active, even though the forum is plagued by advertising bots and the site lacks moderators who would clean it up regularly.

The last of its active users have declared the end of their activity in October 2017, having lost their faith in the forum’s future.

In its prime, the forum served as a platform for any topic related to SF and fantasy fandom and culture. It lacks a strict division into fandom- and franchise-related sections, rather separate topics that had many-year-long threads, with hundreds of replies. This, combined with the fact that the search page does not link to individual replies, but to the latest reply in the thread, makes the forum difficult to navigate and any research tedious.

57

The functionality of the forum at the time of writing of this thesis is limited even more by advertising bots that fill the forum with spam and slowed its loading considerably.

As was the case with the SFF Ring forum, there are also discussions regarding the aspects of SF technology, and similarly this does not result in discussions about its translation. What little translation-related topics are discussed is seen in one of the oldest threads called “Movies”. A user Erika complains about mistranslation in the movie

Paul28, where the name of the Nebula Award is translated as “Nebulova cena” instead of

“Cena Nebula”, and the fictional weapon known from the Star Trek franchise as a phaser, translated as “fázovač” instead of “fázér” or the original “phaser”.

Another such comment can be found in the thread “Seriály”. In it a user called

Kragh expresses his distaste at the translation of the fictional terminology of the series

Star Trek: Voyager, as aired on a local television channel “Prima COOL”29.

In English: Dubbing of STV bothers me, or rather its awful translation. The person who made the Czech version had no idea about the vocabulary used in the world of StarTrek, so I have to listen to abominations such as “časové pole”, “náčelník strojovny” etc. (Translation mine)

Other, similarly short comments involve the names of films and series. They are discussed in threads “Univerzální bestiář” and “Movies”, and include a superhero film

Kick Ass translated as Zabíjačka (Slaughter) in the subtitles and in the comics30. The translated term is met with mixed feelings from the aforementioned user Kragh regarding

28 [J]ednoduché, vtipné, příliš americké a s nechutně patetickým koncem. Bonus za Sighourney. Jen holt ten dabing a překlad. Za výraz „Nebulova cena“ a „fázovač“ bych někoho nakopala.

29 U STV mi vadí dabing, resp. příšerný překlad. Ten, kdo to „očeštinoval“, neměl o slovníku používaném ve světě StarTreku ani potuchy a tak musím poslouchat zrůdnosti typu „časové pole“, „náčelník strojovny“ apod…

30 “Když čtu *zabijačka*, vidím veřejnou popravu, tepelnou úpravu a snězení prasete, to vše v kombinaci s konzumaci alkoholických nápojů. Termín *Zabíj**e**čka* se mi zdá vhodnější .”

58 its connection to a village tradition of slaughtering a pig, in local context usually accompanied by general merriment and alcohol. Another case noted by Kragh is the strange translation of the title Ironclad aired by “Prima”, which was named in Czech strangely Železná kláda (lit. Iron log, probably used due to the similarity between the words “clad” and “kláda”)31.

Generally, it can be said that this forum is not one to supply lengthy submissions, whether related to translation or not. Brevity is the key, complemented by the fact that in its past the users would respond to each other several times per hour, working effectively as a chat room. As such it does not encourage elaborate reviews, rather a quick exchange of ideas.

The next example is a fan forum Doctor Who.cz forum, which serves fans of the

British SF television series Doctor Who and the franchise around it. Its features are comparable to SFF Ring forum, for example threads about the series itself, fan fiction, books, events, and conventions, and again, random thoughts.

As opposed to the two previously mentioned forums, this one is still active and visited frequently by its users, who are also apparently more interested in the translations within their franchise. One of the threads discusses the book Shroud of Sorrow which, was reviewed also on the aforementioned non-commercial literary web page Schefikův blog, and whose translation was consulted with some of the members of this forum. One of the points that Čapek praises on his blog– the adaptation of cultural concepts, songs, celebrities, etc. to local custom – is a source of controversy here, and proves that

31 Tak jsem se pobavil u TV Prima: Dávali upoutávku na film „Železná kláda“. Když jsem to zaslechl, podíval jsem se o co jde, protože to zní jako titul pornofilmu a byl jsem zvědavý odkdy Prima vysílá péčko. Dámy musím zklamat, žádný přerostlý extrémně tuhý penis tam není, HZHH. Jde o drsnou historickou rubačku „Ironclad“ (viděl jsem – docela slušná) a překlad je dost podivný i když to slovo rozdělíme. „Clad“ totiž opravdu ale opravdu není „kláda“. Překlad by spíše měl znít „Obložený železem“ nebo ještě lépe „Obrněný“. (aspoň podle Seznam-Slovník) 59 translation is often evaluated subjectively, and its criticism is sometimes a matter of personal preference.

A user named Tessuna finds the cultural adaptation to be funny, if not by the effect a joke in their mother language would bring, then at least by imagining it in the foreign context, e.g. a Czech folk song performed in a jazz club32.

Another user, Angi, in turn criticises the appearance of a pair of Czech comedians,

Kaiser and Lábus, as a substitute for a pair of original comedic figures, and the use of the name Božka (an expressive and sometimes vulgar form of a common Czech name

Božena) as one of the generic fake names used to address the protagonist33. In their opinion, cultural adaptation is an insult to the intelligence of the readership by presuming that they cannot find an explanation should they not understand the original, unaltered name.

Another controversial point they find, one related to terminology, is the translation of “sonic” as a noun denoting the signature tool of the protagonist, a sonic screwdriver.

It is translated as “sonáč”, which is an extremely expressive form reminiscent of the language of teenagers. Eleven users have commented on it altogether, four of them saying

32 [P]řeklad se mi moc líbil. Příběh spíš průměrný, ale spoustě věcí, takovým těm drobným narážkám a vtípkům, jsem se smála... A jazzová verze písně Šly panenky silnicí...

33 Překlad - sonáč mi trhal oči mnohem méně, než jsem čekal. Co mi vadilo DALEKO VÍCE je to stejné, co mi vadí na českém dabingu - že si překladatelé ( neberte osobně, překladatelský týme), myslí, že jsme takoví kreténi, že nám musí vše dát do Českého ekvivalentu, jinak to nepochopíme. Příklady - "Kaiser s Lábusem" Já opravdu silně pochybuju, že v originále byli dva policajti přirovnáni ke Kaiserovi s Lábusem. Díky titulkům člověk může v originále slyšet, co postavy řekly doopravdy. Buď to pochopím a pobavím se, nebo to nepochopím VYHLEDÁM SI O CO ŠLO, dovzdělám se a pobavím se stejně tak. Kdežto z "Kaisera s Lábusem" se nepobavím, ale akorát vytočím. To stejné s tím, že Doktorovi říkali všeljak a jeden víkend dokonce Božka. Božka? Obecně nejsem zastáncem překladu jmen.. (výjimka zeměplocha). To mne fakt dokáže naštvat.. na základě čeho se rozhodujete, jak moc jsou čtenáři blbí aby něco pochopili, nebo nepochopili? A proč jim berete tu radost z pochopení/nalezení nepochopeného? Asi proto, jak už tady bylo psáno - knížka je až moc cílená na děti. 60 that they have nothing against the term, and six found the term extremely strange and irritating. Only one user, Kapsa Dan, really liked the term.

Terminology is in general a popular topic here, even in conjunction with its translation. A user called Zusp in the same thread regarding Shroud of Sorrow comments on the inconsistency in translating some terms into Slavic-based words, while others are only adapted English words. They express that not only is uniformity more natural, Slavic words also sound better to them34. On the other hand, a user Lososmaster comments on two different occasions in threads “Nejoblíbenější společník” (favourite companion)35 and “DW Divadlo” (DW Theatre)36 that they find the original terms, with both pronunciation and spelling maintained, to be the most pleasing to them.

In the former case they prefer not to adapt the Czech spelling to mimic pronunciation in English, which is a trend common for loanwords. In the latter they explain that the name of the villain, Master, should not be translated as “Vládce” (used in official translations on television), because it does not reflect the whole nature of his original name with all the nuances and associations it has in English. They also list possible translations in Czech, but state that neither fits the role completely and it should be kept in its original form to reflect its complexity and “untranslatability”.

34 Jestli jde o překlad tak mě sonáč ani tak nevadil, jako spíš manipulátor vortexu. Proboha když už překládáte věci jako: kyberlez, náhodník, vládce atd… je to vážně takový problém přeložit to úplně česky jako manipulátor časového víru. (Podle mě to zní i líp)

35 A strašně mi nesedí, že se to v češtině píše Brigadýr. Já bych nechal anglickou verzi a pokud přeložit, tak Brigádník, ale to taky není nic moc.

36 Prosím neříkejte Masterovi Vládce, vůbec to nedává smysl. Vládce se jmenuje jen proto, že by v díle The Sound of Drums znělo divně to přirovnání – já jsem váš pán a vládce (I am your lord and master). Master se nedá jednoznačně přeložit do češtiny, protože je to dost komplexní jméno – vlastnost, a na to není jednoznačný překlad. Nejvíc se tomu asi blíží Mistr (to nezní moc zle), Pán (to zní spíš honosně, což Master není) a nebo ten Vládce (ale nad svými sluhy nevládne). Nejjednodušší je mu prostě nechat původní jméno THE MASTER.

61

3.2.3 SF Web Pages

This category includes web pages run by a team of professionals, journalists and reviewers, who publish their articles there as if it were a magazine or a newspaper. As it was mentioned before, these articles usually have a comment section below them, which is used by fans to discuss the topic further. Such web pages include Sarden and

FantasyPlanet. Sarden, despite being one of the longest-running local web pages of this sort, offers little in terms of translation criticism, focusing mostly on literary aspect of reviews, accompanied by news, interviews, etc. The only two reviews that mention translation are by Jiří Halama (reviewing Jack McDewitt’s novel Chindi) and a reviewer writing under the pseudonym Hanina (Ben H. Winters – World of Trouble), however both only state that the translation has “nothing to criticise”37, and is “great as usual”38, respectively.

As far as FantasyPlanet is concerned, it seems to have a linguistically sensitive audience writing in its comment section. For instance, it houses a lengthy discussion between professional translators and SF fans: the translation of Star Trek’s terminology of fictional inventions and futuristic science theories. Even though the original hypothesis of this thesis claims that it is the fans who comment on the terminology, this discussion and the involvement of translators prove that it is not limited to them.

The problematic translation of terminology in Star Trek has been mentioned even in Ikarie 9/200539. Milan Pohl in his review of Peter David’s novel Imzadi mentions the

37 všechny McDevittovy knihy do češtiny přeložil Petr Kotrle a jeho překladům nelze nic vytknout

38 Překlad Miroslavy Polové je opět skvělý.

39 Došlo samozřejmě ke sladění některých výrazů s terminologií, která se v průběhu let prosadila a osvědčila nejlépe: z „velitele“ Rikera se stává komandér, ze Základní poučky je Základní směrnice a názvy všech lodí jsou vráceny do své anglické podoby (skloň ování bohužel místy zůstalo neupraveno). Většina ostatních změn je pouze kosmetického rázu, některé podle mě nutné nebyly, ale nové knize prospěly. 62 need to adjust for example the translations of ranks and functions of the personnel on spaceships, the name of the basic legislative text, the Prime Directive, or the avoidance of translating ship names into Czech.

The discussion on this web page, however, predates Pohl’s review by three years

(July 2002) and spans two separate articles by a user called Leian. In her own words, she has worked on the translation of several episodes of the series Star Trek: Voyager, and thus speaks from experience. Her first article covers a novel from Star Trek: The Next

Generation series by John Vornholt Masks, which has trouble with ranks, as mentioned by Leian40:

The traditional problem of The Next Generation novels published by Laser is their complete chaos in ranks. I believe that some people may find this as nothing substantial for the story. And I may be wrong and Laser has a system in it, but I personally do not think so. Pardon me, but since Riker is at one moment “komandér” (meant as a rank) and at the other “velitel” (meant as a function) without any clear reason… (Translation and parentheses mine)

Leian also mentions that another publishing house, Netopejr, has a systematic approach to terminology and follows a strict internal dictionary they have established.

She has also attempted to help Laser find a system in the translations by sending them a similar table of terminology, but was rejected rather rudely.

In order to warn the public and, by extension, the publishers, she has written an article “Problematika překladu Star Treku” (On translating Star Trek). In this extensive article she explains the distinction between the rank system in Star Trek, based on

American Navy ranks, and the Czech system, which has no naval ranks, because it has

40 Tradičním problémem Laseru u TNG románů je jejich naprostý zmatek v hodnostech. Věřím, že některým lidem to nemusí připadat jako něco zásadního pro příběh. A možná se také mýlím a Laser v tom jasno má, ale mně osobně to tak nepřijde. Promiňte, ale když bez zjevných příčin a souvislostí je Riker jednou komandér a jednou velitel…

63 no Navy. She then uses a set of tables demonstrating the conventional translations of ranks used in military texts, and followed in the television series.

She also points out the distinction between a rank and a function, since a rank is a level of military hierarchy, while a function is more of a post or a job. Another aspect of translation is the need to adapt the dubbing in order to synchronise the lip movement of the actor on screen and the length of a translated word pronounced by the voice actor.

This has affected for instance the signature propulsion technology used on the series’ spaceships41:

In dubbing, the Czech words must fit to the words spoken by the character. This cause a certain unpleasant change regarding the warp drive, and everything that is warp-something. Discussions whether it should be only “warp” or “warpový” (using an adjective suffix) have taken place before. But then there was a situation in dubbing, where this suffix -ový/-ová/-ové has made the phrase too long and the voice actor, in a situation where the character says “warp”-something, would not say “warpové”-something. (Translation and parentheses mine)

This sort of discussion has been mentioned above regarding the series Sanctuary and Doctor Who, where the forum users were speculating as to whether to change the terms based on dubbing, and whether to adapt them to Czech loanword conventions. Even here has the conversation continued, making use of the comment section below.

A translator Viktor Janiš, famous for his SF and other literary translations, expresses his opinion42 that the warp drive should be translated using a meaningful Czech

41 V dabingu prostě musí česká slova sednout na ta, která říká postava. Kvůli tomu jsme také zažili jednu nepříjemnou změnu týkající se warp pohonu a prostě všeho, co je warp -něco. Už dříve se diskutovalo, zda má být jen warp nebo warpový. Pak ale nastala v dabingu situace, kdy tato koncovka -ový/á/é už spojení moc prodlužovala a dabér by ve scéně, kdy postava říká warp-něco neřekl warpové-něco.

42 Jde o prachobyčejnou transkripci, která českému čtenáři vůbec nic neřekne. Zatímco anglické warp je výrazně polysémní (znamená kroutit, bortit, deformovat, též přitahovat loď /za provaz/), v češtině je warp jen shluk nicneříkajících hlásek, které si divák ex post facto spojí s „takovým tím motorem ve Star Treku“. We are not amused.¨ 64 word, since the word “warp” in English has a meaning of its own, whereas in Czech it is

“nothing but a bunch of meaningless sounds that the audience will ex post facto associate with ‘that kind of engine in Star Trek’.” (Translation and italics mine.) A user called

Dimik responded43:

“WARP” is more than a simple epithet. It is a name of a whole (pseudo)scientific theory and technical fields based on it. Since “WARP” technology is studied by countless (pseudo)technical books, using an artificially translated more Czech term would be the same as coming up with equivalents for “SIM card”, “stealth”, or “quark”. “Warp” is fully declinable and alterable, its use as “warp pohon” is more a matter of technical jargon.

Another user called Přemek Houžvička encouraged Janiš rather rudely to come up with a better solution, while Jan Dvorak insisted on the benefit of intelligibility, since having a meaningful Czech word would look strange44. A user named Luke then ended this branch of the conversation with an observation that “warp” is understood around the world and in future it is possible the whole planet would use a single, universal terminology, that will most likely not be Czech45.

43 „WARP“ je vic nez jen obycejny privlastek. Jde o oznaceni cele (pseudo)vedecke teorie a na ni zalozenych technickych oboru. Vzhledem k tomu, ze technolgii „WARP“ se zabyva nespocet (pseudo)odborne zamerenych knih, bylo by umele naroubovani nejakeho češtějšího prekladu stejne, jako vymýšlet ekvivalent pro „sim karta“, „stealth“ nebo „kvark“. „Warp“ je jinak plne sklonovatelny i prechylovatelny, jeho uzivani ve forme „warp pohonu“ je spise veci odborne hantyrky.

44 Kontinuita prekladu je sice pekna vec, ale dulezitejsi je srozumitelnost. Nebo byste tu opet chteli mit tvrdohlavce, vzdusne zamky (air locks), a rotaci („They´re warping“ – „Oni rotuji“) ? Ja myslim ze ne

45 Warp je podle mě dobrý použít,protože z něho v podstatě vychází celá tahle(zatím) teorie, v jednom z významů v překladu slova warp je zbortit a právě při warpu se v podstatě bortí okolní prostor,proto taky Gene Roddenberry použil tohle slovo,vemte si že když to přeložíte nadsvětelný motory,bude tomu sice každej potom u nás rozumět,ale nemyslíte že bysme se měli taky učit to čemu nerozumíme a používat slovo Warp kdyz tomu v podstatě rozumí celej svět,a jednou se bude muset používat jedna terminologie pro celou planetu a nejen ta naše,pokud se jednou nebude mluvit všude česky 65

Another set of comments was focused on the translation of ranks. Leian in her article claims that the rank “captain” is translated into Czech for both genders as the same term “kapitán”46. A user called Hanato disagrees and states that it is used differently for male and female officers: “kapitán” and “kapitánka” respectively, even in today’s army47.

He is then supported by Jan Vaněk Jr.48

The user Dimik also comments here, stating that the term “chief” should not be translated universally as “náčelník”, since this is reserved for use in non-officer ranks, while as a function “chief of security” this should be translated as “velitel bezpečnosti”49.

Leian disagrees, stating that they need to distinguish between a rank and a function, and offers to clarify this to them via e-mail. Dimik then insists he is not mistaken and he understands the distinction, but this is where this line of conversation ends. This would suggest that it is rare to find a comment thread that results in a creative suggestion of improvement. Instead the prevalent ending to such conversations is abrupt, with the participants having lost interest in continuing, or simply having forgotten about it due to ling intervals between responses.

46 Tak tedy hodnosti i v případě žen zůstávají neměnné. Není kapitánka, poručice či snad praporčice. Mně osobně se kapitánka nelíbí, ale to asi ten důvod nebude. Ve Star Treku je prostě kapitán i žena (a tato tendence je už i v naší ar mádě). Dalším důvodem je, že kapitánka je o slabiku delší a dabing je za každou slabiku méně vděčný.

47 No cetl jsem tu problem se sklonovanim v hodnostech, zda kapinan, ci kapitanka a potom tu byl naznak ze v ceske armade se to kloni ke kapitanovi, i kdyz je to zena. Tak to je spatne. Jelikoz jsem vojak, tak bych to mel vedet. Uz od roku 89 (predtim fakt nevim) je vojak zenskeho pohlavi v hodnosti kapitana kapitankou. A ted v roce 02 vysel novy zakladni rad a porad tak zustava kapitanka kapitankou, takze nevim…

48 Zrovna jsem chtěl říct totéž, i když jsem byl vojákem jen do loňska (duben vládne!) A ZŘ s přílohou o přechylování hodností, které jsme měli, pocházely snad ještě z hloubi 80. let (po několika úpravách přelepením). Ale i překladatelé, kteří se tím o ficiálním slovníkem ohánějí, dávají přednost shodě podmětu s přísudkem ve stylu „výkonný důstojník poručík Harringtonová byla velmi krásná“.

49 Wesley nemuze byt kormidelnik – helmsman, jelikoz takova funkce v TNG neni. Je „kon“ anglicky „conn“, coz je zkratka z „flight control officer“ – „dustojnik letove konroly“.“Cheif of security“ se IMHO spravne preklada „velitel bezpecnosti“, zatimco „nacelnik“ se pouziva pro oznaceni nedustojnicke hodnosti „chief“ (napr. „chief petty officer O´Brien“). 66

3.2.4 Personal Blogs

The last category of web pages analysed in this thesis are the personal blogs. These are designed to offer their owners an outlet for anything they might feel the need to express, some serving as a diary, some as a platform for journalism, or a place to publish reviews. Literary and cinematographic enthusiasts are a frequent type of bloggers, writing down their opinions about the latest work of fiction they have read or seen.

One of such enthusiasts is Aneta Čižmáriková, a Slovak blogger who publishes reviews on her blog “Riddick’s Realm”. Her reviews are done on a professional level, which is supported by her participation in “Soutěž recenzentů”, a 2011 competition held by FantasyPlanet in order to choose the best amateur reviewer and award them with a prize, as well as publish some of their reviews. Her review of Miroslav Žamboch’s

Hitman, Anne McAffrey’s The Dolphins of Pern, and others earned her praise from several users in the comment section, as well as a 13th place out of 51 as per the jury of professionals.

Out of her reviews there are two that combine SF and translation criticism: The first is the review of a novel The Passage by Justin Cronin. In it Čižmáriková criticises the translator’s exaggerated use of antiquated and stylistically inappropriate vocabulary50.

According to Čižmáriková, the translator uses antiquated words, despite elsewhere being clearly capable of using modern expressions. Later she criticises also their repeated use without the need to use any of their numerous synonyms. Another point

50 Nechcem byť elitársky snob a nežiadam ani hip-hopový slang, božeuchovaj, ale fanúšikovia hororov aj trilerov sú už zvyknutí na modernejší jazyk. Milan Kopecký sa síce narodil v roku 1984, no podľa toho čo mi predviedol v Priechode, by som ho tipovala skôr na vyslúžiléh o docenta z Jazykovedného ústavu Ľudovíta Štúra SAV. Jednoducho nechápem - keď dokázal v správnej chvíli použiť slovo "zasratý" a v dialógoch nájdete dokonca spojenia "jak hovado" a "seriem na to", prečo to ostatné muselo byť písané ľúbozvučnou slovenčinou spred pol storočia? Nenazdajky, akomak, prichodilo, zaraz, šteblík, črienka... kde zostali zrazu, trochu, zdalo, hneď, priečka či rukoväť?!

67 mentioned in this review was the use of the acronym RPG for a rocket-propelled grenade, which is a military designation generally not known to laypeople. However, the translator does not explain it anywhere and the reader is left to search for it on the internet, should they wish to know, what is used in the story.

In the second review, one regarding Pittacus Lore’s I Am Number Four, she finds it wrong that the translator has used the phrase "mal asi meter osemdesiattri" (lit. he was about a metre and eighty-three centimetres tall) as a translation of “he was about 6 feet tall”51. This number, Čižmáriková says, is unnaturally specific to be accompanied by an approximation “asi”, rather it should be rounded up or down to the order of five (185) or ten (180).

51 Za prekladateľský kiks Patricka Franka považujem formuláciu "mal asi meter osemdesiattri". Ak si prevediete tento údaj do stôp, ktoré používajú v USA, zistíte, že je to 6. Čiže v originálnom texte muselo byť napísané "meral asi 6 stôp". Avšak urobiť jednoduchú konverziu a otrocky ju preložiť nutne vedie k takejto lingvistickej i logickej chybe. Veď ak niekto meria "asi", bude údaj zaokrúhlený logicky do podoby "asi 180 cm", prípadne 185, a nie "asi 183". Ak uvediem presný údaj, nepotrebujem slovíčko asi, naopak, ak použijem "asi", neuvediem presný údaj. Nabudúce sa možno dočkáme aj vyjadrenia "meral asi 182,88 centimetra" 68

4. Results of the Analysis

Having analysed the sources of SF translation criticism, it is now possible to draw conclusions about its state. The original hypothesis, that SF fans, thanks to the scientific insight they are reputed for, are capable of producing professional-quality translation criticism, while focusing especially on terminology, has not been confirmed in its entirety.

Proofs have been found that there are commentaries regarding terminology submitted by the fans (such as Star Trek discussed on FantasyPlanet or Doctor Who on the respective Doctor Who forum), and that the fans are capable of writing elaborate criticism, analysing the problematic passage from multiple perspectives, both linguistic and cultural, and even offering a more suitable variant (Aneta Čižmáriková and once again, FantasyPlanet and Doctor Who forum users). The problem is that these are a minority as compared to the vastly outnumbering majority of fans who disregard the nature of their favourite franchise as a translation, or simply choose not to comment.

The latter seems to be a substantially numerous group, and it has been noted by

Ivan Adamovič in a response to a fan letter submitted to “Hvězdný tamtam” (Ikarie

3/1996: 49) analysing a short story by Ray Nelson. In the letter, Stanislav Hošek thinks about the nature of SF fans and communities, and their future, which Adamovič appreciates with certain regret52:

You are right, SF fans are thoughtful creatures, but mostly non-communicating and passive. This is why it happens rarely that we are sent a letter where someone thinks as deeply about a short story as you do, rather it does not happen at all.

52 Máte pravdu, scifisté jsou tvorové přemýšliví, ale vesměs nekomunikativní a pasivní. Proto se nám nestává často, že by se někdo v dopisu dokázal tak jako vy zamyslet hlouběji nad nějakou povídkou, ba nestává se nám to vůbec. Třeba alespoň váš dopis povzbudí jiné, ať už k reakci na výše řečené, nebo k jinému komentáři. 69

Maybe at least your letter spurs others into action, be it to respond to what you said, or to another commentary. (Translation mine)

It is a pessimistic fact that a magazine such as Ikarie, publishing for nearly three decades at the time of writing of this thesis, with likely thousands of readers at any given time, has not managed to gather enough letters from fans to sustain a fan-mail section for more than 3 years without interruption. Despite the efforts to revive fan participation and use it for public service and improvement of local translation quality (with similarly short run, and questionable and controversial results), the activity of fans, let alone their reviews, was never visible after the year 2000 in this magazine.

The internet sources offer a greater room for fan submissions than printed sources.

The greatest amount of elaborate criticism can be found on personal blogs and discussion forums, such as Riddick’s Realm, SFF Ring, and Doctor Who forum. These contain the most contributions towards confirming the original hypothesis. There are several discussion threads on the forums that comment on translations and terminology, but it is still a minority, even among other similarly avid fans.

Another observation that can be made, based on the reviews published in Ikarie and XB-1’s “Vivisektor” and on the webs Sarden, and Knihy Dobrovský, is that a distinction must be drawn between professional literary criticism and professional translation criticism. Literary critics tend to disregard the translation quality of a foreign work of fiction published on local market, and should they evaluate its quality at all, they resort to general statements that the translation is “good” or that it “reads well”. This demonstrates that Reiss’s complaint about this phenomenon is justified. Over time, the number of overly general translation criticism published in Ikarie was just as high as the number of specific reviews, if not higher. Also, the positive general statements outnumber the negative ones greatly, which could be ascribed to the fact that individual mistakes

70 stand out, whereas a smoothly written translation does not let one notice the individual well-translated parts.

The high number of non-specifying reviews and the lack of detail in them would imply that the distinction between a translation criticism present in a review by a professional literary critic is similar to a translation criticism written by a fan. This area, however, is the only one where it can be said that professional and fan-made criticism is comparable, as per the original hypothesis. Informed fans producing elaborate criticism following Reiss’s and House’s recommendations are even more outnumbered by the fan- made literary reviews with mere statements of translation quality than it is with professionals. In short, professional-like fan criticism does exist, but is extremely rare.

This is also supported by the fact that even if a multi-perspective discussion about a translated term does occur, its result is rarely a productive one. Should any suggestion to improve the translation be made at all, it is usually either disregarded, denied and disliked, or buried under other suggestions. Such discussions usually end with loss of interest of participants, not with finding a solution.

The final observation made during the research for this analysis is the decreasing interest in the media publishing SF criticism in general. Discussion forums SFF Ring and

FantasyPlanet forum that focus exclusively on SF and fantasy fandom are now abandoned, the former having been shut down completely. Doctor Who forum still survives and is active, but the majority of its content is submitted by roughly a dozen users, sporadically assisted by less frequent visitors. Many magazines that have attempted to publish on local market have been unsuccessful (Nemesis, Ramax) or have lasted for several years and recently ended their publishing activity (The Magazine of Fantasy &

Science Fiction). This would suggest that SF Fandom is not as prosperous, or less

71 pessimistically, that fan contribution to public media, including fan-made criticism, is a phenomenon in decline.

The possible hypotheses attempting to explain this decline are numerous. It could be the increasing dominance of the English language, resulting in a higher production of more quality translation, or an audience more used to seeing English phrases and thus not seeing them as mistakes anymore. It could be the growing popularity and subsequent commercialisation of the SF genre, flooding the market with so many new titles as to effectively deny criticism due to overabundance of titles to evaluate, and variants of translation to choose from. Criticism would thus be useless because the readers could choose something else instead of criticising the faulty product. Moreover, another reason for the decline in fan-made criticism could indeed be the aforementioned “non- communicativeness and passivity” suggested by Adamovič, having spread from fan-mail to submissions of any kind, with audiences wishing only to consume content and not create it themselves. Proving or denying these hypotheses would, however, require an extensive social or market analysis, which is not in the purview of translation studies.

72

5. Conclusion

This thesis focused on the analysis of printed and internet sources of fan-made and professional translation criticism of science fiction literature and cinematography. Its aim was to prove or disprove the hypothesis suggesting that fan-made translation criticism of

SF is comparable to professional one, especially where terminology is concerned. This hypothesis was formulated based on the observation that SF fans are reputed to comprise of more prominent science and technology enthusiasts than fans of mainstream genres of popular culture. They, along with fantasy and computer game fans, show a high tendency to organise conventions, cosplays, role-plays, and other high-immersion community events, which are not as popular with fans of other genres.

SF has gained popularity with local readers as a non-mainstream literature that was on the outskirts of legality in the Communist era. Translations from abroad were scarce, since contact with the Western way of thinking was undesirable, which resulted a spread of underground self-printed literature. After the fall of Communism, local market was open to western SF and the government was no longer opposing the spread of SF publishing, related media, and fandom activities. But since the newly booming western

SF market was filled with translations of varying quality, a need for translation criticism was soon apparent.

This development was, and continues to be, also a subject of studies, mainly from within the fandom itself, and the academics that belonged to it. The theoretical framework for this work was inspired by such theoretical analyses of local SF, media, and fandom by Ivan Adamovič, Ondřej Neff, Jaroslav Olša, Antonín K. K. Kudláč, and Jan Macek, and a recent diploma thesis on a related topic, an analysis of translator perception by fandom, by Hana Šimečková. The criteria for translation criticism were then based on translatologists Katharina Reiss, Juliane House, and Jitka Zehnalová.

73

The selected printed sources were limited to the magazine Ikarie, which, along with its successor XB-1 of different name and publisher but ran by the same people in the same direction, form the longest running magazine focusing on SF and fantasy on local market. It began publishing in 1990 and continues to do so still at the time of writing of this thesis, 27 years later. Its relevant content consists of three sections dedicated to professional reviews (“Vivisektor”), fan-mail (“Hvězdný tamtam”), and mistakes from books discovered by readers (“Knihomorna”).

Web-based sources were represented by literary web pages iLiteratura.cz, the blog of Knihy Dobrovský, and Schefikův blog, discussion forums SFF Ring, FantasyPlanet forum, and Doctor Who blog, SF-focused web pages Sarden and FantasyPlanet, and a personal blog Riddick’s Realm. The internet houses a near-endless supply of web pages, many of them related to SF and translation, but they are also frequently difficult to navigate, unsearchable, or abandoned. For this reason, the web pages listed here are not a complete overview of relevant online material but a representative sample of the most popular web pages or those referenced in them.

The analysis revealed, that the original hypothesis was not confirmed, the situation is, however, more complex than a simple disproving. There is no dominating tendency to produce elaborate and coherent criticism in the SF fandom, but there are exceptions. A minority of linguistically and scientifically educated fans, or those that are simply interested in these fields without formal education, submit more elaborate pieces of criticism than the majority of their counterparts. Examples of this can be found on the

Doctor Who forum and on Riddick’s Realm web pages, and in several letters submitted to

Ikarie and XB-1’s sections “Hvězdný tamtam” and “Knihomorna”. These fan critics are, however, more anomalies and exceptions to the rule. The majority of fans simply wishes to not engage in public criticism, and instead wait passively for others to produce content

74 for them to consume. Other fans even disregard the nature of their favourite texts as translations at all.

Professional critics of SF are also divided in a similar way. There are some who judge literature and cinematography from a perspective of translation, adhering to criteria set by Reiss and House and producing elaborate reviews with examples of what is laudable and what is not. The majority, however, either choose not to comment on this aspect, or to remark simply that the translation is “fluent” or “reads like an original”.

These cases are mentioned by Reiss as one of the grave problems of today’s translation criticism of works of fiction. The results of this analysis prove her complaint to be justified.

Even though one could argue that in order to enjoy a book or a television series it is not necessary to know of its linguistic background. This passive and consumerist approach, however, relies on translators producing high-quality translations, and on corrections being carried out whenever mistakes appear in published material. This cannot be achieved to full potential without translation criticism. And the effectiveness of criticism requires a comprehensive theoretical and practical set of criteria for what to focus on when evaluating.

Stating that a translation is good or bad may be enough for readers who wish to know whether to buy a certain book or not, also some translators are satisfied on hearing that their translation was “good”. But knowledge of what specifically is a good or bad choice is essential for improvement and for learning from one’s mistakes.

As was demonstrated by the analysis, SF translation criticism is not without problem, and especially the fan-made variety. This is supplemented by the fact that the fans themselves are losing interest in the media that publish it. Discussion forums are abandoned, magazines cease to publish, or their sections are discontinued due to a lack

75 of fan submissions. It can be deduced from this analysis that fan-made translation criticism of SF is a phenomenon in decline. Several hypotheses were formulated in the final chapter, ranging from general passivity of SF fans to overall increase in the number of local English speakers. Their verification, however, is outside of the domain of translatology and remains a subject for further studies.

76

6. References

6.1 Primary Sources of Criticism

Printed Sources

Ikarie: Měsíčník science fiction. 1990-2010. Prague: Mladá fronta.

XB-1: Měsíčník sci-fi, fantasy a hororu. 2010-. Prague: Konektor XB1.

Internet Sources

Čižmáriková, Aneta (2011a) “Anabáza života a smrti”. Riddick’s Realm. Cited 5

November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://riddicksrealm.blogspot.cz/2011/01/anabaza-zivota- smrti.html

Čižmáriková, Aneta (2011b) “Pittacus Lore: Som číslo štyri”. Riddick’s Realm. Cited

5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://riddicksrealm.blogspot.cz/2011/04/pittacus- lore-som-cislo-styri.html

Halama, Jiří (2010) “RECENZE: Jack McDevitt, Čindi”. Sarden. Cited 5 November

2017. Retrieved from: http://www.sarden.cz/2010-04-19-0100/recenze-jack-

mcdevitt-cindi

Hanina (2017) “RECENZE: Ben H. Winters, Ztrápený svět”. Sarden. Cited 5

November 2017. Retrieved from: http://www.sarden.cz/2017-03-10-

0000/recenze-ben-h-winters-ztrapeny-svet

Leian (2002a) “Star Trek – Nová generace 7 – Masky – Vornholt John”

FantasyPlanet. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://www.fantasyplanet.cz/literatura/knizni-recenze/star-trek-nova-generace-7-

masky-vornholt-john/

77

Leian (2002b) “Problematika překladu Star Treku” FantasyPlanet. Cited 5

November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://www.fantasyplanet.cz/uncategorized/problematika-prekladu-star-treku/

Movies – FantasyPlanet. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://www.fantasyplanet.cz/diskuzni-fora/ tema/movies/page/21/

Seriály – FantasyPlanet. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://www.fantasyplanet.cz/diskuzni-fora/ tema/serialy/

Univerzální bestiář – FantasyPlanet. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

http://www.fantasyplanet.cz/diskuzni-fora/tema/univerzalni-bestiar/page/11/

Janák, Petr (2010). „Burgess, Anthony Mechanický pomeranč“. iLiteratura.cz. Cited

5 November. Retrieved from: http://www.iliteratura.cz/Clanek/27357/burgess-

anthony-mechanicky-pomeranc

Mejstřík, Petr (2017) “Ohnivý muž rozpoutá peklo na zemi”. Knihy Dobrovský. Cited

15 October. Retrieved from: https://www.knihydobrovsky.cz/blog/recenze-

ohnivy-muz

Schefik Čapek, Petr (2014) “Tommy Donbavand – DW: Závoj smutku”.

Schefikův blog. Cited 5 November. Retrieved from:

http://www.schefikuvblog.eu/tommy-donbavand-dw-zavoj-smutku/

“Diskuze k titulkům obecně”. SFF Ring. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120512141757/http://forum.sff.cz/viewtopic.php?

f=70&t=882

“loď na dostřel”. SFF Ring. Cited 5 November 2017. Retrieved from:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120511193815/http://forum.sff.cz/viewtopic.php?

f=35&t=4650&start=15

78

6.2 Secondary Sources

Adamovič, Ivan (1995a) Slovník české literární fantastiky a science fiction. Prague:

R3.

Adamovič, Ivan (1995b) Úvod do science fiction, Tematická Jednotka Pro Základní

Školy. Brno: CERM.

Adamovič, Ivan (2003) “Bída a lesk fanouškovství”. In: Ikarie 11. Prague: Mladá

fronta a.s. 34

Bronec, Michael (1998) “Poslední jednorožec vrací úder”. Interkom Vol. 5, 1998.

Retrieved 19 October 2017 from: http://interkom.vecnost.cz/1998/19980566.htm

Czechaczek, Jan (2015) Ceny Karla Čapka ve fanzinech. Brno: Filozofická fakulta,

Masarykova univerzita.

Dědinová, Tereza (2015) Po divné krajině: charakteristika a vnitřní členění

fantastické literatury. Brno: Filozofická fakulta, Masarykova univerzita.

House, Juliane (2015) Translation Quality Assessment, Past and Present. New York:

Routlege.

Janák, Petr (2005) “Fungování vícejazyčnosti v Mechanickém pomeranči”.

Jazykovědné Aktuality, Vol. 1-2, 2005. pp. 8-26.

Kantůrek, Jan (1998) “Nemačkejte ten kohoutek, mohli byste vystřelit!”. Interkom

Vol. 6- 7, 1998. Retrieved 19 October 2017 from:

http://interkom.vecnost.cz/1998/19980611.htm

Kotrle, Petr (1999) “Knihomorna naposled: ad Rozlet Ikarie 3/99”. Interkom Vol. 3-

4, 1999. Retrieved 19 October 2017 from:

http://interkom.vecnost.cz/1999/19990322.htm

Krombholzová, Iva (2014) “Fan and professional videogame localization”. Brno:

Filozofická fakulta, Masarykova univerzita.

79

Kudláč, Antonín K. K. (2016) Anatomie pocitu úžasu: česká populární fantastika

1990-2012 v kulturním, sociálním a literárním kontextu. Brno: Host.

Lem, Stanislaw (1974) “Todorov's Fantastic Theory of Literature”, Science Fiction

Studies. No. 4 – Fall 1974, Vol. 1. Retrieved 11 May 2017 from:

http://www.depauw.edu/sfs/backissues/4/lem4art.htm

Macek, Jan (2006) Fandom a text: fandom - subkultura textu: profesionální česká SF

a F periodika před rokem 2000. Praha: Triton.

Neff, Ondřej and Jaroslav Olša (1995) Encyklopedie literatury science fiction.

Prague: asociace fanoušků science fiction.

Pohl, Milan (2008) Mediální obraz českého sci-fi fandomu v denním tisku v letech

2001–2006. Prague: Fakulta sociálních věd, Univerzita Karlova.

Reiss, Katharina and Rhodes, Erroll F., (2000) Translation Criticism – The

Potentials and Limitations: Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality

Assessment. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Šimečková, Hana (2016) Translators of Science Fiction and Fantasy in the Czech

Republic and the Fandom Influence. Brno: Filozofická fakulta, Masarykova

univerzita.

Šustrová, Petruška (1017) “VZPOMÍNKA: Za Evou Kondrysovou”. In: Lidové

Noviny. Retrieved 13 October 2017 from

http://neviditelnypes.lidovky.cz/vzpominka-za-evou-kondrysovou-dmz-

/p_kultura.aspx?c=A170923_212326_p_kultura_wag

Todorov, Tzvetan (1975) The Fantastic. New York: Cornell Paperbacks, Cornell UP.

Zehnalová, Jitka (2015) Kvalita a hodnocení překladu: Modely a aplikace. Olomouc

Modern Language Monographs Vol 4. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.

80

Zbiejczuková, Irena (2011) Pojetí hrdiny ve fantasy literatuře. Prague: Filozofická

fakulta, Univerzita Karlova.

Unsuitable Primary Sources of Criticism

The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction: Czech Edition. 1992-1996. Frenštát pod

Radhoštěm: POLARIS.

Martinus.cz. Cited 5 October 2017. Retrieved from: http://blog.martinus.cz

Nemesis – Časopis pro sci-fi, fantasy, hry a horror. 1994-1995. Prague: Magnet-

Press.

Pevnost: měsíčník o fantasy, mystice a historii: film – seriál – hudba – literatura –

comics – internet – hry. 2016. Prague: Jastog.cz

Benešová, Jana (2016) “Ódinovo dítě je jako neobroušený diamant”. In: Martinus.cz

Blog. Cited 5 November. Retrieved from:

http://blog.martinus.cz/2016/06/odinovo-dite-je-jako-neobrouseny-diamant

81

Resumé

This thesis deals with the phenomenon of fan-made translation criticism of science-fiction in comparison to its professional counterpart. Science-fiction fans are reputed to be avid science and technology enthusiasts who tend to discuss various scientific theories regarding their favourite franchise, with emphasis on terminology. The main goal of this thesis is to verify whether this hypothesis is true, and to offer an overview of this phenomenon and the forms in which it is realised.

The theoretical background follows science-fiction studies and theoretical works elaborated by Ivan Adamovič, Ondřej Neff, and Jaroslav Olša, and their successors

Antonín K. K. Kudláč, and Jan Macek. An overview of the history of Czechoslovak, and later Czech and Slovak SF fandom based on their findings is presented in the first part of the thesis. It is followed by a delineation of translation criticism and of criteria for quality assessments by Katharina Reiss, Juliane House, and Jitka Zehnalová.

The analytical part then applies this theoretical frame on a corpus of printed and internet-based media which publish and feature examples of fan and professional-made

SF translation criticism. The printed media are represented by the longest-publishing local

SF and fantasy magazine – Ikarie, later XB-1 – and mainly its three sections focusing professional literary reviews and fan-submitted content: “Vivisektor”, “Hvězdný tamtam”, and “Knihomorna”. The internet sources then consist of literary web pages and blogs, discussion forums, SF web pages, and personal blogs. The findings from the analytical part are then summarised, compared to the original hypothesis, and potential explanations for possible incongruities are suggested.

82

Resumé in Czech

Tato diplomová práce se zabývá problematikou fanouškovské kritiky překladu science-fiction ve srovnání s kritikou profesionální. Fanouškům science-fiction je připisován živý zájem o vědu a techniku a schopnost diskutovat o různých vědeckých teoriích v rámci jejich oblíbených fiktivních vesmírů, se zvláštním důrazem na terminologii. Hlavním cílem této práce je ověřit, jestli je tato hypotéza pravdivá, a vypracovat přehled tohoto fenoménu a forem, v nichž se realizuje.

Teoretický rámec práce následuje studie a teoretické práce zaměřené na science- fiction, které vypracovali Ivan Adamovič, Ondřej Neff a Jaroslav Olša, a následně také

Antonín K. K. Kudláč a Jan Macek. V první části práce je na základě jejich zjištění představen historický přehled Československého a později Českého a Slovenského SF fandomu. Následuje vymezení samotné kritiky překladu a kritérií pro hodnocení kvality

Katharinou Reiss, Juliane House a Jitkou Zehnalovou.

Analytická část pak aplikuje zmíněný teoretický rámec na korpus tištěných a internetových médií publikujících příklady fanouškovských a profesionálních kritik překladu. Tištěná média zastupuje nejdéle vycházející místní časopis zaměřený na SF a fantasy, Ikarie, později vycházející pod názvem XB-1, a především jeho tři rubriky zaměřené na profesionální recenze a obsah zasílaný fanoušky: „Vivisektor“, „Hvězdný tamtam“ a „Knihomorna“. Internetové zdroje pak sestávají z literártních webů a blogů, diskuzních fór, SF webů a osobních blogů. Zjištění z analytické části jsou pak shrnuta a porovnána s původní hypotézou a jsou navržena možná vysvětlení pro případné nesrovnalosti.

83