Year: 2017
Type: book-chapter
Abstract: Over the course of the last five years my research has led me to \nconclude that the literary representation of a trauma is not the immediate \nstep after the historical event and that there are other, intervening layers in \nbetween. First is the occurrence of the historical event. What then follows \nis the translation of that event in the minds of the survivors—that is, in \ntheir memory and interpretation of the event. Then, memory becomes the \nsubject of oral history. This oral history enters the minds of the writers of \nmemoir and fiction, where it becomes a literary translation. Finally, the \nfilmmaker, if such a story makes it to this step, translates the text in order \nto render her interpretation of it as film. If we acknowledge that \ntranslation involves interpretation, then what exists here are different \nlayers of translation. The aim of the paper is to analyze the different \neffects that each medium (literature, translation, cinema) may have on the \nexperience of its readers and audience—what that medium is trying to \ncultivate, the limitations of each, and how all of them in different ways \nbring greater attention to the historical phenomenon of the Armenian \nGenocide.
Author: Sona Haroutyunian
Language: English
Subfield: Cultural Studies
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2784737938