Conclusions – the future of the profession

Conclusions

the future of the profession

Translators are a pillar of cultural diversity in Europe and the world. Without them, books, films and theatre plays would appear in their original language only and, as a result, Europe, which is built on cultural diversity, would lose its identity. In addition the increasingly globalised publishing, audiovisual and performing arts sectors would lose significant revenue.

Yet the profession of translation for the creative and culture sectors has become unattractive due to poor working conditions, low remuneration and precarious status, as well as a lack of recognition and visibility. Fewer and fewer students are engaging in languages and translation studies, and the situation is particularly concerning with regard to smaller, lesser-used languages.

Several actions can and should be taken in order to promote language learning in general and the practice of literary translation in particular, and to encourage a new generation to take up translation as a vocation. Policies that encourage children to be exposed to, and engage with, other languages should be promoted not only to encourage multilingualism, but also to teach the immense value of Europe’s cultural diversity.

The decline in language studies at university level poses a serious threat to the supply of translators across Europe, and every effort should be made, particularly through the promotion of inter-university cooperation, to make sure that all European languages can be studied in Europe. Furthermore, stronger links between language courses at universities, the translation industry and the book sector should be promoted, so that young people have a better understanding of the opportunities available, as well as deeper practical knowledge of how the industry works. In this way, young people can develop entrepreneurial skills and better find their way in the industry.

In the book sector, translation usually represents a substantial investment for publishers, and, in some cases, it can pose a financial risk, given the uncertainty of the market for translated books outside bestsellers and ‘big’ languages’ books. As a result, publishers find it hard to pay translators what would represent a fair remuneration, given the complexity of the task and the time it takes to translate a work of fiction. Although many publishers act in good faith, the financial constraints they face might tempt some to take advantage of the fragile position of translators to impose very low fees and/or unfair contracts. This is not sustainable in the long term and is in the interest of neither publishers nor translators. In a sense, the book sector does not exploit the full potential of translators as ambassadors and mediators.

As long as the creative processes involved in translation are not supported and rewarded by way of adequate pay, respect of copyright, and decent working and living conditions, it will become increasingly difficult to attract a new generation of translators to the profession, and publishers will find it even more difficult to find translators for specific combinations of languages, due to the difficulty translators face in staying in the profession as they do not have continuous work. This poses a direct threat to European diversity, Europe’s wealth of languages and its unique cultural set-up and to literature written in Europe.

The situation is not better in the audiovisual sector, where there is a shortage of translators. This is mainly due to unattractive working conditions. The growth of global streaming platforms has resulted in an increased demand for quick output. The use of MT adds further pressure on translators working in this field, as

01

well as threatening the quality of subtitles and dubbing. Considering the increasing screen time spent by Europeans, and younger audiences in particular, reading subtitles, it is urgent that the debate on the quality of subtitles and dubbing takes place.

In the theatre sector, the profession is less organised: the practice of surtitling performances has only recently been widely disseminated, in response to audience demand and advances in technology and equipment.

The profession has no collective representation, and practices vary considerably in Europe.

If the EU’s motto ‘united in diversity’ is to have any real meaning, the people promoting our unity through their work should receive the recognition and support they need to be able to do their work and stay in the profession.

The good news is that the situation can be improved, and there is indeed no need to reinvent the wheel. Most of the structures needed to strengthen and improve the status of literary translators in general, and of translators from lesser-used languages in particular, are already in place.

The copyright (DSM) directive provides a good framework to bring the various interested parties to the table. The logical partners/consultants at European level are European organisations such as CEATL, AVTE and RECIT, with their in-depth knowledge of the profession and market, and their existing expertise regarding the specific preconditions in terms of copyright, contracts, remuneration and working conditions, but also in terms of training and lifelong learning. A pan-European collective bargaining process could include model contracts with minimum fees recommended by the national associations, the setting up of databases/networks for publishers and other interested parties to consult when looking for specific language combinations, and, most importantly, for linking EU funding mechanisms for the book and audiovisual markets to specific and fair conditions, based on best practices such as the Traduki model.

Increasing support across Europe for continuous training and lifelong learning, in all its various forms, is vital to the professionalisation of the literary translation sector. Europe-wide organisations, such as RECIT and PETRA-E, offer great examples of what can be done at European level to support continuous training, particularly with regard to promoting collaboration between national centres for expertise in literary translation, and residencies for writers and translators.

Bringing parties together and eventually reinforcing the partnership between writers, translators and publishers will not take place without the strong political and financial support of public authorities. If we are to safeguard the EU’s multilingual, multicultural heritage, we need to provide incentives for the book market (publishers, booksellers, cultural institutions) to be sustainable and for copyright owners (writers, illustrators, translators) to provide it with content. The two go hand in hand.

If the EU’s motto ‘united in diversity’ is to have any real meaning, the people promoting our unity through their work should receive the recognition and support they need to be able to do their work and stay in the profession.