The Journal!

There are two parts to the journal:

1. A part where you have specific pages assigned to you.
2. A part where you are responding to the whole novel, but whenever you feel moved to do
so.
Now, for Part 1 – you are supposed to do two things:
1st thing: for each assigned page, you are supposed to compare each page of the original text
of To Kill a Mockingbird with the translation, and for each page, find the least satisfactory
translation, and the best. Of course, if there are other translation issues you felt are interesting,
important, etc., you can certainly do more, say more!!!

And for the translations, I asked you to insert “una tabella – two columns, one line, for each
translation comment:

Link, that boy might go to the chair, but he’s Link, quel ragazzo può andare sulla sedia
not going till the truth’s told. elettrica: ma non ci andrà se viene detta la
verità.

And then a comment on what is good or bad about the translation (this is good example of a
particularly problematic translation!)

2nd thing: you were supposed to annotate the text. Well, the first thing we need to do is look
up the word, “annotate” – and here is the definition from Word Reference: “to supply (a text) with
critical or explanatory notes.” That sounds pretty clear, but then we ask, well – what exactly should
be annotated? And this is something that is part of your task: deciding what needs to be explained,
and what does not. Now, a clear example should be: if you come across in your assigned pages a
name such as: Henry W. Grady, you probably don’t know who this is, or even if there is a real
person being referred to. Well, you do some research, usually googling, and you find out, and you
then put as much information as you think is necessary for someone like you, for example, to know

Here is what one person wrote:

Journalist and orator who helped reintegrate the states of the former Confederacy into the Union
after the Civil War. He was the leading exponent of a “New South” based on industrial
development, giving speeches throughout the country and writing articles and editorials in his
newspaper.

What does NOT need to be annotated, in general, are words. When Dill grabs the “clapper” of the
bell, you do not need to say anything about this word. There is nothing unusual about the way the
word is presented; it is simply a question of whether the reader will look up the word or not. Now, if
you have: “I’ll tan you,” that is an idiomatic expression that might require more than simply looking
it up in the dictionary. “Cootie,” needs an annotation; “he’da told us” – this could use an
explanatory note: “he would have told us” – and then you should say why this form is being used –
an attempt to give a sense of oral speech… -- etc.
Now, annotation is NOT simple. You have to be the ones who decide, for your assigned pages, what
is important and what is not, for a reader – like yourself – to know!
Now, the second part: “2. A part where you are responding to the whole novel, but whenever you
feel moved to do so.
Let me say first what this should NOT be: it should not be a “paraphrase” of the text. What
is the definition of the word, “paraphrase”: “a restatement of a passage giving the meaning in
another form, so as to make the meaning clear” (Word Reference Dictionary). Here is an example
from one of you:

Original: “You don’t understand children much. […]

[…] Well, in the first place you never stopped to gimme a chance to tell you my
side of it – you just lit right into me. When Jem an’ I fuss Atticus doesn’t ever
just listen to Jem’s side of it, he hears mine too”

Someone’s Journal: Scout is blaming Uncle Jack for not listening to her. She is upset
because after the fight with Francis she has not been asked her side of the story and that’s
why she tells Uncle Jack, he doesn’t understand children. She explains that her father,
when there’s a problem between her and Jem, always asks for both sides of the story, and
to her, this is what justice should be like: having the chance to talk and explain.

Now, this is a GOOD paraphrase, but it is not what I am looking for as a journal. I mean – this is a
process that you could do for the entire novel – as in Schmoops, or something like that. What would
be more of a journal entry would be something like this; (I am acting as if I am “you” folks --

My Journal:
(94) “You don’t understand children much…” Scout is wagging her finger at her Uncle Jack –
fatherless guy – much more could be said about him -- one of the articles Whitsitt assigned to us
talks about the novel as a children’s novel – telling us about the loneliness of children, children
without a mother…. but I don’t really feel that the “motherly” is missing – there are mother figures
who fill in for the absent “real” mother. But this would be a point when we have smarty Scout,
criticizing, not just an adult, but a male – chastising an adult – which can be both cute, yet, once
again, undermining the adults, and a male in this case…. But what about Dill – he does seem to be
an almost abandoned child … I knew a kid like that, except he did not have the talent of Dill – but
when he left school, he just seemed to drift home more than “go” home…as if he wasn’t really sure
where home was … or didn’t want to get there …

************************************************************

something like that – let the text get you to drift, go astray, or stay focused… for example, we talked
some earlier about Byoncé – recently she has popped on the world stage once again… did any of
you note this – simply because we have noted her in class? did anyone pay a little more attention
than they would have, had we not mentioned her? Has anyone, in noting stuff on Byoncè, come to
the link between Byoncé’s songs and this young female poetess, Warsan Shire, the Somali-British
poet whose words are featured in Beyoncé's “new globe-shaking” Lemonade album? – I mean, this
is what makes a journal – the world should be tagging you, snagging you, a bit differently, a bit
more – one student wrote of being recently in a bar in Forlì and the dj for whatever reason called
out to everyone to “hug” someone – so this guy, white, ends up hugging a black guy. He notes: I
had never hugged a black person before. This is the stuff of journals. Did you notice the world –
i.e., a black in front of you in the check out line, for example – a bit differently, or note that you do
NOT note anything differently…. etc
“That’s your job,” said Atticus. “I merely bowed “Te ne occuperai tu” ribattè Atticus, “Io mi sono
to the inevitable.”
[…] Where Finch Negroes had loaded bales and
produce, unloaded blocks of ice, flour and sugar,
farm equipment, and feminine apparel.
soltanto arreso all’inevitabile!”
I didn’t find an unsatisfactory translation for this
page, so I will comment on two passages that I found
very interesting to analyse. I liked the idea of
associating the English verb “to bow” to the Italian
verb for “ surrender”. It conveys Atticus’s resignation
towards his children’s favourite pastimes and the
conviction that he will never be able to make them
behave properly.
[…]Dove un tempo i negri dei Finch caricavano balle e
derrate e scaricavano blocchi di ghiaccio, farina e
zucchero,attrezzi agricoli e abiti femminili.
It is still problematic to find a proper way to adress
POC people nowadays, so I wanted to linger on this
topic and draw attention to the Italian translation of
the word “negro” in this page.
The term “negro” was first used by the Spanish and
Portuguese to refer to the populations they
encountered in central and Southern Africa. It was
considered to be the proper English-language term
for black people of black African origin until the late
1960s (after the later African-American Civil Rights
Movement). “Negro” replaced the term “colored” as
the most polite word for African Americans at a time
when “black” was considered more offensive.
Similarly, the Italian term “negro” was not considered
offensive at the time of publication of “Il buio oltre la
siepe” (1962). The term only began to be seen as
“politically incorrect” almost a decade later, as a
result of the growing influence of English-American
political correctness over the Italian language. It is
very interesting to me to note how perceptions of
“bad” words change based on social and historical
context. I think we must never forget to consider the
background of a phenomenon when we analyse it
(and I think I have written about this one quite a lot, I
almost got to the end of the page!)
There went with the house the usual legend
about the Yankees: one Finch female, recently
engaged, donned her complete trousseau to
save it from raiders in the neighborhood; she
became stuck in the door to the Daughters’
Staircase but was doused with water and finally
pushed through.
[…] Where Finch Negroes had loaded bales and
produce, unloaded blocks of ice, flour and sugar,
farm equipment, and feminine apparel.
Sulla casa correva poi la solita leggenda a proposito
degli yankee; una Finch, da poco fidanzata, per
salvare il proprio corredo dalle razzie che avvenivano
nella zona, lo indossò dal primo all’ultimo capo e
rimase incastrata nella porta che dava sulla Scala
delle Ragazze. Per fortuna qualcuno ebbe l’idea di
inzupparla d’acqua da capo a piedi, di modo che, a
furia di spintoni, riuscirono a farla passare attraverso
la porta.
This translation is hilarious. Though longer than the
original passage
[…]Dove un tempo i negri dei Finch caricavano balle e
derrate e scaricavano blocchi di ghiaccio, farina e
zucchero,attrezzi agricoli e abiti femminili.
It is still problematic to find a proper way to adress
POC people nowadays, so I wanted to linger on this
topic and draw attention to the Italian translation of
the word “negro” in this page.
The term “negro” was first used by the Spanish and
Portuguese to refer to the populations they
encountered in central and Southern Africa. It was
considered to be the proper English-language term
for black people of black African origin until the late
1960s (after the later African-American Civil Rights
Movement). “Negro” replaced the term “colored” as
the most polite word for African Americans at a time
when “black” was considered more offensive.
Similarly, the Italian term “negro” was not considered
offensive at the time of publication of “Il buio oltre la
siepe” (1962). The term only began to be seen as
“politically incorrect” almost a decade later, as a
result of the growing influence of English-American
political correctness over the Italian language. It is
very interesting to me to note how perceptions of
“bad” words change based on social and historical
context. I think we must never forget to consider the
background of a phenomenon when we analyse it
(and I think I have written about this one quite a lot, I
almost got to the end of the page!)