Thread by @tachtco

My thoughts on critiques of #TranslatorsOnTheCover as being unrelated to pay/working conditions 1/

https://twitter.com/GalhosD/status/1443581232118321180

1st, things are different in France, where translators have a union & 33% of published novels are translations as opposed to 1-3% in Eng. This already makes lit. translation a visible, accepted profession. Fr. readers aren't considered to be allergic to reading in translation. 2/

For me, #TranslatorsOnTheCover is about reaching the reader and author as much as the publisher. The received wisdom in US/UK is that readers avoid translations, tho to my knowledge, no one has ever produced market research on this point. 3/

As long as readers are supposedly resistant to translation, publishers can treat translators as "dirty little secrets."& dirty little secrets don't get paid well. Hiding our name is supposed to help the book sell, but it continues to keep us from the recognition of the reader. 4/

When translation is more visible to readers and authors--and still sell--then translators have more power to set their conditions. When readers seek out translations by certain translators, those translators can set their conditions. 5/

#TranslatorsOnTheCover is long-game organizing. No one thinks it will miraculously fix pay/working conditions. Sure, it could lead to gesture-politics of recognition without pay, but put into a larger picture of organizing--and organizing always takes time--it has benefits. 6/

I also note that most of the critiques I've seen by people who "don't care" about their names on the cover are men. And I can't help but think of the way women constantly have our labor go unrecognized (in the home, in university service and advising work, in organizing work) 7/

Recognition/acknowledgment of labor may thus signify differently for women (cf. Lori Chamberlain's "Gender and the Metaphorics of Translation") 8/

Is #TranslatorsOnTheCover equal to better pay and conditions? No, but /fin