Gulliver's Travels

4.1 Translations and Author Intention: Didacticism
Fantasy genres and motifs like those Swift uses in Gulliver’s Travels have the power to veil moral messages within the structure of the novel. When they rework an original text, translators can also embed their own didactic messages that overlap with that of the author. Translating didactic messages can prove challenging, as differences in historical epoch, culture, and social norms can sometimes alter the author’s original goals. Similarly, translated texts can—and perhaps should—include different intertextual references that make more sense to their audience. The complexity or changing nature of intertextual references does not necessarily cloud the author’s original intent (Nikolajeva 38). Both the Jenkins/Casas version and the Stilton version can be considered didactic.
Didacticism refers to using a text deliberately for instructive purposes, usually entailing moral messages. However, didacticism can just as well serve overarching political or social goals. Some didactic texts include extratextual material designed specifically for instructive purposes, like exercises at the end of chapters or at the end of the book, appendixes, or vocabulary glossaries. In this sense, the Jenkins/Casas adaptation of Gulliver’s Travels is more overtly didactic as it contains such extratextual material, whereas the Geronimo Stilton version is designed more purely for entertainment purposes given the greater emphasis on humorous illustrations and jokes than on didactic materials. Likewise, Stilton opts to transform characters into animals: making Swift’s story more accessible for child audiences.
A comparison of the Jenkins/Casas adaptation and that of Stilton reveals differential functions of children’s literature. Some children’s literature has evolved for instructive, didactic purposes and can be included in educational curricula. Other children’s literature has evolved purely as entertainment for young readers. Stilton’s intent was to adapt the source text for young readers who derive pleasure out of captivating narratives told in picture book format. The Jenkins and Casas adaptation includes didactic material in addition to stellar illustrations. Both versions address a similar audience niche. To further appeal to that niche, Jenkins/Casas and Stilton also needed to strategically censor some original Swift material, adapting the text to become developmentally appropriate.
4.2 Censorship
Even if juts to abridge the text to fit into the format of a children’s picture book, or to change the language so that it is more suitable for young readers, both the Jenkins/Casas version and Stilton’s adaptation present a similar level of censorship. Both adaptations retain as much of Swift’s satirical tone and style, refusing to sacrifice the core elements of what makes Gulliver’s Travels a classic. Yet only Jenkins opted to include an appendix with explanations of why certain things were omitted.
Neither Jenkins/Cases nor Stilton shy away from violence and sexuality entirely, but both adaptations are sensitive to the needs of children and their caregivers. After all, violence abounds in children’s folktales, and children do derive entertainment from watching characters work their way through difficult situations. Sexuality, on the other hand, needs to be cloaked in innuendo in the same way that an allusion to an obscure or adult text might elude a child. Adult readers may recognize the undercurrent of sexuality or violence, but children can encounter the text without grappling with difficult subject matters. Overall, though, the degree to which translators censor will also depend on cultural and historical variables. Social norms will dictate what types of material to adapt or omit, and how such adaptations can be made culturally relevant and age appropriate.
4.3 Translation strategies
Translators also need to take into account idiomatic constructions and the conveyance of various forms of culturally embedded humor like irony, sarcasm, or satire. Given Swift’s original satirical intent, which was historically and culturally relevant, translators do need to retain as much as possible of the original while ensuring the novel is relevant to their audience. Censorship does not usually serve the purpose of making the source text more relevant. On the contrary, censoring for translation purposes can be considered a lazy means of avoiding difficult passages. Translators like Jenkins and Stilton instead rely on techniques that transmute humor into other languages, sacrificing the literal in favor of the overall intent of the original author. Each passage or scene in the novel needs to be treated differently, as different translation strategies will work for one scene but not another. Translators also refer to the dictates of historicity: the historical context that is critical for determining translation strategies. The development of the novel as a discreet literary form was in fact concurrent with the evolution of history as an “objective” field, reflecting an increased awareness of time and place as significant determinants of human experience,” (Bixler 19). What is deemed “appropriate” for children from a moral framework will depend largely on the cultural and historical context, as well as the translator’s own frames of reference and the target audience for the text.
4.4 Function of the Text and Cultural References
Culture determines the shape and form of children’s literature, which is why texts like Gulliver’s Travels can only be fully understood by examining the specific features of those cultures and eras,” (Bixler 19). The translator needs to retain as much as possible of Swift’s cultural references that make Gulliver’s Travels unique; otherwise the result would be a complete retelling or adaptation that alludes to or pays homage to the original without actually being a children’s rendition of the text. The Jenkins/Casas version and the Stilton version of Gulliver’s Travels both retain Swift’s core content and even the overarching tone of satire, while still offering a translation that is suitable for children. Satire itself is not necessarily unique to certain cultures, but the object of satire might be. The didactic approach like that used by Jenkins and Casas can be useful in explaining some of the references that child readers might find obscure. Alternatively, translators might opt to modernize the text, but that would risk too much deviation and dilution of the Swift original.
4.5 Own Approach
It is my belief that children can understand difficult concepts, including moral conundrums as well as sophisticated humor like satire. The target audience for the Jenkins/Casas and the Stilton versions of Gulliver’s Travels includes young readers who thrive off cognitive challenges in their reading. Fusing entertainment and pure fun with education and learning opportunities, Jenkins/Casas and Stilton achieve their goals with aplomb. Similarly, I believe that adapting adult texts like Gulliver’s Travels for young audiences requires the deft integration of didactic principles to catalyze young minds with entertaining features like skillful illustrations and contemporary humor. The purpose and audience of the adapted texts is understandably different than they would have been in Swift’s time. In fact, adult readers of the original text will also have different expectations and may find that many of Swift’s references are anachronistic but can also be applied to contemporary social and political issues.
Finally, children do not necessarily struggle with moral ambiguity. The ability of Jenkins and Stilton to preserve the moral ambiguity of the source text is what makes these adaptations effective. Gulliver, for example, is not a likeable hero and the translations do not try and change that fact in order to simplify the text into moral binaries of good versus evil. Instead, the difficult situations, the occasional violence and sexuality, and the immorality portrayed in the text are what make Gulliver’s Travels instructive and appropriate for most children.
Abstract
Known as one of literature’s greatest satirists, Jonathan Swift did not pen Gulliver’s Travels for children. Yet the whimsical nature of the story and its colorful cast of characters make Gulliver’s Travels eminently adaptable for young readers. Adapting a satirical novel for young audiences is never easy, especially one that contains some degree of violence and bawdy humor. Translating the text to make it linguistically and culturally relevant presents a unique set of challenges, requiring the translator and adapter to remain as true to the original text while repackaging the story for a new historical and cultural context, as well as a young age cohort. Using two adaptations as primary sources (Jenkins and Stilton), I analyze their similarities and differences, particularly in terms of their use of didacticism, preservation of humor, and censorship. An analysis of the Jenkins and Stilton children’s adaptations of Gulliver’s Travels shows how translators can balance the needs of their audience with the need to remain faithful to the source.
Works Cited
Bixler, Phyllis. “Didacticism and Morality in the Novel and Children’s Literature.” Children’s Literature Association Quarterly, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 19-22.
Nikolajeva, Maria. “Comparative Children’s Literature: What Is There To Compare?” Papers, Vol. 18, No. 1, http://www.paperschildlit.com/pdfs/Papers_2008_v18no1_p30.pdf