Abstract

Discourse on disability is often reconsidered by societies with the aim of advancing perception and implementation of human rights. The intention of this study is to investigate representation of disability in fiction, through translation, namely, how disability is portrayed in two Greek target versions of Steinbeck’s novella ‘Of Mice and Men’ (1937). Τhe intention is to examine whether and how fiction translation may register societal attitudes in perception of disability, over time. The study focuses on the character of Lennie, who probably is in the autistic spectrum, and on how the potentially face-damaging content towards the intellectually disabled is manifested in two Greek versions (1961, 2013). The study uses both etic and emic approaches to assessing meaning, juxtaposes parallel data and draws on pragmatic theories of im/politeness (Brown and Levinson 1978; Leech 1983; Culpeper 1996) along with models of disability to account for depiction of impairment in a societal context. Analysis shows that TTa (1961) enhanced the weak traits of Lennie, constructing a vivid image of his hopelessness, whereas TTb (2013) assumed a more powerful image of disabled Lennie. The two versions seem to have been influenced intra-culturally by discourse on disability across time.

Keywords: intellectual disability, translated fiction, eticemic approach, Steinbeck’s Lennie

1. Introduction

1.1 About the novella and Lennie’s character

The study intends to examine how translation may render the threatening aspects of an intellectually disabled character in fiction. ‘Of Mice and Men’ is a novella written by American writer John Ernst Steinbeck (1937), the third novel he wrote during the 1930s and his first attempt to write for the theater (Meyer 2009: 115). It narrates the experiences of two men, George Milton and Lennie Smalls, searching for new job opportunities in the US, during the period of the Great Depression (1929-1939). As displayed in the back cover of the Penguin Classics edition (Steinbeck 1937/2006), they found a job at a ranch in search of the American dream, and this is when trouble begins with gentle giant Lennie.

The story comes to a bitter end: the climax starts with Lennie accidentally killing the wife of the boss’ son. George finally kills Lennie, as an act of compassion and love, because he would have been lynched by workers of the ranch. Steinbeck could not have created Lennie having “a sophisticated understanding” of autism because the condition was identified in 1943 (Lawrence 2020: 2).

‘Of Mice and Men’ has been censored ad nauseam for the vulgar, offensive, and racist language it uses. Another reason was the claim that it promotes euthanasia by having George kill Lennie, so that Lennie would not cause further damage to society (McCabe 2014: 18). George is portrayed as ‘self’ and Lennie as ‘other’, they are different “on physical and cerebral levels” (Halliwell 2016: 144), with Lennie following and imitating George (Halliwell 2016), throughout the story. He lacks agency, as “completely subordinated to George” even though he is a major character (Freeman Loftis 2015: 63).

Lennie displays typical characteristics of autism, such as “his love of repetition and use of echolalia, his idiosyncratic memory, his sensory attraction to things that are soft and his over-load (or ‘meltdown’) in the face of noise or panic” (Lawrence 2020: 2) which place him on the spectrum; his impairment controls him, and he could do nothing but eventually murder somebody accidentally (Freeman Loftis 2015: 66). He is presented as being closer to an animal than other characters, with uncontrolled strength in combination to less rational thinking, a technique called “animalization” (Haslam 2006: 253) in literary criticism. His physical appearance is dehumanized by menacing properties which demonize him, a stereotype of people with disabilities (Livingstone Smith 2016). Such features highlight his ‘un-human’ (Iyer 2007: 129) nature. He is both innocent and vicious, a portrayal that is common for people with disabilities (Stalker 2012). He is threatening, dependent like a child, a tragic figure and freak of nature (Marks 1997).

The study aims to shed light on how intellectual disability is depicted in the Greek versions of ‘Of Mice and Men’ and what kind of assumptions are made for Lennie.

The next section presents the theoretical tools employed in this study to analyze how Lennie’s identity is shaped. This is done through the theory of (im)politeness and the implications following from verbal choices the translators make in order to shape the identity of the disabled.

2. Literature review

2.1. On implicatures and politeness

Grice (1975) developed his theory of implicatures and the co-operative principle so as to investigate how people use language regarding what is said and what is implicated, in an interaction. Grice’s co-operative principle worked as the basis for studying communication and implications (Leech 1983, Levinson 1983, Yule (1996). Levinson (1983: 133) refers to linguistic scales which “can be arranged in a linear order by degree of informativeness or semantic strength”. Yule (1996: 41-42) also refers to scalar implicatures, which he explains as the choice of a word “which expresses one value from a scale of values”. Simply put, scalar implicatures are words of similar meaning which denote a different degree of intensity. The study needs this notion because translators create implicatures in the two target versions, which are of a different scale.

A question is whether and how scalar implicatures are identified in the versions of the novella.

The notion of ‘face’ is central in im/politeness theory: it is “the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself” (Brown and Levinson’s 1978: 61-62). ‘Positive face’ concerns a person’s need to be liked by their peers, and ‘negative face’ their need to act freely and be non-imposed. Brown and Levinson (1978) assume that every member of a society abides by these wants, which are applicable for people from various cultural backgrounds. One could lose their face if the interlocutor performed – accidentally or not – a Face Threatening Act (FTA), which may be a verbal or non-verbal act that is opposed to the person’s needs for being likeable or non-imposed upon (Brown and Levinson 1978: 65-68). Yule (1996: 59-69) mentions ‘face saving acts’, which a person may use in order to minimize threats to one’s face. Leech’s investigation (1983: 79-84) on the Politeness Principle (PP) elaborates on such strategies, which reinforce interlocutors’ cooperation and friendly relations, as the role of the PP is to maintain social stability.

There are some linguistic devices that may inherently threaten face, and the question arises how they may be rendered across cultures. By reversing the Brown and Levinson’s (1978) five politeness superstrategies, Culpeper (1996: 356-358) suggested five impoliteness ones: (1) bald on record impoliteness, (2) positive impoliteness, (3) negative impoliteness, (4) sarcasm or mock politeness and (5) withhold politeness, which do not take paralinguistic or non-verbal features into consideration (Culpeper 1996: 358). Additionally, Culpeper reverses Leech’s (1983: 81) Politeness Principle to apply it to impoliteness: “one general way of being impolite is to minimize the expression of polite beliefs and maximize the expression of impolite beliefs” (Culpeper 1996: 358). The question is whether and how impolite strategies addressing Lennie are rendered into Greek.

2.2. On disability

The study also needs awareness of models of disability, to achieve an understanding of translation behaviour. The section elaborates on some of these models and popular schools of thought, because they are relevant to Lennie’s portrayal as an intellectually disabled.

A prominent model is the ‘Medical Model of Disability’, which sees disability as a result of an individual’s limitations, physical or mental, for which they may be disconnected from society (Michigan Disability Rights Coalition n.d.). The ‘abnormal’ person suffers from pathologies which must be treated for the person to become more ‘normal’ and functional; they are the ones to blame for their inability to live as the rest of the people do, in the same spaces and with the same rights, so they must be rehabilitated (Griffo 2014). Thus, people with disabilities are treated as if they are defective outsiders, in need of getting fixed or cured, which is a harmful and problematic notion for their being (McCabe 2014: 8). ‘Abnormality’ must be accepted, and care and support provided to the ‘incurable’ impaired person (Michigan Disability Rights Coalition n.d.: 5). This belief echoes a paternalistic approach which, in the end, justifies institutionalization and segregation of the disabled individuals. They are branded as inferior because they do not fit the boxes of ‘normality’ and are determined as deviant and commanding control (Michigan Disability Rights Coalition n.d.). They cannot control their bodies; therefore, they are considered failures that are unproductive, incapable and have nothing to offer to society (ibid.). Marks (1997: 87) claims that, up until the late 1990s at least, the World Health Organization (WHO) was mainly engaged in deploying programmes for the prevention of impairments, instead of accommodations and social changes which would promote social integration for disabled people.

Secondly, there is the Tragedy/Charity Model; according to Griffo (2014: 148), it dates back to the Middle Ages and is still present in several societies and cultures nowadays. It delineates disabled people as pitiful victims of their circumstances, for instance due to poverty and familial abandonment. Tragedy and pity result in a culture “care” which leads to segregation and institutionalization (Michigan Disability Rights Coalition n.d.: 9), similarly to the Medical Model. Disabled people are portrayed as tragic victims in desperate need of assistance and care, as they cannot do it themselves and have to depend on charity (McCabe 2014: 9); hence, it brings about their diminishing self-esteem, as they are socially stigmatized and undesirable (Griffo 2014). The disabled individuals are responsible for their societal exclusion (ibid.). The two models almost coincide, and both fabricate a negative image of disability. One could realize how detrimental this belief is for the disability community. As Marks (1997: 87) proposed, “society needs to adjust to impaired people rather than disabled people needing to adjust to their impairment”.

A third, and final, model of Disability is the Social Model; it first appeared during the 1970s in the United Kingdom and has spread and developed since then (Griffo 2014: 150). It stems from criticism towards the Medical Model (ibid.) and suggests that it is society’s fault, due to its environmental, social, and behavioral hurdles, that impaired people cannot take part in it, at their full capacity (Michigan Disability Rights Coalition n.d.). The disabled are have limited opportunities in a community because the community itself has failed to accommodate them. These barriers are the reason why impaired people are dependent and discriminated against (Marks 1997). Thus, cultures, institutions, and relationships have to be reconstructed for inclusive societies to be developed, as impairment cannot be examined outside the environmental context. This model has had an impact on disability activism during the 1980s and 1990s, as it set it in motion (Barnes 2012) and catered for the creation of inclusive societies where everyone has equal rights and opportunities (Griffo 2014).

The disability theory is important in this study because findings suggest that the two target versions assume a different model in understanding ‘disability’.

3. Methodology

The study was in search of disabled figures in literary works to examine how they have been rendered into Greek and decipher the implications following from translator’s choices. ‘Of Mice and Men’ came up for the disabled and touching figure of Lennie and the fact that at least two target versions were readily available, which were many years apart. The first target text (TT) of the novella was by Kosmas Politis (TTa 1961) and a re-translation of it was by Michalis Makropoulos (TTb 2013).

The texts were thoroughly studied in search of features that shape Lennie’s character differently intra-culturally. The assumption was that the shifting aspects of Lennie’s disabled identity, between TTa and TTb, would be meaningful in terms of the narratives of disability circulating in target society, at the times of publication. The types of variation the study was interested in were any attacks on Lennie’s face and potential degrees of offensiveness in discourse addressed to Lennie or coming from Lennie, the disabled character. The majority of findings are situated in the first of six chapters.

Table 1. Data sources

The etic analysis (the researcher’s view of the meaning potential of items) was followed by an emic analysis (lay peoples’ understanding and assessment of meaning).

Ten instances of Lennie’s portrayal were cross-checked via a Google Forms questionnaire (see Appendix), addressing 14 English-Greek bilingual respondents. The aim of the questionnaire was to examine whether the implications following from examples are evident to lay people, who are not familiar with the goals of the study.

The questionnaire offered an introduction to the novella and two renditions of source extracts, one from each Greek target version (TTa and TTb), placed at random order so that respondents did not know which option came from the earlier translation and which from the more recent one. Respondents were asked to justify their answer. The questionnaire analysis confirmed findings of the etic analysis and appears in section 5.

4. Data analysis

The findings were categorized and seemed to form four categories of variation. There are shifts which seem to pertain to (1) shaping the intellectually disabled, (2) scales of aggression, (3) scales of emotion and (4) rendition of the dehumanization implication. The analysis of the findings draws on the theory of im/politeness, and implicatures (Grice 1975, Levinson 1983, Brown and Levinson 1978, Culpeper 1996, Yule 1996).

The ST (source text) comprises multiple attacks against Lennie’s face, which are either enhanced or maintained on the same level, in TTa and TTb. There are additions of FTAs in TTa, that were not – so evidently – present in ST and TTb, but there are almost no additions of any mitigating devices which would operate as ‘face saving acts’. Therefore, changes enhance understanding of impoliteness strategies rather than of politeness ones.

4.1 Shaping the intellectually disabled

The section shows that Lennie’s character is depicted as weaker and powerless, and in some cases even defective, in Politis’ TTa translation compared to Makropoulos’ re-translation (TTb). The former also instills a passiveness in Lennie’s role, whereas the latter maintains the agency which the ST concedes to the character. Lennie’s character is sculpted both by (a) the narrator’s descriptions of him and his actions, and (b) through the others’ perceptions.

4.1.1 The narrator’s descriptions

Example 1

When Curley (the boss’ macho and aggressive son) provoked Lennie, he started a fight with him. Even though Curley is much smaller than Lennie, Lennie was too frightened to react.

TTa foregrounds Lennie’s lack of thought, which portrays him as more vulnerable; Also, ST ‘frightened’ turns into TTa ‘τρομαγμένος’ (frightened) and TTb ‘φοβισμένος’ (scared), which is milder; TTa is painting a more defective image of him, accentuating his passiveness and inability to act on his own, thus attacking his negative face by scorning him (Culpeper 1996: 358).

Example 2

Curley, the boss’s macho son, is in the bunkhouse and ready to brawl. He attacks Lennie verbally and physically, and Lennie catches his hand and crushes it, without intending to actually hurt him. Everybody is shocked with how easily he did it, Lennie too.

ST item ‘cried’ turns into TTa ‘κλαψιάρισε’ (whined) which creates a weaker image of Lennie. TTb item ‘φώναξε’ (shouted) could potentially signify an effort to justify himself; TTa displays a domesticating intention, as it ‘hellenized’ Lennie’s name into ‘Lenos’ (Λένος) by adding a typical Greek suffix for a male name.

Example 3

Lennie enters the barn of the ranch, where Crooks (a negro) lives and works. Lennie approaches him.

TTa shows Lennies amiable feelings towards Crooks, the marginalized negro worker, rather than simply his intention to make friends with him.

The section shows that TTa shapes a weaker image of Lennie vs. that of TTb.

4.1.2 Other people’s perceptions

The section highlights how Lennie is indirectly depicted through the eyes of others.

Example 4

George gives advice to Lennie. George: “[…] You never oughta drink water when it ain’t running, Lennie,”

The fact that George tries to advise Lennie ‘hopelessly’ is in itself a face threatening act on Lennie’s negative face, as it threatens his independence (Yule 1996: 358) in all three versions. In terms of Culpeper’s (1996: 358) negative impoliteness output strategies, George ‘condescends’ and ‘ridicules’ Lennie. However, TTa accentuates Lennie’s dependence on George and George’s fatigue with the situation. TTa shapes a more powerless Lennie.

Example 5

Before George and Lennie reach the ranch, Lennie realizes he doesn’t have his work card and is worried. George scolds him and suggests that he has taken precautions.

This is another attack on Lennie’s negative face denoting his incompetence as an adult member of society (Brown and Levinson 1978) by George’s ‘emphasizing on his own relative power’; that is, the impoliteness superstrategy of ‘negative impoliteness’ (Culpeper 1996: 358). TTa boosts George’s certainty on Lennie’s inability with TTa item ‘και βέβαια’ (of course). TTa enhances Lennie’s unreliability and incompetence to keep something in his care, as TTa brings up the notion of Lennie’ s un-trustworthiness explicitly (translating ST ‘let’).

Example 6

After the climax of the story, in which Lennie accidentally killed Curley’s wife, he ran to hide in the bushes; he sees a vision of his deceased Aunt Clara talking to him. She reprimands him for doing things he shouldn’t, and Lennie promises that he won’t cause any more trouble. Aunt Clara says in dialectal English:

Curse words are prominent in the whole novella. TTa offensive TTa item ‘πουτανίστικα’ (whory, translating ST item ‘sonofabitching’) berates Lennie more and makes him appear even more inferior, along with ‘κοτάς’ (dare), implying that he is a coward and incapable of changing his behaviour. All versions comprise a threat to Lennie’s negative face, but in TTa it is stronger.

4.2 Scales of aggression

Another characteristic of Lennie that is differentiated in target versions is aggression. His appearance and actions, in TTa, are described with expressions which have more negative connotations, whereas in TTb they usually are more neutral and closer to the ST. As a result, his identity in TTa manifests itself through more aggressive behaviours.

Example 7

One of the first images that the author creates of Lennie is the following, when he drank water from a stream:

TTa adds ‘άπληστα’ (greedily) to shape Lennie’s uncontrollable behavior when describing him drinking water, as if he cannot moderate his impulses. This, in combination with his huge composure, makes him look threatening.

Example 8

George praises Lennie in the presence of Slim, who is respected among workers, for his strength and hard work.

Even when praising Lennie, George uses offensive language (‘bastard’) which is toned down in TTb ‘ο ψηλός’ (the tall guy) and making TTa the most offensive target version.

Example 9

Lennie is in the barn, telling Curley’s wife about the puppy he accidentally killed there.

The ST item ‘smack’ is rendered in as ‘χτυπώ’ (hit) in TTb both leading to the assumption that he hit it once, while TT item ‘δέρνω’ (beat) is more threatening and assumes repetition and a more violent image of Lennie repeatedly hitting the puppy and not controlling himself.

4.3 Scales of emotion

The intensity of emotions also varies across target versions, creating different connotations with reference to Lennie.

Example 10

Lennie has forgotten where they are going once again and asks George. George reacts as follows: “OK- OK. I’ll tell ya again. I ain’t got nothing to do.” And he continues:

TTa differs in the intensity of the George’s exasperation towards Lennie’s constant forgetting through adding TTa item ‘όλη μου την ζωή’ (all my life), which results in an implicature of a different scale. This implies that not even he, Lennie’s protector and friend, has enough patience to deal with him, painting a non-flattering image of Lennie.

Example 11

George and Lennie have arrived at the ranch and meet their new boss. George has instructed Lennie to keep silent, so that he does all the talking. He lies that Lennie is his cousin. Lennie asks George about that. George: “Well, that was a lie.”

George expresses joy and its intensity differs again between the versions. In ST and TTb he appears ‘glad’ that he is not Lennie’s relative, while in TTa he invokes God implying higher intensity, hence the implicature is of a higher scale, thus in TTa, Lennie appears weaker and more problematic as a person.

4.4 Dehumanization

Lennie is often described as having un-human traits, physically or intellectually. TTa strips Lennie of his very human qualities, thus dehumanizing him in the readers’ mind. The original novella comprises numerous examples of dehumanizing, for instance by assigning animal qualities to discriminated characters such as Lennie and Crooks, the negro worker, which helps extend their marginalization. TTa reinforces dehumanization, as depicted in the following examples.

Example 12

Crooks, Lennie, and Candy are in the barn when Curley’s wife comes in and starts talking to them, complaining. She says: “Sat’iday night. An’ what am I doin’?” and she continues:

The example shows how all three people are discriminated: Crooks for being a negro, Lennie for his intellectual differences and Candy for his age and physical disability, as he is missing a hand due to a work accident. All versions comprise attacks on the characters’ positive face with derogatory expressions which threaten their need to be liked. There is no variation between versions regarding Crooks and his race, but there are changes regarding Lennie and Candy. Lennie is referred to as ΤΤa ‘μουρλός’ (madman), vs. TTb ‘βλάκας’ (idiot). All adjectives are insulting, but TTa retracts the element of reason from Lennie; Rationality is what separates humans from animals.

Example 13

Lennie chats with Curley’s wife in the barn. Lennie says:

TTa makes Lennie more verbal about his fear of George. He is portrayed as aggressive, whereas ST and TTb simply refer to Lennie being ‘cautious’. This cautiousness, despite George’s harsh behaviour, enhances Lennie’s humanity and gentleness as a person. To strip him of that, is to strip him of another trait that makes him the human that he is.

Example 14

Lennie wants to touch the wife’s hair and feel it because it looks soft. She lets him do so, but she panics when he grabs her more tightly and doesn’t let her. He panics as well; she starts screaming and he tries to shut her mouth so that the others don’t hear them. This is part of the climax, as he ends up accidentally killing her. The scene is described by the narrator:

TTa uses a magnifying noun for hand (‘χερούκλα’ [=unnaturally huge hand]) which carries negative implications, highlighting Lennie’s unnaturalness and un-human appearance with a physically menacing attribute which dehumanizes him.

Findings show that both TTa and TTb deviate from the ST in different respects.

TTa enhances weak and odd features of Lennie, assuming a more defective image of him. He appears more vulnerable and powerless than other characters such as George, he is more aggressive than initially intended by Steinbeck. Variation in the scale of emotions, in TTa, also enhances Lennie’s inferior image. Dehumanization was also emphasized in TTa. Lennie’s inferiority was intensified, enhancing the distance between him and the rest of the characters, even the ones which were also discriminated against, such as Crooks.

TTb manifested closer affinity to the ST. It toned down offensive language, rounded off curse words and vulgar expressions to less insulting ones thus protecting the characters’ positive face. He also moderated the dehumanizing features of the ST by removing animal associations and decreasing Lennie’s un-humanity.

5. Questionnaire analysis

The questionnaire (in Google forms) addressed 14 individuals. Three of them were 31-45 years old and the rest belonged to the 18-30 age group. They had to answer 10 questions using their insight into Greek by picking one of two options: one option came from TTa and one from TTb, following different ordering patterns, so that respondents could not tell which option originates from TTa and which from TTb. They also provided meta-pragmatic comments, e.g., what motivated their choice and why. Justification of respondent choices in the following analysis comes from their own meta-pragmatic comments, in the short answer box. In this section, examples appear in thematic categories, namely, ‘shaping the intellectually disabled’, ‘scales of aggression’, ‘scales of emotion’ and ‘dehumanization’. Backtranslation (BT) did not appear in the questionnaire since all respondents were native or fluent speakers of Greek.

5.1 Shaping the intellectually disabled

Question 1 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 64.3 percent of respondents opted for (b) and the rest 35.7 percent for (a). The majority of respondents confirm analysis results, justifying their choice in terms of items ‘βρε παλαβέ’ (You crazy), ‘και βέβαια’ (of course), and ‘φαντάζεσαι πως θα σου εμπιστευόμουν’ (Do you imagine me trusting you). Some respondents explained their choice of (b) in that they considered τρελάρα (crazy) more offensive.

Question 2 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 92.9 percent opted for (a) and justified their choice by pointing to ‘τόσο τρομαγμένος’ (that frightened) and ‘που ούτε σκέφτηκε’ (he didn’t even think) structures (emphasis in the answers of the respondents).

Question 6 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 100 percent of the respondents went for (a), as they all agreed that the verb ‘κλαψιάρισε’ (whined) makes Lennie seem weaker, as suggested in the data analysis. They suggested that Lennie’s distress is expressed in a more vulnerable manner, it is a more passive verb, crying and whining are not usually attributed to ‘manly’ characters.

Question 7 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 85.7 percent of respondents selected (b) as the utterance that belittles Lennie more, matching the analysis in section 4. They pointed to the item ‘πουτανίστικα’ (whory) suggesting that it is more belittling for and κοτάς (dare) as highlighing his cowardness.

Figure 1. Questionnaire results for shaping the intellectually disabled

5.2 Scales of aggression

Question 3 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 64.3 percent went for (b) pointing to item ‘άπληστα’ (greedily) because it makes him appear sloppy, crafting a negative picture with negative connotations, and the present tense which emphasizes duration.

Question 8 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): Almost all respondents (13/14) chose (b) as more disrespectful, in agreement with the analysis. They all indicated ‘μπάσταρδος’ (bastard), an insult.

Question 5 of the questionnaire (see appendix): 100 percent of respondents opted for (b), confirming the suggestions made in the analysis. They all indicated δέρνω (beat) as more violent and aggressive.

Figure 2. Questionnaire results for scales of aggression

5.3 Scales of emotion

Question 10 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 78.6 percent of respondents chose (a), pointing to exaggeration ‘όλη μου τη ζωή, θα χάνω τον καιρό μου’ (All my life, I’ll lose my time), as suggested in the data analysis section, where George appears more irritated.

Α respondent who chose TTb (b) mentioned ‘ξοδεύω’ (spend) because it indicates annoyance and the phrase ‘γιατί να μην ξοδεύω’ (why don’t I spend) emphasizes irony; despite selecting TTb (b), she suggested that ‘όλη μου τη ζωή, θα χάνω τον καιρό μου’ (All my life, I’ll lose my time, TTa) manifests higher emotional intensity. Another respondent who chose (b) pointed out the rhetorical question.

Figure 3. Questionnaire results for scales of emotion

5.4 Dehumanization

Question 4 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 8 respondents opted for (a) and 6 for (b). The ones who opted for TTa (a) mentioned that their choice is motivated by ‘νοστιμούλα’ (toothsome) and ‘εκστατικό’ (ecstatic), as suggested in the data analysis. It physical and sexual attraction, reinforcing the claim that he appears sexually hyperactive in this version.

Question 9 of the questionnaire (see Appendix): 13 out of 14 respondents opted for (a), for creating a more unnatural image of Lennie. They all indicated the item ‘χερoύκλα’ (huge hand, magnifying noun with negative connotations), suggesting that it adds a monstrous connotation to Lennie’s identity representation.

Figure 4. Questionnaire results for dehumanization

Questionnaire findings suggest that the two versions are very different in how they shape intellectual disability and manifest scales of aggression and emotion.

6. Discussion

Lennie is led to social isolation, as often occurs with people in the autistic spectrum (Gumińska, Zając, and Piórkowski 2015). Marks (1997: 85-86).) suggests that disability should be conceived as “a continuum with blurred and changing boundaries both between disabled and able-bodied people and with those categorized as disabled”.

Awareness of mental and physical disability has been raised in the 21^st century and people on the spectrum of autism are not treated in the same way as in the previous century. During the late 1990s and early 2000s, the United Nations declared “inclusive education as a basic human right for all” and implemented worldwide changes in favor of that view.

In Greece, inclusive education for children with autism was first established in 1985 and nowadays the majority of students with autism attend mainstream schools and receive special services within them (Kossyvaki 2021). These developments indicate a more sensitized attitude towards disability in the recent decades, as society and its people are shaped by education. The gradual change in society has been identifed by Freeman Loftis (2015), who examined various works of literature from 1887 forward, which incorporate characters with autistic traits – mostly, the investigated books tend to focus on ‘high-functioning’ and verbal individuals. Her study extended from classics such as Conan Doyle’s ‘Sherlock Holmes’, Steinbeck’s ‘Of Mice and Men’, Harper Lee’s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’, to a most recent one ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’ by Stieg and Larson published in 2005. She suggests that some stereotypes seem to remain established, while others are slowly soothed, such as sexual deviance. A similar evolution could be observed through studying the target versions of these stories; the assumption is that society’s prevailing beliefs are shifting and registered in translated versions.

Similarly, this study noticed variation in the Greek translations of ‘Of Mice and Men’. The different approaches to disability, between TTa and TTb, may be interpreted through disability theory.

In more specific terms, Lennie is portrayed as a tragic and pitiable individual, in Steinbeck’s novella (ST), which has led researchers to suggest that his character is mostly viewed in terms of the Tragedy/Charity Model (McCabe 2014: 9). George prefers others to pity Lennie and conceive him a victim of tragic circumstances whose mind has remained in its childlike state, rather than a mentally unwell person who should be institutionalized, as the perspective of the Medical Model would imply (MacCabe 2014: 9). Pertinent to that is the theme of eugenics which is present in the novella, as George’s lie suggests; Lennie is considered ‘abnormal’ and, due to his being ‘incurable’, his death in the end can be considered as an extreme form of segregation, euthanasia (Freeman Loftis 2015; Lawrence 2020).

This stance has been registered in Politis’ translation in 1961 (TTa) where Lennie’s ‘defective’ traits have been highlighted, as suggested in the data analysis. His powerlessness has been enhanced in numerous instances. His passiveness is usual for figures with intellectual disabilities in fiction, where they are rarely portrayed as active (Iyer 2007: 130). His inferiority is foregrounded in TTa through the heightened intensity of others’ feelings towards him: they appear more exasperated with him, more offensive and less patient. Iyer (2007: 130) suggests that fiction tends to accentuate the disabled people’s “lack of normative functioning”. In other words, he relies on George’s and others’ charity and urge to aid him because they pity him for his incapability; hence, his persona is fostered in the context of the Tragedy/Charity Model of Disability more profoundly, than in the original version.

TTa dehumanizes him by removing some normal moral restrains from his demeanor (Haslam 2006); he is no longer regarded as somebody with feelings and concerns, but as a “sub-human object” (Bandura 2002: 109). He is a victim of ridicule and casual cruelty, even caused by the ones close to him, but it is amplified in TTa; it highlights Lennie’s ‘abnormality’ with regards to his appearance, sometimes even adding descriptions which are not part of the ST; such shifts render Lennie as ‘other’, ‘nobody’, an outcast of society, as if he is to blame for not belonging, as the Medical Model would suggest.

A different approach appears in TTb (2010): it appears to decrease the dehumanization features of the text maintaining a closer affinity to the source text, but disregards Lennie’s portrayal as something unnatural and animalistic. This echoes the Social Model of Disability. ST and TTa seem to portray him as un-human, unnatural, a defective version of a human. Iyer (2007: 129) asserts that resemblance to animals is employed to highlight the difference of the intellectually disabled and indicate their un-humanity.

The finding that the earlier target version assumes the medical model of disability, with the latter target version conforming to the social model, aligns with findings in article 2 of the present special issue, which examines naming the disabled in Greek original and translated legal discourse: it suggests that Greece is abandoning the medical model (following the international trend) and is moving towards a social interpretation of disa­bili­ty.

TTb confirms the re-translation hypothesis by being source-culture oriented (Paloposki and Koskinen 2004, Brownlie 2006, Susam-Sarajeva 2006, Desmidt 2010).

7. Significance of research and concluding remarks

Examining how disability is rendered through translated fiction is important because it reflects how human rights have been implemented in societies.

The study shows the value of theories and models of (im)politeness to account for translator behaviour pertaining to shaping societal assumptions prevalent at the time of TT publication and highlights the importance of fictional data for studying societal assumptions. McIntyre and Bousfield (2017) suggest reasons for using fiction as linguistic data, because they may not differ as much: “advances in corpus analytical techniques have begun to show that some fictional data is perhaps not as different from naturally occurring language as we might first have assumed” (McIntyre and Bousfield 2017: 761). Likewise, they suggest that (im)politeness theory has been used for analyzing characterization and plot development in parts of plays. In the same vein, the present study has used impoliteness to analyze how the narrative of disability unfolds in target versions of a novel.

‘Of Mice and Men’ investigated through the lens of Disability Studies, may dismantle various inappropriate assumptions about people with impairments, physical or intellectual. It is a novella so deeply embedded into cultural narratives of disability and euthanasia that it has even been taught, especially with regards to medical ethics (Freeman Loftis 2015).

The significance of this study lies on the different implications which the two target texts register with respect to the conception of intellectual disability in Greek society and is a good example of how much may implicated through intra-lingual translation. For instance, a prevalent misconception is that cognitively impaired people are hypersexual (Freeman Loftis 2015: 67), a trait that is highlighted in TTa, portraying Lennie as sexually deviant. TTb offers a more ‘humanized’ version of the ST. There is less bias in the re-translation which sculpts the readers’ frame of mind toward the intellectually disabled, from a more compassionate and humanitarian perspective. Αs people in the autistic spectrum face difficulties in developing communicative skills and maintaining interpersonal relationships (Gumińska, Zając, and Piórkowski 2015: 579), so does Lennie. In TTa, every negative connotation is enhanced to heighten the dramatic effect. It seems that during the 2010s there was more awareness regarding autism and disability than there was in 1960s; TTb translator may have attempted to indicate that the problem with autism does not lie with autistic people, but with the society in which they are members. TTb has more chances of resisting negative attitudes towards disability. “The target texts help uncover the sociocultural conditions in which the translation activity was undertaken” (Tian 2017: 10).

Disability is a relatively new topic in translation in the Greek context, so it is still up for investigation if comparable results would emerge, in searching for the same phenomena in other re-translations of literature. Would more recent translations be influenced by waves of public understanding of disability? An investigation of disability literature and its Greek translations could enrich this area of research and further confirm or advance the abovementioned arguments.

•  Previous article
• Next article