Deconstruction in "Lament for the Littlest Fellow"

Deconstruction in “Lament for the Littlest Fellow” by Edith Tiempo
Perci Paras / AB/BSE Literature / PNU


One of the aims of deconstruction is to expose the gaps, the incoherence, and the contradictions of the text. These gaps are present in the language because of what they assume about language.

In the poem “Lament for the Littlest Fellow” by Filipina Poet Edith Tiempo, there are gaps, incoherence, and even contradictions that make the poem a little confusing and challenging.In the persona’s point of view, everyone is a marmoset; a bushy haired little monkey.
The man holds the bars of the cage, which is why the one inside the cage would think that the one who holds the bars of the cage is the one inside the cage. Notice that man is being compared to a marmoset. We can say that they are binary oppositions and that commonly, the animal (compared to a human) is the less privileged side. Here, it is the marmoset.

According to one tenet of deconstruction, meaning is made by binary oppositions, but one item is unavoidably favored over the other. This hierarchy is arbitrary and can be exposed and reversed. Like in the poem, the monkey can be described as ugly and unpleasant compared to the man, but it can also be wiser and can outsmart a man.

Jacques Derrida, a Frenchman who has relentlessly and astonishingly exposed to uncertainties of language, once said that the signifier and the signified are not a unified entry, but rather an arbitrary and constantly shifting relationship.
In the poem, it says that the monkey is the one in the cage and not free:

“He held the bars and blinked his old man’s eyes…”

But later in the second stanza, Tiempo exposes the idea that the man is also in “a cage” and not free:

“Sometimes in your sleeping face upon the pillow,

I catch our own little truant unaware,

He had fled from our rain and the dark room of our cage…”

What is being said is a “living cage” – which can talk about the physical body, and problems in life. The monkey can be literally in bondage but men’s soul will never be free from the physical body, not until death comes. This suggests that man can never experience the freedom from our life and will never escape the sad reality of life aside from the force of death (apart from being born again spiritually [John 3:3, The Bible] which is a different topic :) hahah).Moreover, men are also imprisoned by our own trials, burdens, and problems in life, making the man lesser privileged over the other. This idea reminds us of the arbitrary and unstable nature of the text – giving the text a different meaning. (So if the Son set you free, you will be free indeed –Bible.)

Post-Modernism in "A Supermarket in California"

Post – Modernism in “A Supermarket in California”
by Perci Paras / AB/BSE Literature / PNU


As quoted by one writer of post-modernism, “the only certain thing is absolute ambiguity”. In reading the poem “A Supermarket in California” by Allen Ginsberg, reader would most probably be lost in its ambiguous structure, subject, and even message.

In the post-modern point of view, as applied in literature, the poem is trying to show what happened to America after post-modernism, where as after establishing a great nation of “absolute” liberty, order and idealism (as people would say, in relation to their American Dream), the poem, then, starts to give ideas that will contradict what history has already recorded.

“We strode down the open corridors together in

Our solitary fancy tasting artichokes, possessing every

Frozen delicacy, and never passing the cashier…”

From this stanza of the poem, what would be the picture of Americans? (You might say thieves… robbers…) and also, where is the image of America being the “Promise Land” – where everyone wants to be, to experience liberty and a life of peace?
Also in these lines:

“Will we stroll dreaming of the lost America of

Lone past blue automobiles in driveways,

Home to our silent cottage?”

What has become of America now?The expertise of Allen Ginsberg in using the language to transform reality into images shows a tenet post-modernism. Even the intertextuality of subject proves it, using Walt Whitman as his object in the poem (the poet behind “I Hear America Singing”… and the famous lines “Oh Captain my Captain”, among others) surely, Ginsberg wrote his subject as if it is new, well in fact, ”nothing is new” (another tenet of post-modernism). Interestingly, he mentioned something controversial about Whitman:

“I saw you, Walt Whitman, childless, lonely

Grubber, poking among the meats in the refrigerator

And eyeing the grocery boys.”

The last lines exposes Walt Whitman as a homosexual – “eyeing the grocery boys”. This might be (or might not) destroying his image to create something new. Also, according to another tenet of post-modernism, there is no lo9nger a need to quote the “grand narratives”; they are incorporated, to the point where the line between high art and commercial forms seems increasingly difficult to draw. It also shows that writer like Ginsberg will no longer be able to invent new styles because they’ve already been invented; but instead, he tried to make something new out of something already existing.

A Communicative Translation of the Novel "A Child of Sorrow" to Filipino

A COMMUNICATIVE TRANSLATION OF THE NOVEL“A CHILD OF SORROW” TO FILIPINO

Researcher / Translator: Percival S. Paras

Title: A Communicative Translation of the Novel A Child of Sorrow by Zoilo M.Galang to Filipino (Isang Komunikatibong Pagsasalin ng Nobelang A Child of Sorrow [Anak ng Pighati] ni Zoilo M. Galang sa Filipino)

Specializations: AB/BSE Literature & TESOL

Adviser: Dr. Ma. Antoinette C. Montealegre
Philippine Normal University
October, 2007

Objectives:This study aims to translate the novel A Child of Sorrow by Zoilo M. Galang from its original English version to Filipino. The communicative approach by Newmark was used in the translation.

Specifically, the study aims to:
1. Translate A Child of Sorrow from the Source language (SL), English, to the Target language (TL), Filipino.
2. Apply the techniques of Newmark’s Communicative Approach in the translation.
3. Identify the problems and give solutions through revisions to arrive at a final translation.
4. Evaluate the translation made by means of the comparison check and marginal notes from the evaluators of the translation.

Methods and Procedures:

1. The first draft of translation was made after several readings of the novel. The first draft of translation was evaluated using the comparison check and marginal notes.
2. After gathering all the data made by the evaluators, the translation was revised. The second draft of translation was again evaluated using the same comparison check and marginal notes.
3. The researcher gathered all the suggestions and recommendations of the evaluators to the translation.
After the second revision, the final draft of translation was made.

Findings:

1. There are grammatical errors in the original text (SL). It is necessary for the researcher to correct the grammar first before translating to Filipino.
2. The same strategy can be applied to words that connote a different meaning. The culture of the SL plays a vital role in probing for the exact perceived meaning or message received.
3. Some terms are translated literally. Some of the terms that were used are derived from the pre-translation done in the previous drafts. The one-to-one correspondence as an approach poses conflicting translation of the true meaning of the text.
4. Contradicting statements are present in the original text.
5. There are difficulties in sentence construction in the Filipino translation.


Conclusion:
Based on the findings on the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. The communicative approach can be appropriately used in translating the novel A Child of Sorrow by Zoilo Galang, from English to Filipino.
2. Applying the available techniques from Newmark is equally helpful.
3. The final revision is extensively done through the recommendations of the evaluators together with the researcher’s own intuition and discretion in translation. Comparison check and marginal notes are effective tools of the whole translation process.

Recommendations:
Based on the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are offered:
1. Any theory or method can be employed by a would-be-translator; however, the communicative approach is the most ideal way to transfer an original text to another translated version.
2. There are many techniques that can be used but Newmark’s techniques are effective steps in getting the equivalence in response. Finding the most appropriate techniques for your translation will likely ensure appropriateness in context.
3. Translating any novel is a sure challenge to any would be translator. It is a good practice for research and analysis, specially the complex sentence structures and cultural equivalents.
4. For future research of this similar work, administering questionnaires and rating scales to the target reader will greatly contribute to the validity of the evaluation.








For more information, visit the Department of Linguistics, Bilingual Education and Literature (LBEL) of The Philippine Normal University, College of Languages, Linguistics and Literature – Room 301, Bonifacio P. Sibayan Hall, or contact the researcher/translator at perci.paras@yahoo.com

who is Eleanor Rigby? (The Beatles)

WHO IS ELEANOR RIGBY?
By Percival Paras / Philippine Normal University

In the survey “The 25 most exquisitely sad songs in the whole world” conducted by Spinner.com, Eleanor Rigby of The Beatles ranked 3rd. (Spinner.com © 2008 AOL LLC. All Rights Reserved.) While a lot of commentaries available on the internet and magazines says that Eleanor Rigby of The Beatles is a sad song that talks about the inner life of a lady named Eleanor Rigby, who was with a seemingly-happy family, but deep inside was lonely; no body has truly provided an intelligible and concrete answer behind her loneliness except from some historical or biographical so-called proofs that some reviewers gave. These proofs are based on other articles and wild maybes. But the answer to her loneliness is in the lyrics of the song itself; however, we should identify first who really was Eleanor Rigby.

The song says:

Eleanor Rigby, picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been. Lives in a dream. Waits at a window, wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door. Who is it for? All the lonely people, where do they all come from? All the lonely people, where do they all belong?

The opening lyrics are quite vague unless you read the whole lyrics. But somehow, it gives us clues. Is the face that she keeps in a jar by the door a mask? Is it a literal mask or a mask of pretension? Why does she need to hide behind that mask? What is she trying to hide? Then the question came… Where do they all come from? Where do they all belong? The first one is a question of origin, while the second is of identity. Of course, our origin defines our identity. Like a Christian who acknowledges that his origin is from God, then his identity is on God as well. Eleanor’s identity will be traced by his origin (or where she came from). Could there be something wrong with her and her identity that’s why she’s hiding behind the mask?

Next:

Father McKenzie, writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear, no one comes near. Look at him working, darning his socks in the night when there’s nobody there. What does he care? All the lonely people, where do they all come from? All the lonely people, where do they all belong?

Right after Eleanor Rigby, a Father McKenzie came in the picture. Who is this person? How is he related to Eleanor Rigby? (If not, why would his name be mentioned here?) If no one would hear his sermon, there might be something wrong with his credibility as a priest. Then if he’s not earning a living by being a priest, he should be working, just like what the song says… look at him working, darning his socks in the night… after which, a question says, what does he care? Why does he have to work? Must he provide for someone else? For Eleanor? Why? How was Eleanor Rigby related to Father McKenzie, that he had to provide for her? Could he be the father of Eleanor? That might be a shocking question, but before we answer that, let’s look at the remaining lines from the song:

Eleanor Rigby, died in the church and was buried along with her name, nobody came. Father McKenzie, wiping the dirt from his hands as he walks from the grave, no one was saved…

Notice that there is a big leap on the story of Eleanor Rigby, because here in the last part, it’s already her death, the end of her story – but true enough, it’s not yet the end but just the start of a bigger revelation of who she really was. She died and was buried along with her name… only with her name. Her name might be her only possession. As we know, names are for identities. Our name is who we are. We are called by it, we are known by it, we are associated by someone or something because of it. Her name is who she was. She was Eleanor. Eleanor Rigby. But why would the song have to say that she died along with her name, if obviously we die with our name? I believe that it was placed there for emphasis…that she died with that name, which makes us think that she could die with another name. Now the answer comes. She died and was buried along with the name Eleanor Rigby but it wasn’t her real name. It might be a name given by Father McKenzie, to hide her identity from other people. She must be an Eleanor McKenzie, but to hide the shame of being a daughter of a priest (coz priest should not have a daughter) he named her Rigby. But she had to be with her dad, live with her dad, stay with her dad and grow up with her dad. That’s why father McKenzie have to work to earn a living for them. It’s also the reason why no one would listen to his sermons. He is not anymore credible (according to the Catholic rules). Eleanor was a forbidden daughter. She was a sinful fruit of a “holy” minister. There was no mention of how she died (it can be suicide or murder) if you are emotional, you might identify with her and think that she committed suicide to end her loneliness, but if you are not, you might think that she was murdered by her own father, father McKenzie, to cover up for his shame of having a daughter. And on her death, nobody came, because she doesn’t have any family except her father. The song says, Father McKenzie, wiping the dirt from his hands as he walks from the grave. The wiping of the hand could mean the literal taking away of dirt after burying her, or can be a figurative wiping of hands, which connotes denial of sin or trying to be innocent. Either of the two, one fact remains, being a daughter of priest is lonely, isn’t it? Here, we already identified who really Eleanor Rigby, hence, the reason why she was lonely.