The American Dream

'The American Dream' immediately makes me think of a little suburban house with a white picket fence, a father with a lousy job that pays the bills, a beautiful wife with three children and a perfect little dog, but it means much more than just that. The American Dream is rooted within the Declaration of Independence, with "all men are created equal and that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". The Founding Fathers introduced the revolutionary idea that each person's desire to pursue their idea of happiness was not self-indulgence, but a necessary driver of a prosperous society. The essence of 'The American Dream' implies an opportunity for all Americans to achieve prosperity through hard work. No matter your background, social status, wealth, or ethnicity, you can arise and attain your greatest hopes and dreams.

It is a common expression to say that 'money can't buy happiness', while American society is essentially based on the fact that it can. To me, happiness is determined by a focus on more of what really matters, such as creating a meaningful life, contributing to community and society, valuing nature, and spending time with family and friends. But with the romanticization of the 'American Dream', the definition of happiness began to change. Happiness was driven by a greed for wealth, determined by the acquisition of material things, seen clearly in F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. American society has essentially romanticized the idea of wealth, and completely flipped the concept of the 'American Dream' put in place by our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence.

In American society, happiness is completely reliant on wealth. People in poverty are looked down upon, and people with wealth are deemed successful. Success is dependent on how much money you make, what house you can afford to live in, what car you can afford to drive. And that is the 'American Dream'. Having a nice house with a white picket fence, a well-cared for family, a lousy job that pays the bills, and a lovely wife and children with a perfect little dog is living the American Dream, living with ultimate happiness, and that is all reliant on having the amount of wealth to uphold it.

A reflection: who I am now and who I wish to become.
While I could say that I believe money can't buy happiness, you may not believe me. I live in a relatively wealthy family, with three nice cars, three lovely children, and two loving parents in a nice neighborhood, and while I lack the white picket fence, I would say that we live the 'American Dream'. My parents have great jobs and have worked hard to acquire the amount of wealth that they have, and they represent the notion that all Americans can achieve prosperity through hard work. But, that doesn't determine our happiness. I can tell you right now that I am not the happiest person on Earth, and my family isn't either. I hope that the 'American Dream' I am supposedly living in is not the 'American Dream' that means reaching ultimate happiness. Because I still have so much to learn, so many people to meet, so many places to see, and so many things to realize about myself. And that's what determines happiness, not the number in my bank account.

I couldn't chair less about this blog post

Since it is common in current literature for meaning to get blurred and fraudulent interpretations to take flight, how could it not happen even further after the process of translation? So much significant and valuable meaning can be lost in the process of translation. In my Latin class, we majorly analyze this, and we often find that there is meaning behind things like the word structure of lines in Latin that adds another layer of importance to the message, and is completely lost in the process of translation.

In Franz Kafka's German novella Metamorphosis tells the story of Gregor Samsa, who wakes to find himself transformed into a large insect. Kafka's work represented a description of the absurd condition, but Kafka failed as an absurd writer because his characters and his work maintain a sense of hope. Each translation offers a different interpretation on his transformation and greatly represents how meaning can be easily lost in translation. 

#1: As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

This translation, first of all, has a very contained and neutral tone, with somewhat calm diction such as "awoke one morning' and 'uneasy dreams'. His dreams are 'uneasy' as opposed to horrific or disturbing, words that would make his transformation seem more intense. Additionally, it creates more imagery with the inclusion of the 'bed' for setting and the word 'gigantic' to show his size. The sentence has no pauses and builds suspense to the very end, showing what he transformed into. This sentence blatantly says the actions and the plot but does not show anything about the main character and his feelings about the transformation, and it has a very neutral tone, making me unsure about whether this was very surprising or not at all. This translation also makes the action seem more current and makes the reader feel in the story, with the usage of "As Gregor Samsa awoke... he found...".

#2: Gregory Samsa woke from uneasy dreams one morning to find himself changed into a giant bug.

This translation is short, sweet, and quickly gets to the point. It uses the same diction with the 'uneasy dreams' as the first translation, but toward the end, the light diction used in 'changed into a giant bug' makes the transformation seem very underexaggerated. The word 'changed' as opposed to 'transformed' makes it seem like a usual occurrence for him to be 'changing' into this bug. Additionally, 'giant bug' while shows the size of him, has less of an effect on the reader as opposed to 'gigantic insect' in translation 1. The diction is therefore very subdued. Also, the translator does not include the detail that he woke in his bed, leaving less room for imagery, as the setting is not really emphasized. This translation also seems more written and more of a story being told with the usage of the narrative writing. 

#3: When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning he found he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug.

This translation has stronger diction than translation 1 and 2, shown by the usage of 'troubled dreams' and 'enormous bug'. I think that the usage of 'troubled' specifies his emotions more strongly, and 'enormous' is a much stronger word to describe his size and makes the situation seem more transformative. The structure is very similar to translation one, as it arranges the words in the same manner, including the topic of transformation at the end, as the other translations do, and including the detail of being in bed. This translation, like translation 2, is written more narratively with lots of past tense, and makes it seem more like a story being told, shown by "When Gregor Samsa awoke... he found he had been...".

#4: One morning, upon awakening from agitated dreams, Gregor Samsa found himself, in his bed, transformed into a monstrous vermin.

Finally, this translation has much stronger diction than the other three, with words like 'agitated dreams' and 'monstrous vermin'. It makes the transformation seem abrupt, unexpected, and horrific. It makes imagery for the reader, with the words 'monstrous vermin' disgusting and making the reader uneasy. Additionally, the sentence has lots of commas and pauses, building suspense for the end of the sentence revealing what had happened. 

Original: Als Gregor Samsa eines Morgens aus unruhigen Träumen erwachte, fand er sich in seinem Bett zu einem ungeheuren Ungeziefer verwandelt.

How does the word choice, syntax, punctuation, and imagery shift in each affect meaning? Is one more effective than another? Why? What does this exercise bring up about the difficulty of reading translated texts? How do different translations effect the tone of the sentence? 

Each translation is different in their own ways, but all present different interpretations of the story. Translation 1 makes the transformation very non-dramatic with no punctuation and neutral diction which creates less imagery. It presents the transformation as less significant and more a usual occurrence. Translation 2 is similar, as it is simple and gets straight to the point. The casual diction and the short syntax makes the transformation seem even less significant than translation 1 does, and it is a very simple translation, adding no effect to the story and having no effect on the reader. Translation 3 is also similar to translation 1, except the diction is a little more enhanced and makes the transformation seem more enticing and significant to the story. I think translation 4 did a good job of enticing the reader and making the writing fit the context of the occasion. It uses very dramatic diction, creates imagery galore, and uses lots of punctuation to slow down the sentence and add suspense. All of this makes the transformation seem like a large and important occasion, contrasting from the other translations. But personally, I like translation 2 the most because it creates the absurdist idea that life is meaningless and that the transformation to a bug had no great importance to his life. It intrigues me in a different way because the simplicity of the sentence containing such a large concept is interesting. 

I think this brings about the difficulty of reading translated texts because the emotion and the deeper meaning of texts are lost in the process of translating, and these translations perfectly present that idea. The context of the sentence is clearly a dramatic concept, and some sort of emotion must be connected to the transformation of a man to an insect. I think that in the process of translation, the emotion tied to a text may be lost, and in some circumstances, such as this one, emotion may be incredibly important to the context of the story. As we can see, different translations can create a totally different interpretation of a story, and while some can make a transformation to a bug seem like a normal thing, others can make it seem incredibly abnormal just with the usage of things like diction and syntax. We, as the audience of a translated story, don't know if the author meant to make the sentence take an absurdist route or express much drama and emotion over the transformation. Therefore translated texts leave much up to interpretation to the reader, and bring into question whether translated texts can be analyzed if the work doesn't and can't fully encompass the author's intention.