و نه چندان مبسوط آمده است.
– البته تمامی مطالب کتاب با واقعیتهای جهانی همخوانی ندارد و نظرات و قضاوتهای نویسنده نیز دربارهی تمامی گروهها و نظامهای حاکم بر کشورهای مختلف کاملا صادق نیست.
Show that although the Center of Islamic Republic Documents appreciates the view of the writer and his work, they are not in agreement with all the matters went on in the book. They believe that since Iran played a vital role in not only the Middle East but also over the globe dealing with matters related to Iran must have been more in depth and length.
In the preface of the book “All the Shah’s Men, An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror” written by Stephen Kinzer who is a veteran New York Times correspondent and has reported from more than fifty countries on five continents we are facing someone who is in the US context and is trying to elaborate on the matter why the outlook of people outside the borders of the US is gloomy toward America. Looking at the following sentence which are told by an Iranian woman, we figure out the main mission of Kinzer’s writing this book is to go into the detail of the reasons why other countries mistrust the USA, so that this would never happen in the future and America would gain the trust of other nations back and become the godfather everyone expects.
“Why did you Americans do that terrible thing?” she cried out. “We always loved America. To us, America was the great country, the perfect country, the country that helped us while other countries were exploiting us. But after that moment, no one in Iran ever trusted the United States again. I can tell you for sure that if you had not done that thing, you would never have had that problem of hostages being taken in your embassy in Tehran. All your trouble started in 1953.Why, why did you do it?”
Moreover in one paragraph of the preface kinzer uses the word “Theocracy” to refer to the newborn Iranian government which was elected in a public election as Islamic Republic of Iran and takes for granted that this government uses “terrorism” as its weapon to control the country. The sentences are as follows:
”In Iran, almost everyone has for decades known that the United States was responsible for putting an end to democratic rules in 1953 and installing what became the long dictatorship of Mohammad Reza Shah. His dictatorship produced the Islamic Revolution of 1979, which brought to power a passionately anti-American theocracy that embraced terrorism as a tool of statecraft. Its radicalism inspired anti-Western fanatics in many countries, most notably Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda and other terror groups found homes and bases.”
On the other hand Shahryar Khavajian, the translator of the book ” همهی مردان شاه، کودتای آمریکایی ۲۸ مرداد و ریشههای ترور در خاور میانه” although respects the idea of the writer of the book to some extent, he is not after reclaiming the lost reputation of the USA as kinzer is. Khavajian as an Iranian does not believe in the reasons Americans standing upon to force the Coup to Iranians. Americans claim that they arranged the Coup in Iran just because the danger of communism and the Soviet Union was threatening Iran. Khavajian says “if the Soviet Union had been going to attack Iran and had had the power to do so, it would have happened after withdrawal of American and British soldiers from Iran when still Stalin was in power.”
Another point is that kinzer mentions in different parts of his book, specifically, the back of the cover page of the translated book that what USA had done 60 years ago ignited a flame, in that America is still burning. One of those flares coming out of the flame of American Coup in Iran, he claims, is Iran’s revolution which if it had not been for the Coup it would not had happened and Americans would not have had such problems they are facing now. On page 203 of his book he mentions the above mentioned ideas as this:
“With their devotion to radical Islam and their eagerness to embrace even the most horrific kinds of violence, Iran’s revolutionary leaders became heroes to fanatics in many countries. Among those who were inspired by their example were Afghans who founded the Taliban, led it to power in Kabul, and gave Osama bin-Laden the base from which he launched devastating terror attacks. It is not far-fetched to draw a line from Operation Ajax through the Shah’s repressive regime and the Islamic Revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York.”
What he mentioned above bears two sides. One is informing Americans of why hatred around the globe toward them is growing and why they are suffering from terrorism so much. Another side of the coin is that America has done a bad deed once 60 years ago in a corner of the world, and Americans are still suffering from it. Looking upon the matter in this perspective brings pity for Americans. The latter view also takes for granted that whatever is happening to the USA is on behalf of Islamic extremists, at the top of them Iranians. Nonetheless, it has not yet been indicated that one who was behind the attack to the World Trade Center.
This showed that the translation aimed at showing that America was a false pretender of democracy and human rights. While the author’s objective, as stated in the preface and specifically the last parts of the book, was to show that the Coup in Iran in spite of America’s direct meddling was the cause of later side-effects.
۴.۳.۲ Translation Strategies
By analyzing the strategies applied in the translation of these two books, it became clear that in both سرکوب امید، دخالتهای نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی” دوم به بعد” and همهی مردان شاه، کودتای آمریکایی ۲۸ مرداد و ریشههای ترور در خاور میانه”” the translation strategies were applied purposefully and ideologically. The justification of choosing each strategy is brought after each case. In the following the strategies the translators, Khavvajian and Hooshang Mahdavi, employed to apply their ideologies to the TT are brought in length and in short (in tables 4.3 & 4.31).
۴.۳.۲.۱ ”Killing Hope, US military and CIA interventions since World War II”
In the translation of the ”Killing Hope, US military and CIA interventions since World War II” different strategies such as omission, addition or over-wording, mistranslation, under-translation, substitution or alteration, and explicitation were applied. Since the organization behind the translation of this book, “”مرکز اسناد انقلاب اسلامی, is supported directly by the government, the strategies were applied consciously by the translator to fulfill the expectation of the mentioned organization or his own beliefs. The number and percentage of each strategy is depicted in table 4.1 below.
Table 4.3- strategies applied in the translation of Killing Hope, ”سرکوب امید، دخالتهای نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی دوم به بعد”
Strategies Applied in Translation of Killing Hope
Rearrangemet of Sentence Elements
Selection of Parts From Wholes
Total Number of Strategies
Here come the cases on which the investigation of translation strategies has taken place and divided based on each strategy:
۴.۳.۲.۱.۱ Omission Strategy
“After completing training, each group of Tibetans was flown to Taiwan or another friendly Asian country, …” (p.25)
“… به تایوان یا کشور آسیایی دیگری گسیل میشدند … ” (ص. ۲۸)
The translator did not use “friendly Asian country” because to the country of the author -USA- may some Asian countries be friendly which in the eye of the translator’s country -Iran- they are not considered as allies. In this regard he used omission strategy to fulfill the ideology he believes in.
“the Iranian Communist Party (The Tudeh)” (p.65)
“حزب کمونیست توده”(ص. ۱۳۶)
By omitting the word “Iranian” consciously or unconsciously, being under the influence of Islam, the translator avoids mentioning that “The Tudeh” party was also part of Iranian history. So somehow he is trying to purify the name of his country from the Communist ideology.
“[Mosaddegh] had appointed some Tudeh sympathizers to government posts.” (p.66)
The above sentence from the ST is totally omitted from the TT may be because Mosaddegh was a national figure and did really important measures for his country the translator did not want to mention that he had communist inclinations.
“the “The notorious Iranian secret police, SAVAK, created under the guidance of the
CIA and Israel,…” (p. 71)
“ساواک پلیس امنیت بدنام ایران که به راهنمایی موساد اسراییل تاسیس شد،…” (ص. ۱۵۱)
In the translated text two strategies are employed by the translator: explicitation and deletion. The translator used “Israel” next to “Mossad” to highlight Israel’s role in training notorious SAVAK agents. Also he deleted “CIA” from the translated text to magnify the role of “Israel” which is Iran’s number one enemy. Since the Israeli forces occupied Palestine, Iran does not even recognize them as a country.
“it [Syria] was the only state in the area to refuse all US economic or military assistance.” (p.85)
“]سوریه[ تنها کشور منطقه به شمار میآمد که کمک نظامی آمریکا را نپذیرفته بود.” (ص. ۱۸۱)
Omitting the term “economic” by the translator represents the fact that he is trying to induce that American help can only cover military part and this country is always after military interference.
“the United States is prepared to use armed forces to assist any Middle East country requesting assistance against armed aggression from any country controlled by international communism”. (p. 89)
“ایالات متحده برای حفظ تمامیت ارضی و استقلال سیاسی ملتهایی که برای مقابله با تجاوز آشکار مسلحانهی کشورهای زیر نفوذ کمونیسم بینالمللی چنین کمکی را تقاضا کنند، قوای مسلح خود را به کار خواهد برد.”(ص. ۱۹۲)
As it is obvious above there is no sign of Middle East in the translation. By deleting Middle East from the translation, the translator indicates that the US army is going to interfere everywhere over the globe.
۴.۳.۲.۱.۲ Substitution/ Alteration strategies
“An altitude approximating that of their mountainous homeland”(p. 25)
“ارتفاع آن شبیه تبت بود”(ص. ۲۸)
By using the adjective “mountainous” and the word ”homeland” instead of Tibet itself the writer brings a sense