Sinophone Adaptations of Shakespeare: An Anthology, 1987–2007. Ed. Alexa Alice Joubin. Palgrave Macmillan, 2022. 303 pp.

Reviewed by Zhixuan (Mia) Zhu

Sinophone Adaptations of Shakespeare: An Anthology, 1987–2007 (2022), edited by Alexa Alice Joubin, consists of an introductory chapter by the editor and seven English translations of Sinophone Shakespeare adaptations in different performance genres between 1987 and 2007, rendered by different translators. The anthology is divided into three sections, each focusing on two adaptations of one of the three tragedies, King Lear, Hamlet, and Macbeth, with a coda that merges the three plays together with Othello and thus brings the book full circle. These sections are also organized thematically under topics such as existentialism, self-identities, and the tension and connection between traditional and avant-garde performance forms. Ultimately, the book aims to broaden the English readers’ perspective on the richness and diversity of “non-Anglophone understanding of Shakespeare and Sinophone performance practices today” (Joubin 2).

One striking feature of the anthology is its framework of “the region as method.” Instead of using “Chinese-speaking” as its selection criteria, the book adopts the inclusive concept of the “Sinophone,” which refers to “communities that are connected to or are resisting various forms of dominant Sinocentric ideologies” (8). Such a geo-cultural framework means that the selected plays may originate from regions beyond China and cultures that circumvent the nationalist pursuit of “Chineseness.” They can be in languages in the Sino-Tibetan language family other than Mandarin, such as Suzhou vernacular in Story of Bloody Hands (chapter 4) and Taiwanese in The Witches’ Sonata (chapter 5). By juxtaposing these diverse locations and languages, the book breaks away from the prevailing “East-West” dichotomy and the tendency to endow Shakespeare’s original texts (and by extension, the Western dramatic tradition) with a canonical authority in the discussion of Asian Shakespeare adaptations. Instead, it emphasizes intra-cultural dynamics and the “connections between distinctive and often conficting interpretations of Sinophone aesthetics and Shakespeare” (3). The regional framework is firmly anchored in the structure of the book: along with the opening chapter by the editor that introduces the Sinophone world in broad strokes, each translation is coupled with a detailed introductory passage that contextualize[s] and historicize[s] the adaptation by situating it within the larger region. Each chapter thus gives readers a snippet of the complex cultural and historical phenomenons of the region by using the translated script as an access point.

To evaluate the language style and quality of these diverse translations, it is essential to understand their collective purpose. And it is commendable that the opening chapter states the anthology’s three-fold goal clearly for the readers: artistically, it aims to showcase the Sinophone directors’ “methodic transformations of three of Shakespeare’s tragedies into various performance genres” (2); pedagogically, the plays are selected partly for their “curricular applicability” and it is intended as a tool for teaching global Shakespeare or Sinophone theatre.In terms of research value, the anthology “turns influential plays into stable, citable, common objects of study” (18) to provide researchers with an easier access to primary research materials. True to these functions, the translations do not prioritize the practical stageability of the language but offer an elegant language style that affords a smooth reading experience with detailed annotations to facilitate study and research. For instance, with the operatic productions (chapters 4, 6, and 7), although the translations do not correspond perfectly to the rhythms of the stylized performance in highly condensed classical Sinophone languages, meaning that they might still need some polishing before being performed in English, the translators make an effort to render some of the rhymes into English that help preserve the poetic quality of the original texts.

While not primarily created for staging purposes, these translations provoke stage imaginations instead of limiting themselves to the page. For example, as classical Chinese lines in operatic forms boast rich imagery in poetic idioms and proverbial expressions that do not have an English equivalence, the translations often choose preserving the “foreignness” of the imagery and symbolism with a literal translating approach over “localizing” them in the English context. The metaphorical expression “hai yan he qing 海晏河清,” for instance, is translated literally into “The sea calm, the river clear, and peace we enjoy” (Chang and Joubin 217), rather than only its implication of the country in a peaceful and prosperous state. On the one hand, the imagery and symbols in traditional operatic performances often correspond to stylized gestures. Such a translation method allows the readers to imagine the gestures and make connections between the texts and the performance recordings linked in the chapters. The translations’ resistance to localizing the imagery and symbols also supports the book’s larger anti-Eurocentrism agenda and its infra-cultural focus. English readers are challenged to visualize these novel expressions by immersing themselves in the Sinophone context and language style instead of falling back on the original Shakespeare texts and the Western dramatic tradition to interpret Sinophone cultures and theatrical practices. As a result, the translations provide a solid ground for directors and producers in the English-speaking world to visualize the performances before making their own artistic choices in future productions.

Under the overall arch of the three-fold goal, each chapter demonstrates diverse language styles and translation strategies of different translators. Some of these strategies are exemplary in theatre translation. For instance, as many of the plays are translated not from textual scripts but video recordings, some translators, such as Siyuan Liu and Alexa Alice Joubin in chapter 4, add stage directions to the dialogues based on their professional analysis of the videos, facilitating the readers in visualizing the flow of the performances. The same chapter also attempts to preserve the musicality of the lyrical lines by translating them into English ones with corresponding syntax, temporal rhythms, and duration, cultivating an experience of the original operatic form in reading. The other side of the coin in juxtaposing a diverse pool of translators, however, is that the lack of cohesion in translation strategies becomes evident. Some of the effective strategies are regretfully not maintained throughout all chapters. For example, in the translation of Lear Is Here (chapter 7), while the production video presents rich interpretative potentials with the actor’s stylized movements and creative use of props, the translator does not add any stage directions and these embodied connotations are lost to the readers. There are also cases where the transitions from dialogue to singing in the operatic performances are not marked in the translations, which leaves a blank in the readers’ imagination of how the lines are delivered and the overall pace of the show. I believe such oversights can be overcome by establishing a closer collaborative relationship between translators, allowing them to share their experience and promote best practices.

Despite the minor strategic oversight, Sinophone Adaptations of Shakespeare: An Anthology, 1987–2007 is a worthy attempt not just in Shakespeare translation but also in using translation as a theatre studies and artistic methodology. Before this book, many of the selected plays existed only as ephemeral memories, fragments of reviews, or mediated photos/recordings. By translating and thus grafting them from the various media into an anthology, the book demonstrates how translation can be site of archiving cross-cultural exchanges and experimental theatre undertakings. The decision to pair the translations together and attach an introductory passage to each that explains their unique values in Sinophone theatre also shows the importance of contextualization and historicization in archiving theatre texts. By drawing on the collective wisdom of scholars and translators and juxtaposing their different approaches, the anthology practices polyphonic translation, generating a multitude of best practices for future researchers and translators. And by preserving the poetic imagery and symbolism of the Sinophone language in the translation, the book offers artists a window into the Sinophone performance style, which might facilitate their endeavor in staging these productions in English. As the first anthology to bring Sinophone Shakespeare adaptations into the English world through translation, it is worth the time and attention of both readers who seek information on Sinophone Shakespeare and those who are invested in the theories and practices of theatre translation.

Zhixuan (Mia) Zhu is a doctoral student in Theatre and Performance at the Graduate Center, City University of New York. She holds an MA in Theatre Studies from the University of British Columbia, Canada, and a BA in Translation and Interpreting from the Beijing Foreign Studies University, China. Her research interests include theatre and performance translation, performance and new media, puppetry and performing objects, and Chinese theatre history. Currently, she is investigating how the curation of performance sites contributes to the communitization of the audience. Her analysis of the theatricality of early 20th century Chinese woman playwright Bai Wei’ s rarely staged plays, adapted from her MA thesis, was published in Asian Theatre Journal in 2023 and her essay on the potential of performing objects in expressing political dissent is in Puppetry International Research (2023).