Rubadubbing the wrong way

NYCulture vulture Felix Salmon reviews Dramaten‘s New York production of Ibsen’s Ghosts at BAM, directed by Ingmar Bergman. He can’t get over the fact that they’ve decided to offer simultaneous translation from Swedish á la UN instead of surtitles á la Opera.

The idea of dubbing any performance, as opposed to sur/subtitling it, is not just plain irritating, but wasteful, and unimaginative in its use of modern technology.

Irritating, for the same reason that dubbed movies are irritating. Actors’ voices are an integral part of the performance. Dubbing replaces part of the performance, while sur/subtitling complements it. And — not that Felix is in any danger of learning Swedish — it insulates the viewer from new languagesThe French, Germans and Spaniards — all notorious film dubbers — speak far worse English than the Dutch, Flemish and Swedes..

Astonishingly, I’ve actually met people here in Europe who prefer dubbed films. There is less information to process; it’s easier, they say. I wonder if Bergman — who not only likes to control every aspect of a production, but who is known to condescend — assumed Americans couldn’t handle surtitles. Too many notes, so to speakImagine applying the same logic to Opera: simultaneous translation of La Bohème into English, helpfully read out to you through a headset..

Wasteful, because the performance, whether on screen or live, is a fixed text. Having translators would make sense if the words were improvised, but having them grope for the same mot juste every performance seems silly. From Felix’s description, it seems they didn’t even have a fixed text to read from.

An unimaginative use of modern technology, and not just because the deaf have no recourse, as they do with sub- and surtitles, to text versions of the spoken wordI love Swedish DVDs of Swedish movies because they all have Swedish subtitles; perfect for learning..

I have no idea how much it would cost to buy or rent a surtitling system as with the opera. It can’t be that much — it’s glorified trainstation timetable technology. But perhaps the systems are just not portable enough for limited runs. In which case, how about setting up a little Wi-Fi network in the theatre and renting out Palms/Pocket PCs with a push technology app on it? You’d have the entire script right in front of you, with a little dot, much like with karaoke machines, running alongside it. You could even have the original Norwegian script, if you’re a devout Ibsenist, or the director’s written commentary to follow. This last feature, instead of having you walk out half-way, might have you come back for seconds.

3 thoughts on “Rubadubbing the wrong way

  1. The reason Bergman chose dubbing as opposed to surtitles is simply that he is a very vision-minded director and he doesn’t want the audience to take their eyes away from the actors. Sim.translation is definitively not an ideal solution, but neither is surtitles.

  2. If you need any information about possibilities and prices for surtitle equipment (opera, theatres and chours) just call me. We have big LED screens, slave-displays and seat-displays.

  3. Most Scandivian countries prefer Subtitling
    to Dubbing
    Though now all countries follow subtitling for Deaf & hard of hearing people.
    60% of dubbed productions are bad due to various reasons & hence the general perception against it.
    Both,Dubbing/Subtitling,require perfect hands to ensure that the final result does justice to the local audience & original programme.Both equally input in education of masses in long run.
    Technical advancement at highest level wouldn’t mean exsist of localization..infact all such events will require localization at all stages to be able to “talk” to each person across the globe in their language.
    Lawrence Visnu
    CEO
    Media Movers, Inc.
    Dubbing/Subtitling/Voice over Company
    http://www.media-movers.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *