Freud no plural: uma leitura próxima e desconstrutiva das traduções freudianas no Brasil

Abstract

This research is focused on the debate surrounding the translations of Sigmund Freud, in particular the Brazillian Portuguese versions. The translations of Freud’s texts have been subject to criticism and controversy since the English Standard Edition collection, which was elaborated by Ernest Jones and James Strachey in England. This theme has Brazilian specificities because the first versions of Freud’s texts were based on other translations, rather than the original in German. Since 2010, a movement emerged in Brazil to retranslate Freud’s texts, with different translators criticizing the earlier indirect translations. By questioning the differences between these new translations, this research aimed to produce discussions about the similarities and differences between the Brazilian translations and the possible implications of these differences. I conducted a close and deconstructive reading of five versions of the article “Trauer Und Melancolie” (1917). Based on this analysis, I discussed how these translations understand the forms of translation in different ways and how they relate to the English and French traditions of Freudian translation. Rather than aim for a universal and timeless translation, it is argued that Sigmund Freud is “untranslatable”, a term coined by Barbara Cassin to describe what never ceases to not be translated. Therefore, it is appropriate to retranslate Freud's texts in new manners. The constant movement of retranslation can be enriching for readers because, while something may be lost in translation, new relevant additions could be made, expanding the text. As such, I defend a plural Freud recognizing the plurality of his readers and translators.