Dr Carlos Alvarado has produced a blog post
which points out that a large quantity of psychical research has been published
in languages other than English, aptly titled ‘All Our Past is Not in English’. He notes that publications which rely solely
on English-language sources often provide an incomplete, or even erroneous,
picture because they fail to take account of what was going on elsewhere and not
reported in English:
'These works tend to
emphasize developments in the English-language world—such as the work of the
Society for Psychical Research and of J.B. Rhine and associates—to the neglect
of developments in other countries. No one would deny the importance of this
work. What I decry here is that reliance on these sources produces an
incomplete view of the development of the discipline. But what is worse is that
some seem to have accepted these incomplete views as the whole canon, and feel
no need even to qualify the obvious incompleteness of their writings.
This concern resonates with me as Reviews
Editor of the Journal of the Society for
Psychical Research. I am aware that
a great deal is published which is not in English, and much of this remains
inaccessible to the monoglot English-language reader. Occasionally I am able to run a review, in
English, of a foreign-language book (usually either German or Spanish), which I
am happy to do because the Society for Psychical Research is an international
organisation, but I am always conscious that the bulk people who read the
review will not be able to access the original text.
The major difficulty I have, over and above
hearing about and being able to evaluate such books, and the perennial one of
people not having the time to write book reviews in any language, is finding
reviewers who are both knowledgeable about the subject under consideration and
able to write decent enough English that I at least know what they are trying
to say, even if the review requires polishing to bring it to the required
standard. Those obstacles mean it is
possible to cover only a small proportion of what is published in languages
other than English. There is a
considerable volume that English-language readers never even get to hear about,
much less read.
Alvarado is quite correct in highlighting an
issue that many writers seem happy to ignore; after all, a smooth enough
history can be fashioned from English-language sources and whatever happens to
have been translated. He remarks that
the situation is improving to an extent, though with historians rather than
psychical researchers tending to make the running. I have to say that while this is to be
applauded, there are often problems when non-specialists tackle an area in
which they may possess depth in the specific topic they are examining but not
breadth in the wider subject. And
English-language readers still do not have access to the sources to be able to
check the validity of what is written.
What can be done about this state of
affairs? Well, certainly we could all
learn additional languages, however reaching the required standard isn’t going
to be feasible for most adults. At one
time the SPR was not afraid to publish reports in non-English languages on the
assumption that readers would understand them; those days are sadly long
gone. Being practical, professional translations
would be ideal, but translators are expensive and not always au fait with specialised terminology.
One possibility that would help to address the
problem in a small way is group sourcing of translators, a kind of Wiki effort involving
a number of people collaborating to produce translations with the consent of
the author that could either be submitted to a publisher or appear in an online
edition. This type of project might be
best aimed at journal papers rather than books and requires careful quality
control. It would make sense to focus on
rendering foreign works into English as this would make them accessible to the
greatest number of people. Something
that might stimulate interest in translation is to institute a book prize. The Parapsychological Association makes a
number of awards each year and one for the best translated book could easily
fit into its scheme.
Those researchers who are fluent in more than
one language should try wherever possible to make their results available in
them all. A number of scholars are keen
to transcend linguistic boundaries to reach the widest possible audience. Carlos Alvarado himself is one, bringing foreign-language
information to English-speaking readers.
Icelandic Erlendur Haraldsson writes in English, as does German Andreas
Sommer. In the opposite direction, Francisco
Cánovas Picón has a blog in which he frequently translates English-language
material into Spanish (including an article of mine on the Warrens and
Enfield). Alvarado suggests recruiting
colleagues who can help with the literature in various languages, as he has
done in his tireless efforts to disseminate the international history of psychical
research. The key to progress is to
share information, and the wider it is shared, the greater will be its
contribution to enriching the field.
That entails breaking down language barriers wherever possible.
