[ SECRET POST #3023 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3023 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 056 secrets from Secret Submission Post #432.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[silverr]

I don't think it's all that bad, though? -- it sounds like it was just an arbritrary detail of little importance.

If it were all that essential to the plot one of the editors would have redlined it (though in that case I'm betting OP wouldn't have done it anyhow).

[(Anonymous)]

It's still rather disrespectful of the original author though.

[silverr]

I can see that, and while I agree that it's not entirely professional, without knowing more details about the context of the Easter egg (what the work is /what the overall tone of the work is, what OP ought to have translated the Whovian reference as) I don't think it qualifies as a major crime, either.

[(Anonymous)]

Of course it's not a major crime. It's just really disrespectful.

[(Anonymous)]

It depends. I'm also a professional translator, and it's potentially a pretty crass ethics violation. Still, if it was a literary translation, it might not be so critical to the text.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Without saying exactly what the text is...

One character is trying on suits. The woman with him is critiquing the suits he tries on. She says "No, not this, no, not that. That makes you look like X. That makes you look like Y. And that makes you look like the Doctor." He chooses not to wear any of them and picks a different suit.

The original said that it just make him look posh/old.

After that conversation, none of that information is never mentioned again, so it's really a one-off scene.

Man, If you knew how casually my editors change text, this would seem like absolutely nothing. I just had an editor re-write a rape scene as consensual. I get why they did it, but those editorial decisions have a FAR greater impact than what I did. Who's the "unethical" one here?

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I hoe you and your editors stick with translating fiction, because that attitude (aka unethical practice while blaming the other party) can lead to a lawsuit in any other field.

[thistlechaser]

Even if it's an "arbritrary detail of little importance", it's not the secret maker's place to add their own references into someone else's work. They're supposed to translate it to the best of their abilities.