Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper examines dubbing as a site of plastic translation through a historical analysis of Korea–Hong Kong co-produced and re-produced films from the 1950s to the 1980s. Dubbing has long attracted criticism as an inauthentic or manipulative mode of audiovisual translation. Rather than rejecting these critiques, this study takes them as its point of departure. It argues that the very features long regarded as problematic were what made dubbing central to the transnational circulation and re-formation of films in East Asia. The paper draws on Carolyn Shread’s theory of plastic translation and Catherine Malabou’s philosophy of plasticity to conceptualize dubbing as a process of irreversible re-formation. In this view, dubbing produces new cinematic forms by re-forming sound and narrative, and, in some cases, national affiliation itself. The analysis focuses on three modes of plasticity: reciprocal, deflective, and generative. These modes are examined through case studies that range from early Korea–Hong Kong co-productions to more radically re-produced exploitation films. Across these examples, dubbing does not merely represent national identity but actively produces and displaces it. By foregrounding dubbing as a material and generative forces, the paper calls into question the stability of national cinema as a fixed origin.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miseon Yoon (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: