Employing a practice-based approach, this study examines the translator's positionality in relation to the translation into English of transcribed oral history interviews on Romanian communism. The ethical implications of translating politically charged interviews imbued with trauma and suffering are discussed. The article builds on the notions of translators as "secondary witnesses" and "engaged" figures, while reflecting on the "shared authority" of the translator in the transmission of memory and intercultural exchange. Inspired by the "brokenness of language" associated with Holocaust testimonies, the critical analysis of fragmentation illustrates the way translators assert their authority, while giving a voice to those previously deprived of one. Finally, the translation of oral histories of communism is seen as an act of resistance, highlighting the major contribution translators can make to societal debates on witnessing, trauma, and the impact of totalitarian regimes on individual lives.
Diana Painca (2025) studied this question.