Bon dia a tothom. És un plaer donar-vos la benvinguda a tot l'alumnat que esteu aquí, que esteu per primera vegada la Pompeu Fabra a la Facultat de Traductiu i Interpretació, a l'alumnat que ja esteu des de fa alguns anys, a tot el professorat i personal de l'administració i servei. Benvinguda a l'acte dins de l'acte d'inauguració del curs acadèmic de la Facultat de Traductiu i Interpretació. Vull en primer lloc traslladar-vos la salutació del rector, el doctor José Juan Moreso, aquí estic representant perquè li ha estat impossible estar aquí i per suposat, molt interessat en el que serà el contingut acadèmic d'aquest acte. Jo no parlo més perquè precisament aquesta és la part més important, el contingut acadèmic de l'acte i us adreçaré algunes paraules al final, simplement com a reflexió general del curs. Per tant, iniciem el que és la part acadèmica amb la intervenció dels estudis de la Facultat de Traducció i Interpretació, el doctor Luis Pegenauté. Sí, moltes gràcies. Tinc el gust de presentar-vos la doctora Susan Basnet, en ocasió de l'inauguració oficial del curs acadèmic 2006-2007, el 14 de la assignadura de la nostra facultat. La doctora Susan Basnet és professora del Center for Translations Studies central que va fundar al SANS-80 i que va fer de la Universitat de Warwick un lloc de referència internacional en la formació de posgrau en l'àmbit de la literatura comparada i dels estudis de traducció. Susan Basnet és autora, editora o coeditora d'una vintena de llibertes. Aquí, per exemple, sobre traducció el següent translation studies, un altre translation history and culture, un altre translating literature, un altre en cara poscolonial translation, theory and practice, en cara a un altre constructing cultures, essays on literary translation, també sobre literatura comparada, comparative literature, a critical introduction, també sobre literatura en llengua anglèsa, Silvia Plath, an introduction to the poetry, també sobre historias studies culturals. Elisabeth I, a feminine perspective, també feminist experiences, the women's movement in four cultures. També studying British cultures i també breeding at the turn of the 21st century. Susan Basnet, a mes, exclu poesía. La seva última colecció és exchanging lives del 2002 i col·labora frequentment en diversos diaris. En la meva opinió hi ha dos aspectes que cal destacar en la biografia acadèmica de la professora Susan Basnet. En primer lloc, la participació activa en la fase inicial de desenvolupament de la disciplina dels estudis de traducció, més concretament en la seva branca descriptiva, als anys 80, quan el seu nom es va associar amb els dels integrants de la anomenada Escola de la Maniculació. És cert que en realitat es tractava més d'un grup d'investigadors a uns interessos comuns, en alguns casos orientats cap a la teoria polisistèmica i la recuperació dels formalistes russos, i una escola en el sentit estricte del terme, però la influència d'aquest grup en qualsevol cas va ser determinada. D'aquesta època data una de les aportacions més conegudes de la Susan Basnet, el famósissim Translation Studies de l'any 80, que es va convertir en una de les primeres publicacions a proporcionar una visió general del camp objecte de estudi, adoptant ja en el títol la denominació per la qual seria coneguda més tard la disciplina. En aquesta obra s'analitzen algunes qüestions teòriques principals, es revisa la història del pensament sobre la traducció, cosa no tan corrent en aquella època, i es presenten els principals problemes de la traducció literària, distingint entre les tres gèneres, teatre, poesia i brossa. Però sobretot, jo destacaria el que potser és més important i que ha estat una constant en la trajectòria acadèmica de Susan Basnet, l'intent continuat de diferenciar els estudis de traducció com una disciplina autònoma i de ple dret. I és que, ja a la seva primera pàgina d'ella, translation studies is indeed a discipline in its own right, not merely a minor branch of comparative literary study, nor yet a specific area of linguistics, but a vastly complex fields with many far-reaching ramifications. En segon lloc, podem destacar la portació feta una década més tard, al 90, en una publicació que certament va iniciar una nova època en el desenvolupament de la disciplina. M'estic referint al recul de Sajus, que sota el títol de translation, history and culture, va publicar conjuntament amb Andrele Faber, teòric amb qui mantindria una prolífica relació investigadora fins a la seva mort. En la introducció al volum, advocàvem per transcendir el tractament merament linguístic de la tradució i per centrar-se en la relació entre tradució i cultura a través de qüestions com són el context, la història i la convenció. Estractava d'un intent de superar la aproximació textual a la tradució per passar a entendre-la com una manifestació política i cultural tot incident en les implicacions ideològiques que comporta l'exercici traductor. A la publicació d'aquest volum, es prefigurava ja l'adveniment d'algunes manifestacions teòriques que tindrien una gran influència en la disciplina en anys posteriors, com som el poscolonialisme, el posestructuralisme i el femenisme. De fet, moltes vegades s'ha assenyalat aquesta obra com la inauguradora del que s'ha anomenat el gir cultural en els estudis de tradució. Bé, no voldria acabar aquesta breu presentació de referència a dos treballs mes de Basnet, en els quals defensa ultrança la labor desenvolupada en els estudis de tradució, en molts casos superiors, en la seva opinió alè desenvolupada en altres disciplines amb les quals aquests estudis mantenien relació. Així, per exemple, en l'article titulat The Translation Term in Cultural Studies, publicat en la seva colecció Constructing Cultures, defensa que si bé des dels estudis de tradució s'havien estudiat ja qüestions relacionades amb la rasa, el gènere, les mitjans de comunicació de masses, la cultura popular, etc. En definitiva, s'havien adoptat com objectes d'estudi, qüestions propies dels estudis culturals, havia arribat ja el moment en què els estudis culturals es començessin a interessar per la tradució. Al cap i a la fi, la costament cap a la tradució ja s'havia iniciat en altres disciplines, com, per exemple, els estudis poscolonials. En últim lloc cal esmentar com al seu llibre Comparative Literature, a Critical Introduction, no només defensa la independència dels estudis de tradució respecte a aquesta altra disciplina, la literatura comparada, de la qual alguns l'havien considerat una mera branca, sinó que fins i tot posa de manifest la patent fossilització de la segona en comparació amb el fructífer de s'envolupament que havia experimentat la primera. Diu allí. Comparative Literature continues to argue about whether it can be considered a discipline or not, translation studies states boldly that it is a discipline and the strength and energy of work in the field worldwide seem to confirm that assertion. The time has come for a reconsideration of the relationship between Comparative Literature and Translation Studies and for a new beginning. En definitiva, tenim avui amb nosaltres de les personalitats acadèmiques que més han contribuït a dinamitzar el desenvolupament de la disciplina des d'una perspectiva no lingüística incorporant el seu desenvolupament teòric les aportacions més innovadores procedents d'altres àrees, però mantenint sempre, per sobre de tot, la genuina independència que aquesta disciplina es mereix. Ja sense més preàmbuls, li dono la paraula. Molt bé, no, moltíssimes gràcies. Ara té doncs la paraula la doctora Susan Bassnet i repeteixo, no, professor de la Universitat de Warwick i fundadora del Centre for Translation and Comparative Cultural Studies d'aquesta universitat. La lliçó inaugural, com sabeu, porta partítol de Translator as Writer. Volem també agrair-li el que acceptés estar aquí amb nosaltres. I, evidentment, per la universitat i per del rector, moltes gràcies. La distinxió que, en la crítica literària, ha tendit a ser feina entre translators, que s'han vist com aquí, i writers com aquí, és una distinxió falsa. Això, si us plau, és la hipòtesi bàsica, i el que em demanaré és com veig la distinxió que parlo d'allà. Vull dir que és molt difícil per entendre l'argument de la translatoria i de la lliçó. I que, efectivament, el que és una translatora literària és una rewriter de la feina, en una altra llangua, en el primer instant. I vam veure, en les últimes dues hores, l'anunciament de la lliçó turística, Orhun Pamuk, per rebre la lliçó de la literatura. I alguns de vosaltres en aquest lliçó són Orhun Pamuk. I, certament, he rebre Orhun Pamuk perquè és translat per un col·leg i un amic de mine, Morin Frili. Però el punt és, ningú de vosaltres, sense turcà, podria començar a rebre Orhun Pamuk si no teníem bons translatoris. I la qüestió, és clar, és que, quan dic que he rebre Orhun Pamuk's novel Snow, he rebre Orhun Pamuk o he rebre Morin Frili. Certament, sense Frili, no seríem donant Pamuk els bons reviews en anglès. Podria igualment dir, com en molts de vosaltres, que he rebre Tolstoy. He rebre tres versions d'Anna Karenina, dos en anglès i un en italiano. I què he rebre? A la llengua, que he rebre? Como la literary, ¿un castellano? ¿un castellano? Les llenguers, les llenguers, les llenguers de la llengua, diuen que és un llot. Em va dir que et porten un llot. tot i que et porten un llot. I el que volem fer és que volem invitar un nombre de translators treballant en diferents llengües, uns translatant en xinès, uns translatant en anglès i altres llengües, uns translatant en clàssic llengües. Vam invitar-los a reflectir en el procés de llengüe. Què volia fer a ser una translatora? El tasc, que believem, és exactament el mateix, si la llengüe és translatora o no, va ser llençada dos anys abans, o si va ser llençada 2.000 anys abans. El tasc per a la translatora és fer-ho fer a la feina d'un llengüe, vivint o mort a un nou llengüe public, i ensurtir, en qualsevol manera que sigui possible, que la llengüe i l'excitement que una llengüe generada per la primera grup de llengües pugui ser regenerada per una altra grup de llengües. Això és el tasc bàsic. Si la translatora transmet una llengüe en qualsevol manera que la segona grup de llengües trobi aquesta texta abismal, que és una fàcil, perquè l'excitement ha de ser generada en la segona llengüe. Ara, ens ens va preguntar la qüestió. Aquesta és la distinció entre la translatora i la llengüe. ¿És el processament de treball? Què ho fas? Perquè moltes de les llengües que contribueixen a la nostra llengüe també serien novelistes, poets, o altres, com els translators. Ens va preguntar a pensar en el processament. I el que vam veure és el fet de la distinció entre la translatora i la llengüe was very, very fuzzy indeed. And fuzzy is a wonderful word, because I think it's pretty untranslatable. You know, in most languages, the word fuzzy is borrowed. Is this the same in catalan? Very much so. You borrow fuzzy. And it's good, because it's actually one of those words where things are not, there's a lack of clarity in fuzziness. And that's good. What is different though, what we found was different, is that the working processes of writers who are writing and translating initially might be different. And the biggest difference is that what a translator has to do to begin with is to read very, very carefully. There's a reading dimension in translating that is not necessarily there when you start to write. That doesn't mean there's not a vast amount of research, but the basic thing is if you are translating something that has been written somewhere else, you first have to read it, and you have to read it well. However, two of our writers, one is the writer-translator, Anthea Bell, and she's very well-known as a translator from French and German, and she's also the woman who has translated as Derix into English. And you can imagine how difficult this is and what kind of cultural shifts involve. But Anthea Bell says, the end product of the writer and the translator is not distinguishable. Whatever the process is, the product is a text for people to read. And Josephine Bauma, who is a translator from the classics, and also author of a recent collection of poetry called After Catullus, where the boundary is between translating and writing are very, very fine. She says, and I quote, the one leads into the other, and in their continued practice, the two, that is writing and translating, become indivisible. Now, what I have here, and perhaps if we publish this later, I will do the full text, but I'm going to shorten it, because what I had is a number of examples taken from literary history, which actually shows something that I think is a fascinating question. And that is, how many of the great literary figures in European literatures have also translated? A fact that very often, when we look at traditional literary history and the way it's written, is marginalised. And so part of my argument is going to be that the way literary history has been formulated has tended to focus so much on, if you like, issues of nationalism and the national tradition, that it has sought, in all kinds of ways, to push the role of translation in writer's works to one side. I just give you three examples. One example is Alexander Pope, who is, if you study English literature, you're always taught a great satirical writer. Actually, he translated more and was best known in his own age as the translator of Homer. The second one is George Eliot. We remember George Eliot as a novelist, author of Middlemarch, et cetera. George Eliot was a prolific translator from German and actually translated Spinoza for the first time into English. And the other, of course, is Walter Scott, who we all think of as a great, romantic historical novelist. Goethe's first play was translated by Walter Scott. And you can just do this, it's a kind of game. I do this sometimes with my students. Go and think of a great literary figure and actually look at a little bit of investigation. How much translation did many of these people do? And it's a fascinating issue. So, really, there's two basic questions, I think, that we need to address. Is that going to go on, do you think, or...? The ambulance, there is a little bit sometimes. Okay, all right, I shall raise my voice past it. Two basic questions, then, that need to be addressed. On the one hand, the question is, why have so many writers chosen also to translate? And the second question, why has the translation work of so many writers been ignored by literary historians? So, there's two questions. I do think that there has been resistance, very strong resistance, certainly over the last couple of centuries, to the idea that the polysystems theorists posited very strongly, which is that translation is and always has been a major shaping force in literary development, a major force for innovation. And a good example is what's happening today in China. China has opened up to the West, translation is absolutely booming, the enormous amount of translation happening in China. And through that translation, an enormous amount of innovation in the work of contemporary Chinese writers. The Chinese novel, for example, is being expanded in all kinds of fascinating ways. And this is essentially through translation. And I think that this idea of recognising that translation is a major force for innovation in the history of literature, doesn't fit comfortably with, as I said before, nationalistic theories of creativity that emphasise the importance of so-called native products and reject ideas of importation. And I think that is a very crucial issue and it needs a lot more research. But what has always happened is that writers have always gone out into the wider world in search of inspiration from somewhere. D.H. Lawrence, another good example, you can argue that the impact of the Italian Verista novelist, Giovanni Verga, or Lawrence, was absolutely fundamental. Lawrence translated and translated and translated. And he translated in a particular way, there are accounts of how he translated. He would sit with the Verga text and a pen in his hand, just writing, writing, writing, almost at the speed with which he read so that the reading and the translation initially were almost the same. He was desperate to try and understand what was happening in Verga's writing. And I recently, earlier this year, I was doing a workshop with the Irish poet, Kieran Carson, who has translated Dante's Inferna.  Because he's not really an Italianist. And he said, well, he said, I was fascinated by Dante's Inferna. Because I thought, Dante was exiled from Florence. In Florence, in the 13th century, you have the Guelfi and the Gibellini. You have these factions. I've grown up in Belfast. In Belfast, we've got the Protestant and we've got factions. And so what he had done was to kind of reconstruct or reread Dante through contemporary Irish political and social culture. And what he's done with the text is absolutely fascinating. But it was, in a sense, a departure from his other kind of writing, but a very logical thing for him to do. And I think what we can say is that sometimes, or rather always, let's say always, when a writer translates another writer, there's a good reason for it. And I don't just mean the reason is that some publisher is giving them money. I mean, in terms of your own personal development, there's always a good reason. And sometimes it is possible to argue that a writer will translate another writer simply because that work to be translated is what he or she wishes they could have written at that point in their career. And Kieran's argument would be precisely that. He needed to translate Dante because it was the best way of writing about contemporary Belfast. Now, you'll see that part of what I'm arguing, I'm arguing in two ways. I'm arguing about the creative process of the writer-translator. But I'm also really saying that things have happened in terms of the writing of the history of literature that have increased the problem of this boundary between translating and writing.  For many different perspectives, we have asked questions, how do writers become canonised? Who determines and who sustains the literary canon? Why are there so many writers who remain outside of the canon? And obviously, one of the principle arguments in feminist scholarship was to look at why so many of the people outside the canon are actually women. There are obviously some writers whose work endures over centuries, but there are also other writers who are hugely successful in their own time and then disappear. So the whole question of literary history is indeed one of, basically, manipulation. The literary history is written and rewritten and reinvented at different points in time. But I would argue that far from being a marginal activity, at whatever point we look in terms of canon formation, translation has always played a very central role. I think that it's important for us to remember, and I come back to the beginning, that what translating is about is about recreating, reproducing, rewriting for a new set of readers. And hence, in the process of canon formation, the role of translation is also enormously significant. I want to just make a little digression for a moment here to use one of the essays that we had in our book was by the New Zealand scholar and translator, Michael Hanna, who wrote an essay that we used as the epilogue, entitled Matchmaking, Cannibalism, Transplant Surgery, and 97 Other Metaphors for Translation. And the essay explores the metaphors used by translators at different points in time. And again, this is a really interesting way of thinking about translating and thinking about writing. So, for example, he has transportation metaphors. He categorizes them, transportation metaphors, carrying across, bridging, ferrying. Organic metaphors that have to do with plants, transplantation. You think of Shelley's metaphor of putting a seed in new soil. Bodily metaphors, including digestion, which was hugely popular in the 17th century, the idea of digesting a text. Lots of interesting bodily metaphors involving, indeed, blood transfusion and transplants and grafting. Very violent metaphors of penetration, rape, violation. Metaphors of subservience, of taking possession of a text and the translator being in a slave relationship. Lots of references to handmaidens and servants. The whole notion of the bel infidel. So what you can begin to see in these metaphors are very, very different conceptualizations of what happens in the translation process. Some of which are clearly thinking about an unequal power relationship. And some of which, like the organic ones, are not conceived in terms of unequal power relationships, but conceived in terms of difference. Parallel, but difference. We've had the Brazilian writer, Araldo de Campos, has talked about patricide. The translator, effectively, is killing the paternal text. And also, from de Campos and from the Brazilians, we get the notion of cannibalization, cannibalizing a text. We get metaphors of following in footsteps, changing clothes. Metaphors of import and export. And if any of you at any point want to think about doing a dissertation or to look more closely at the metaphor in particular moments in time, this is a really good way of getting right to the heart and thinking about how individual writers, or indeed how particular cultures. It would be fascinating, for example, I don't know, to speculate on what have been dominant Catalan metaphors, at which points in time, how the figurative language evolves. What we have had in recent times in the English-speaking world, though, is the dominance, whichever metaphors you use, of the notion of acculturation. This is something that Lawrence Vanity, of course, has written a great deal about. The idea that a text should somehow, in translation, lose that which it carries with it of foreign and become acculturated in order that it can be read as though it had been written in the target language. Very complex question, this. And it's a complex question that relates also to questions of power. It's also by no means being consistent, at different points in time, different writers, and indeed different cultures, have preferred a foreignisation approach rather than a acculturation approach. And the cannibalisation principle is by no means acculturation. It's something very different. But again, you can actually begin to see, when you look at literary history from a translation point of view, you can begin to see very different kinds of patterns emerging. And I think, really, this is partly what I would like to see. I would very much like to see more literary history written from the perspective of translation studies, rather than, as has been the case so far, from the perspective of literary studies with translation added somewhere in the middle. Now, I said before, I'm okay? Yeah, good, no problem. I'm thinking about the time here. My principle is usually, when the audience goes to sleep, or some of them do, I stop. But you seem to be fairly awake, so that's okay. The innovative potential of translation, then, I would suggest, is one of the principal reasons why so many writers choose to translate. What can be brought in? How can translation be used to innovate, to move on? And it's also important when we think about literary history to remember something. It is relatively recent that we have made a distinction between writing and translating. In the Middle Ages, and right through into the Renaissance, there was no such distinction. There was a very interesting study done a few years ago, and I should remember who it was, but I can't, on the English writer Chaucer, pointing out how extraordinarily complex it is to try and distinguish between translating and writing in the Middle Ages, if we take Chaucer as an example. Why? Because Chaucer. Sometimes he translated and admitted he was translating. Sometimes he translated and did not admit he was translating. Sometimes he wrote things and said they were translations when they weren't. Sometimes he just bore... It's a wonderful case of a writer who was simply reflecting the norms, the rightly norms of his time, and does not make this distinction. And we now are in our kind of dividing and separating. I think we've caused quite a number of epistemological problems for ourselves, quite apart from the fact that we've also caused other kinds of problems by downgrading translating. And if I were doing a different lecture, I would also be talking about the way that translators are paid so much less than writers and the status of the translator, which is so much lower, and so on, and so on, and so on. But that's not what I'm talking about today. But that is implicit, in a sense, or in what's happened. Now, let me give you an example of innovation and ways in which a writer can use translation in a very exciting way. And that is the example I'm going to give you is the example of the late English poet laureate, Ted Hughes. And I've been working all this summer, I finished writing a book on Ted Hughes this summer. And I've been very interested in his because his reputation is all about his English poetry. Actually, he was a phenomenal translator. And not only was he a phenomenal translator, but he founded in the 1960s the journal, which is still going, Modern Poetry in Translation, deliberately to try and break the insularity of English poetry.  One of his last works was the translation of Euripides' Alsestis. And he was performed a year after his death by a company in the north of England, working who do very interesting things with language, actually. They go away from standard English and, in fact, use regional pronunciation. And Alsestis is an interesting play.  It's a play therefore about goodness. It's a very life-enhancing play. Because at the end, the wife who has agreed to die is brought back into life through the intervention of the great hero Heracles. The opening sequence of the play shows death coming to claim Alsestis, because she's offered to die. He should be taking her husband.  So death comes to collect her. Now, most of the translations, the standard translations, follow the Greek in rendering this scene. This is a dialogue scene. It's a dialogue between death and the god Apollo. And Apollo is basically saying to death, don't do this. And death is saying tough.  So it's an angry exchange. And when I looked at what Ted Hughes did, I was really fascinated, because Hughes, he keeps the exchange, so he's keeping the form.  Hughes' death gets a lot to say. And Apollo has really very little to say in comparison. I want to just read you a speech and listen while I'm reading this to what is happening in the language. This is a translation from Ancient Greek. But listen to how many contemporary words are actually in this passage, okay? So here's death attacking Apollo. You fill the minds of human beings with lunatic illusions, a general anesthesia, a fuzzy euphoria, a universal addiction to the drug of their games, chasing a ball, or power, or money, or torturing each other, or cheating each other, all that drama. Life is your hospital and you call it a fun fair.   Man is deluded and his ludicous gods are his delusion. Death is death is death. What's he put into this? Well, addiction, hypodermic syringes, chasing a ball, chasing power, chasing money. What he does, and he does this in all his translations, in his translations from Ovid and so on, he effectively takes these texts from Ancient Greek or Ancient Roman writers and renders them contemporary. He retains the form, the plot, the sequence of scenes, the sequential order in other words, but what he's actually doing is giving a contemporary input that brings the plays. If we think of the famous essay by Walter Benjamin that I'm sure you've all read, and if you haven't read, you will be going to read it, your professors will be making you read it, but the famous essay by Walter Benjamin, when Walter Benjamin says, what is translation? It is the giving of life. It is the reinvigorating. It is translation, is that which breathes life? It is a kind of resurrection. Nobody, in this day with Ancient Greek disappearing from European schools, nobody would read Euripides or Iskulus or Homer without translation. And in order for us to understand the impact, the powerful impact of the early writers, we need to understand them in terms of modern science. And another one little quote before I just sort of move from this. Wonderful quotation from another very famous contemporary English poet who's translated from the Greeks, Toni Harrison. And he asked this question. How was it, I asked myself, that the Greeks could present the worst things they could imagine? Gaze into terror, as Nietzsche said, and yet not be turned to stone. And my argument is that what Hughes and Harrison and many, many other writers have been doing in the latter part of the 20th century and continuing strongly now into the 21st, they've seen this period as a time when art has been pushed to its limits. And so one way of exploring the limits is to explore again through the ancient world. So the horrors of the Trojan Wars become parallel and a way of talking about the horrors of the wars in the 20th century, the suffering of the Trojan women becomes comparable to that of the deportees to Nazi slave camps and the Gulags, and the absolute unblinking cruelty in Greek drama and poetry can be reflected in a post Auschwitz, Iraq and Afghanistan age. There are ways in which these bridges can be built and these ancient texts can then become perhaps even more powerful contemporary than many of the contemporary texts that have been written. So what are they saying? What's happening here? Well, what's happening? Can I have 10 minutes? Sure, good luck. Right, what's actually happening here, and I'm trying to argue, is that there is just in the case of Hughes and in the case of many, many writers, a relationship that is a relationship very strongly of empathy. This empathic relationship between some writers and the texts they translate is enormously important. And I want to use the metaphor, the image is one that Michael Hanna doesn't use, of the love affair between a translator or writer and a text. And I want to do this now for the next 10 minutes by talking a bit about my own work and my own writing process. And talking in a sense about the kind of passion that one can have with a writer and the sort of impact this can have on that writer's development. For many years I had what I can only describe as a love affair with the Italian writer Luigi Perrandella. He's a writer who died in 1936, who wrote plays, I mean, he's actually given his name to an adjective, Pirandellian. We think about the Pirandellian type of humour. Very ironic writer, rather very intellectual, produced these often rather dark plays, had an uncomfortable relationship with fascism and with Mussolini, a very kind of tortured writer. I found Perrandella's work absolutely fascinating. I was intrigued by it. I wrote a couple of books on Perrandella, translated a number of the plays in a couple of cases for the first time into English for the BBC. I was very involved with Perrandella and there were Perrandella conferences and I would be invited to a conference here and I was a Perrandella expert. And then I literally woke up one morning and all my passion had gone. I had no interest in Perrandella and I have never been to a Perrandella conference. I have never looked at a Perrandella play. I have just had nothing to do with Perrandella ever since. And this is why I use the parallel of the love affair. There's a phrase in English, there is nothing so dead as a dead love. And end, end abrupt end. Now, why? I have no idea why. Because what I'm now talking about in a sense, I'm trying to get at these notions of empathy and what people need at certain points in their own writing career. And obviously the intellectual games that Perrandella played were clearly very important in terms of my own writing for a long time. So then I translated all sorts of things. I translated a Mexican novel. I translated some contemporary English poetry into Italian. I translated some work by a 16th century Anglo-Latin poet. I translated another long Italian novel. I did all sorts of things, but there was no passion. And then I found another, in a sense, passion, not for a single writer, but for a group of writers. And this came about towards the end of the 1980s with working with a colleague, my Polish colleague Piotr Kohevjak, and I experimented with co-translation. We translated a number of Polish women poets. I had no Polish. What I did have was some basic Czech. And so I could read, I would be given the poems. I would look at the poems through my Czech. I would try to decipher keywords, anything. Then I would get a literal translation. Then we would rework. We wrote an essay about this in modern poetry and translation of the process. It was a complicated process. But I actually liked working like that. It was very challenging. And a lot of the Polish women writers were, again, quite ironic, quite very personal, writing about themselves and also using mythology in ways. And in terms of empathy, the sort of themes that the Polish women were dealing with were themes that I was also writing about at the same time. And I want to just read you one poem. It's the title poem for the collection. The collection was called Ariadne's Thread. And it's based around the idea, again, another Greek myth, Ariadne, the woman who helped Theseus go into the labyrinths to kill the Minotaur. So a very kind of famous story. It's an interesting story, of course, because Ariadne, I was writing a lot of poetry about Ariadne, but I was writing it from a feminist perspective. Ariadne did all this for Theseus, and then he abandoned her on an island. So she didn't exactly, it didn't really work out very well. However, the title poem is called Ariadne's Thread, and it's by a woman called Maria Pavlikowska Jesnosewska, and it's, which you can't remember, no, and you couldn't spell, and if I try to spell it, we'll be here for a long time. It's a poem above where the idea of the labyrinth is built in to Hitler's invasion of Poland and the flight of Poles out of Poland, the woman going into exile. So here it is, Ariadne's Thread. Down in Żaleśiszka along Ribaszka Street is the Ariadne Hotel. The nearby hills were spread against the sky in a tapestry blush of honest autumn colors. Shallow and sleepy, the Nista crept along and cut off Polish tragedy from Romanian silence. Up in the cloudy sky, a monastery reared like a clump of bluebells. At dawn you couldn't see the sun in the abyss, but by nine o'clock it cleared the hurdles proudly like a golden horse in slow gleaming leaps. The lazy waters brightened unexpectedly and slowed down further. Shimmering leaves brought by the wind fell into the border waters and the neighbouring land. Roses shed petals across gardens. Poland was withering. The Ariadne Hotel was the last place I stayed in that country. After that I entered the labyrinth. But may the name of Ariadne be a good omen for me. I am holding the ball. The string is fixed to the threshold. I will be back. What I loved about these writers was the way in which they continually dealt with adversity, using these extraordinary images and these powerful mythologies. And in my last few minutes, very few minutes now, you can then go and have some lunch. I want to tell you about my last great love affair which resulted in the publication of the little book that Professor Pergonauta mentioned, The Exchanging Lives Book. And this was a very powerful relationship with an Argentinian poet, a woman called Alejandra Pizzarnik, who I met some years ago when I was in Colombia and I was given some of the poems. And I'd written a book on Sylvia Plath. And my friend in Colombia said, Alejandra Pizzarnik is the Latin American Sylvia Plath. Okay, it's an interesting idea. Image poems, she committed suicide young, you know. So there are some parallels. And I got very interested in this and I began to translate.  And it was very compulsive working like this. But my own poetry was quite solid. I don't know how to explain it. What I would work on in English, which is why I like the Polish poetry, was irony and quite complex games with words. And so the poems on the page looked like little blocks. But Pizzarnik's poetry was tiny, imagistic, very, kind of, almost, how to put it, very, very slight, it looked quite fragile and was actually very, very strong. And so I got completely fascinated by this. And in the end, the book that came out is a collection of poems and translations, of which the first section, it's in four movements. So the first section was poems by Pizzarnik with her Spanish and my translation. The second section was a dialogue, a poem by me and then a translation of a poem by her, because ironically, we hit the same themes, time and time and time again. And then the third section, which was the most curious thing, consisted of a sequence of my poems, a new sequence, that were, however, completely different from anything that I'd written before. And this is my argument. My argument is, had I not been translating, I would not have written the poetry that I came to write completely differently. And I took, you know, the very first point I made about translation as an innovative force, I feel that I have had this experience demonstrably in my own writing by having changed a writing style, having learned to write differently as a result of the activity of translation. Do I have time to read a translation or not? Do I? Shall I read a translation, just one piece? Yes, yes, yes, yes. Right? Yeah, yeah, yeah, okay. Cos I was just going to read you, what I was going to read you was one thing. I was going to read you one poem, which illustrates this whole question of empathy, and then I'm going to conclude with the final point. And it's two poems, her poem and my poem, about fathers. And this is, we both wrote a poem with the same title. I had written and published a poem entitled For My Father, and then I found a poem by Pizzardnik For My Father. And when I translated the Pizzardnik poem, there were incredible parallels. The parallels were about the father being silenced through death and illness. They were, they had Shakespearean echoes. My poem had King, oh. My poem had King Lear, and her poem had the Tempest. Oh, dear. But the parallels were extraordinary. And I'd like to just read it to you because again it's about relationships and empathy. When I wrote my poem, I had no idea that this woman 40 years earlier had written her poem, but then I translated it. So here's mine, and then there's my translation. And then I promise you, I will conclude with just a few words and you can have lunch. Poem For My Father. This is Basmets version. Rain for five days, the fields a lake, the house walls seeping wet. Before dawn broke, I lay and listened to a world awash with water. Inside the ward, it's dry and far too warm for tears. I sit beside the man stuffed in a wheelchair, hands like leers, plucking at flowers that were never there. This was and is my father. Quite oblivious to rain outside, or me. Once he would tell me stories, tales of wars and men, Troy and Tobruk, a blur of past exploits. Now, waiting to die, words fail, blankness for him. For me, prospect of summer somewhere through the rain. And his pizzanics and listen again to the parallels. And then it was that with his cold, dead tongue in his mouth, he sang the song they never let him sing. In this world of obscene gardens, of shadows that came abruptly to remind him of songs from his time of boyhood. He, who never could sing the song he aspired to sing, the song they never let him sing, except in his absent blue eyes, his absent mouth, his absent voice. Then, from the highest tower of absence, his song rang out through the gloom of concealment, through the silent spaces, filled with uneasy hollows, like these words I write. I, in this relationship, I found again and again, parallels, extraordinary parallels. And I think that when you start to look back at the history of why writers translate, you find this pattern, you find a certain kind of empathic relationship.  It's the fourth section of this book, and it raises for me very interesting problems about translating. Alejandra Pizzanik wrote her own epitaph, and she wrote it in three lines. It's very simple. It is Alejandra, Alejandra, debajo estoy yo Alejandra. Just those six words arranged. It is, of course, perfectly translatable. Anybody in this room could translate it. But it is also, I would argue, completely untranslatable, because the moment you start to put it into English, it loses all its beauty. Do you translate the name or not? And if you don't, does it sound foreign? It raises huge, in a sense, theoretical problems. So I decided to translate it by writing my own epitaph. And I decided to keep the rhythm, keep the three lines. I decided to use two versions of my name because I grew up in Italy, and so one of my names is Susan, and the other version is Susanna. So I had the two names, by which I'm equally known. And what Pizzanik does is she has debajo estoy yo, which has double meaning. And so I made a double meaning in my middle line. And my translation of Pizzanik's poem is Susan, Susanna, Lying Below, Susanna. And I would argue that that is a translation. If I may say, thank you very much. Susan was saying, perdó, la Susan, Susanna, m'estava dient que estava molt contenta d'estar aquí, jo crec que tots nosaltres també estem molt contents d'haver-la sentit. We're all very pleased to have heard you. Us dic dues cosetes molt ràpidament per acabar l'acte. Deixeu-me dos minuts. Volia simplement formular en paraules el que em sembla que és qualsevol acte inaugural, que és dir que és un moment d'il·lusió. Un acte inaugural d'un nou any acadèmic representa l'il·lusió de començar les nostres activitats, les vostres, que són d'emprendre estudis. O bé de primer any, que m'imagino la il·lusió, és imbèndiament forta, de segon, de tercer, els nostres de començar assignatures, de vegades noves, de vegades no, però sempre amb il·lusió. M'agradaria referir-me a tres qüestions ja molt concretes del que representarien il·lusions d'aquest curs escolar, 2006-2007, i que també compartim. La primera és que ensetem en aquests estudis, i dic ensetem perquè jo estic aquí com a vice-rectora, però soc professora d'aquests estudis, evidentment, com sabeu. Doncs ensetem una implicació complerta en el model Bologna, i això es fa amb il·lusió, es fa amb il·lusió però evidentment comporta reptes i comporta dificultats. Tenim una altra il·lusió, que és també que cada vegada està més apropet al moment en què es farà realitat el projecte de l'estació de la comunicació de Calaranyó, i que aleshores es traslladarà tots els estudis que estan aquí a Rambla, el que és la difícil de Calaranyó, i quan dic que s'acosta és perquè és difícil dir una data, però ja fa anys que el projecte l'estem consolidant, i sí que estarà aquí. També el repte és aquest, la impaciència, és un projecte molt maco, que volem que sigui realitat tan aviat com sigui possible. La tercera il·lusió, i aquesta sense cap repte, i potser de la qual heu sentit a parlar una mica, però no tant com de l'altra, és simplement el fet que des del Consell de Direcció de la Universitat Pumpeufabra s'ha decidit dedicar aquest any a fer un homenatge, precisament la persona que dona nom a la universitat, que és Pumpeufabra. Aquest és un homenatge que sent Pumpeufabra qui és, que era molt a prop dels estudis de traducció. Això s'ha fet en motiu de la celebració del 75, aniversari de les normes de castelló, del centenari del primer congrés internacional de la llengua catalana, especialment, i de dades rellevants respecte a la bibliografia del Pumpeufabra. Aleshores us vull convidar a tothom que tingueu molt present el que s'anirà dient com els actes importants d'aquesta celebració. Ja la conferència inaugural de l'any va ser sobre un tema relacionat amb el Pumpeufabra, les confessions d'un aprendit de l'exicògraf, que conferència que va donar el José Antonio Pasqual de la Real Acadèmia, i per dibuixar-vos una miqueta que passarà, hi haurà jornades en torno del personatge com a filòleg i en torno del personatge i al seu temps. Recordeu que era un personatge de múltiples facetes, el Pumpeufabra, que va ser autor de les normes ortogràfiques, reformador de la llengua, autor de les gramàtiques, d'aquestes gràmàtiques i en diferents idiomes, i home molt compromès amb el catalanisme i les seves institucions. Per a l'alumnat hi haurà qüestions importants i de caire acadèmic, i en concret hi haurà una convocatòria de beques per a presentació de treballes específics en relació amb la figura del Pumpeufabra, i aquell aspecte de la seva figura que està relacionat amb la llengua, potser és el com que ens podrem plantejar. Jo sé que des de la facultat hi haurà també tota una programació, no estic entrant en aquesta, sinó que us dono la programació de la universitat en general, i sí que potser, com dic, és una informació que en alguns casos, especialment per a vosaltres, potser és nova. Amb això ja no us retingueu més. La il·lusió de l'inici de curs, jo la remato amb la frase formal que s'ha de dir i és Declaro inaugurat amb il·lusió el curs 2006-2007 de la Facultat de traducció i interpretació de la Pumpeufabra.


Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're having a CUBE conversation in our Palo Alto studio. The conference season's taken a little bit of a break so now we can do interviews in the studio which is a little bit more comfortable situation and we're really excited to have first-time guest, Karen Steele. She's the GVP of corporate marketing at Marketo. Karen, welcome. Thank you. Very happy to be here, Jeff. Absolutely. So you are talking about something that I've seen in the research giving up to this about engagement and everybody talks about engagement. What is engagement? People are trying to measure engagement but then it seems like so many people are still stuck though on the mass, broadcasting kind of numbers. They want big numbers which is a very different number than engagement. So you guys are getting really into this, obviously Marketo, a leader in marketing innovation and marketing platform. Is this new? Is it renewed focus?  Yeah, so thanks, it's a great opening question because we are passionate about engagement and in fact we believe that today people, human beings want to be engaged with as opposed to marketed to. So our CEO created a vision of this idea called the engagement economy. And the idea is that everybody and everyone is connected.  Before they buy from you, during the sales process and post sales. So it's all about creating an experience and we think the way to do that is through engagement. But it's kind of interesting because the dichotomy is we're in this Google world, right? And the Google world is, you know, build great engineering, people will come. It's all about the data, it's cookies and where have you been and, you know, recommendation engines and more this kind of feels more machine-y, not necessarily engaging, which is more of a person-to-person than necessarily a machine-to-person. Correct. But yet even the person-to-person is still supported by and enabled by a lot of this technology. So this intertwining of both kind of a person to machine or machine-to-person, excuse me, versus really connecting with it, whether it be the brand, whether it be a person that represents the brand. So how do you see this kind of evolving and how can people not get too wrapped up in the machine-y part and actually build a relationship, another word, instead of engagement, with their customers or even take it another step, really their constituents, if you will. Yes. Their community, even more passionate. Yes, yeah, so I think it's interesting you brought up the machine aspect because there's sort of a positive and negative. So if you think about the spaceware and it's called marketing automation and it does feel sort of process oriented and machine-like, but at the end of the day, marketing has always been about the human being and building that relationship. And technology has simply helped facilitate that and do it through multiple channels like never before, but it still comes down to the marketer's primary role is to connect with in a personalized way, in an authentic way and create a relationship, a relationship that's going to generate advocacy for the brand that's going to ultimately generate revenue for their business. So it's really important that engagement is about the human being and it's about how you can create positive experience throughout the life cycle of the journey. Right, it's interesting you say experiences too because we've seen a huge shift in two customers wanting really more of an experience or an engagement that's potentially tied to a brand, but you look at great experience marketers like Red Bull to pull one out, that buying and drinking a Red Bull, the way they've positioned that in the marketplace is really being part of this really cool thing that's visually stimulating. It's a lot of adrenaline and a lot of cool stuff. And then the other one I always think of is Harley-Davidson and the passion that that community has around that motorcycle but it's so much more than driving that motorcycle. It's the open road and it's all the accessories and stuff that they put, but people brand it on their arm, a lot of people. So in terms of how does that translate with newer brands, how do you try to get that type of connection with your customers, hold it. And I think you've mentioned in some of the things I looked up for the interview, really thinking about the lifetime value of the customer as opposed to a transactional relationship that's a one-time shot. Yeah, I mean a lot of the examples you just gave are very experiential in terms of the physical aspects of seeing and feeling and touching a brand, but a lot of digital marketing is not physical. And so you're communicating with people through a lot of channels that are bits and bytes and they're not looking somebody in the eye. And so I think being in touch with your brand and the messages you wanna deliver, making sure they're relevant and they carry your brand promise forward and they connect with what that person wants to hear at exactly the right time. So for us, engagement is about being smart in terms of reaching the person if I use a social or excuse me, a mobile device and that's my preferred way of communicating with you. I want you to reach me through that device and not try and get me through direct mail or an email campaign. I might not pay attention to any of those things. So having that intelligence about your customer or your prospect or your partner or even your employee is gonna give you a better option to engage with them and create that one to one while you're still marketing one to many in terms of the actual relationship. The other challenge a marketer obviously has too I don't know who said it, you did too many shows but when it's done well, when suggestive selling is done well and recommendation engines are working well, it's magical, right? It's what I want when I want and it's presented to me. If it's done poorly, it's creepy, right? I don't necessarily know that you wanna know that that was what I was looking at and obviously did the target example which now is way far in the rear view mirror but just because you have all the data doesn't mean you can use all the data and the challenge and the nuance of knowing what to use when and where and now you have so much more kind of ammunition in your quiver if you will is a whole different type of a challenge. Yeah, I think it's a good point. I think you're right, you don't want it to feel like big brother and somebody's following or stalking you, that's the last thing you want but I think paying attention to the response, paying attention to a personalized message, testing that message, seeing what comes back and helping execute the next thing that you do and so there's sort of a fine line but I definitely think the marketers that are using analytics today and it's just getting smarter and smarter and we're gonna talk about adaptive coming up here, I hope and the big buzz right now which is AI, what does AI mean for engagement and we have some ideas around that as well. Okay, so you broke it down to the big threes of the engagement economy so the art of storytelling, adaptive engagement as you just mentioned in advocacy which you talked about early before so let's kind of touch base on each one of those things. How do you define them, why are they important so we'll start with the storytelling. Yeah, so it comes back to what we've already been talking about which is the one-to-one relationship, understanding who you're talking to, crafting a message that resonates, having that message be front and central to what your brand value is. We are more prone to buy from somebody if we value their brand. You might make choices and pay a price premium if you care about a brand or how a brand interacts with you so crafting the art of storytelling is the right message, making sure it resonates, understanding your audience and connecting it to the brand so you can make that emotional connection. So done well, you can do a very good job. Right, and it's always interesting to me I always think watch sports on TV, right? I always think of the poor guy that just got assigned, I gotta do a car commercial. How many car commercials have been created up till now and I gotta think of a new one. But traditional high-end TV broadcast commercials are really storytelling. Some of them are fascinating what they can actually convey in a 30 second ad or whether it's a coat commercial and it makes you cry at the end. So that in that format has pretty well developed but how are you seeing it translated into all these various digital formats and really short engagements or it's a Snapchat or it's a quick hit on Instagram or it's a Facebook post. How are you seeing some of that storytelling evolve into these different kind of communication mediums if you will and you have so many that you have to manage, right? Huge challenge. Yeah, and again, I think it's the authenticity as I said but also the personalized nature of it. I wanna deliver a message that matters to you where you wanna receive that message. I might wanna deliver something different to somebody else through an entirely different channel. So but crafting the story, having the story be based on what you stand for as a brand and the value for that customer or whoever the message is you're attempting to land it on is still foundational and fundamental. And I think that a lot of the marketing because technology's automated so much we've lost a little bit of the art of the story and really making the story connect back to you as a brand so that you deliver the best message to your customer. That kind of feeds into your cycle in which you described as adaptive engagement which I presume was situational, contextual. Correct. That's defines the how, the when, the where. Yeah, yeah and I think in terms of our vision so yes, it is about delivering the right message at the right time to the right person to get the response you want. That's sort of the basics of adaptive and being able to do that very flexibly with technology. But when we think about adaptive in the next generation of it we think about the impact that AI will have on engagement or marketing. So imagine a marketer today could say to their engagement platform, let's say the Marketo engagement platform, I wanna understand an outcome and the best way to go about it. I wanna know how I can increase sales in a particular region in a particular quarter. And the engagement platform based on that outcome that I want will help determine what the right campaign is, what creative elements you put in that campaign based on the assets you've created and importantly who you target and what is the audience and think of almost just creating that outcome, having the platform deliver that whole experience when you push a button and that entire campaign gets executed. So that I think is the future of adaptive. Because you'll be able to run AB test is probably not a very accurate description, because it's a much more multivariate test that you can run and really start to optimize for a much tighter group of attributes of your customer than you ever could in the past. You try to think of every kind of variable. And we do that today, but I think now what we're saying is the marketer is gonna truly be in the power seat where they can say, not just here's two ideas test one against the other, it's basically here's the outcome I want, tell me exactly the best way to put that message out, what channel it should go through, who it should be delivered to and run it. And so I think that's gonna be the future of adaptive. Interesting. And then the third A that you have of engagement economy is advocacy. Heart and soul of any brand strategy. You know, customers, loyal customers are great customers and you want to create advocacy in relationships. I think when companies talk about advocacy, they talk about I want a customer reference. I want somebody who's gonna approve a customer story or a quote in a press release. We go far beyond that when we think about advocacy. We want customers that are going to partner with other customers and make the community around us better. And so they're speaking on behalf of our brand Marketo, but they're also making our brand stronger in the relationships they're creating around Marketo. So we have a program called Purple Select, which has about 1200 customers that every single day, we're putting challenges forward for them. We're offering them places to go, generate conversations in community. And as a result, they give stuff back to us and they make things available to us that otherwise it wouldn't be. It's really kind of analogous to open source, right? The fact that, you know, all the smartest people in the world don't happen to reside in your four walls. And you know, if you can use your product service, offering, platform, store as a basis point for an engaged community to engage around through with. Correct. You get, you know, one plus one makes three or 10 for that. So huge, huge kind of shift in thinking to really kind of open it up and to share and be collaborative and find out what other people are doing. And I think that's a great point. And let the advocates be your heroes. Let them advance their careers based on learning your technology, participating in your community and taking, you know, their businesses forward in terms of success from a marketing standpoint. So I'm just curious in terms of the holy grail of measuring engagement, you know, kind of your thoughts on that. I mean, there are obviously engagement measures out there. Right. How do you, you know, what are some of the things you look at to measure engagement or you tell people they should look at to measure engagement? And how do you see engagement as a metric, as an actionable metric kind of evolving now that we have so many more potential touch points, data points, other ways to measure? Yeah, so I think in the traditional marketing automation world, which we have played a big part in over the years, the true measurement has always been about pipeline because you're doing campaigns to generate revenue for your business. I don't think that goes away, but it gets extended to across the entire life cycle. So it's not just new customer acquisition, it's upsell, it's cross-sell, it's renewals if you're in a software as a service business. So it's lifetime value, not just revenue. Right, right. It's advocacy, not just references. It's, you know, peer to peer. There's this whole idea of voice of the customer. There are new companies out there like Trust Radius and G2 Crowd, which provide platforms now for customers to do reviews on products and rank companies and making that available to users gives everybody a voice in the process. So there's a whole bunch of new metrics. Many of them are going to be, you know, very, very much around emotional connections back to your brand and participation in the community. Today we have the Marketing Nation, which is a 60,000 person community. The way I can cultivate content on that and grow people's roles in participating in that dialogue is certainly an engagement measure for us and it will lead to stronger sales. It will lead to stronger, you know, preference in terms of our brand. It will lead to premium pricing if we want to do that in the future, et cetera. Right. And then I wonder too if you could just speak the evolving role of marketing. Not only within the company, but specifically within IT spend and business analytics spend and really as a driver. Because before the analytics was really a service provider to the rest of the company and we gave you your quarterly's and your weekly sales reports and, you know, that was kind of the role of IT. Now we're seeing IT as a business partner stepping in to say here's all these cool technologies but now marketing and the marketing automation, which is way ahead of the automation. And a lot of the other places is really driving that and you've got measure results and you can connect all the different channels that are new that weren't there two years ago when you just had newspaper and billboards and TV. So, you know, as that has evolved, how have you seen marketing's role change in terms of kind of power seated at the table, driving IT investment decisions and those types of things. Obviously, Marketo's one of those decisions for a lot of companies. Yeah, and it's a great conversation because there's been a lot of talk about the hybrid CMO and what does that look like today because the CIO and the CMO now have to be in lockstep and many cases now the CMO's technology budget is looking as large as the CIO's technology budget. And so, and then there's this other notion of if marketing owns the customer experience or all things around customer engagement, are they not in fact the chief customer officer? And so, there's a whole bunch of things that I think are crossing lines but I think it's great news for the marketer because they need to be more customer centric, they need to be more data centric and ultimately they sit in a really pivotal place in the organization to achieve many of those things. Right, and it's still interesting and for all the soft things, I'll call it a soft thing of engagement and lifetime value and some of these things that aren't necessarily tied to the bottom line at the end of the quarter, every quarter, we still have to respond to that and at the end of the day there has to be some tie, some connection, some demonstrated value of these efforts. It can't just be for apple pie and lemonade, I forget the expression, but anyway. So, because it still has to tie back to business, right? Still has to pay the bills, it still has to get more sales. But what you're saying is it does. Engagement does translate to sales. Engagement translates to sales. Engagement translates to brand preference. Engagement translates to price premium. Engagement translates to advocacy. I mean, engagement is, it's such an active way to move the market forward that I think there's going to be a whole set of new metrics that combine sales enablement and sales processes as well because as marketing and sales partner, from a sales engagement standpoint to go after named accounts, the ones that are most strategic to the business, we're going to see a huge shift in terms of sales engagement metrics as well. Just as you're saying that, I'm thinking of brands, right? There's always a debate about the power of brand and does brand still have power? And I think it does, but the market's really kind of bifurcated where either the brand is super powerful or has zero power, you know, kind of depending on the product or the engagement. And it sounds like really, engagement is probably the best way to make sure your brand can't be replaced by the old white label stuff that they used to have at the grocery store. Because people got to be connected, not just the label. And they need to care about, people need to ultimately care about the relationship, not the one thing. I, you know, it used to be you dropped a direct mail. It was sort of an episode and you were never having a dialogue. Today, there's so many ways and so many channels to reach people. You have to have a consistent way to engage and a consistent way to look at, did I move the needle forward? Am I ultimately renewing that customer or generating more loyalty from that customer or, you know, reference ability or advocacy? And so engagement helps you do that through all the channels. It's interesting because the customer can engage with you whether you, or communicate with you whether you necessarily want it or not in new ways that were here before not existent. That's right. Fun stuff, great place to be. Well, Karen loved sitting down and talking about engagement. It's a thing we talk about here all the time. Great. It's really how we should measure success. That's how we know we're getting through and look forward to follow up and we have some research coming out and some books coming out and Marketo's up to all kinds of stuff. So we will look for that in the not-so-distant future. Awesome. Thank you. We look forward to it. Absolutely. She's Karen Steele from Marketo. I'm Jeff Frick. You're watching theCUBE. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time.


So you've been tracking these spaces for a long time around our footprint, our corporate footprint, our human footprint on the planet, how we're relating to it. And an idea around a new social contract that the contract we've had is broken and has not been working. Give us a little slice on what you've been seeing even recently that's got your attention in this space. Well, first, let me just police your wording a little bit. Please. Just like the concept of a footprint. Typically, it invites you into some kind of calculation of how much ecological resource you are consuming with your lifestyle or with your corporations supply chain and so forth. And this idea that you can calculate your impact converted into a number and navigate your relationship with the world through that number. I think is actually part of the problem. It's a very comfortable and familiar way to deal with things because navigating by the numbers is in the DNA of not only the corporation but but modern the modern consumer the modern neoliberal subject like you you navigate according to what is going to maximize a number, so it's not that big a step to expand that number to include the environment. And so the easiest way to do that is to calculate your carbon footprint, and then abracadabra, you have a way to be moral to be ethical to be environmental. And my, my, so I guess to answer your question I can say what is on my mind a lot with that is what gets left out of the numbers. Mm hmm. Yeah. So I just came across a film I haven't seen it yet, but my son saw it and was profoundly affected called sea spiracy. And it's about the fishing industry. And at the same time as another friend wrote me about her diving like, you know coral reef explorations, and just like being blown away by the beauty there. So, you know, here we have basically an industry, the fishing industry that's killing the ocean. Not that environmentalists are ignoring this, but if you just talk to environmental funders or, or, you know, read environmental media, like that issue is tiny, compared to climate change. Climate change is framed in terms of carbon. And so it fits into the same mentality of find something to measure and go to work on that. And what gets left out is the whales. What gets left out is the coral reefs. And yes, it's not that that climate is unrelated to these things.  Are actually more important when you look at the world through the through the lens of, of life of a living being to understand the planet as alive as having a physiology as having organs. Things get a lot more complicated than this geomechanical view that compares the earth kind of to like a big machine. And there's levels of this and levels of that and tweak those levels kind of like an engineering object. So this is just to give you an example of this, this basic mindset and how, you know, it's part of our economic thinking that's part of our scientific thinking I mean, and to suggest the magnitude of the change in front of us, if we want to have a different kind of future. Charles talk talk us through you've touched on a very important points. And I think what you're saying is climate change has become carbon footprint in terms of the marketing message, both at an individual level and at a company corporate level all through the different segments and groups. And often there is some almost a generalization that if we source out the climate issue will probably sort out the environment. Earth will be fine again. And I think what you're saying and you touch on some very important points may sound obvious to many of us when we hear this but you talk a lot about cause and symptom. And you can describe that momentarily. But I think one of the things you did you do do talk about is outside of the stuff you're not seeing outside of fixing the carbon issue. What else is going on a byproduct of mass consumption and mass production and some form of aggressive capitalism is that we've got used to building things. We've got used to getting things fast and cheap globalization is something to do with it. We're building buildings all over the place. We want food as quickly as possible. We want it we process food is one part of it pesticides.  And that involves using much more chemical in in in the food production. We've seen that in the West already and all sorts of deforestation and land abuse. So can you tell us what sits on the other side I've touched on the big big areas but just break it down for us so we understand the other side the stuff we're not seeing. Well, let me start with India. What's really going on there is a coordinated effort to destroy village life and the rural economy and to put it in the hands of multinational corporations, chemical companies seed companies, you know, big agricultural companies that and to, to, you know, convert essentially the land of India into a industrial agricultural production site, which is similar to what's happened in in North America. In most of this continent. And yeah the farmers are right to protest and they really deserve our support because And like, you can, it's not like the corporations or the people in them are evil. They are doing this work with their own high ideals that unfortunately depend on a very limited view of of the consequences, and also a prejudice about what the future of humanity is and what a good life is, and what our destiny is. So, the ideology of progress has long implied that we move away from the land that we become more global that we become more efficient that we produce more using less labor. Right. And in that view, the lowliest profession would be the subsistence farmer. And progress would mean, yeah, my father was a farmer but I've gone to university, you know, and my children are getting PhDs, and they're operating in a mechanized or information environment and not soiling their hands. So, so this, and they're producing much more food with less labor and we need more food right because there's so many hungry people. And we need more goods because there's so many people in poverty. But after now how long has it been since the Industrial Revolution, which was supposed to erase poverty and want forever. It's been a couple hundred years now, and we still have tremendous poverty and inequality and it's because of the inequality, like, there is actually no objective shortage of food in the world. There's a huge surplus, but half the world wastes enough to feed the other half. There's no shortage of floor space per capita in the world yet, or in North America, for example. You know, half a million or a million homeless people and 10 or 20 million vacant housing units coexisting. So the problem, the solution of more upping the numbers isn't actually meeting the need. And even those who are wealthy in conventional terms are not as wealthy as a traditional villager in India has been in certain important ways. The feeling like the experience of community, the experience of feeling at home in the world, the experience of feeling free to be generous. If you ever go to a traditional society, it's amazing how generous people are, how connected they are, how at ease they are with time. Like where are people more in a hurry of a traditional village in India? Where are you from originally? Where is your family from? My family is from Delhi. Yeah, so maybe you've gone to some of these places. Where are people in more of a hurry there, or London, or New York? Well, those in London and New York have access to a lot of labor-saving devices. In India, to have a conversation, you have to walk to somebody else's house, at least until recently. But in New York, you can just pick up your phone. So that saves a lot of time. We should be in an abundance of time in a modern technological society, but it's the opposite. So this failure to achieve the paradise that technology and efficiency and capitalism has promised is becoming harder and harder to deny. And it is fomenting a, you could even call it a spiritual crisis. Like the question, what are we doing here? Is this really me in this role? I'm thinking of being trapped in a system that I don't really agree with anymore. And maybe all of us being trapped in it. And how do we get out? Like, these are some of the things that are boiling under the surface. You know, this is reminding me, Charles, last time you came on here, you talked a lot about this narrative that we have around disconnection, that we have a story that we're disconnected from our ecosystem, from our planet. And therefore we can have more of an extraction relationship versus a generative collaborative relationship. And I know it's really underneath so much of what we're talking about here. So here's my question to you is when I look at a lot of organizations, we are seeing a lot of trends toward being more sensitive to their impact to their employees to their environment to their consumers. There's much more receptivity toward that than ever. There's some hope in some of those ways. And it also seems like there's a whole revolution that still needs to happen to really build this next level of empathy and compassion, which is one of the titles of this talk today of how to how do you actually generate compassion. How do you start to feel more empathy toward that if I'm destroying my backyard, I'm destroying myself. How do we any any tips you have on how to help people connect those dots a little more clearly. Yeah, so you've actually named two different things. One is compassion or empathy. The other is self interest. So, if I destroy my backyard I'm harming myself. If I destroy the whales I'm harming myself if we cut down the rainforests, we're harming ourselves. That is one reason to stop doing these things. But it's not a good enough reason. Like, if you approach a corporation and they're like, they're like, Rick, I'd like to become, you know, we would like to become more sustainable. And but we want to make sure that it, we're going to make even more money. And you say, yes, that's possible. If you do this, this and this, you're going to make more money. Well, are they actually doing it because they want to be sustainable? Right. What are you appealing to? At some point. Okay, like there is this kind of dogma that if you are socially and environmentally responsible as a corporation, then your profit profits are going to improve as well. And morale is going to improve. There's lots of reasons why you're going to be more innovative.  And all these arguments why profit and social environmental responsibility is not in opposition, except it's not always true. And probably anybody who's running a company or making these decisions, or even as a consumer, like you're going to have moments where the more ethical product is more expensive. It sure looks like your bottom line is going to suffer. And maybe it will suffer. Like, because the question is, why are you actually doing this? Is it, what do you care about?  That would be one way to put it. The choice point will inevitably come up as a way to clarify the driving question of a human being, or one of the driving questions, which is why am I here? What is the purpose of my life? And so we're given these opportunities to clarify that to ourselves and to whatever social or divine witness there is. What do I serve? And it's necessary for it to seem like a choice to seem like, yeah, I have to either, you know, play it safe, minimize my risk, maximize my profit. And maybe within that, I'll make the best ecological choice. But you're serving the profit. Or are you going to serve what you really care about? That's the choice point that every human being faces in one form or another.


From DailyDoseOfWeirdNews.com, I'm Darren Marlar and this is your Daily Dose of Weird News. A Virginia Beach Virginia woman is accused of arson after investigators say she purposely set a potted plant on fire. The charge is a Class 3 felony, which means the 29-year-old could go to jail for anywhere from 5 to 20 years if convicted. Man, somebody needs to tell this lady that setting a potted plant on fire is not the same as smoking pot. This is just hilarious. Or sad, it depends on what side of the political aisle you're on. A new Bloomberg poll shows Hillary Clinton is viewed less favorably than President Trump, despite Trump's historically low approval ratings. So maybe you don't get those pantsuits dry cleaned for the 2020 campaign just yet, Hill. A study says many U.S. children suffer lower back pain. I used to tell my mom that, that's why I couldn't clean my room, but she never bought it. In Northern California, Judge Michael S. Williams has lost his job because apparently he could not resist the urge to swipe two Art Deco-style business card holders from a judge's dinner in San Francisco. The Commission on Judicial Performances censured Williams and he agreed to resign effective December. Williams was attending a dinner hosted by a Matrimonial Lawyers Association in March 2016 when he took two card holders in the Art Deco décor of the City Club of San Francisco. They were each worth about $30 to $50. The Commission says Williams returned the card holders after being informed that he was caught on video. So the judge expressed remorse, said he had an unexplainable impulse to take the card holders. So a judge's career destroyed, or the theft of something less than $100. If you can't be trusted with the small things, how can you be trusted with the big things? Speaking about calls from all sides to cut down or out his use of social media, President Trump argues they want to take my voice away. Trump claims it's my voice, they want to take away my voice, they're not going to take away my social media. Am I MTV? I want my MTV! San Francisco school officials have banned chocolate milk because they say it contains too much sugar. They're also banning sugary soft drinks, non-sugarless gum, and deaf leopards pour some sugar on meat just to cover all the bases. Researchers have found that an all-corn diet can quite literally turn a female hamster into a deranged cannibal. A new study found that the European hamster, which once used to feed on a varied diet of grains, roots, and insects, is not doing so well on a diet limited to industrial ground corn. The study notes that the hamster species is on the verge of extinction in Western Europe. The all-maze regimen has turned the burrowing critters into deranged cannibals that eat their own offspring. Do you see what you're risking here by going vegetarian or vegan? You might be the beginning of the zombie cannibalistic apocalypse. New research seems to indicate that Tyrannosaurus rex couldn't run, and they were extremely poor dancers. Sometimes a price increase is so steep it must be criminal. A woman in Australia called police to report that her drug dealer was asking way too much for marijuana. The woman told police she was completely offended at the outrageous price hike.  Calling the cops for pricey pot? That's a call for the Better Business Bureau. A melting glacier in the Swiss Alps has given up the bodies of a couple that went missing 70 years ago. The ice preserved them as they were when they disappeared all those years ago. Scientists are baffled as to why one of them looks like Brendan Fraser. A new study says that people in Seattle spend 58 hours a year parking their cars. I'm guessing that number doubles during Christmas shopping season. Because bacon reserves are currently at a 50-year low. On the plus side, our cholesterol levels are looking a heck of a lot better. Heidi Montag says she has gained 25 pounds during the first six months of her pregnancy.  Some of that extra weight is you. Lifetime is going to debut a new show next week where they show blind dates live. Obviously not a true reality show, because nobody in their right mind is going to want cameras watching their first date with somebody when everything you do is already being judged by the person you're hoping will be the one. A team of engineering students from UC San Diego is on a quest to discover whether the moon provides the necessary conditions to brew beer. Wait, is there something wrong with brewing beer on earth here somehow? Are we going to have beer shortages unless we're able to start brewing in space? Why didn't somebody warn us about this? Excuse me, I've got to go stock up on some Guinness. A New Mexico man is facing charges after police say he threatened to pull a gun on a taco shop employee for giving him the wrong order. Bullets, Taco Bell, neither one is good for your health. Please support my channel by sharing the daily dose of weird news on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit and other social networks. If you liked this video, please give it a thumbs up and be sure to subscribe if you want to see more. And click that little bell icon next to the subscribe button to be notified when I post new videos. Find even more weird news that I didn't have time for at DailyDoseOfWeirdNews.com. I'm Darren Marlar and I'll see you next time, Weirdo's.


Income tax 2021-2022. Archer, MSA deduction and jury duty pay. Get ready to get refunds to the max. Diving into income tax 2021-2022. Most of this information can be found in the Form 1040 Instructions Tax Year 2021. Here we are in our income tax formula looking at the adjustments to income, which you might hear called the above the line deductions, deductions for adjusted gross income, the schedule one deductions, keeping them distinct in our mind from other kinds of deductions, categories being the standard deduction, the itemized deduction. This is page one of the Form 1040. We're focused on line 10 adjustments to income from schedule one. Here is schedule one part number two. The total of schedule one part number two would flow into page one of the Form 1040 line number 10. Archer MSA deduction. After December 31st, 2007, contributions can't be made to an Archer medical savings account for you unless you were an active Archer MSA participant for any tax year ending before January 1st, 2008, or you became an active Archer MSA participant for a tax year ending after December 31st, 2007 because of coverage under a high deductible plan, HDHP of an Archer MSA participating employer. So, less likely that you'll see that one. The jury duty is an interesting situation as well because we saw that if you got jury duty pay, then you're typically going to have to report that as income because you're going to get a 1099 for it and you want to make sure that you report that in the system. So, whatever we have on our side will match what is on the side of the IRS. So, there's no inconsistency and the return will be processed of course. However, you could have interesting situations with the employer employee situation with regards to jury duty. So, for example, what if the employer is going to pay you for the jury duty and then they want basically you to pay them the jury duty that that you got the pay that you got because they're going to pay you for the time within the jury duty. So, that can be you know a fairly common scenario depending on the employment situation. So, then the question is if you have to record the income, you get basically a deduction for the jury duty pay. And the general concept would be enter your jury duty pay if you gave the pay to your employee or because your employer paid your salary while you served on jury duty.   But we're getting a 1099 from the state for the jury duty which we're going to have to record as income and then pay taxes on it and we're going to be paying taxes on the wages that we got for going to jury duty. So, I have to record the income for the jury duty 1099 or else the government the IRS is going to get confused. They're going to say I didn't report my income. So, to net it out in essence you've reported the income and then you've got this deduction for the jury duty pay in that instance. So, other adjustments use line 24z to report any adjustments not reported elsewhere list the type and amount of the adjustments. So, if you've got other kind of adjustments then this is the place you can go and you can put the amount or the name of the adjustment at that point.


And the Germany government in collaboration with the Nuru, Nigeria Development Initiative have flagged off the distribution of famine equipments to 36,000 women, speaking at inauguration of the machine distribution at Government House YOLA. The managing director of the organization disclosed that victims of Bukoharam in affected seven local governments of the state have been reached out to with famine impute and other empowerment skills by the organization. The mark of this day is that we should inspire inclusion. So for us to inspire inclusion and ensure progress, we need to empower women. Empowerment means a woman must have the economic resilience to manage the household. She must have financial resilience. She must have food stability. She must have opportunities to education. So for us as an organization, call to our mandate is ensuring that we close the equity gap through empowering women for them to attain economic resilience. She added that over 30,000 farmers have been reached out to with needed skills and various interventions programs by the organization in partnership with the German government. So today we are funded over this machine to women in the community so that they can be able to rebuild the food system. During the Bukoharam insurgents, a lot of productive assets has been lost. So because this productive asset has been lost, some people have to travel up to six kilometers just to grind corn. So for us to take this burden of women carrying a lot of wood load to go six kilometers is better we bring it to their doorstep. So this is called to us to ensure that women have stability in their household and they are able to attain self-reliance. And the state government found New Romania for such gesture while some of the beneficiaries share their views. And surprisingly when we came we made the organization that is the donors you know with a lot of machineries to empower women to celebrate the International Women's Day in order to bring them out of poverty. So it is a thing of joy. My ministry we are really elated to see the woman who come woman would come out of poverty because if not through this we would have done it but probably it would take a little bit it would be slower. Pression was good and the women are enjoying and since we have experienced this program Nuru Nigeria they have established women in our pledges through farming, farming vegetables, soybeans, grain nuts and other. They established women in new businesses, not women to be seated alone. Their advice was to do businesses differently, making kulu kuli and other things, even my my. The same problem of food in my community because of Nuru Nigeria limited because Nuru has helped my community tremendously. They are giving them seeds, giving them fertilizers, giving them advice, giving them even some people following them to their farm to teach them how to farm so we have gotten a bomb harvest. All the innovation of Nuru into our community we have almost lost everything we have global for all this years by the Boko Haram Insight but with the innovation of Nuru came it taught us how to practice modern farming system, it gave us improved seed, it gave us fertilizer, it now taught us how to contribute money and start making service.