Localization and Webcomics

It can be seen that the processes that comics undergo when being adapted for a target locale are primarily out of concern for general aims native to localization: that is, creating a marketable product that appeals to a given target readership. This is all a given within the context of comics in general, but what about the niche category of webcomics? As is known, webcomics usually do not undergo commercialization, as they themselves are often works available free of charge. Can certain perspectives of localization be applied to webcomics? And if so, would these perspectives be in any way beneficial to webcomic translation?

House (2018) points out that nowadays, in the age of high digitization, “there is (. . .) an ever-growing demand for translation in what is called ‘localization’, i.e., adapting a product to the local conditions of the receiving linguacultural community” (p. 22). House (2018) notes that now much depends on the process, and that localization includes a large number of activities, most of which include translation in some form: “indeed, translation is part and parcel of all worldwide localization” (p. 22). Furthermore, translation is “propelled” by the World Wide Web, which in turn is further connected to globalization and market needs (House, 2018, pp. 22-23). As can be deduced, in many ways the Internet is connected to translation and vice versa- it therefore becomes no wonder that localization becomes a vital part of it. Webcomics become an extension of this connection.

Therefore, a general answer would be yes, of course. If one were to look at localization and webcomics from an economical perspective, it is possible to analyze them from a monetary and business understanding that permeates localization theory, especially if a select webcomic calls for it. However, this would an exception rather than the rule in the case of webcomics. As

aforementioned, webcomics are usually independent pieces of work that are not made for monetary benefit, at least not primarily. It is usually with time that an author turns to crowdfunding printed versions of the webcomic or creating and selling dedicated merchandise online, and this phenomenon usually occurs a good year or more after the success of a webcomic. This is something that Kleefeld (2020) references in his book on webcomics (pp. 203-207), emphasizing that webcomics cannot be subject to the same models of economic success as printed comics and graphic novels or syndicated digital comics, as the economic metric of success is wildly different (p. 204).

Charlie Spike Trotman (2014), who is a creator and editor of comics and webcomics alike, mentions how lengthy this process can be: “Be patient. Don’t expect it [a webcomic] to be paying for itself or for you in a year or even two years or maybe even three years” (qtd. in Davis, 2014, n.p.). Davis’ (2014) article goes on to quote a number of active webcomic creators that emphasize the virtue of patience and putting the art over the potential money; Kleefeld (2020) also cites a number of artists who talk about the stress and challenges of the work, and how great patience is needed to even get to the point of being able to earn a living (pp. 102-105, 204-206). As such, webcomics continue to be more of a passion project than a true business endeavor, even though the possibilities of crowdfunding and audience participation has made it more probable (Kleefeld, 2020, p. 209). For webcomics, money making is contained primarily within selling things that are not always susceptible to translation: merchandise (Kleefeld, 2020, p. 106). Kleefeld (2020) goes as far to mention that “in business terms, the webcomic is a loss leader for whatever is actually being sold” (p. 106). These can include print comics which can be translated, but also T-shirts, keychains, stickers, pins, collectible toys, and so on. Websites like Topatoco, Etsy, Redbubble, and Big Cartel serve as a comfortable online platform where independent creators can sell their merchandise, that is if they haven’t already set up a personalized store, like the creators of Penny Arcade (1998-current) or Sarah’ s Scribbles (2011-(1998-current).

Furthermore, webcomic creators advice themselves on how to make money, advice which often centers around creating a marketable website and merchandise, as well as setting up crowdfunding websites such as Patreon or Kickstarter and participating in conventions (Webcomic Friends, 2018). In fact, translation is sometimes seen as a threat to an independent creator: the recently released “Making Money from Webcomics” guide mentions the danger of signing on to a translation by a publisher, noting that a webcomic creator could lose the rights to their content if they are not careful (Webcomic Friends, 2018, p. 50). As can be seen, the notion that webcomics are independent works can influence translation and localization processes. It is for these reasons and others that the localization and potential publishing of a webcomic is a rarity-but it does occur.

If the localization of a given webcomic does take place, it is often not motivated from a business standpoint, but rather from the internal motivation to make a work widely available for an

international audience. Webcomic creators often see translation, let alone localization, as an added bonus that is carried out by fans: this is why so many webcomic creators have no issue with mirror websites that publish translations. An example of this is in figure 16, where xkcd’s (2006-current) Russian mirror site underwent a simple process of localization, i.e. the buttons and titles have been translated. In other cases, mirror websites may be potentially localized at the author’s encouragement, but this is a very rare occurrence due to the time and financial investment that may not yield returns. Aside from the crowning example of the fanmade website localizations and webcomics of xkcd (2006-current), another recent example is Sarah Anderson’s webcomic strip titled Sarah’s Scribbles (2011-current). Since its inception, the webcomic has gained huge popularity; in order to accommodate this, Anderson allowed her strips to be translated and republished on websites and social media. As a result, the strips were widely translated by fans and reposted on localized websites and social media (figures 17 and 18), leading to an even further increase in popularity and a demand for translated, printed volumes- Anderson’s work is still currently available in English on her website, Sarahcandersen.com.

Figures 17 and 18

Sarah’s Scribble’s Localizations- Screenshots

Note. Russian and Spanish localizations of Anderson’s strips; figure 17 is hosted on a Russian mirror website, figure 18 on Facebook. Retrieved July 12, 2020, from https://acomics.ru/~doodle-time and https://www.facebook.com/SarahsScribblesenEspanol

Currently, Anderson’s printed webcomic strip collection has been translated into 14 languages, the most recent one being the Russian translation published in 2020; a Turkish and Chinese translation is also slated to be soon published (Anderson, 2020b). However, Anderson, unlike Munroe, has retracted permission to republish her translated strips, on the account of the growing number of translated volumes of works and professional translators working on them (Anderson, 2020a). Thus, any fanmade localization processes that the webcomic underwent have been nullified by the

ongoing process of printed localization, which becomes more akin to comic localization as we know it. In fact, when it comes to webcomics, it seems that full online localization that includes the website usually occurs when a webcomic is hosted on a commercially owned website: this can be observed in the case of the Webtoon website, which is available in a number of languages such as French, English, Spanish, Indonesian and Chinese, and is combined with the translations of webtoons in these respective languages.

As rare as localization is when it comes to webcomics, it still warrants a context-based discussion. Comics, including webcomics, are surrounded by rich paratext that influences their reception and message; furthermore, this paratext is largely encoded in the digital sphere. Thus, it can be helpful to focus on the localization of webcomics from the point of view of technology and other imagetext relevant elements. Zanettin (2008b) brings up constrained translation when discussing the localization of comics, and points out that in such a translation, “the focus of analysis is on the linguistic features of comics, while the non-verbal components are only seen as constraints that the translator must take into account” (p. 228). Interestingly, he goes on to say that a constrained approach can help in making translation decisions pertaining to works that have an abundance of non-verbal elements; therefore, he applies a somewhat outdated translation approach for practical purposes. It also shows that localization can be applied to webcomics; as Zanettin (2008b) points out: “a localization approach may usefully be applied not only to the translation (in its broader sense) of software, websites and videogames, but also to all types of products, especially those in which non-verbal elements play a major part in shaping the information offer available to the end user/viewer” (p. 228). Thus, webcomics easily fall under this categorization. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, localization has been primarily derived from new media and modern technology. Dunne (2006) points out that up until the mid-1990s, localization had been connected at first to software and the translation of its interface, and included any needed adjustments (p. 3).

However, with the advent of the Internet and the rapid development and appearance of different kinds of content and forms, localization becomes a widespread concern that went beyond the mere translation and adaptation of software (Dunne, 2006, p. 3).

Dunne (2006) provides a wider definition of the term localization which is based on Cadieux and Esselink’s findings; he sees localization as: “The processes by which digital content and products developed in one locale (. . .) are adapted for sale and use in another locale” (pp. 3-4).

Dunne (2006) also includes in his definition the translation of textual content and conventions along with the adaption of non-textual content and “input, output and delivery mechanisms” (p. 4). As a more developed definition, it not only emphasizes the digital nature of localization but also the importance of processes involved in localization (Dunne, 2006, p. 4). In an earlier article, Esslink (2006) echoes this importance by defining localization as the combining of language and technology (p. 21). This sentiment is repeated by Michael Cronin (2003) in his book on

globalization and translation, where he too describes the connection between the World Wide Web and localization, similarly pointing out the fluidity and constant need to update and revise websites and localization projects (pp. 13-14). As much as the economic money-making factor plays a vital role in localization, it also unmistakably is connected to technological advancement, especially in the digital realm.

Interestingly, Cronin (2003) brings up translation’s original analogue status, and how its primary seeming simplicity in translation studies i.e. rendering word for word helps to broaden current perspectives in understanding the complexity of translation in the modern world (p. 13). In a later title on translation and identity, Cronin (2006) discusses the merits of looking at translation as mobile and mutable (p. 26), especially since one way of translating may be applied anywhere, but with some fragments being “reworked” or added/deleted. Cronin (2006) does not see translation as immutable, especially in our contemporary world where shifts between cultures, languages, forms, modes and platforms occur rapidly: “The perception of translation as a mutable mobile which operates within a topology of fluidity (. . .) would usefully put paid to the conventional habit of dismissing translation as synonymous with loss, deformation, poor approximation and entropy” (p.

28). These sentiments concerning localization continue to be reflected in current academia (Jiménez-Crespo, 2013; 2019).

Indeed, Cronin is right to perceive contemporary translation work as highly fluid; it is also why Cronin (2006) also brings up Reinhard Schäler’s so-called “bottom-up localization”, which would not focus on the capitalist driven localization practices that focus on maximization of profits, but rather would be a localization form “that would seek, for example, to provide relevant, local digital content in as many languages as possible” (p. 29). In the comic realm, we see this currently occurring with webtoons, manga and some webcomics (e.g. Hobo Lobo of Hamelin), which are being published on dedicated websites and apps not only in a variety of target languages, but also within localized websites that feature interfaces, help guides and information in the target language.

Such a localization model focuses on the mutability of translation, essentially contributing to the practice of thorough, and not superficial localization. The only exception here would be certain webcomics that are fan-translated- these are usually done with less care and translated within the confines of select social media (an example of this is the aforementioned Sarah’s Scribbles), which on its own is already localized- all the reader needs to do is switch to the version in their local language. Still, such efforts make up a part of localization, albeit in an indirect way. Such a flexible stance is especially valuable when it comes to the translation of online works, where immutability and lack of mobility is all but an unrealistic concept in an environment that is primarily dynamic.

It is for this reason that when translating a given webcomic, one must take into consideration localization; while translation is a part of localization, if a translation team were to successfully translate a webcomic, then that would have to be done whilst taking localization into account- this

is due to the surrounding paratext that often accompanies webcomics, and one that influences the reception of a given webcomic. Certainly, some paratext is not as influential as others; the lively reader discussions and colorful framing that accompany each published page of Unsounded (2010-current) hold more semiotic and semantic weight than, for instance, the nearly two decade old Digger (2003-2011) website which is not active now that its run has ended- it serves as an archive.

Furthermore, Digger (2003-2011) does not feature accompanying materials scattered across other online platforms, unlike Unsounded (2010-current). The more intricate a digital work is, it logically concludes that the more it will need to undergo the entire process of localization. This is something that Ray Whitcher (2019) points out in the context of print publishing and funding of digital comics and webcomics- if a webcomic has been published with a potential print form already in mind, the larger the chances are that it may be translated and localized, as complex reformatting and additions are simply not needed, and a potential reader can transition between both online and print mode with ease (p. 175).