|
|
|
 |
|
(or
How Asterix crossed the channel and was published in English)
|
|
Introduction
|
|
Asterix has been speaking english in his
speech bubbles for almost 40 years. Despite being the
french creation of Goscinny and Uderzo, under the translations
of Anthea Bell and Derek Hockridge Asterix is loved
by children and adults alike in english speaking countries
such as the UK, Australia, South Africa and even...
New Zealand! Some fans even express surprise when they
learn that Asterix is indeed a translation! You could
say Asterix speaking the english language is taken very
much for granted. We know all about the history behind
Goscinny and Uderzo's creation of Asterix and initial
publication in the Pilote magazine.
|
|
|
We also know by opening the cover that Anthea Bell
and Derek Hockridge translated the series into english.
But we don't know much else about the wider history
of Asterix in english. What was behind the decision
of Brockhampton Press to publish and translate the books
into english? Why were the books published out of order?
How was the series marketed? And how successful was
the series at the beginning? This article will answer
these questions and more.
Asterix had made an appearance of sorts in Britain
in the Ranger and Look and Learn magazines from 1965
- 1967. Readers were introduced not to "Asterix"
and "Obelix" but "Beric" and "Son
of Boadicea". Asterix and the Big Fight and Asterix
and Cleopatra were adapted as if they were about not
the Gauls but the British - their titles became Britons
Never, Never, Never Shall be Slaves! and In the
Days of Good Queen Cleo (Source).
It wasn't until in 1969 that Asterix
the Gaul, the first book of the english translations
we know today was released.
It is at this point that I must introduce Antony
Kamm, whom I am indebted to in producing this history.
He was the editor-in-chief at Brockhampton Press 1960-72
and oversaw the publication of the first seven Asterix
books into english. He was "technically"
the editor "with all that entailed";
the detailed editing was undertaken first by Dorothy
Ward and then by Ian Aitken. He also participated "fully
and enthusiastically in all decisions and in the memorable
Asterix editorial meetings at which the latest translation
(and the various reports thereon) was discussed round
the dinner table (with porc en sanglier served by Anthea)."
He also supplied the Latin for the early books.
Antony made contact over a mistake that
had been included on the Asterix
and Cleopatra mistakes page. I had incorrectly attributed
the mistake (Asterix saying that the die that Getafix
had rolled showed three sixes when in fact the image
of the die showed a 4, a 2 and a 1) to the english translators.
Antony quite rightly pointed out that the original artwork
HAD been changed when the book was first published (the
current mistake stemming from Orion in their 2004 reprinting
using the original french plates). With the attribution
of the mistake righted, Antony graciously allowed me
to ask him further questions about his Asterix Story.
He provided me with the following article
he wrote in 1993 which details the early publishing
history of Asterix, and my interview with him appears
following that.
|
|
|
Early
Publishing History by Antony Kamm
|
This is an extract from an article, "Whatever Happened
to Litle Oleg: Brockhampton Press in the Sixties",
by Antony Kamm (Editor-in-Chief of Brockhampton Press from
1960 to 1972) in Signal, issue 70 January 1993. It is reproduced
here by permission of the author.
|
1969 was the year of Asterix. It all
began with an inter-company memorandum from Ron Kirkman,
Modern Languages Editor of the associated University
of London Press, accompanied by a battered copy of
a French strip-cartoon book and the suggestion that
this was something Brockhampton should publish. A
comic strip did not seem fully compatible with current
policy, but a Celtic rugby football match (the book
was Astérix chez les Bretons) looked
promising as far as one's school certificate French
allowed. Dorothy Ward, a London-based editor whose
French was really rather good, was given the opportunity
to test her mettle and to produce a report.
|
|
What she came back with was quite startling.
Asterix was the rage not only of France but also of much
of the rest of the Continent. Two British publishers (believed
to be Methuen, publishers of Tin-Tin, and Usborne) had turned
it down on the grounds that it was untranslatable, and the
English language rights were still available.
A historical record would reveal that Asterix
was smuggled onto the agenda of the next board meeting,
disguised as "Any Other Business", and that the
copy of the book was at that point passed up the table to
the Chairman, Paul Hodder-Williams. Deputy Chairman John
Attenborough, sitting on his right, got it first, took one
look at the endpapers (which in the French editions are
printed), burst out laughing, and exclaimed, "Ewart,
you must go to Paris tomorrow and sign this up!" Managing
Director Ewart Wharmby, who did not have a word of French,
and who had not yet seen what it was he was supposed to
sign up, went perceptibly pale.
If the object of marketing is to get the product
right and to exploit all available avenues to ensure that
as many potential purchasers know about it and can readily
obtain it, then the Asterix campaign was unusually successful.
Since a collaboration was involved in creating the storylines
and inventing the (often highly sophisticated) jokes in
the originals, it seemed sensible to entrust the translation,
too, to a partnership: a professional translator with a
sound background in literature and a college lecturer in
French who was au fait with the current French scene and
culture [Anthea Bell and Derek Hockridge]. A certain
amount of mythology, some of it generated by the translators
themselves, has grown up around the English translations,
but if one accepts that the primary object of translation
is to represent the spirit rather than necessarily the actual
words of the original, then theirs is based on the soundest
academic principles, with a creative identity akin to that
which distinguishes, for instance, Sir Thomas Urquhart's
version of Rabelais. This is no more apparent than in the
first book of the canon, Asterix the Gaul, which, probably
because the original creators were feeling their way, is
not brimming with linguistic fireworks. There is little
basis in the original French for the accumulation of excruciating
scholarly puns at the bottom of the opening page of the
English version. It was soon justified, however; a county
librarian wrote that he had skimmed the first page of an
approval copy with a sceptical eye, but had become firmly
hooked when he reached the concluding frame on that page.
The sales and publicity aspects of the campaign
were supervised by Paul Hodder-Williams himself in his capacity
as Chairman also of the Hodder group of companies, utilizing
all the resources and skills of the group, to every member
of the staff of which he sent at home a copy of Asterix
the Gaul with a personal letter. Promotion of books
through the media does not just happen; it has to be worked
for.
Two events above all brought Asterix to the
notice of the public at each end of the target spectrum.
The Times Literary Supplement ran a front page leader
in its children's books issue. (Yes, gentle readers, in
those days the TLS had two extensive supplements a year
wholly devoted to children's books.)
BBC television, faced apparently with the stark
choice of using a clip from a
film of Asterix the Gaul, which had been made
by the French publisher and dubbed into Americanese
with different names to those in the English edition
of the book, or not featuring Asterix at all, did
neither, and came up trumps. Five nights in a row
the Tonight programme closed with a five-minute
serial from the film, the new commentary being voice-over
by Eric Thompson (of the Magic Roundabout)
from the Brockhampton translation.
|
|
|
Within a short time, the three books
published in hardback at intervals during that first
year of 1969 (Asterix the Gaul, Asterix and Cleopatra,
and Asterix the Gladiator) had been reprinted six,
five, and four times respectively, while at the same
time being available also in two different paperback
editions. In spite of the fact that René Goscinny's
tragically early death in 1977 deprived the French
origination team of its more creative half, since
when there have been only six new titles, total sales
of the English translations in all editions are now
more than sixteen million. The annual receipts of
just over £1m represent in real terms considerably
more than the turnover of the complete Brockhampton
list (including the paperback imprint) at the time
when Asterix was first published. The secret of its
success is that the books really do contain a literary
something for everyone; sometimes there is in addition
an uncanny sense of the topical.
|
|
|
My Interview
with Antony Kamm
|
|
Q: How was the original publication order
decided on? The English Asterix books were quite notorious
for being printed out of order. I note that the first seven
books published were numbers (1.) Gaul,
(6.) Cleopatra,
(4.) Gladiator,
(8.) Britain,
(10.) Legionary,
(14.) Spain and
(7.) Big Fight.
Why this order and why were books such
as Asterix
and the Golden Sickle (the real second book in the series)
skipped?
Antony Kamm: The contract between Dargaud and
Matthew Hodder, the holding company of the Hodder Group,
stipulated that the licence would remain in force as long
as a new title in English was published within six months
of the previous one. It was the decision of the Brockhampton
board to publish three books at intervals during the first
year, and two a year thereafter. The initial order of
publication, after Asterix the Gaul, was quite simply
geared to making from the start the maximum impact on
the UK market, and the advice of the translators was taken
into account when planning it. (You virtually anticipate
my answer by your award of gourds to no. 2 (3), no. 3
(3), no. 5 (2½). [Antony is referring to the
ratings I gave to the books in the Take
a Look Inside pages] What if we had never got
to Asterix and Cleopatra?). I believe you would find that
deft touches were introduced into the translations where
necessary to suit the new sequence.
|
Q: What was the amount of turnaround time
for producing the books - from first getting the licence,
to the translation, to the publishing?
| Antony Kamm: It may have taken six months for
the lawyers on each side to hammer out the original contract,
especially because of language difficulties. I cannot
remember at what stage I started to work on the problem
of translation. I believed, and still believe, that anything
can be translated if one concentrates on rendering the
spirit of the original, not necessarily the actual words.
I had had three sample translations, perfectly adequate
but somehow lacking that essential sparkle, before I hit
on the idea of a collaboration of Anthea and Derek, backed
up by the wider team (two of whom had submitted sample
translations that I had rejected). Maybe it was 4--6 months
before we had a final edited text. Tremendous care, under
the direction of Clifford Hufton, was taken at the design
and production stages (and of course the texts had to
be hand-lettered, and proofed, and the film retouched
where necessary). To publish in March 1969, we must have
had finished copies in December 1968 (an unheard-of lead
time these days). The whole process may have taken 18
months to two years the first time. After that, it was
a continuous cycle of about eight months each time. |
Q: How involved where Uderzo and Goscinny
in the publication of Asterix in English? What were your memories
of them?
|
Goscinny's English was perfect, with a slight American
accent from having spent some years in USA. Uderzo had
no English. All the arrangements for publication were
done with the firm of Dargaud, for whom Louis Olivier
(who I think was chief of PR) acted as front man. Neither
Goscinny nor Uderzo were involved in the publication,
though as a matter of courtesy Goscinny used to be sent
a script of each new translation for his comments. I
don't think he ever had any in my time, and on the occasion
of the launch of the film of Asterix and Cleopatra in
UK, in an interview on BBC television, he said that
the English translations were better than the French
versions. He was that sort of man. (One evening in London
he insisted on being taken to a pub, so that he could
drink "warm beer", which he rather liked.)
That was the second occasion on which the Goscinny/Uderzo
circus came to England. The first was for the annual
sales dinner and conference in Leicester in December
1968 at which Asterix was launched. Both attended the
Asterix session, Uderzo with Derek in attendance as
interpreter. When introduced, he haltingly said, "I
regret I do not speak English," which Derek, quick
as a flash, rendered as, "Je regrette que je ne
parle pas Anglais." I also met them mainly socially
on two or three occasions in Paris, when I was there
to discuss business with Dargaud.
|
Q: Perhaps you could comment on the special
message that the authors wrote for the release of Asterix
in Britain asking readers not to take offense? Was it
a genuine concern that readers might take the stereotypes
the wrong way amongst your editorial meetings?
| I asked Anthea. She replies, "That Goscinny preface:
it was his idea, he sent it in French, and we translated
it." She does not know why or when it was dropped. |
Q: Do you remember discussing the translations
of some of the original main character names? Panoramix to
Getafix is a particular favourite of mine. Were there any
other potential names?
|
There was always much discussion of names at the editorial
meeting, and at other times. It was usual of course
for Anthea and Derek to include in the draft their own
choices, and for everyone else then to chip in. Getafix
was certainly theirs, though thereby hangs a tale. Shortly
after the initial publication, the BBC decided to run
the original Asterix the Gaul film, with the wrong sound
track (including the wrong names). Eric Thompson (and
he was that sort of man, too) formally offered to redub
it with our translation for no fee. Eric and I even
took Ursula Eason, deputy head of children's programmes,
out to lunch to try and persuade her. She was adamant,
one of her arguments being that Getafix was an unsuitable
name to be included in a children's programme!
Dorothy Ward devised Dogmatix. I think I contributed
Crismus Bonus and two obscure legionaries called Sendervictorius
and Appianglorius. As you can guess, much fun was had
by all!
|
Q: Was there a strategy to target the books
not just to children, but to adults as well?
| Yes, certainly -- see, for instance the last frame on
the first page of Asterix the Gaul (my contribution, BTW).
A lot of the humour is quite sophisticated, and deliberately
so. We already knew that, for instance, many academics
in UK were fans of Asterix in French (among them, I remember,
the historian John Terraine and the archaeologist Professor
Stuart Piggott), and we wanted such people as these to
enjoy the English also. |
Q: What was the early response like to
Asterix’s publication? How early did you know you had
a hit on your hands?
|
I have occasionally come across a press report, the
latest in an obit. of PH-W, that initial sales were
"slow". Not from where I was! I think this
may reflect the fact that the French were definitely
disappointed at the early UK sales, expecting more.
But they, and the Germans, thought in terms of hundreds
of thousands of copies, whereas we were thinking of
tens of thousands (original publication was in hardback).
I think we printed 10,000 copies of Asterix the Gaul.
As W H Smith weighed in with an initial order for 10,000,
which they distributed to all their outlets (known as
a "scale-out"), this means we must have reprinted
before publication, and I think there was another reprint
shortly after that. I have a 1974 Brockhampton catalogue
from which it would appear that all the hardbacks were
regularly reprinted every year at a time when early
titles were also being published in paper covers and
(in black and white) in paperback format.
When is a hit? I think we did most things right, and
particularly the product was right. (Not only were alterations
to the black plate engineered, but in places where French
exclamations, etc. were in the original taken out of
the colours, the appropriate pages of film were laboriously
retouched by hand. Uderzo, incidentally, only drew the
black line; the colour was put in by girls in the Dargaud
office.) There were a couple of promotion disasters:
a magazine to whom we gave an exclusive on an interview
with Goscinny and Uderzo did not print it, and the journalist
setting up a feature article in the Sunday Times magazine
failed to register that they printed by gravure, whereas
our film was for litho. Ewart Wharmby wrote to me a
year or two after I left the firm in 1972, and said,
"Asterix is self-propelled", and that is the
point at which from his view he could happily accept
that he had a "hit". The accountants would
probably agree. For others, it was not so much a case
of realising one had a hit, as a conviction that, given
the backing of the complete skills and resources of
the whole group from the chairman down, it could not
fail. It was question then of the scale of hitness.
Of course, in USA, Asterix flopped, I think, at least
twice! Maybe these Americans have no sense of humour!
|
|
|
Final
Thoughts
|
The english publishing of Asterix has changed a quite a
bit since Antony's time. The popularity of Asterix saw the
books published again and again - hardcover and softcover,
half size and black and white - with the covers changing
format many times. We have seen Asterix published by Brockhampton
Press and Knight Books, Hodder Dargaud and Hodder and Stoughton
and now Orion books. But through it all, in the english
speaking world the Asterix books have maintained a favoured
spot at the children's sections of libraries and on adult's
private bookshelves alike.
It is people like Antony Kamm that are the forgotten heroes
in the english publishing history of Asterix, responsible
for the early direction of the series and helping to ensure
its popularity. I can't thank Antony Kamm enough for providing
this fascinating insight into Asterix's trip to Britain
and beyond.
|
|
|
|
