Tennessee Williams was one of 20th century America’s most important playwrights. Williams’ The Glass Menagerie was written in 1944 and premiered by the Playhouse Theater in 1945. The Glass Menagerie has two different translations in the Turkish literary system, the earlier of which is Can Yücel’s Sırça Kümes, published by the Ministry of National Education in 1964. Since its release, Sırça Kümes has been met with great interest and has been staged by both private and state-funded theaters, such as the State Theaters. The other translation is Aytuğ Izat’s Sırça Hayvan Koleksiyonu, published by Mitos Boyut Publications in 2000. This text, supported by the American Consulate and published as part of the Cultural Heritage Project, was added to Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality City Theater’s repertoire and was first staged in the 2014–2015 season.

This study aims to examine the translated texts in light of André Lefevere’s theories on rewriting. In the preface to their book Translation/History/Culture, Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere state that every translation/rewriting strategy develops in line with ideological and literary reasons related to the text (Bassnett & Lefevere, 1992: xi). When translated or rewritten texts are examined in this way, it is possible to treat the translator's unique behaviors as a subject of inquiry and to produce a detailed opinion of the time and environment in which the translation was performed.

The study is organized in three parts. The first focuses on the theoretical framework of translation as rewriting and theater text translation. In the second part, the definitions established in the first part are applied to the process of scrutinizing the translations, and the two translated target texts are examined alongside the source text within the framework of Marilyn GaddisRose’s concept of “stereoscopic reading.”.” Finally, the processes underlying the production of the two translations are analyzed under the subtitles Usage of Slang, Usage of Idioms, Expressions Related to Staging Process, Expressions Related to Target Culture, Expressions Related to Source Culture, and Title Preference. Differences between translators’ selections are explained according to these characteristics.  

To reflect the characters’ spoken language in the target text, Can Yücel employed idiomatic and slang elements that stand out in the daily use of the target language. Yücel’s choice can be considered an effort to prevent the target audience from attracting a stranger to a work that belongs to the source language and culture system. Taking the staging notes into account, Yücel created a text ready to be staged by reflecting the directions given by Williams, the original playwright, in the source text. By contrast, Aytuğ İzat's translation uses everyday language within the semantic range of the words in the source text, reflecting his desire to protect the linguistic and cultural features of the source system and to provoke an emotional response in the target audience. İzat’s translation preserves the source language and culture system and thus represents a resource-oriented translation. It can be considered a text that allows directors' decisions to come to the fore in the staging process, ignoring both staging notes and actor directions.

In conclusion, differences in the translators’ interpretation of the source text were reflected in both target texts in line with the translators’ different reading processes. These differences can be recognized as translator decisions that enrich and develop the target language and culture system. Within the scope of the study, the shaping of the translation process and the differences between the translators’ discourses (tracked in the target system by comparison with characteristics of the source text’s own language and culture system) can be analyzed in the context of rewriting. Thanks to the different paths chosen by the translators, Can Yücel and Aytuğ İzat, the source text is re-created in the target system. In other words, the study shows that the translators reached noticeably different destinations despite using the same source, writing the same yet different plays in the target system. These play texts, which have assumed and preserved a place for themselves in the target literary system, have continued to meet with audiences in the theater halls. It is important for a target text to be represented by more than one translation in a target literary system, both for the reader and the system itself. The richness created by this diversity stimulates further development of the literary system, progress among readers and audiences, and the expansion of creativity.