Interpreting Japanese Cinema: Monika Uchiyama
The treasured interpreter of film Q&As and more reflects on speaking for others
I’ve been on many Zoom calls with Monika Uchiyama over the years, but usually I’m talking through her, rather than with her.
Monika Uchiyama is a Japanese-English interpreter working with Japanese cinema, contemporary art, and visual cultures. If you’re a New Yorker, you likely know her – she’s the woman with the long dark hair seated, smiling, to the side of the esteemed Japanese guest of the day at venues such as the Japan Society New York and Film at Lincoln Center. If you follow Japanese cinema from afar, you’ve likely read words that she assisted in their travels – for example, interviews with Kiyoshi Kurosawa at Letterboxd, Ryusuke Hamaguchi at Interview Magazine, Yoko Yamanaka at IndieWire, Meiko Kaji at Filmmaker, and translations of supplemental material and subtitles for Kani Releasing.
Uchiyama has worn many hats across her working life — artist, filmmaker, teacher, translator. They each offer her unique perspectives and vantage points from which to better understand those she interprets for. But the most useful one has been there since birth — Monika Uchiyama really loves people.
How did you get into interpreting?
Monika Uchiyama: To answer that, I’d have to go way back to when I was a teenager living in Japan. I started working for music magazines as a means to get free tickets to shows. I knew that my one skill that I had was that I was bilingual. I would find the free magazines at Tower Records and email the addresses on the back, and let them know that I was willing to work for free if they’d let me go to shows. It was more translation than interpreting – I would work on interviews with bands or musicians, translating their replies into Japanese, and then those would get published.
As an extension of that, I found my way into what they call ‘attending’, which is not interpretation, but more when a band comes to Japan, you would be their person that makes sure that they make it to their things on time. There’s very little serious interpretation involved. I interpreted for press interviews a few times during my years of music journalism work. Then I pivoted to translation throughout my young adulthood, taking small jobs here and there while I was in college. In a sense, I’ve been doing this since I was sixteen.
My actual start with interpreting – in the capacity that we’ve been working together – was only five or six years ago. My partner at the time was a film programmer at Japan Society, and I was friends with people that work there. The head of the performing arts department, Yoko Shioya, saw some kind of potential in me and said: you know, you should try interpreting. But I had stage fright, and I didn’t like speaking into a mic. So she first put me in little workshops for small groups of attendees – a bunraku workshop with a master puppeteer, or a court music workshop. Then I started interpreting filmmaker intros ahead of screenings. Eventually I started doing Q&As – and that’s when I realised I’m actually a total ham!
What’s it like being a linguistic extension of another person?
I’m not sure I see myself as an extension. I’m often asked if I strive for accuracy, or if I make efforts to interpret a person’s mannerisms, tone, and sense of humour. When you said ‘extension’, I was visualising myself melding into that person, but I see myself as very separate. I’m my own person on stage. The only way I can put it is that I feel like the only time I reach flow state is when I’m interpreting. I have pretty bad ADHD – I’m very distracted as a human. But when I’m interpreting, I feel very tuned in. It’s just the right kind of focus for me.
What’s going through your head while the interviewee is speaking on stage? What’s your mental process? Do you have an inner monologue?
It’s not a monologue. It’s pages and pages of notes – which are completely illegible to me after the event. It feels like incredibly active listening. I’m jotting down keywords that will help me recall what they were saying. It’s obviously about comprehension – trying to capture the general thing that they’re trying to convey. At the same time, I’m formulating how I’ll deliver it. I’m thinking about the English terms I’ll be using, and sometimes they’ll change as I make my notes.
Do you get some interviewees who speak their answers with an understanding of what you’re about to do with their words, and some who really don’t?
My approach has always been to let the person talk for as long as they want. I think one of my strong skills is that I can retain a lot of information. Sometimes the speaker will forget that I’m there. They’ll give their long-winded answer and then kind of have a panic when they realise that then I have to interpret it. And I try to set them at ease and say, it’s okay, I got it.
There are challenges that stem from the interviewer, too. The person asking the questions often doesn’t realise that, due to the presence of an interpreter, it won’t be the smooth conversation that they have in their head. I’ve never felt frustration with how a Japanese actor or director has responded to a question – I’m always ready to catch whatever they’re giving me – but sometimes when an interviewer does the kind of thing where they’re formulating a thought on the fly, like ‘I was thinking of this, and I was thinking of that, and I was thinking of this other thing’ – they start being in their head and trying to be really colourful about it. They may have to modify the way that they ask their questions if they want to get the most generative response. When there is that mediating presence of the interpreter, a direct question is usually better.
Do you feel there’s too much expectation on their side for you to be that modifier for them?
I think that often they don’t realise that there needs to be a certain level of cultural interpretation. Sometimes padding things to make sure they make sense, or sometimes taking a question that feels very direct – in a way where, in a Japanese context, it would be too direct – and trying to find a generous interpretation of that question to generate an answer. I want to make sure that, even with a question that sounds a little strange, I can find the generative interpretation that might lead to an answer. I don’t think that interviewers expect or realise that I am doing that kind of work.
You always translate in first-person when interpreting. What’s it like when you have to re-speak things that you feel are kind of insensitive? What’s that disconnect like to reconcile, as a human being?
I feel a real responsibility to accurately convey their sentiments even if I don’t agree with them. I’ve definitely had to interpret ideas that aren’t PC, or I’ve had to say things that feel ableist. I have an obligation to accurately interpret these sentiments because if I were to censor them in any way, that’s protecting the person who said that from criticism.
I’ve heard of instances where interpreters have been in a position where they would have to say something that, from their positionality, would be a slur. Let’s say the interpreter is white, and the speaker is a person of colour. There are words that a white person would not have access to culturally and contextually. You would hope that every person everywhere has a certain kind of cultural sensitivity and understanding of how language works contextually.
There feels a pastoral quality to interpreting as an art. The interviewer and interviewee are in many respects ‘in your care’. You’re holding the responsibility of carrying and conveying language from one to the other.
That makes me feel like it’s an immense responsibility, which it is. I think a lot of the things that I do feel really unintentional, and are maybe more of a reflection of who I am as a person. One of the things that I think makes me well suited for this job is that I really like people. A defining quality of myself is that I’m friendly, and I like people, and I want to see the good in them. As much as I’d love to be like “I do this because I love movies”, or “I do this because I love language”, it’s actually: I just really like people.
The caretaking aspect extends to all parts of my life. Communication is the biggest part of being a person who’s very social. I’m always in that mode of smoothing things over and making sure that things feel generative and interesting – interesting for me, and interesting for those listening.
I know that I’m quite expressive in how I speak. Sometimes I question whether I’m very eloquent, but I know that my body, my voice, and my facial expressions convey a lot too. So I’m just kind of having fun with it.
Talk me through your working process with an interviewee. I understand that you’re typically introduced to them in advance of a round of interviews or a Q&A. How do you get to know each other before you work together?
I’m always excited to meet the people that I’m going to be working with. I prepare by watching their films, so that I know who I’m working with and what we’re going to be talking about. I’m also a filmmaker and an artist myself, so being around creative people who have accomplished the great feat of making a movie is really exciting to me. First, I meet them with curiosity and interest in them as humans. I’m interested in how their day’s been. How long was their flight? How many times have they been to New York? These are all things that I’m genuinely curious about. Next, I will say: okay, I have a couple questions about your work – or: there’ll definitely be questions about references and influences – are there any that come to mind that I should know about, so that I can look up the Japanese titles and English titles of works?
I can’t know everything. I think that a lot of people forget that interpreters aren’t AI, and we don’t have this memory bank. We’re only a product of our own experience, interests, and research. If a film title comes up, and I don’t know the Japanese or English title, I’m gonna have to look it up, or I’ll have to ask someone on stage – or even the audience sometimes..
Is your approach to working with filmmakers in this role inflected by your own experience as a film practitioner yourself?
I think my work as a filmmaker and artist helps me understand where they’re coming from. I would be a terrible interpreter for a business person; I would be a terrible interpreter for a scientist.
My brain just doesn’t work that way. I’m suited for working with people who are creative, who often speak abstractly. And I’m used to that abstract way of talking about art and film because of my education and my background.
Last week, you interpreted for Meiko Kaji at Japan Society New York. Tell me about that experience.
It was such an honour to work with her. She is so powerful, and so very direct as a human being. She said in one of the interviews that her favourite quality about herself is her honesty and her straightforwardness, and I experienced firsthand how that is just her entire being.
We talked about our zodiac signs, because – like every millennial – I’m really into astrology. She told me she was an Aries, and I said: ‘Oh, fantastic. Of course, you’re an Aries’. And she said: ‘Well, what does that mean to you?’. And I said: ‘Well, Aries is the sign that I’m most envious of, because their ambition comes from a very bodily, gut kind of place. They don’t spend a lot of time questioning their momentum, they are just propelled, and go towards this thing that they feel ambitious about’. And she goes: ‘That’s absolutely true. I don’t think too hard. I just trust my gut and I go’. I told her: ‘Well, Lady Gaga’s an Aries’. And she goes: ‘Oh, yes. I love Lady Gaga, because she’s always shapeshifting and changing her vibe every time she comes out with an album’.
That felt like a moment of genuine connection between us offstage, and it helped cultivate the friendly connection between us onstage, where she trusted me enough to talk about her experience fluidly and openly. I think a lot of people were really surprised by the anecdotes that she provided us that day, and I wouldn’t discount the backstage camaraderie that we had built. It really does feed into how that conversation is going to go. It’s nice to have a friend on stage.
On social media, a lot of people have been spotlighting you and your work on those Meiko Kaji Q&As. It leads me to ask, how ‘visible’ or ‘invisible’ do you wish to be as an interpreter on stage?
I don’t think an interpreter can be invisible. . For the most part when I interpret, I dress in black – I don’t dress in a way that feels ‘eye-catching’. But I also think that it would be a lie to try to make myself invisible, because my role is so important in the conversation.
There are always going to be people in the audience that speak the language of the person that’s being interviewed. It’s not like every single person in that room is relying on me. Just like when you watch a movie with subtitles, you’re going to see the interviewee expressing themselves. Even if you don’t understand what they’re saying, you’re watching them speak and communicate to you in some way. I try not to imbue my interpreting with too much of my own personality. I’m also naturally a mimic – I do impressions of the people around me, it’s just how I’ve always been. Maybe that makes me well-suited for the job. But I’m not trying to mimic them either, because then it would become performance. I’m not acting, I’m just speaking.
As far as the visibility: I came from a place of stage fright. Will I be able to hold a mic and speak into it? Am I confident in the quality of my voice? Am I okay with having eyes on me? Through experience, I’ve learned that I don’t hate it – I actually enjoy it quite a bit. And I’m never the centre of attention. I think that’s what makes it nice. It’ll always be about the [other] person. I’m just this supporting role on stage.
Interpreting is a linguistic bridge, but you’re also a cultural bridge. If folks Google you, one of the first things they’ll find is an interview that you interpreted between Jeremy O. Harris, an American playwright, and Ryusuke Hamaguchi, a Japanese filmmaker.
I grew up in a multilingual household, and so I was always going back and forth between speaking Japanese and English. My speaking style and sense of humor are different in each language. If interpretation is like language passing through a filter, I’m not only interpreting words, but also applying my American or Japanese sense of humour and acting like a buffer.
What does interpreting and translation mean to you?
Interpreting and translating feels like this gift that allows me to interact with and meet so many people. A lot of people expect me to say that I have a particular love of language, and I don’t think that I do. I have a love for communicating, and I have a love for connecting with people. Interpreting is a conduit through which I get to do that every day. That’s why it makes me happy – I enjoy it because it’s such a social job.
Is there anything about interpreting and translation that you wish was better understood by those who aren’t interpreters and translators themselves?
I think most people understand that translation is an imperfect thing, that you’ll never have access to everything that the source language offers – that it’s just an approximation. Because English-language speakers are so used to theirs being the dominant language, they don’t really get it sometimes. Even that expectation of “the interpreter should be invisible” isn’t really understanding what interpreting is – because we’re never going to be able to give you the pure experience of hearing ‘that person’s response, but in the language that you understand’.
You mentioned hitting a flow state when interpreting – are you exhausted after you finish an interview?
Yeah, I’m like a shell of a human after. I find it really hard to turn my brain off, because I have so much adrenaline from this hyper-focused state that I have to be in. If I come home, I can’t watch television, or put on a movie – I basically can’t do anything that requires cognition and information. I’ve turned to knitting to calm myself, because it’s repetitive and it’s hands-based, and I don’t have to think. I used to be a teacher, and I recall how tired I would be after a full day of classes. Sometimes this feels like a mini version of that, because it’s just so much focus, and also so much talking. And that dehydrates you!
What’s been your most treasured experience as an interpreter?
I once got to interpret a candid interaction between Shinya Tsukamoto and Thelma Schoonmaker after a screening of Killing. Thelma had spent so much time editing scenes of him in Silence that when they met, she grabbed him by the shoulders and went “Mokichi! Mokichi!” – which is his character’s name in that film. She told him he was the heart of the film. That was maybe my most special experience, just because I was like: ‘I can’t believe I’m witnessing this’. What a beautiful meeting.
I’m also just a big fan of Tsukamoto. That same day, I brought along some old photographs from when I was like 20 years old, where I dressed up as the lady in the subway from Tetsuo. I had made this metal hand from stuff that I bought at the dollar store, I had my crazy makeup and this office lady outfit. My boyfriend at the time was Tomorowo Taguchi’s character. He had screws coming out of his face, like he’s mid-transformation. I brought the photos to Tsukamoto-san and he signed them for me. He was like, ‘Monika, we’ve been spending so many days together – you never told me you were a fan’.
As a final question, what are your hopes for the future of your profession?
I’ve been affirmed every time I interpret events that my role isn’t obsolete quite yet. With translation, we’re going to have a trickier time navigating how that’s being taken over by AIl. It’s really depressing and sad. Language models are getting so smart that people are seeing a future where human translators are no longer necessary. But with interpreting – in all of the ways that I’ve hopefully conveyed to you today – it’s a linguistic feat, but it’s also a social one. Something that needs to be preserved is the social aspect of all work. We’re surviving and relying on each other, and we need to make sure that we’re not depending on computer software and AI in a way that makes us alienated from one another.
I’m hoping that interpreting will at least continue to be necessary for a little bit longer. I’m feeling optimistic about it. I think people like the experience of live theatre, seeing people on stage, and Q&As are an extension of that. So it’s like: save the theatre, save cinema, then hopefully save live talks where an interpreter is present. Or maybe everyone gets an earpiece and an AI translation of everything. But would you trust it? You wouldn’t get to see me!
Monika Uchiyama is an artist, interpreter, and translator based between Tokyo and New York City. You can find her work at her website here.
Monika is one of the greatest interpreters I’ve ever worked with, love seeing her get into all the details of her work here.
I had the pleasure of seeing Uchiyama interpret for Meiko Kaji a few weeks ago and everything she says here really translates into what I saw watching her work. She’s really good, a robot could never.