The fallacy of the The Interpreter as Cultural Mediator

In the context described in the previously linked document The Interpreter as Cultural Mediator, the author stresses how the liaison interpreter in a business situation is called forward more than often for inputs that go beyond the mere transition of meaning back and forth. There are situations where the interpreter is deemed by the client to go beyond and almost behave like a partner. I have experienced such situations time and again. Of course, in more formal business situations, where the interpreter is expected to just do interpretation, "cultural mediatorship" is not even expected. Call it pure interpretation. Not pure interpretation, the format blasphemous enough to go beyond the sanctity of neutrality, is endemic with bad, chatty, born yesterday interpreters. But even when you dare call yourself a seasoned one, there are times and situations where the client will start giving you free reigns as she now feels that you better understand what she is trying to convene to the other side, what she is trying to achieve. And at that moment, whether this is good or bad judgement, the interpreter who grasps the situation, the purpose and the expectation (and the product or service discussed) , turns into a collaborator who happens to speak the language of the other side. Of course, it happens because a wordless bonding between the interpreter and the client, made of perceived (could be wrong) feeling on the client's side that the interpreter got it, understand the intention, and may be brighter than the client to now push things forward. I always ask my clients before the show starts what they are expecting to achieve. It can be selling, understanding better what is needed, therefore currently lacking, for the business relationship to further on. That is why I do not buy into that expression "cultural mediator", because "cultural" doesn't sell. You know, the client wants to make a deal, not understand the meaning of bowing according to the back's angle. That's why I don't even buy into "Mediator", because the interpreter through mediation is hopefully an agent of change, an agent of "go ahead". She allows, through extra beyond what it is said service, things to go forward. That is why happy clients would tell the interpreter after the show is over "thank you, you helped us move forward". When do you start not being "simply" an interpreter? When do you start being an interpreter on the verge of being "part of the team"? When you feel inside that your business card reading "Interpreter" does not tell the real service you may provide to the client. Liaison interpreter and Business Agent, or something similar, may convey a better understanding of where you want to be positioned - at the risk one day of dropping the term "interpreter" altogether. Interpreter is - in liaison context - too heavily charged with linguistics and culture, while what you may bring into the discussion is the decisive factor that helps stuck situations to move forward. In a recent such assignment, the word "audit" printed on documents and spelled aloud in the discussion was seemingly a strong inhibiting factor on the Japanese side, so much that I looked at my clients and told them that "audit" was bad. We rephrased it, told that it was not convening the proper intention and that "workshop" was a better naming for the situation. All of a sudden, the Japanese side felt relieved, and things went further on. The interpreter was at that moment an agent of change.