This study focuses on literary translation into a non-mother tongue (the L2 direction), investigating how it has been regarded by Translation Studies, practitioners, and the publishing market, particularly in the anglophone context. L1 directionality (into the translator’s L1) remains the norm in the literary translation world, which has a systemic bias against the multilingual subject, and toward the monolingual. To what extent can L2 translation change the way people assess quality and agency in translation? In a post-monolingual paradigm (Yildiz, 2012), the notion of a mother tongue has come to be increasingly problematic. What are the implications of this for directionality in translation? Studies that have broached the issue of L2 translation still focus on and privileged the role and status of the native speaker. Applying the notion of exophony (i.e., writing in a foreign language) to translation (in what I term exophonic translation), this project draws on insights from sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, translation history and translator studies. Using phenomenographic interviews with L2 literary translators, the thesis analyses how these translators approach directionality in translation, their ideological stance on issues of bi- and multilingualism, as well as their specific professional contexts, considering the monolingual bias and power structures within translation. These interviews ask what L2 translators think about L2 translation, why they choose to go against the grain of the L1 translation norm and how these language practitioners value/position their own practice. In writing this thesis, I explore the potential for L2 translation to become a force for change, asking to what extent radical ideologies have the power to change prevailing attitudes and practices in the field of literary translation. My project is interdisciplinary and aims to bridge the gap between disciplines for L2 translation, helping this practice become more visible and legitimised in literary translation.