Well, no offense was meant, Alison, and, yes, you did mention "Eros" might be a
better choice.
I suppose as a translator this is a particular issue for me. While I'm quite happy
for comparative readings and so posted the translations for comparison, I'm
also aware of how the search for the 'definitive' translation tends to result in
exalting the merits of one translation at the expense of the rest, to devolve into
issues of fidelity (the sort of conclusive judgement) as it has here into the
resulting discussion on 'eros', the hinge of one word, and how generally readers
who can not read the original tend to approach the English with their usual
tastes and predilections. Nothing wrong with that, I do it myself, but as a
translator am aware of always trying to circumvent it, that if I have a taste for
iambs (and I don't but that's just an example) as a translator I would have to be
aware that my taste for that particular linguistic beauty might result in a kind of
metric exhuberance that is not, at all, in the original. I prefer, as I said before, to
have more translations of any particular work because most translations bring
something to the reading of the original. Often the 'flaw' of the translation is a
particular sensitivity to some element that exists in the original, and so in the
comparative readings of various translations, the original in its untranslateable
elements may be evoked somewhat as a shimmering phantom. I don't really like
that old joke, since I think it's a false choice and hope as a translator to always
have both, fidelity to the original in all of its elements that I can be aware of,
and beauty in the translation. And in practice, choosing beauty in English over
fidelity to the original is often to lose or not bring over various elements of
beauty in the original, etc,
best,
Rebecca
---- Original message ----
>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:42:32 +1100
>From: Alison Croggon <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Mark, two translations/same Cavafy poem
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>On 16/1/05 4:08 PM, "Rebecca Seiferle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> I
>> thought I should chime in and draw attention to some of the merits of the
>> Haviaras (whom I don't know) translation before there's some kind of poetic
>> electoral landslide that obliterates a worthwhile work from view.
>
>I hope none us are here to "obliterate" a fellow poet. It was interesting
>looking at the two versions, as we were invited to, and trying to work out
>why I liked one so much more than the other.
>
>I mentioned that I thought "Eros" was probably the better choice. Otherwise
>your comments remind me of that old translators' joke, that translations
>can't be both beautiful and faithful.
>
>Best
>
>A
>
>
>Alison Croggon
>
>Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
>Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
>Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|