I take your point on the Campo, mark, but also thought he did try to
get at something specific. Have to confess, however, that I likely
wouldn't read it again....
Doug
On 6-Feb-05, at 4:06 PM, Mark Weiss wrote:
> I'm not sure how the two translations maintain the Persian form--they
> seem
> to reduce it to repetition of the last word at the end of each
> couplet. If
> that's all you're talking about, easy enough. The Campo, which tries
> to do
> more, is simply ghastly, the repetitions often artificial in the
> extreme.
> As if he thought no one would notice.
>
>
> Mark
Douglas Barbour
Department of English
University of Alberta
Edmonton Alberta T6G 2E5 Canada
(780) 436 3320
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/dbhome.htm
Reserved books. Reserved land. Reserved flight.
And still property is theft.
Phyllis Webb
|