 |
 |
Thanks for that link, Peter, and the very interesting reviews. I'm guilty of thoroughly enjoying producing a version from cribs, only modern poems so far. I believe in checking any obscure details with the original poets and consulting on phrasing etc. My pleasure is in trying to grasp a sense of the original purpose and try to let its feeling come through in the translation, also the sounds of the original language if possible. My latest effort was a poem in Arabic, which I couldn't read at all, but I had translations in English, Spanish and French, and recordings. The poet was very happy with my version in the end, and I gained tremendously from the cultural and linguistic journey. (Taha Adnan was the poet, the anthology Migrant Shores, ed. Manuela Palacios, Salmon Publishing). I agree with your thoughts on Philip Terry's Inferno, which I found very readable, but wasn't fascinated. Have you read Ciaran Carson's translation? Are there many translations of Paradiso? Why are people so fascinated with the Inferno, or is that just my ill-informed impression? Maighread On 17/03/2018, Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Peter, whether you or I like the particulars, "the world we live in" is a > matter of debate, but the "translators" and their work are clearly a part of > it. Not to note them would be a misrepresentation. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peter Riley >> Sent: Mar 17, 2018 4:39 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: Swollen translation >> >> >> Peter: I’ll skip the “& all” bit if you don’t mind and come back to you >> in the outer world. >> >> Except to say: I agree that it was not necessary to draw you into that >> review, and as it turns out, clearly a mistake. >> >> + (Mark:) What troubled me was not so much the misrepresentation ( >> especially partialisation) of the original author (that is almost a >> necessary condition of “translation” itself) but the misrepresentation of >> the world we live in. >> >> + (Michael:). I think it goes further than that, I think it involves the >> whole question of non-transmissive poetry, the abhorrence of >> “sense”(explicitly by at least one senior poet I can think of) and >> Atkin’s dismissal of “content”. I mean once you’ve chucked it you can’t >> have it back. I can’t see how your explanation of the word “Plant” changes >> anything at all. It’s really a very academic tactic. In fact you’ve done >> exactly what I said near the end of that section, that they will find a >> way somehow of claiming a transmission when the author seems to do >> everything he/she can to avoid one. He’s chucked sense and you’re handing >> it back to him. There must be some theory of subliminal >> exposition involved which I can’t trust for a second. sure those two lines >> can (for the aficionado) “invoke” those questions of concern, but there is >> no way the poet can be said to have made any kind of statement about any >> of them. “Saying”is a completely different process from this. >> Pope: No, not that one. “January and May; or, The Merchant’s Tale” and >> “The Wife of Bath, her Prologue”. He referred to these as translations. My >> date was wrong, should be c1704. >> >> But since the Sacred Leaves to All are free, >> And Men interpret Texts, why should not We? >> >> PR >> > -- Máighréad Medbh 42 Boroimhe Alder, Swords, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Web: www.maighreadmedbh.ie Phone: 353 87 2894744 Poet, Writer. -------------------------- Most Recent Books: Parvit of Agelast: http://www.maighreadmedbh.ie/published-books.htm Savage Solitude http://www.dedaluspress.com/auth/76 Pagan to the Core http://www.maighreadmedbh.ie/published-books.htm#pagan ****** The Body Coat and The Coal-black Sea (E-books) http://www.smashwords.com/books/search?query=maighread+medbh&covers=on