Posts tagged `translation`
The Mysterious Island The Mysterious Island by Jules Verne
Publisher: Modern Library
Year: 2004
Pages: 768

Though Jules Verne was best known as the father of science fiction—his most famous works, like 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea Journey to the Center of the Earth, but largely excluding Around the World in Eighty Days, all share this genre—but not even he could resist the hot topic of desert islands. Daniel Defoe arguably started the phenomenon with Robinson Crusoe in the early 18th century, and was imitated by everything from The Swiss Family Robinson (Wyss, 1812) to Gilligan’s Island (1964).

The only reason I so eagerly rushed out to read The Mysterious Island as a young boy was because I heard—the source is lost to me now—that the book contained an appearance by the hero (villain?) of 20,000 Leagues…, Captain Nemo. Moreover, I was promised, this later book would explain Nemo’s origins, heretofore shrouded in mystery. I was vaguely familiar with the genre at that point (I was probably about 10), having watched the requisite television like Gilligan’s Island and even, I suppose, Lost in Space, in addition to having read some pathetic children’s abridgment of Robinson Crusoe. Still, The Mysterious Island appealed to me for a number of different reasons which still hold true today.

Read more…

§6059 · October 28, 2010 · (No comments) · Tags: , , , , ,

And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning by Joel M. Hoffman
Publisher: Thomas Dunne Books
Year: 2010
Pages: 272

I’ve always been interested in the vagaries of translation—both the accomplishment of it and all the problems which plague it. Most recently, I read Robert Alter’s new translation of Psalms; it’s not a surprise that, not even counting the significant introduction on methodology, almost half of the book’s text is explanatory footnotes. The truth is, translating ancient Hebrew is a tricky business, and translating anew such beloved books is a delicate issue.

Thus it was that my interest in translation only slightly overwhelmed my suspicion of the book’s subtitle (“How Translations Conceal the Bible’s Original Meaning”), which seemed designed to provoke. “Conceal” has connotations of intent, in the same way that frauds and hucksters want to tell you about “real herbal remedies they don’t want you to know”. I hoped that Hoffman wouldn’t take a Freakonomics tack and oversell itself.

Read more…

§5176 · March 18, 2010 · 3 comments · Tags: , , , , , ,

The Book of Psalms: A Translation With Commentary The Book of Psalms: A Translation With Commentary trans. Robert Alter
Publisher: W.W. Norton
Year: 2007/2009
Pages: 560

Any time one deals with a book which has been translated, you’re opening up a whole new can of worms above and beyond the quality of the book itself. I noted this with some hesitancy when I reviewed Orhan Pamuk’s Snow—or, more accurately, a translation of Orhan Pamuk’s Snow.

Biblical translation is even tougher: the politics it involves go beyond mere word choice and touch things which people hold as sacrosanct. Maybe you think I’m exaggerating, but consider as an example the movement of Christians who believe that the only correct version of the Bible is the King James Version. Mess with canon at your own peril.

Read more…

§4666 · November 19, 2009 · 3 comments · Tags: , , , , , , , ,

The Book of Job The Book of Job trans. Stephen Mitchell
Publisher: Vintage
Year: 1992
Pages: 176

The Book of Job continues a recent trend of books I’ve read that I received as gifts—specifically from my brother, who has similar taste.

Read more…

§3795 · April 26, 2009 · 3 comments · Tags: , , , , , ,

Snow

Snow Snow by Orhan Pamuk
Publisher: Knopf
Year: 2004
Pages: 448

Possible minor spoilers below!

I was blissfully unaware of Orhan Pamuk’s existence until he won this year’s Nobel Prize for Literature. Being shallow and weak-willed, I went out and picked up Snow, his latest novel, the next day (I’ve no idea if Snow is his best or not).

Having only recently finished Snow, I am unable to talk about it with the sort of fullness I’d like. Part of this has to do with the fact that I haven’t fully digested it yet, but mostly it is because Snow is not the sort of novel that reveals its secrets in a single read.

The novel’s premise is that Ka, a Turkish poet exiled to Germany, returns to a small Turkish town called Kars just in time for the entire city to get buried in a blizzard, cut off from everything, for two days. During this time, he manages to fall in love with an old friend, Ipek, and also get caught up in a minor revolution.

Pamuk was chosen for the Nobel largely because of his ability to highlight conflict of every sort, and if there’s conflict anywhere, it’s in Turkey: though Islam is the predominant religion, the nation is officially secular after Atatürk—the first president of the Republic of Turkey—effectively Westernized it… kind of like Peter the Great and Russia. The plot of Snow centers around the conflict between Kars’ secular government and many “atheist” citizens and its fundamentalist Muslim citizens. Prior to Ka’s arrival, there had been a rash of suicides by young Muslim women, either because they were “unhappy” or ostensibly because of the other controversy in Kars pertaining to expulsion from school of any girls who wore head scarves to class. There are conflicts on every level—the physical conflict of the armed revolution, the spiritual conflict of the secular and the religious, the cultural conflict of Turkey’s simultaneous Middle Eastern and European natures, the intellectual conflict of European intellectuals (Ka, the poet, is perceived as one) and the entrenched traditional modes of religious learning, the economic conflict of the unemployed and destitute residents of Ka, the personal conflict of best friends, the romantic conflict of the love-smitten—I could go on, but you get the idea.

One of the interesting things to me was the manner of narration: one does not realize it until midway through the book, but Snow is actually a frame narrative of “Orhan” the novelist from Istanbul, who is compiling a biography of sorts of Ka, who is murdered in Frankfurt, after the action of the book has taken place. This frame narrative only exists in occasional asides by “Orhan” and sometimes entire chapters dedicated to “Orhan’s” search for Ka’s notebook of poetry. Most of the novel is about Ka’s experience as he attempts to convince Ipek to return to Germany with him, all the while attempting to play both sides of the conflict. Importantly, I noticed that certain plot devices of the inner narrative were also present in the outer narrative—the characters of Necip and Fazil, two religious boys whose relationship is literally the stuff of science fiction, have a great deal in common with Ka and his biographer friend “Orhan”: lovers of the same women, and each seems to inhabit the other after death.

I didn’t like Ka: he was a truly annoying person, because he himself was like Turkey, divided between the atheistic and the devout, the poetic and the pragmatic, the European and the Turkish. His own eventual disillusion, abandonment, and death may be a clear indication of Pamuk’s diagnosis of his divided nation. But what began almost entirely as a snapshot of snowy Kars through the eyes of a poet became a bloody game of intrigue, betrayal, and lies. The very character of the novel seemed to change on me, which was both unexpected and bewildering.

I should also note that I wasn’t impressed with the style of writing. However, because I read a mere translation and not the original text, I cannot say with any certainty whether I find Pamuk’s writing ability to be decidedly average, or whether there is a distinct loss of quality that accompanied that change from Turkish to English. It was “poetic,” to be sure, but in a shoe-gazing way that detracted from its poignancy.

Translation isn’t the only thing which makes reading “foreign” literature difficult. I’m glad that Snow is my 52nd book—thus fulfilling my “contractual” obligation to the meme—because it really highlights what the spirit of 52 Books in 52 Weeks is: a chance to expand and challenge myself. Reading a book about Turkishness is hard because I know nothing about Turkishness. I have to stop and realize how I react to Pamuk’s descriptions of fundamentalist Muslims. When they are intractable and violent, do I nod my head in agreement? When they aren’t, do I think that they must have been westernized, and this explains their good behavior? How do my preconceptions as an American semi-intellectual compare to those of a native Turkish intellectual?

Snow hardly stands as one of my favorite books, but I’m immensely glad that I read it, because it’s the sort of work that needs to read by Americans who have little, if any, understanding of foreign culture. Despite the resulting opinions about the work, it’s clear that it stands on its own, and its author’s recent Nobel prize makes a lot more sense.

§1478 · October 24, 2006 · (No comments) · Tags: , , , , ,