I continually appreciate the reality check: there is no such thing as a perfect translation. There is a continual loss in the space of translation, but it makes it no less worthy or important of a task. The distinction between "faithful" and "literal" continues to be a helpful conversation as well. This notion of loss and gain, and faithful being far more accommodating than we may have anticipated, seems to tie in with how much we seem to like "correcting" translations or making them "better." I think of the over 20 ways a singular Wang Wei poem was translated amongst all the poems and texts that have been translated over and over and over again. If a translation was perfect, there would be no need for new attempts, or if people understood a text in the same way, perhaps a single translation would do, but because of the nuances of language (and its continued evolution that continues to spark modernized translations), the invitation is extended to try again and to capture a different angle of the piece.
I think another part of translation is how it inspires new work. It was cool to hear about Baranczak and how he translated Bishop's "One Art" and then used that form to work within his own language, not just in translation. It's kind of a two-for-one deal, in a way. I find myself experiencing a similar kind of inspiration as I have been working on my own translation project, which I think is a really cool side effect!
Lauren
No comments:
Post a Comment