What Are You Reading Now?

[SteelBlue]

Those aren't the only translations. P and V are publicity hounds (I don't hold that against them; it's a business). But everyone here should know that fidelity to the original isn't the be all and end all of good writing. Which is the greatest translation of the Bible? The KJV, of course. One thing I can't countenance about P&V is the way in War and Peace they put the French in the text without translation and then put the English translation in footnotes. Artificial and pretentious. For Chrissakes, we're reading something that was originally in Russian--except for the French. Why not put the whole thing in Footnotes? What's so special about the French? Just saying in the text that this or that is spoken in French (it is important to know this) can be done elegantly and is much preferable in my opinion. Fidelity to the original or a pretense about the French is not the point of reading any of these great novels.

I think BK is very funny in parts, and actually quite modern. The Grand Inquisitor is not the best part. It's kind of distracting, I've realized.

You might be interested in this article if you haven’t read it already. Maybe a few others would be too.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars

I agree with you about the French not being translated.

[SeattleUte]

You might be interested in this article if you haven’t read it already. Maybe a few others would be too.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars

I agree with you about the French not being translated.

Have you read this? By Janet Malcolm. She cite other literary scholars and critics. Redeems Garnet as unfairly maligned and characterizes P & V as a tragic fad. What matters is the quality of the writing in English.

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/23/socks-translating-anna-karenina/

[SteelBlue]

Have you read this? By Janet Malcolm. She cite other literary scholars and critics. Redeems Garnet as unfairly maligned and characterizes P & V as a tragic fad. What matters is the quality of the writing in English.

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/201...anna-karenina/

I haven’t. Thanks, I’ll check it out.

[Pelado]

Make sure you're awake when you get to The Grand Inquisitor.

I think BK is very funny in parts, and actually quite modern. The Grand Inquisitor is not the best part. It's kind of distracting, I've realized.

[SteelBlue]

I wasn't able to read that article, SU because there's a paywall. Would you mind summarizing? I'm guessing the article is one of the main pieces of evidence that you've used to develop such strong opinions about Garnett vs P&V. Is the idea that P&V are a "tragic fad" something that is gaining traction? I mean, if that's true, they managed to impress a lot of the right people. It's hard for me to imagine that isn't a controversial take currently but the article I posted is the only one I've read on the topic.

In the past year I've read the P&V translations of Brothers K, The Master and Margarita, Dead Souls and Anna Karenina, all of which delivered for me an excellent reading experience. Prior to this, I'd only read Garnett but that was more than 20 years prior. I will say that the Garnett translations I read also delivered an excellent reading experience. I mean, bottom line, I read them too far apart to compare, but I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not Garnett will endure or if P&V are to become the new standard.

[SeattleUte]

I wasn't able to read that article, SU because there's a paywall. Would you mind summarizing? I'm guessing the article is one of the main pieces of evidence that you've used to develop such strong opinions about Garnett vs P&V. Is the idea that P&V are a "tragic fad" something that is gaining traction? I mean, if that's true, they managed to impress a lot of the right people. It's hard for me to imagine that isn't a controversial take currently but the article I posted is the only one I've read on the topic.

In the past year I've read the P&V translations of Brothers K, The Master and Margarita, Dead Souls and Anna Karenina, all of which delivered for me an excellent reading experience. Prior to this, I'd only read Garnett but that was more than 20 years prior. I will say that the Garnett translations I read also delivered an excellent reading experience. I mean, bottom line, I read them too far apart to compare, but I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not Garnett will endure or if P&V are to become the new standard.

If you get me an email address I’ll get behind the paywall and send you the full article. I’m pretty agnostic about the translations, actually, except that I was really glad to see a backlash from credible critics and writers. I understand that publishers struggle to turn a profit and translators need to pay the mortgage. But the publicity that accompanied issuance of these translations was like StarWars. What was offensive, though, was the way that P&V and some of their admirers trashed Garnett. As you noted, it was Garnett’s transliterations that propelled these works into the Western Canon and inspired Lawrence, Hemingway, et al.

So I was skeptical. As for the New Yorker article, just listen to the New Yorker Radio Hour and you’ll soon see how insufferable David Remnick is. He’s just the type to fall for the publicity of a native Russian husband and wife team translating these classics.

I haven’t read Garnett so far as I know. My War and Peace was translated by Ann Dunigan. I read and reread it. Loved it. I read all the novellas and short stories of Tolstoy translated by David McDuff. I started reading my wife’s Brothers Karamozov from college, it broke in half and so I bought the Penguin edition translated by McDuff and finished that. I was interested in how different the two translations were, but loved them both. I didn’t find the first half. Maybe it was Garnett.

So I have been doubly skeptical of the P&V furor because it was earlier, not ballyhooed translations that were those life transforming translations for me.

When reading Anna Karenina I decided midway through to try out the P&V version, but it was a big bulky Oprah Book Club version, and I returned to my original, more compact book(this was before Kindle) to finish. I’ve lost it. Maybe it was Garnett?

As I said before, as with the Bible, fidelity to the original tongue means almost nothing to me. I want what is most beautiful and feels right in my own tongue.

Finally, I think it’s kind of rude, when someone is scaling the Brothers Karamozov, to tell him he may be climbing the wrong mountain. Not true. At this level, it’s a matter of taste. Malcolm and others think that P&V are klunky and overrated.

[SteelBlue]

Finally, I think it’s kind of rude, when someone is scaling the Brothers Karamozov, to tell him he may be climbing the wrong mountain. Not true. At this level, it’s a matter of taste. Malcolm and others think that P&V are klunky and overrated.

I went back and read what I wrote and this is a fair criticism. It is not at all what I had intended, but it is what I said. I really just wondered if Pelado was bored by the translation I'd enjoyed. My apologies, Pelado.

Thanks for you comments, SU. I enjoy reading different viewpoints and especially when we're in the middle of a moment where people seem to be forming a new consensus. I'll get you my email as I'd love to read that article.

[Pelado]

I went back and read what I wrote and this is a fair criticism. It is not at all what I had intended, but it is what I said. I really just wondered if Pelado was bored by the translation I'd enjoyed. My apologies, Pelado.

Thanks for you comments, SU. I enjoy reading different viewpoints and especially when we're in the middle of a moment where people seem to be forming a new consensus. I'll get you my email as I'd love to read that article.

Apology accepted, though I'm not smart enough to realize you had need to apologize.

[happyone]

All - seeking recommendations for best single volume on the D-day experience. 75th anniversary this summer and will be accompanying my father to Normandy beaches in the fall. It’s a lifetime dream for him and I want to have a deeper appreciation for those who fought in those events. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you haven't already gone, IMnsHO Peter Caddick-Adam's book, Sand and Steel IS the one to read. Not only is it the best history I've read of the Invasion, it is also a bit of a Normandy/D-Day guide book. C-A has been going to Normandy since 1975 and he highlights what has been preserved, how the terrain has changed, where the museums are and their quality, available parking etc. However it is a bit of a door stop at just under 900 pages of text, with another 200 pgs of notes and indicies

I finally typed up my thoughts if anyone is interested

[eldiente]

If you haven't already gone, IMnsHO Peter Caddick-Adam's book, Sand and Steel IS the one to read. Not only is it the best history I've read of the Invasion, it is also a bit of a Normandy/D-Day guide book. C-A has been going to Normandy since 1975 and he highlights what has been preserved, how the terrain has changed, where the museums are and their quality, available parking etc. However it is a bit of a door stop at just under 900 pages of text, with another 200 pgs of notes and indicies

I finally typed up my thoughts if anyone is interested

Thanks so much!! Not going until October so have time to get to this.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bo Diddley]

Thanks so much!! Not going until October so have time to get to this.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not a reader, but this review makes me want to go get it, particularly before going out for a visit.

[happyone]

I'm not a reader, but this review makes me want to go get it, particularly before going out for a visit.

Do! (Both read the book and visit Normandy) As military man I think you would really enjoy walking the ground!

About the only problem I had with the book is that in a couple of places C-A puts the 16th INF in the 29 ID and the 116th INF in the 1 ID. (Its actually the other way around) These are the two regiments comprising the 1st wave on Omaha Beach. However most of the time he has them with the correct division - somebody blew it when proof reading. Quite frankly, only a History Nerd like me would probably care. C-A actually apologized for the error in the WWII group I'm a member of on Good Reads.

One other note - C-A is a retired British Territorial Army Officer, so he brings a professional's understanding to the narrative.

[Sleeping in EQ]

I'm reading Is There Anything Good About Men? by Roy Baumeister.


I highly recommend it.

[Bo Diddley]

Do! (Both read the book and visit Normandy) As military man I think you would really enjoy walking the ground!

About the only problem I had with the book is that in a couple of places C-A puts the 16th INF in the 29 ID and the 116th INF in the 1 ID. (Its actually the other way around) These are the two regiments comprising the 1st wave on Omaha Beach. However most of the time he has them with the correct division - somebody blew it when proof reading. Quite frankly, only a History Nerd like me would probably care. C-A actually apologized for the error in the WWII group I'm a member of on Good Reads.

One other note - C-A is a retired British Territorial Army Officer, so he brings a professional's understanding to the narrative.

Book came in the mail today. It's a big one! I'll have to schedule time for reading if I'm going to manage it.

[happyone]

Book came in the mail today. It's a big one! I'll have to schedule time for reading if I'm going to manage it.

I sincerely hope you find it as good as I did. I agree, it is a bit of a door stop

I have one more recently released D-Day book on my TBR and I am waiting for the library to get it for me - James Holland's Normandy '44

I recently finished James Scott's look at MacArthur's liberation of Manila - Rampage. I gave this a 5 star rating on Goodreads, but is a difficult read. If you have ever read Iris Chang's Rape of Nanjing , you can probably get an idea of much of the content from pgs 200-400. Mr. Scott tells just what the Japanese did to the civilian population of Manila in excruciating detail. This includes vivid stories of beheadings, burning people alive, mass rape of 11/12 yr olds (along with their mothers) bayonetting of babies and any other way the Japanese could think of to terrorize the population. The best estimates are that the Japanese killed more than 100K civilians in the fight for Manila. MacA doesn't come off particularly well either. He believed that the Japanese had been defeated on Leyte so they wouldn't fight and even if they did, they would follow his example and declare Manila and Open City. Even when his people received Intel from reliable sources that the Japanese were fortifying the city - he refused to believe it - presaging what happened in Korea 5 1/2 yrs later.

He originally forbade his troops from using any indirect fire weapons or CAS. When the troops could not advance, he reluctantly gave permission to use Arty, but never allowed CAS. The Japanese were so well dug in, the Americans basically flattened the City to dig them out. Even with the heavy damage to the City, most residents welcomed the Americans as liberators.

The final 50 pages or so are a recount of the Japanese Commander (Yamashita) war crimes trial held in Manila. Contrary to popular belief, Mr. Scott doesn't believe that MacA dictated the verdict, but the rules of evidence were so loose and the charges were so broad, the verdict was probably a forgone conclusion, basically "Somebody had to Pay". He also states that if somehow Yamashita had been found NOT GUILTY, the British and Aussies were waiting the wings to try him for what happened in Malaysia and Singapore

My more complete thoughts