[mignon ledgard]

Carl,

Your translation is a fine piece of writing (poem). You seem to be on neutral ground a far as the crib goes, as per the way I understand your explanations. But I can't help feeling 'out of it' because of the preponderance to 'influence' the crib.

In other words, as many as may do the same translation would have a different crib. This seems far from 'literal'. I don't think 'literal' can really be attributed to cribs. I'm thinking that it would be best to use, let's say, Google translator as a crib may be more like it. In short, finding a translator that's closest to one's understanding of the original would make more sense to me.

I didn't know where to bring this up, but your approach may be the closest I have seen to stick to the original. I don't know if the effort to rhyme and stick to a form affects this, nor how much if it does.

Then, there's Borges, whose poems really should not deviate. For instance, he is known for his adjectives, of using, through time, certain adjectives, in a way all his own. This important part of his work (and personal habit) is lost if it is not respected. Soon, we have a poem, yes, but not quite Borges's. This saddens me hugely because I think the purpose of a translation is to bring for the author through his words, as close as possible. How else would a person who doesn't speak the original poem's language get acquainted when each translation reflects the translator's personal choices far more than the original author's.

Susan tries to stick to the original meaning and I think her translations of Rilke's poem are great. I think you do the same--I hope this is correct.

Oh, I changed my poem according to your comment on "the future makes new space .." to "opens space'. I don't want to bump the thread, but would be most thankful if you skipped over and let me know what you think. Or suggestions?

Thank you, thank you!
~mignon