[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

[Julie Steiner]

Hi, Carl!

Disturbing and mysterious, in a chant-like way. Interesting.

I'm out of my depth, so let's see if I turn into a blue and bloated cadaver, heh.

If you changed "The sky, like someone's udder, squirts" into "The sky, a sort of udder, squirts," that might preserve the vague gesture of the original without the distraction of conjuring a bare-breasted, lactating woman. Having been one of those, and also having milked goats by hand for many years, I'm more inclined to see the latter here, with beams of light slanting through clouds, on a hot and muggy day in which the longed-for cooling rain won't come. Such an image suggests the single channel of milk streaming from each teat of a member of the Bovidae family, rather than the multiple channels of milk squirting out from each nipple of "someone" human. (Of course, what I'm picturing might not necessarily be the image that the poet intended, which is a constant danger.)

Since I am now a crone who often feels hotter and sweatier than I want to be, I can't imagine peri- or post-menopausal women choosing to climb into a literal sauna on such a day. Although the imagery of the sauna seems clear, I wonder if the crones are actually canning summer produce for the winter, using the water-bath method, and thus generating steam. Only the threat of future starvation could drive me into more heat on a hot day.

The mention of reeds makes me think that "wider" would be better than "deeper" at that point of the river, and poem. The drowned kid can still be out of his depth later.

I wonder if the diction of "kids," which I at first took to mean young goats rather than children, is a good fit.

I don't know if any of this is helpful, but it's offered in case it might be. And to express appreciation for what you've done with a difficult piece.

[Carl Copeland]

Thanks, Mignon. I’m so glad you enjoyed the translation and, if I did my job, the poet’s creation.

I try to do as neutral and literal a crib as possible, but you’re right that absolute literalism is impossible, and every crib, like every translation, will differ. I’m very impressed with the progress machine translators are making, but I just now tried Google Translate on this poem, and it makes some serious mistakes that I’d have to clean up, and then I’d be “influencing” again.

Originally Posted by mignon ledgard

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.

I hope so too. I do try to stay as close as possible to the original, while making it sound as if the poet could have written it in English. That’s my ideal. There are other, looser styles of translation, and some feel they have to find different words and forms to capture the “feel” of the original. But the result, as you suggest, will be half poet, half translator. That’s ok for a translator who’s also a great poet, but my half won’t pull its weight, so I try to minimize my share.

Originally Posted by mignon ledgard

I don't know if the effort to rhyme and stick to a form affects this, nor how much if it does.

Rhyme and meter complicate things, but I believe form is inseparable from content. Maybe we should talk about form-content, as we do about space-time. I’m willing to compromise a little in the form direction here and the content direction there, but I try not to stray too far in either direction. It’s a continual balancing act.

Originally Posted by mignon ledgard

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?

Thanks for sending me back to that beautiful poem of yours. I prefer the version of that line that I suggested, but that’s hardly surprising, since it’s mine! I like your new version too.

[Carl Copeland]

Thanks, Julie. I always look forward to your comments.

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

If you changed "The sky, like someone's udder, squirts" into "The sky, a sort of udder, squirts," that might preserve the vague gesture of the original without the distraction of conjuring a bare-breasted, lactating woman.

I was worried about “someone’s,” which does sound more human than I’d like. The Russian is perfectly neutral, and I hoped “udder” was bovine enough to keep things ambiguous. I’m trying out a correction; see what you think.

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

Since I am now a crone who often feels hotter and sweatier than I want to be …

I hope you weren’t put off by the word “crone.” I wouldn’t call you that if you were 103, but English doesn’t have a neutral word for “old lady,” and it seemed suitably folksy and weird for the poem.

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

I can't imagine peri- or post-menopausal women choosing to climb into a literal sauna on such a day. Although the imagery of the sauna seems clear, I wonder if the crones are actually canning summer produce for the winter, using the water-bath method, and thus generating steam. Only the threat of future starvation could drive me into more heat on a hot day.

You’re not the only one who seems to be missing the surrealism here. The sauna imagery is clearly there, but the old ladies aren’t climbing into a literal sauna, but into an oven, where they’re literally baked to a crisp. Is ”stew of crones” coming off as a stew cooked by crones?

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

The mention of reeds makes me think that "wider" would be better than "deeper" at that point of the river, and poem. The drowned kid can still be out of his depth later.

Do you mean that a wide river is more likely to have shallow margins where reeds would grow? If so, I’ll make that change. I’m out of my depth in natural and farmyard surroundings, so I really need this kind of help. In fact, I’m out of my depth almost everywhere.

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

I wonder if the diction of "kids," which I at first took to mean young goats rather than children, is a good fit.

I haven’t been around animals the way you have, so young goats didn’t occur to me, but I did wonder about the register of “kids.” The only easy fix would be “boys.” Would you prefer that? (It would provide some nice alliteration and keep the girls out of danger.)

Thanks again, Julie. All good points. (So good, in fact, that I wish you’d have a quick look at my previous Zenkevich translation. You could respond here or by pm. Don’t bother saying anything good about it, just whether anything sounds off or doesn’t make sense.)

[mignon ledgard]

You guys are having so much fun!
The image of the sky as a full udder is grand. Why not more directly say,

The sky, a puffy udder OR The sky, a swollen udder, or something more direct that makes the image clear - it's an awesome one I wish I had thought of.. It's so good that I get the feeling I've encountered before, in someone else's poem.

I'm enjoying this thread.
~mignon

Addendum: Oops! And HA HA. I just saw you used 'swollen' - Yay!

[Julie Steiner]

Hi, Carl and mignon!

There is actually a scientific term that makes the connection between udders and a certain cloud formation, although I wouldn't advise using it in the poem because the register would be way off:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammatus_cloud
I think the new L1 is perfect.

I did not take offense at "crone," even if that term is often used pejoratively. This is poetry. Folksy and weird diction is totally appropriate.

I took both the sauna imagery and the "stew of crones" figuratively. I'm still puzzled as to how literal the description of them (plural) climbing into an oven is supposed to be, because the steam implied by both the sauna and the stew imagery; ovens seem dryer than that. To me, simply from the standpoint of how large their oven is likely to be, it seems more likely that multiple women would be congregating in a larger area like a kitchen, that is as hot as an oven, perhaps so they can perform some communal task like canning, as an opportunity to gossip. None of these musings should be taken as demands to change anything in the poem; the poet said what he said and you shouldn't steer the translation a certain way unless there's a very good reason for doing so. I'm just thinking with my mouth open (expressing all this mainly for my own benefit as I wrestle with the idea). My use of that expression was puzzling in another thread, but generally that's what my husband says when he's muttering to himself and I answer him — "Oh, sorry, I wasn't talking to you; I was just thinking with my mouth open."

If it's a kitchen and not an oven, I don't know what to do with the descriptions of ash, which do seem pretty literal. So I'm probably wrong.

Yes, I meant that reeds grow in shallows, not depths, and since "wider and deeper" were both mentioned in the definition, I thought "wider" would fit better.

Yes, I prefer "boys" to "kids."

[Carl Copeland]

Thanks again, Mignon and Julie!

Originally Posted by mignon ledgard

The image of the sky as a full udder is grand … it's an awesome one I wish I had thought of.

I wouldn’t have thought of it in a million years, and that’s what I love about it.

Originally Posted by mignon ledgard

Addendum: Oops! And HA HA. I just saw you used 'swollen' - Yay!

Yeah, Julie convinced me a change was needed, and you and I must have come up with “swollen” at about the same time. We’re on the same wavelength, Mignon!

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

There is actually a scientific term that makes the connection between udders and a certain cloud formation …

So the connection between udders and sky isn’t as farfetched as I though. Fascinating. I see that Russian, which doesn’t use much Latin, calls these “udder-shaped clouds.”

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

I took both the sauna imagery and the "stew of crones" figuratively.

I take the crone stew in the oven as literal and absurd. You’re right that the oven and sauna imagery don’t mix perfectly, but if that’s a problem, it’s not mine, as you say.

Originally Posted by Julie Steiner

Yes, I meant that reeds grow in shallows, not depths, and since "wider and deeper" were both mentioned in the definition, I thought "wider" would fit better.

Yes, I prefer "boys" to "kids."

Great, I’ve made both changes. As usual, you’ve really helped me polish this one, Julie! Thanks so much!