P&V: A Rebuttal of /lit/'s Memes

[Anonymous No.17419445]

Anyone who regularly browses Russian literature threads on here has inevitably run into posts that shit on P&V, and these posters usually backup their insults with articles that accuse P&V of being bad translators, the most notable one being Gary Saul Morson's "The Pevearsion of Russian Literature" hitpiece. Using these articles, the people who hate P&V vehemently argue that all of the love that P&V have received is shilling by critics who don't know any Russian and thus have no idea how to properly assess P&V's work. Some go even further, claiming that translators who know Russian despise P&V.

However, these claims are patently false. Here are five examples that refute the "no Slavic scholars like P&V" argument:
Caryl Emerson, a Slavic scholar who has translated Russian works into English, highly praised their translation of The Brothers Karamozov (see: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3851924?seq=1).).
Michael Henry Heim, another Slavist translator, loved their Dostoevsky translations (see: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-10-16-bk-50750-story.html).).
Andrei Navrozov, a Russian who is the son of a translator, lauded their translation of TBK (see: https://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/11/books/dostoyevsky-with-all-the-music.html))
Joseph Frank, the leading Dostoevsky scholar who wrote the definitive Dostoevsky biography, said of their translation of TBK: "[I] [h]eartily [recommend it] to any reader who wishes to come as close to Dostoevsky’s Russian as it is possible." (he provided this blurb for the publication of their translation of TBK).
Angela Livingstone, a Pasternak scholar who wrote a book on Doctor Zhivago and has translated some of Pasternak's texts, was impressed with their translation of Doctor Zhivago (see her "Meaning Every Word of It" article that was published in The Times Literary Supplement)
And there are plenty of other people who are intimately familiar with the Russian language and Russian literature who have praised P&V.

1/2

[Anonymous No.17419453]

As far as I can tell, P&V get so much shit on here because they have committed the unforgivable sin of being popular. Compare and contrast their reception with David McDuff, a translator who is far less well known than P&V. Searching "McDuff" on warosu shows that he has gotten far more love on here than P&V; yet, like P&V, McDuff is a heavily literalist translator who can sometimes be a little clunky. In fact, Peter France accuses McDuff of being more awkward than P&V (see: https://archive.org/details/oxfordguidetolit00pete/page/596/mode/2up).). Also, Gary Saul Morson, a man whose word is treated like gospel by P&V haters, disliked McDuff's translation of Crime and Punishment and preferred P&V's over his, although Morson strongly preferred Garnett over both (see: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/gary-morson/how-to-read-crime-and-punishment/).). Obviously, taste plays a critical role in these matters, but for /lit/ to consistently praise McDuff's literalist translations while simultaneously shitting on P&V for literalism is so contradictory it seems highly likely that a lot of the P&V is simply contrarianism.

Ultimately, what makes a translation good or bad is going to wildly vary from person to person. Contrary to the press they receive, P&V are not universally acclaimed, but contrary to the narrative that is pushed by many people on here, they are not universally despised by Slavic scholars either. The discussion surrounding P&V is a lot more nuanced than a lot of people make it out to be.

2/2

[Anonymous No.17419457]

jesus that is an absolutely dogshit cover, id fucking burn that book

[Anonymous No.17419519]

I read TBK P&V, and I really enjoyed it. I read Oliver ready C&P, and I really enjoyed it. I read Garnett’s the Idiot, and I really enjoyed it

[Anonymous No.17419520]

>>17419445
the fuck is P&V nigga
and no I don't read books by russians (or seppos either)

[Anonymous No.17419556]

>>17419520
penis and vagne

[Anonymous No.17419566]

i found this to be true myself, op, and i'll attest to it. i've read a good handful of russian books and translators--i made a conscious effort to find and read non-P&V translators for the russian novels--and, so far, nobody has surpassed them.

if you're going to get into russian lit, read P&V

[Anonymous No.17419587]

>>17419445
Cringe. P&V is only successful because of heavy marketing. Constance Garnett is public domain, so Penguin can't make money off of her.

[Anonymous No.17419604]

This should help anybody decide. I suppose it just depends on taste. I’m a McDuff man, myself.

[Anonymous No.17419667]

>>17419604
god, those are all so much better than the katz translation i read. i'll have to read C&P all over again, since i tortured myself with that piece of shit translation

[Anonymous No.17419670]

>>17419604
I would be happy with either McDuff or P&V, think I like P&V a bit more, McDuff reads too much like British literature.

[Anonymous No.17419680]

>>17419604
Garnett's translation seems pretty nice desu, revised or not

[Anonymous No.17419754]

>>17419457
yes, there are better covers out there. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.17420016]

>>17419587
>Constance Garnett is public domain, so Penguin can't make money off of her
Worded ignorantly, but I see the point your making. The next 100 years will be interesting for classics in translation. As translations move into the public domain (i.e., publishers lose the exclusive rights to the translation) will we see publishers commissioning new translations simply to offer something the "other guy" can't? Because this raises the question if in 50 years anyone can publish P&V, why would I buy penguin, when I could buy it from another publisher for cheaper. Of course the risk is the other publisher won't make a which has the same standard of quality as penguin, but is that a risk penguin is willing to take? How many of you would choose an unknown publisher for cheaper (even if only a dollar or a few cents cheaper) over a Penguin book which is exactly the same (main text-wise)?

[Anonymous No.17420066]

>>17420016
Language and culture changes with time, translations will need to be revised or redone to suit the times. You are basing your view off the idea we have reached the pinnacle of translation, but culture and language will change and so will the ideal translation.

[Anonymous No.17420082]

>>17419457
The covers of Wordsworth books are purposefully dramatic and reminiscent of romance pulp specifically so housewives might accidentally buy a classic. Makes sense, they cost £2 and need to make it back somehow.

[Anonymous No.17420127]

I liked the P&V translation a lot. It has a very distinctive feel to it and I imagine it's not too far off from how it reads in Russian

[Anonymous No.17420211]

>>17419445
I agree. P&V haters are actual retards.

[suekohn22 No.17420211,1]

great book