/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.9138370]

Are the Pevear and Volokhonsky translations just a meme due to marketing, or are they really the best Russian to English translations for Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky?

I feel like most people just say they are the best because they are the most recent, and they have had large amounts of money dropped on them for marketing in order to help that assumption.

I read that the Maude translation was approved by Tolstoy himself, and that P&V often simplify and modernize the text.

Thoughts? Is Garnett good enough for most people? Are we being duped by P&V?

[Anonymous No.9138380]

>>9138370
I read the garnett translation and thought it was fine. It was pretty stiff but I imagine the russian version is pretty stiff too

[Hэйтив Paшн No.9138390]

Garnett is shit - anything is better. P&V are really good in terms of accuracy, but English text isn't spectacularly cohesive and the flow is not great at times. If you're OK with that, then go for it. Most autists here dislike it for these reasons, but then go over to next thread to recommend Lattimore for Homer, so you might as well disregard all the cocksuckers.

[Anonymous No.9138409]

Garnett is unironically terrible.

[Anonymous No.9138420]

>>9138370
They just got trashed in the NYRB a few months back. I believe their method involves a literal translation and a secondary editing for readability.

[Anonymous No.9138449]

>>9138420
>I believe their method involves a literal translation and a secondary editing for readability.

One of them does a literal translation, and the other pretties it up a bit. The latter (I forget whether it's P or V) doesn't even know a lot of Russian.

Garnett's fine, she's just old. Though if you read her make sure you get a revised version because she wasn't perfect.

[Anonymous No.9138498]

P&V is fine, they're a little too literal sometimes, like this guy (>>9138390) said, so you have some awkwardness. But they're fine. I would recommend a number of translators over them: Michael R. Katz, Ignat Avsey, and Alan Myers for Dostoevsky; for Tolstoy, Rosamund Bartlett's Anna Karenina and the Maudes (preferably in revised form) for the rest.

[Anonymous No.9138759]

>>9138380
>>9138370
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars

[Anonymous No.9138785]

>>9138380
>I read the garnett translation and thought it was fine.
“The reason English-speaking readers can barely tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky is that they aren’t reading the prose of either one. They’re reading Constance Garnett.” ~ Vladimir Nabokov

[Anonymous No.9138801]

>>9138785
>caring what Nabokov thinks about anything

wew

[Anonymous No.9138811]

>>9138801
He’s not wrong

[Anonymous No.9138816]

>>9138801
>why care about the opinion of a great writer with native grasp of russian when you can listen to autistic monolingual anglo college students
W E W
E
W

[Anonymous No.9138834]

>I love Constance Garnett, and wish I had a framed picture of her on my wall, since I have often thought that what I do for a living is teach the Collected Works of Constance Garnett. She has a fine sense of English, and, especially, the sort of English that appears in British fiction of the realist period, which makes her ideal for translating the Russian masterpieces. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky were constantly reading and learning from Dickens, Trollope, George Eliot and others. Every time someone else redoes one of these works, reviewers say that the new version replaces Garnett; and then another version comes out, which, apparently, replaces Garnett again, and so on. She must have done something right.

-- Gary Saul Morson, scholar of Russian literature

[Anonymous No.9138873]

>>9138834
>what I do for a living is teach the Collected Works of Constance Garnett
That about sums it up. Garnett may have a fine sense of English, but she's a shit translator. Anyone who disagrees мoжeт пpocлeдoвaть нaхyй.

[Anonymous No.9138917]

>When Ralph Matlaw [another notable Russian lit scholar] set out to translate The Brothers Karamazov for Norton in the 1970s, he quickly gave up the idea because of the excellence of Garnett's work.
(from the book Dostoevsky in Context)

Matlaw wound up revising Garnett's translation for Norton instead.

The Oxford Guide to Literature in English translation calls Nabokov's literalist approach to translations as "unusual and extreme."

[Anonymous No.9138931]

>PV
>Alexei Fyodorovich Karamazon was the third son of a landowner from our district, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, well known in his own day (and still remembered among us) because of his dark and tragic death, which happened exactly thirteen years ago and which I shall speak of in its proper place. For the moment I will only say of this "landowner" (as we used to call him, thought for all his life he hardly ever lived on his estate) that he was a strange type, yet one rather frequently met with, precisely the type of man who is not only worthless and depraved but muddleheaded as well - one of those muddleheaded people who still handle their own little business deals quite skillfully, if nothing else. Fyodor Pavlovich, for instance started with next to nothing, he was a very small landownder, he ran around having dinner at other men's tables, he tried to foist himself off as a sponger, and yet at his death he was discovered to have as much as a hundred thousand roubles in hard cash. At the same time he remained all his life one of the most muddleheaded madcaps in our district. Again I say it was not stupidity - most of these madcaps are rather clever and shrewd - but precisely muddleheadedness, even a special, nation form of it.
>CG
>Alexey Fyodorovitch Karamazov was the third son of Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov, a land owner well known in our district in his own day, and still remembered among us owing to his gloomy and tragic death, which happened thirteen years ago, and which I shall describe in its proper place. For the present I will only say that this “landowner”—for so we used to call him, although he hardly spent a day of his life on his own estate—was a strange type, yet one pretty frequently to be met with, a type abject and vicious and at the same time senseless. But he was one of those senseless persons who are very well capable of looking after their worldly affairs, and, apparently, after nothing else. Fyodor Pavlovitch, for instance, began with next to nothing; his estate was of the smallest; he ran to dine at other men's tables, and fastened on them as a toady, yet at his death it appeared that he had a hundred thousand roubles in hard cash. At the same time, he was all his life one of the most senseless, fantastical fellows in the whole district. I repeat, it was not stupidity—the majority of these fantastical fellows are shrewd and intelligent enough—but just senselessness, and a peculiar national form of it.

Judge the subtleties of style for yourself, to my non-anglo eye it all looks roughly the same. I gotta say I like 'muddleheaded' way more than 'senseless', sounds properly anachronistic

[Anonymous No.9138938]

>>9138759
That is a shill article. Apparently, they were biased due to connections.

[Anonymous No.9138950]

>>9138931
PDF with PV fucked up some letters, so nevermind that

[Anonymous No.9138984]

>>9138370
They're good.

This site is contrarian by nature so alot of people shit on them.

[Anonymous No.9139044]

>>9138931
I prefer the CG translation tbqh

[Anonymous No.9139084]

TFW just bought a copy of Anna Karenina but it's the Constance Garnett translation.

Did I fuck up?

[Anonymous No.9139106]

>>9139084
It's fine. None of the are perfect, фaмaлaм.

[Anonymous No.9139180]

>>9138370
I read a number of Garnett translations before I knew anything about the virtues or vices of her work. Lots of people who know no better like to shit on them because some publisher pushing some other translation shits on it, but they're just fine. I've also read McDuff translations of Dusty and liked them well enough.

There are two reasons I usually avoid P&V translations... the first is that the idiom feels too contemporary to me. I think a 19th century novel should not read like something contemporary. The second is that I'm a cheap bastard and the garnett translations can be found in cheapo editions (like Wordsworth Classics, which also have the best cover art).

I read a translation of Demons/Devils/Possessed, though I forget which (Magarshack, maybe). I recall one of the characters speaking like a cockney fellow, which was pretty fucked up.

[Anonymous No.9139195]

Garnett for Tolstoy is superior. For Dostoevsky you don't have many options for modern translations other than P&V. The Oliver Ready Crime and Punishment is the best. For other Russians, like Bulgakov, P&V are unreadable. Yes, they're a meme.

[Anonymous No.9139215]

Not native english speaker here, but I'll drop my 2 centavos.

First time I read "The Idiot" was on a pretty lamey translation. I couldn't afford a better one back then and was travelling so I had to settle with that.
Couple of years later I got my hands on a translation straight from russian. Much better! But it didn't change the experience as much as I thought it would. So, I don't know. it was better, but not THAT better.

TL;DR: reading it on any edition is better than not reading it.

[Anonymous No.9139410]

>>9138931
I like the more formalized 19th century styling of the CG better. Def not the same

[Anonymous No.9139576]

>>9138931
The top is so much better.

[Anonymous No.9139590]

>not knowing a Slavic language
Don't worry, you'll never get close to Russian, doesn't matter which translation.

[Anonymous No.9139946]

>>9138370
Garnett may not be the most accurate translation but I enjoy her style. It's comfy.

[Anonymous No.9140431]

>>9138370
Just looked at my copy
>Rosemary Edmonds
Opinions?

[Anonymous No.9140462]

>>9138931
PV is better.

I'm one of the autists who recommend Lattimore. Is PV for me? Is there any other literal translator who handles it better? I can't get over PV's use of Wicked instead of Spiteful in Notes from Underground.
>>9139180
You're stuck reading all the shitty ~contemporary translations of Don Quixote, then.

[Anonymous No.9140780]

>>9138785

regardless of translation, if you can't tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky ur no good to anybody

[Anonymous No.9140919]

>>9138370
Who makes these rare Pepes? they're exquisite.

[Anonymous No.9140937]

>>9140431
>Rosemary Edmonds
>Constance Garnett
What the fuck bongistanians, keep your womyns in check away from the classics

[Anonymous No.9140946]

>>9140919

[Anonymous No.9142014]

>>9140919
I do.

[Anonymous No.9142025]

>>9142014

[Anonymous No.9142040]

>>9142025

[Anonymous No.9142045]

>>9142040

[Anonymous No.9142054]

>>9142045

[Anonymous No.9142079]

>>9142054

[Anonymous No.9142086]

>>9142079

[Anonymous No.9142114]

>>9142086

[Anonymous No.9143078]

>>9138785
>Nabokov says sensationalist bullshit for attention and to distance literary merit from established figures
more at 11

>>9138801
this so hard

revised Garnett is best

[Anonymous No.9143087]

>>9138938
care to back that up with a source my friend?

[Anonymous No.9143124]

>>9138370
P&V are marketing memes, get that shit the fuck out of here

For BK, get the Ignat Avsey translation, it's god-tier.

[Anonymous No.9143141]

>>9143078
>person without working knowledge of original language thinks his opinion on translations has any value whatsoever

[Anonymous No.9143163]

>>9143141
oтвpaтитeльнoe нeгp шлюхa

пoкинyть этo мecтo нeмeдлeннo

[Anonymous No.9143174]

>>9143141
>implying I'm not a ruskie
try again friendo

[Anonymous No.9143180]

>>9143174
>implying I'm not a ruskie
>he said in English

[Anonymous No.9143200]

>>9143174
You are not Russian. You are Ukrainian and you just want to give Russia a bad name, so you recommend the Garrett translation in hopes of making Westerners hate Russian lit so that they will take back Crimea for you. You cannot fool me Khokhol.

[Anonymous No.9144334]

>>9143200
>tfw Ashkenazi Jew from Russia
>tfw tell people I'm Russian
>tfw this lulls them into a false sense of security and then I
do nothing

[Anonymous No.9144438]

>>9144334
>mfw most "Russians" in the USA are (((Russians))) because of preferential immigration legislation for Jews

Sorry goys