When I think about the translation of poetry, it was interesting how both Janine Beichman and Roger Pulvers tackle the same challenge but offer different insights into how the process works. Beichman focuses on how much is lost in translation and the necessity of adding something new to preserve the spirit of the original. Her exploration of Japanese poets like Nagai Kafu shows that translation is not just about linguistic accuracy, but about a translator’s passion for bringing a foreign poem "home" so to speak. I found it compelling that without translations like these, modern Japanese poetry as we know it wouldn’t probably exist.
Pulvers, on the other hand, emphasizes tone and voice as the crucial points in poetry translation. His discussion of 宮沢賢治's famous poem "雨ニモマケズ" and his decision to translate the negative phrases into positive affirmations was pretty interesting for me. It’s not just about literal meaning; it’s about re-creating the poem in a way that evokes the same emotional response in a different language. Though I'm not sure if that's what the foreign audience wants, but Pulvers' approach reminds me that translation is an art form that requires both a deep understanding of the original context and the creative ability to re-imagine it in a new linguistic world.
No comments:
Post a Comment