Though this thread has been interesting for many reasons, I think the crux of this discussion has been lost amidst larger, more contextual problems. Setting aside the question of whether footnotes should be used more in novels (translated or otherwise), or what responsibilities readers of translated fiction should bear, the fact remains that Mr. Row's pithy and sanctimonious review should have never been published. Not only do his citations of the translation's shortcomings (two, by my count) fall far short of any measure of success in a translation, but they also lay bare his own dilettantish predilections, resulting in a review that neglects to actually do any reviewing. That Mr. Row finds his reading experience of the English (it is clear by now that he has no grounds for actual comparison between the Chinese original and its translation) frustrating due its lack of yiyin suggests to me that perhaps Mr. Row should stick to reading the Classics. Is this his standard for reading all fiction, or just that from those permanently ancient Oriental countries? And how exactly is a singular, offhand reference to the main character of Hongloumeng (at which point a footnote or some other type of explanation wold have drawn unnecessary and pointless scrutiny to the remark, much like Mr. Row) deepen our reading of the novel or Baldy Li in any way? Should we start complaining pompously every time a love story fails to properly acknowledge its debt to Romeo and Juliet? This is no heavy literary allusion, but at most a popular cultural lexical one, which in my opinion the translators have accounted for nicely with "sentimental heroine." Regarding the other piece of evidence on the inscrutability of the original, if you are still spending your time searching for that timeless rendering of the word imbued with such untranslatable "pathos" that you "suspect" must exist, Mr. Row, its right here: ASS.The automatic dismissiveness, the lack of careful reading (Row did in fact compare the Chinese original and the translation), the flourishing of half-understood fancy words (I do not think "pithy" means what you think it means), the would-be scathing insult (ASS!!!!), even the obscure, meant-to-be-impressive username (kuyahukduk)—it's all there.
« Older First-person base jumping in Switzerland. Stick wi... | The Freakonomics follow up, Su... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Kattullus at 8:30 PM on October 18