Subject
Re: Nabokov and Translation (fwd)
Date
Body
From: Mlee <mlee@jingxian.xmu.edu.cn>
i----------------- Message requiring your approval (26 lines)
------------------
Nabokov taught Pushkin's EO to American students. As a teacher, I can
imagine how much he tried to share with his students about the text,
translation, background ideas, historical references, and so on. His
translation and extensive notes, it seems to me, is a natural outgrowth of
his zeal in trying to communicate Pushkin to naive and uninformed, but
enthusiastic USA students. My impression of VN is that whatever he did, he
did it wholeheartedly and as best he could. I'm an amateur (as in "love
of") student of Russian language and literature, and my tutor advised me to
simply plunge into Pushkin and trash my conventional textbooks. This I've
done (to some extent,) holding VN's extremely helpful translation in one
hand and Pushkin's original in the other, reading and sometimes memorizing
line by line. I agree with Neal McCabe that this is the way VN's
translation should be used, and I think that was VN's original intention,
given his role for quite a few years as a teacher. I love it! No other
translation will do for me, the novice student of both language and Russian
poetry! And thanks to my tutor for his excellent suggestion.
Megan Lee mlee@jingxian.xmu.edu.cn
Neal McCabe wrote:
>His translation and commentary should only be read with the original
>Russian in hand. Otherwise one is missing the point entirely, and
>neither Nabokov's nor Pushkin's work can be properly appreciated by the
>native English-speaking reader. If VN's translation does not lead the
>reader directly to Pushkin's original, the reader has failed - certainly
>not the author.
i----------------- Message requiring your approval (26 lines)
------------------
Nabokov taught Pushkin's EO to American students. As a teacher, I can
imagine how much he tried to share with his students about the text,
translation, background ideas, historical references, and so on. His
translation and extensive notes, it seems to me, is a natural outgrowth of
his zeal in trying to communicate Pushkin to naive and uninformed, but
enthusiastic USA students. My impression of VN is that whatever he did, he
did it wholeheartedly and as best he could. I'm an amateur (as in "love
of") student of Russian language and literature, and my tutor advised me to
simply plunge into Pushkin and trash my conventional textbooks. This I've
done (to some extent,) holding VN's extremely helpful translation in one
hand and Pushkin's original in the other, reading and sometimes memorizing
line by line. I agree with Neal McCabe that this is the way VN's
translation should be used, and I think that was VN's original intention,
given his role for quite a few years as a teacher. I love it! No other
translation will do for me, the novice student of both language and Russian
poetry! And thanks to my tutor for his excellent suggestion.
Megan Lee mlee@jingxian.xmu.edu.cn
Neal McCabe wrote:
>His translation and commentary should only be read with the original
>Russian in hand. Otherwise one is missing the point entirely, and
>neither Nabokov's nor Pushkin's work can be properly appreciated by the
>native English-speaking reader. If VN's translation does not lead the
>reader directly to Pushkin's original, the reader has failed - certainly
>not the author.