Subject
ONE D.R. HOFSTADTER'S EXPERT ASSESSMENTS OF RUSSIAN-ENGLISH
TRANSLATION, IN PARTICULAR OF _EUGENE ONEGIN_ (fwd)
TRANSLATION, IN PARTICULAR OF _EUGENE ONEGIN_ (fwd)
Date
Body
Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stephen Blackwell <sblackwe@utk.edu>
To: "NABOKV-L@ucsbvm.edu" <nabokv-l@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu>
Chapter 9, "A Vile Non-verse," 255-278 in Douglas R. Hofstadter, LE TON
BEAU DE MAROT: IN PRAISE OF THE MUSIC OF LANGUAGE. New York: Basic
Books, 1997. xxiv + 662 + 72a + 72b pp.
The chapter follows a longer version of the piece that appeared in the NYT
BOOK REVIEW last November, here called "A Novel in Verse." "A Vile
Non-verse" is a fairly angry rejection of VN's theory of translation as
expressed in the EO volumes, a defense of other verse translations of EO,
and a criticism of VN's attacks on his fellow-translators. The chapter
includes extensive parody of some of VN's stylistic trademarks (anagrams,
obscure words), for example, a thumbnail biography of the "eminent
Franco--Irish playwright Marvin Validbook." There are some factual errors
concerning the published form of VN's translation and commentary, and one
or two fundamental misconceptions of Pushkin's novel. The rest of
Hofstadter's book is devoted to various--inumerable--reflections on poetry
and translation thereof.
Stephen H. Blackwell
Assistant Professor of Russian
Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages
701 McClung Tower
University of Tennessee
Knoxville TN 37996
----------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:06:05 -0400
From:Dmitri Nabokov via Sandy Pallot Klein <taxi@flinet.com>
=========================================================
21 MAY 1997
SUBJECT: ONE D.R. HOFSTADTER'S EXPERT ASSESSMENTS OF RUSSIAN-ENGLISH
TRANSLATION, IN PARTICULAR OF _EUGENE ONEGIN_
SINCE I AM TRAVELING AND MAY NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION AT HAND, I
AM SORRY A PRIORI FOR ANY GAFFES OR GARBLINGS. BUT THE CRACKED BELL
SEEMS AUDIBLE ENOUGH.
IS THIS THE HOFSTADTER WHOM THE _NY TIMES BOOK REVIEW_ ACCORDED SOME
ODDLY PROMINENT SPACE SOME MONTHS AGO? WHOSE QUALIFICATIONS WERE
REVIEWED BY A SHARP-EYED NABOKOVIENNE AND FOUND A BIT WANTING -- A
CONTRADICTORY SALAD OF ASSERTIONS & DENIALS ABOUT HIS ACADEMIC
PREREQUISITES, HISTORY AND AFFILIATIONS?
THE ONE WHO EVALUATES ARNDT, JOHNSON, ET AL., AND THEN VN, WITH A
PARTICULARLY PUERILE POSHLO-SNIDE SLANT AGAINST THE LATTER AND NOT THE
LEAST IDEA OF VN'S INTENT?
BUT, ABOVE ALL, A PRODUCT OF DIGITAL STUDIES WITH THE ZEROES HEAVILY
OUTWEIGHING THE ONES IN HIS CAP, THE FATTEST ZERO, AMID A GENERAL SMOG
OF ARROGANT IGNORANCE, BEING ZERO KNOWLEDGE OF RUSSIAN?
I SPEAK OF COURSE ONLY AS A DABBLER IN RUSSIAN-ENGLISH VERSE TRANSLATION.
STILL, IF THE ABOVE WERE SO, HERR H. WOULD BE AN ASS AND A FRAUD,
STOMPING IN WHERE SENSITIVE SCHOLARS HESITATE TO TREAD, AND BOTH
THE _NYTBR_ AND BASIC BOOKS, WHOEVER OWNS THAT OMINOUSLY BASEMENT-BROW
MONIKER, WOULD OWE NABOKOV'S MEMORY A MAXIMAL APOLOGY. WE WOULD NOT
ACCEPT ONE FROM HOFSTADTER -- IF INDEED THIS IS THE SAME HOFSTADTER.
IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, I HAVE BEEN UNJUST IN ANY WAY, IT IS I WHO
APOLOGIZE WITH A QUIXOTIC BOW.
MY THANKS TO STEPHEN BLACKWELL.
DN
From: Stephen Blackwell <sblackwe@utk.edu>
To: "NABOKV-L@ucsbvm.edu" <nabokv-l@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu>
Chapter 9, "A Vile Non-verse," 255-278 in Douglas R. Hofstadter, LE TON
BEAU DE MAROT: IN PRAISE OF THE MUSIC OF LANGUAGE. New York: Basic
Books, 1997. xxiv + 662 + 72a + 72b pp.
The chapter follows a longer version of the piece that appeared in the NYT
BOOK REVIEW last November, here called "A Novel in Verse." "A Vile
Non-verse" is a fairly angry rejection of VN's theory of translation as
expressed in the EO volumes, a defense of other verse translations of EO,
and a criticism of VN's attacks on his fellow-translators. The chapter
includes extensive parody of some of VN's stylistic trademarks (anagrams,
obscure words), for example, a thumbnail biography of the "eminent
Franco--Irish playwright Marvin Validbook." There are some factual errors
concerning the published form of VN's translation and commentary, and one
or two fundamental misconceptions of Pushkin's novel. The rest of
Hofstadter's book is devoted to various--inumerable--reflections on poetry
and translation thereof.
Stephen H. Blackwell
Assistant Professor of Russian
Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages
701 McClung Tower
University of Tennessee
Knoxville TN 37996
----------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:06:05 -0400
From:Dmitri Nabokov via Sandy Pallot Klein <taxi@flinet.com>
=========================================================
21 MAY 1997
SUBJECT: ONE D.R. HOFSTADTER'S EXPERT ASSESSMENTS OF RUSSIAN-ENGLISH
TRANSLATION, IN PARTICULAR OF _EUGENE ONEGIN_
SINCE I AM TRAVELING AND MAY NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION AT HAND, I
AM SORRY A PRIORI FOR ANY GAFFES OR GARBLINGS. BUT THE CRACKED BELL
SEEMS AUDIBLE ENOUGH.
IS THIS THE HOFSTADTER WHOM THE _NY TIMES BOOK REVIEW_ ACCORDED SOME
ODDLY PROMINENT SPACE SOME MONTHS AGO? WHOSE QUALIFICATIONS WERE
REVIEWED BY A SHARP-EYED NABOKOVIENNE AND FOUND A BIT WANTING -- A
CONTRADICTORY SALAD OF ASSERTIONS & DENIALS ABOUT HIS ACADEMIC
PREREQUISITES, HISTORY AND AFFILIATIONS?
THE ONE WHO EVALUATES ARNDT, JOHNSON, ET AL., AND THEN VN, WITH A
PARTICULARLY PUERILE POSHLO-SNIDE SLANT AGAINST THE LATTER AND NOT THE
LEAST IDEA OF VN'S INTENT?
BUT, ABOVE ALL, A PRODUCT OF DIGITAL STUDIES WITH THE ZEROES HEAVILY
OUTWEIGHING THE ONES IN HIS CAP, THE FATTEST ZERO, AMID A GENERAL SMOG
OF ARROGANT IGNORANCE, BEING ZERO KNOWLEDGE OF RUSSIAN?
I SPEAK OF COURSE ONLY AS A DABBLER IN RUSSIAN-ENGLISH VERSE TRANSLATION.
STILL, IF THE ABOVE WERE SO, HERR H. WOULD BE AN ASS AND A FRAUD,
STOMPING IN WHERE SENSITIVE SCHOLARS HESITATE TO TREAD, AND BOTH
THE _NYTBR_ AND BASIC BOOKS, WHOEVER OWNS THAT OMINOUSLY BASEMENT-BROW
MONIKER, WOULD OWE NABOKOV'S MEMORY A MAXIMAL APOLOGY. WE WOULD NOT
ACCEPT ONE FROM HOFSTADTER -- IF INDEED THIS IS THE SAME HOFSTADTER.
IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, I HAVE BEEN UNJUST IN ANY WAY, IT IS I WHO
APOLOGIZE WITH A QUIXOTIC BOW.
MY THANKS TO STEPHEN BLACKWELL.
DN