Agonizing over translations

“35 To reproduce this story with a raciness worthy of the Russian original is practically impossible. The translator has not attempted the task.” C. J. Hogarth admits his helplessness before the task, but goes on to give not even a translation, but a paraphrase of the tale of Captain Kopeikin. This calls into question the very essence of the text and of our task as readers. I have once again begun to compare the original with a number of translations. No wonder poor Gogol falls short in some versions-he is mercilessly cut like an order of salami in which the unskilled apprentice decides to cut out the chunks of fat because they are fat, thereby depriving the salami of its taste. Should we visit a different butcher? No comments required, but anyone with recommendations for a new shop is welcome.

2 thoughts on “Agonizing over translations

  1. Patrick O'Neill

    I just thought I would briefly throw my hat into the ring and make a remark concerning the translation of “Dead Souls” among other works of Gogol. In my opinion, the most outstanding example of wordplay in the works of Gogol may be found in the name of Akakey Akakeievitch but there are also several fine examples in Dead Soulds. One such pun that Gogol seems to enjoy using involves Sobakievitch. The landowner, whose name is derived from the Russian word for “dog” or собака, uses the word several times in his speech in a somewhat derogatory reference to others and even himself. For example, when Chichikov asks him the way to Plyushkin’s estate, Sobakievitch replies,

    ‘I don’t advise you even to know the way to that dog!’

    Later, in that same conversation, Sobakievitch grumbles that he cannot take Chichikov for more money in the deal and laments,

    ‘Well, there’s nothing to be done with you. Very Well! It’s a loss, but such is this dog’s life.’

    Upon further consideration, I really feel that there is no way to properly translate these remarks as to have them convey their puns in English. In such a way, it is only natural that the text loses some of its richest and most peculiar qualities . However, I believe that through education, for if I had not been taking Russian I would never have noticed this wordplay, and other such means, one can acquire a better reading of the text. Accordingly, I am very much opposed to the school of thought that the text should stand on its own, because especially in the case of translations, so much depth contained within the text would otherwise be lost.

Leave a Reply