A query on translation

[joeallonby]

on 4/15/03 8:52 AM, P. Chevalier at Pierre.Chevalier at infm.ucl.ac.be wrote:

> Had this experience with "On the Road" a couple of years ago... after
> having read "Sur la Route"...
> Two different books, eventhough the translation was the best available. In
> the French version, Sal paradise was a teenage drop-out who started to cry
> for his mom as soon as he had turned the corner of the street; it sounded
> so artificial, so "acted"; in the original version, words were flowing so
> easily, it wasn't complain and despair anymore, but something far more
> lyrical, enthousiastic, nervous... And it was a pure translation though;
> you could recognize any single word... Just the melody had changed and
> someone else was telling the story.
> I would be tempted to say the opposite; the translation left the text on
> the periphery, and the original text, even with entire parts that remained
> obscure for my french-thinking brain, brought me a lot closer to the
> "truth" of the book...
> 
> But I guess it depends a lot on the author.
> 
Kerouac depended heavily on the rhythm of language for the effect of his
prose. In fact, he really believed that the artistry of OTR lay in his use
of the language. The subject matter was simply what he had experienced and
had available to write about at the time. By the time OTR was published he
had become an ascetic Buddhist. He wanted to talk about his literary
breakthrough; everybody wanted to hear about the booze and the broads.

Strip the rhythm, the sound, from his books and you really aren't left with
much. The "truth" of the book doesn't really matter much.

I read a good Keruoac bio called "Desolate Angel" by Dennis McNally a few
years back. Unfortunately, I think it's out of print.

Peace
Joe>