NP - Anna Karenina translations

[malignd at aol.com]

My wife read the Constance Garnett translation, then re-read in the 
Pevear/Volokhonsky translation.

She preferred the latter but liked both.


-----Original Message-----
From: John Carvill <johncarvill at gmail.com>
To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Thu, Jan 21, 2010 3:09 pm
Subject: NP - Anna Karenina translations


Anybody got any thoughts on the various translations of Tolstoy's'Anna 
Karenina'? I'm planning a Tolstoy binge, and wonder whether totry a 
different translation of Anna this time.I have only ever read the 
Penguin edition of Rosemary Edmonds's 
translation:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Anna-Karenin-Classics-L-N-Tolstoy/dp/
0140440410/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264103968&sr=1-2... but I 
saw a nice Everyman edition recently, second hand, andnearly bought it, 
until I noticed it has the Maude 
translation:http://www.amazon.com/Anna-Karenina-Everymans-Library-classic
s/dp/1857150589/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264103843&sr=1-20Then 
again, the current Penguin has an 'acclaimed' new translationfrom 
Richard Pavear and Larissa 
Volokhonsky:http://www.amazon.com/Anna-Karenina-Penguin-Classics-Tolstoy/
dp/0140449175/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264103885&sr=1-6To be 
wildly reductive, having compared the first page of each edition- the 
Maude, the Edmonds, and the P&V, I would rate them in this orderof 
preference: Edmonds, then P&V, then Maude.Anybody with a more in-depth 
understanding of these translations offeradvice? If I'm going to go 
through the book one more time, having readit a number of times, all in 
the Edmonds translation, should I juststick with that, or try another 
edition?CheersJ