1Q84

[John Bailey]

1Q84 was cut, but it was also lengthened - the translators felt the
need to pad out phrases or concepts that were too 'Japanese' with
in-text explanations that would have been better as footnotes.

eg: when Aomame gives someone her name, the translator adds "written
with exactly the same characters as the word for “green peas” and
pronounced with the same four syllables, “Ah-oh-mah-meh.” That's
entirely new in the translation.

eg 2: Straight translation: "Sometimes people mistakenly called her
“Edamame-san.” At times she was also called “Soramame-san.”

Version we got: "Some people would get the name of the plant wrong and
call her “Edamame” or “Soramame,” whereopon she would gently correct
them: “No, I’m not soybeans or fava beans, just green peas.”

To me, that's a completely different voice, and it's clunky.

I know Murakami works with his translators but in interviews, his
English is often pretty rough. He might approve of the translations
but that doesn't make him right...

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:36 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I want to slipstream on these comments mostly and only add, for those who
> might not know.......
>
> Murakami is a major translator of English into Japanese----all of Salinger
> I know....Chandler, Great Gatsby...see his essay on...................
> And others, of course....
>
> And he works VERY CLOSELY, as they say, with his translators into English.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 12:42 PM
> Subject: Re: 1Q84
>
> On 3/1/2012 11:34 AM, Erik T. Burns wrote:
> > Does anyone on the list read Murakami in the original? Is this a
> > translation issue (or is it exacerbated by the translation)?
>
> Not me of course but I doubt translation is the issue in the immediate
> case in point.
>
> There is a story about Murakami to the effect that he can't write his
> fiction in Japanese because all his "sources" (e.g., hard boiled
> detective , etc., etc.) are American.  Consequently, he has to formulate
> his thoughts first in English and then translate them into Japanese.
> Strange but (sounds) true.
>
> Reading 1Q84 in English doesn't seem like you're reading a
> translation--except of course for all the Japanese place names, etc. I'm
> only guessing but suspect that it's the Japanese readers will have the
> sensation of reading a translation.
>
> Here's a learned critical theory type study of Murakami and translation.
>
> http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1232&context=clcweb
>
> P
>
>
>
>
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Paul Mackin<mackin.paul at verizon.net>  wrote:
> >> On 3/1/2012 10:24 AM, Erik T. Burns wrote:
> >>>
> >>> i am listening to this one at present, and finding it veeeeeeerrrrrry
> >>> sloooooow to make even the most basic plot points. I'm about 1/3 of
> >>> the way through the book and I could summarize the twin plots so far
> >>> in about 30 seconds. This is not necessarily a problem; the problem is
> >>> the filling in is almost totally uninteresting&    often repetitive.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Using more words than necessary is one definition of hack writing.
> >>
> >> Not saying Murakami is a hack, just than sometimes it seems that way.
> >>
> >>
> >> P
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Mark Kohut<markekohut at yahoo.com>    wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> For the record, which sez something laughable at about me, I do not think
> >>>> his richness is
> >>>> as rich as TRP's---or a few other writers I know---and, his weakness is
> >>>> sentimentality--
> >>>> maybe ultimately---which may be my word for what other readers to whom he
> >>>> falls short,
> >>>> means, dunno.
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Mark Kohut<markekohut at yahoo.com>
> >>>> To: Joseph Tracy<brook7 at sover.net>; P-list List<pynchon-l at waste.org>
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 7:39 AM
> >>>> Subject: Re: 1Q84
> >>>>
> >>>> i found it page-turning and full of thematic richness. The overarching
> >>>> question to me is
> >>>> the historical one: what does the alternative 1984 mean? to the present
> >>>> vs.
> >>>> the Present.
> >>>> Very Iceland Spar-like to me, that is, how different is the historical
> >>>> light? What does it show?
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Joseph Tracy<brook7 at sover.net>
> >>>> To: P-list List<pynchon-l at waste.org>
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 11:19 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: 1Q84
> >>>>
> >>>> Appreciate hearing other feedback. Inclined to agree with both comments.
> >>>> This was my first Murakami book. I actually tend to read about 2/3rds
> >>>> non-fiction.
> >>>> On Feb 29, 2012, at 10:01 PM, John Bailey wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I only finished it on Monday, and given I quite enjoy Murakami it says
> >>>>> something that I took like two months to get through this. It's way too
> >>>>> long
> >>>>> and should have been cut by a third. There's so much going on that gets
> >>>>> lost
> >>>>> because you're just wading through the irrelevant bits.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:27 PM, David Morris<fqmorris at gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>>> Hinting @ But never getting anywhere.  That's a perfect description of
> >>>>> my
> >>>>> experience with this author.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> David Morris
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >