Re: I didn't even read it, I guessed based on the author's initials.
Gaps Send a noteboard - 21/11/2010 01:37:40 PM
What's the point of your response? You say:
"Like hell it's about authorial intent".
Strong! Non-qualified!
Lead sentence:
"It's clearly not just about authorial intent."
Weak... qualified.
That makes it pretty hard to defend myself, as you're trying to pigeon hole me into the standpoint of saying the whole article is only about authorial intent, when that was never my... intent. Can I have it both ways too -- even if I don't want it both ways?
I always forget that we're in a courtrooom, here. In my sentence where I do the little parenthetical aside and say "and here I'm talking about..." I was trying to indicate that my response was referring to those points in the article. Why did I comment on those points, and not the rest of it? Well, for one they caught my attention, because I agree with him that knowing authorial intent would be awesome. But I'm just not sure we can ever truly know what the best translator would be. Frankly, I didn't comment on the other sections because I don't see anything to disagree with, and, as I said, those first few points really snagged my attention.
I always read everything when Nabokov is discussed.
"Like hell it's about authorial intent".
Strong! Non-qualified!
Lead sentence:
"It's clearly not just about authorial intent."
Weak... qualified.
That makes it pretty hard to defend myself, as you're trying to pigeon hole me into the standpoint of saying the whole article is only about authorial intent, when that was never my... intent. Can I have it both ways too -- even if I don't want it both ways?
I always forget that we're in a courtrooom, here. In my sentence where I do the little parenthetical aside and say "and here I'm talking about..." I was trying to indicate that my response was referring to those points in the article. Why did I comment on those points, and not the rest of it? Well, for one they caught my attention, because I agree with him that knowing authorial intent would be awesome. But I'm just not sure we can ever truly know what the best translator would be. Frankly, I didn't comment on the other sections because I don't see anything to disagree with, and, as I said, those first few points really snagged my attention.
I always read everything when Nabokov is discussed.
I cannot even copy his manner because the manner of his prose was the manner of his thinking and that was a dazzling succession of gaps; and you cannot ape a gap because you are bound to fill it in somehow or other -- and blot it out in the process. -- Nabokov
This message last edited by Gaps on 21/11/2010 at 01:38:39 PM
Julian Barnes on translation
18/11/2010 05:49:37 PM
- 904 Views
That's a very interesting article. Though it does sound like he'd never be happy.
18/11/2010 08:06:09 PM
- 587 Views
That was a long article.
19/11/2010 07:05:12 PM
- 513 Views
Re: That was a long article.
19/11/2010 09:59:24 PM
- 492 Views
Yeah, I think English translations on average are better than those in smaller languages.
19/11/2010 10:16:44 PM
- 596 Views
On balance, I'm glad I read the Steegmuller translation when I read the novel.
20/11/2010 05:14:42 PM
- 456 Views
Vas-tu faire s’enculée, Camille!
20/11/2010 05:26:08 PM
- 535 Views
If you don't mind a few grammatical corrections of your swearing...
20/11/2010 05:42:57 PM
- 545 Views
It was a quick and dirty rendering
20/11/2010 05:53:13 PM
- 483 Views
And I didn't order from France. It's a US-based company that I bought it from. *NM*
20/11/2010 05:54:55 PM
- 208 Views
I love Pleiade editions
21/11/2010 12:14:14 AM
- 469 Views
How tall are they, out of curiosity?
21/11/2010 12:50:57 AM
- 614 Views
Not tall
21/11/2010 09:59:55 AM
- 477 Views
I got my books today.
23/11/2010 05:38:20 AM
- 671 Views
Re: I got my books today.
23/11/2010 10:33:10 AM
- 527 Views
Regardless, if Pleiade is the best France has to offer, their book industry is awful.
23/11/2010 07:17:13 PM
- 756 Views
Re: Oh Authorial intent.
21/11/2010 02:07:27 AM
- 594 Views
Like hell it's about authorial intent.
21/11/2010 05:40:22 AM
- 532 Views
Re: I didn't even read it, I guessed based on the author's initials.
21/11/2010 01:37:40 PM
- 725 Views
So I take it you missed the whole part about Nabokov's translation of Eugene Onegin.
21/11/2010 03:28:14 PM
- 469 Views
Re: Yes, I missed all of that. Such a conclusion clearly follows from my previous response. *NM*
21/11/2010 03:57:16 PM
- 298 Views
Actually it does. Your responses are just cheap tricks, not discussions. *NM*
21/11/2010 04:44:21 PM
- 217 Views
Re: Cheap tricks?
21/11/2010 10:45:39 PM
- 574 Views
Barnes' article has little to do with authorial intent
21/11/2010 11:37:25 PM
- 515 Views
I think it is more about the "authentic experience" than about intent.
21/11/2010 10:01:57 AM
- 503 Views