Are these two the best translators of Dostoevsky? The wife has done of a ton of translation work of Russian theology, and the husband is writer and poet and has independently translated a decent amount of Russian stuff on his own before they met. She makes a translation as literal as possible and preserves the syntax, then he molds her work into something that makes sense in English and is actually good writing on top of that. Seems to work pretty well.
>>7422194
>translations
sure is reddit in here
i prefer constance garnett. i've compared a lot of translators, and from a purely english speaking opinion, none of them flow as elegantly as garnett for me. volokhonsky and pevear seem so chunky and clunky. i know the literal translation argument, but we're already quite far away from the original russian, so why not let a bit of aesthetics into the equation if only to make the reading a more pleasurable experience? you're really not going to miss out on anything either way except minute subtleties that pretty much require knowledge of russian idiosyncracies and a pretty general understanding of the language and culture.
How new are you?
>>7422214
Read the New Yorker article on them for what they have to say about Garnett, it's more than just subtleties.
>>7422217
i have read it, several times. and it is mainly subtleties. in tolstoy, she had trouble fully translating the novel, but aside from that even volokhonsky and pevear show utter respect for her capabilities as a russian translator, and i can show you a video in which they say it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ykytca6Y8
>>7422222
nice
>>7422194
always go with mcduff
>>7422217
almost all new editions are revised garnett translations and she does have the best prose of all the translators/writers.
/lit/ hates alternativey on P&V and on Garnett. I've read several books either by P&V and Garnett and McAndrews, I have to say P&V are not bad if you're studying the text, but for personal enjoyment McAndrews is the best. Garnett is p bad. The best idea is to ask around for particular translations of particular texts. The P&V Notes from the Underground is p terrible, fwiw.
>>7422222
Checked
>>7422335
yes, at 1:03:34
Read it in russian you retarded fuck
>>7422194
>the husband is writer and poet and has independently translated a decent amount of Russian stuff on his own before they met
He takes pride in not knowing Russian.
McDuff or Avsey for Dostoyevsky; Maudes for Tolstoy, unless there's a better choice for a specific title (e.g., Amy Dunnigan for W&P).
>>7422222
shit
Garnett has good prose, but that's kind of the problem, her prose is way too polished. Dostoevsky often writes in a deliberately muddled style to better convey human thought.
P and V are good if you enjoy not enjoying literature
>>7422194
>translation
Learn the language, moron.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEl59biItfY
>>7423514
His lack of fluency has been stated in places such as the 'Translation Wars' article:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars
>Then, Richard, who has never mastered conversational Russian, ...
P&V's Tolsoty is amazing, like really incredible. Dunno about their Dostoevsky, I've read Magarshack for him and he's also very good.
>>7422194
>constance garnett
Except if you do a "literal translation" of Dostoevsky you'll fuck it up, because Russian (or any other language) doesn't translate literally into English. Peaver and Volokhonsky are essentially bragging about her removing all the subtitles of the original Russian, and him guessing about what they should have been.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-pevearsion-of-russian-literature/
"Imagine someone translating Paradise Lost from English into Russian who had somehow missed that Milton was a Christian. There is something of that in the P&V version of Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground. Its nameless narrator, the “underground man,” wants above all to discredit the deterministic credo that people are mere “piano keys” played upon by the laws of nature—that since we must always act according to our own perceived best interest, everything we do is in principle predictable and choice an illusion. In response, the underground man describes and performs acts that violate his best interest, either to disprove the prevailing theory or just because, just so, for no reason at all. His word for such acts of self-injury is, in English translations before P&V, “spite.” It is fair to say that to miss the concept of spite is to miss the work entire.
"But that is just what P&V do. Instead of “spite,” they give us “wickedness.” Now, the Russian word zloi can indeed mean “wicked.” But no one with the faintest idea of what this novella is about, with any knowledge of criticism from Dostoevsky’s day to ours, or with any grasp of Dostoevskian psychology, would imagine that the book’s point is that people are capable of wickedness."
P&V are a trend. Go with the classics.
>>7425214
an anon after my own heart, you and i, i think we would get along.
I liked P&V's Crime and Punishment and Notes from the Underground, but their Brothers Karamazov is a disaster. McDuff, Avsey and Maguire are good but Magarshack is my favourite overall.
I read Garnett's translation of C&P and it felt too polished when I read a revised Garnett TBK by Matlaw. As others mentioned, her translations seem to omit the minuscule details that really bring characters to life.
How is the Jessie Coulson translation?
I decided it was time to read C&P and saw it at the used books store. There were half a dozen editions, but I didn't have anything to tell me the best translation at the time, so I just figured the OUP would be safe.
P&V foreignize the prose. If that is what you think translation should be, then go for them. If you want smooth English go for Garnett.
Avoid the other translators they are awful.
in the end, find someone who speaks to you, someone you can be comfortable with, if you read a book, and feel doubts about some of the minutiae, then go back and read another translation while comparing the two. russian in particular has a lot of valid translators for a lot of different authors. in all though, i personally always choose constance if i can find her, and if not, i do research, i have two copies of Petersburg, and you wouldnt believe how different they are, some authors are simple enough to just call it a day, others have such complexity it's difficult to establish who's really giving you the best version.
So who made the best TBK translation?
>>7425558
Personally, I'd go with Andrew MacAndrew
the best translator is your heart.
I read Garnett (revised) Crime and Punishment - Loved it. I read MacAndrew TBK, loved it. I read P&V Notes - loved it.
Any translation is going to be good enough really.
>>7425267
Imo the really old translations need to be revised to be optimal.
>>7425214
P&V explain this in the Note's foreword. They know the book is largely about spite, for god's sake. Don't be a fucking idiot. They had good reason to make that replacement.
>>7425295
Smooth English, anon?
>>7426962
Any translation is going to be good enough really.
I'm around 200 pages into the P&V translation of The Brothers Karamazov and i'm having a hard time getting through this book senpai, I enjoyed the beginning banter between Pyotr and Fyodor but i'm at chapter where Katerina and Grushenka. Is shit going to pop off anytime soon senpai?
>>7427084
it's worth it to meet Ivan's Devil. just work your way through it, maybe check out a different translation. in the end, if you don't like it, read something else. it doesnt always hit everyone the same way, and nothing ever does. don't put yourself down if you end up just hating it. just take up a new novel and keep trucking, don't be discouraged!
>>7427084
I think the murder is about halfway in.
>>7427084
oh wait, whoops, this is /lit/.
suck it up, pleb
