Guys, can we settle the translation debate right here, right now? Who are the definitive translators of Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekhov? Should I listen to Amazon and just get the P&V translations?
>>7566741
I just finished the Coulson translation of C&P and was very happy with it. I haven't read any other translations to compare it to though.
Dostoevsky: McDuff, Magarshack, Avsey
Tolstoy: Maudes
>>7566763
MacAndrew is good for Dostoy too
Madame Bovary- Lydia Davis
>>7566763
>>7566838
>Dostoyevsky: McDuff, Magarshack, Avsey, MacAndrew
>Tolstoy: Maude and Maude
This is it right here.
For translation of Dostoyevsky that leans toward an 'older' feel, Magarshack is the best. Garnett worked in such a hurried manner that she skipped sections she didn't understand, made mistakes (and didn't correct them), and imposed her own editorial opinions and Victorian values on the texts she worked on. Also her translations all carry her own writing voice as opposed to that of the authors. One modification here is that Ralph Matlaw revised her translation of Brothers Karamazov, preserving her older style while fixing the mistakes she made. For a more modern translation, the other names above are all good for their respective titles.
For Tolstoy, he knew the Maudes personally, worked with them on their translation work, and approved of them personally. There are other occasional translations that may be preferable (Ann Dunnigan's War and Peace, for example), but the Maudes' work should always be a first consideration.
The trouble with Pevear and Volokhonsky is that their method is not as good as it's hyped up to be. Volokhonsky (whose English is poor) produces a very rough English gloss, and Pevear (who hasn't mastered Russian, as a matter of personal pride even) makes it grammatical. Despite appearances, this actually introduces an additional source of error and barrier to effective translation; one major issue with their work is that they often mangle idioms.
>>7566741
Yes, just get the Pevear translations.
I've heard good things about Oliver Ready's translation of C&P.
I prefer McDuff for Dostoevsky, but I'm perfectly happy with the P&V translations I have of the other big Russian authors.
>>7566763
I agree with this. Also, the OWC Kentish translations of Notes from the Underground and the Gambler are superb.
>>7566960
>Dunnigan's War and Peace
Never read it; where does it differ from the Maude translation?
>>7566960
All my Dostoevsky books are Garnett (C&P, Devils, TKB, Idiot), is it worth re-reading their best them in their best translations?
People recommend Fitzgerald, Lattimore, Pope and Fagles for the Illiad.
But I'm wondering what people think of Rieu? (Penguin Classics)
How does it compare and is it any good at all?
>>7567461
Am I the only one who liked the Garnett translation of Anna Karenina? It was good IMO
>>7567488
I would say that they're slightly easier to read and, personally, they helped me get into Russian literature, and plus the Wordsworth Classics are ridiculously cheap. They're good starting points.
>>7567488
Reads well but remember it lacks accuracy. Look for revised Garnett translations. I read the excellent Maude translation.
>>7567293
This everyone else is wrong.
>>7566741
>can we settle the translation debate right here, right now?
Nope.
Tolstoy: anthony Briggs for both w&p and AK
Dostoevsky: avesy for the Karamazov brothers, McDuff for crime and punishment.
I would avoid p&v altogether. They are only successful because of marketing. Reddit lovedTake the time and compare multiple translations. Sometimes it doesn't take more than the first sentence to realize one is better than the other.
Got McDuff for Crime and Punishment as /lit/ suggested
I swear to fuck if you sons of bitches lied I'm never taking your advice again
Avsey for the idiot
the correct answer is that it actually doesn't matter for 99.9% of the population, and if you need to ask on what translations are better instead of having the requisite knowledge to make your own decision, then it really doesn't matter for you.
Oliver Ready for C+P
Kids here don't know about it because it came out a couple of years ago.
>>7566741
>Ann Dunnigan
Did I fuck up??
Superior Gogol translation.
>>7568972
>signet
yea a little senpai
>>7566741
>definitive translators
kek
4chan hasn't decided yet what exactly it wants from a translator. Vis the poll:
http://strawpoll.me/5116627/r
>>7568917
This desu
What translation should I read for Demons?
>>7570017
I read Garnett's (inadequately titled The Possessed), and it was alright as far as I was able to determine, but if I were choosing today I would pick Magarshack's (The Devils).
>>7568965
I actually having this on my bookshelf as my next book to read. Having not read C+P yet I'm looking forward to this. I'm also surprised about the lack of coverage its had here on lit.
>>7571303
I read an excerpt and compared it to the p&v version at chapters... Wasn't really impressed, p&v seemed surprisingly better but I just read a small chunk
>>7571303
I've read translations by magarshack, mcduff, avsey, Garnett, p&v and Ready. Some books in more than one translation.
The Oliver ready translation is as good as any. I preferred it to p&v, but could not say which is more accurate since I'm not Russian.
For 90%+ of people, if you read any of the translators I mentioned you will be fine. There is not that much of a difference (the obvious exception being wicked/spiteful in notes).
>>7566960
Is it correct to say that Pevear and Volokhonsky translation really isn't that bad, and is in fact quiet good, yet it isn't obviously the best translation like some of the reviewers claim it is?
I read one version of crime and punishment and completely forgot the translator. Then I read it again and used Pevear and Volokhonsky's translation. The only downside I noticed with it was that the funeral dinner scene was a lot less comical in the P&V translation. I also didn't really like the final dream translation as much.
>>7572658
>Is it correct to say that Pevear and Volokhonsky translation really isn't that bad, and is in fact quiet good, yet it isn't obviously the best translation like some of the reviewers claim it is?
yes
>>7570017
Damn, translate does ruin the title.
I'm russian btw
I've been reading P&V's translation of Tolstoy's stories. Enjoying it immensely.
>>7572699
seconded i thought they were quite nice. superior to garnett.
>>7572696
So, what would you say is a good (or bad) way to translate Бecы?
>>7566741
>Definitive
>Translations
Unless the author approved of the translation or worked on it themselves, there are no definitive translations.
>>7574241
which makes the Maudes the definitive for Tolstoy's works
>>7575855
Don't be a smartass.
when is this "p&v is shit" meme going to die? someone linked an article 2 months ago and now everyone parrots the same opinion
>>7576488
At least he/she is smart and not being an ass.
>>7566741
Currently finishing Eugene Onegin.
I think Nabokov's translation is pretty damn good accuracy wise, but you lose the rhyme scheme. Apparently he spent like a decade making it, and wrote 3-4 volumes of annotations to accompany it.
I'd bet on him.
That said, seems like Russian (especially Pushkin) is really fucking hard to translate serviceable
Will someone please post the picture of the latest available edition of Crime and Punishment translated by David Magarshack?
>>7576733
Fucking Google it, jackass
Reminder that if you don't read the Garnett version of any Russian work, you're not reading the version lauded by the Western literary establishment from 1900-1990.
>>7566741
>Crime and Punishment
Ready
>War and Peace
Briggs
>Iliad
>Odyssey
Lombardo
suck my dick
How many of you lying faggots have actually read Oliver Readys translation?
>>7579468
>lying
Is this thread a joke to you?
>translation
Learn the language, moron.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEl59biItfY
>>7580354
No I refuse to. Deal with it fag.
>>7576507
>when is this "p&v is shit" meme going to die?
Can't speak for their other work, but I found their version of The Master and Margarita legitimately badly written.
Seamus Heaney's translation of Beowulf made me want to kill myself. Who's good for that?
Also, though I can't recall who it was right now, but I just threw out a shitty translation of Chaucer's Tales, and I'd like some recommendations on that as well.
Both books had the original text alongside the translation, though, which is a pretty decent feature.
>>7581551
For Chaucer, just get one with a good glossary -- once you get the gist of it there's no need for a translation.
>>7579424
>sick my dick
Makes sense, only a faggot would read those translations
>>7582691
interesting, but Tolstoy was from a different time. Having the profanity translated unhindered today is probably not much of a translation issue
