From a strictly prose perspective, is Dostoyevsky a bad writer, or am I just reading a shit translation?
I've read all Dosto's major works, translated by P&V, and I got deeply involved with his characters and themes, but I always found his prose to be incredibly rambling, like he was writing insistently in a fever, without much structure. I've heard mixed things on P&V, so perhaps that's the reason why it feels that way?
I've started reading Tolstoy--finished Ivan Illych and 50 pages into Anna Karenina--and I'm already enjoying them ten times more than Dostoyevsky because the writing is far more crisp, clear and direct. The translator is Joel Carmichael.
TL,DR: Is Dostoyevsky's prose shit compared to Tolstoy's or am I just reading shit translations?
>>7776265
The P&V prose for Dostoevsky and Tolstoy are pretty much exactly the same thing
you probably just have some sort of acute internal bias, not to be offensive of course, we all do
human condition, motherfucka
I think you're right in saying that it's easier to read Tolstoy. Reading Dostoyevsky is also enjoyable but a lot of the dialogue feels autistic. His delivery is also scattered.
>>7776337
>The P&V prose for Tolstoy
>The translator is Joel Carmichael.
>>7776265
I've only read P+V's Master and Margarita, but most of it was shockingly badly written.
On the other hand I remember people saying Dosty isn't famous for his prose.
>>7776347
woops, that's what I get for not reading the whole post
my bad, brother
>P&V
You might as well eat dog shite.
>>7776265
dosto prose is shit since he was writing a lot and quickly for money
>>7776265
On the one hand, Tolstoy would probably be said to be a better prose stylist than Dostoyevsky. To some extent Dostoyevsky presented in a more stark manner.
On the other hand, Pevear and Volokhonsky are not as good as they are marketed/hyped to be. Neither of them is fluent in both languages, as is the case with individual translators (and as was the case with the married Tolstoy translators Aylmer and Louise Maude), and that fact introduces a source of error not usually present in translators. Also, their guiding principle in translation is a wooden literalness that, when held too rigidly (as they do), interferes with conveying the spirit of a text in translation.
>>7776446
Nice meme Frank.
Dostovesky only has one novel where his prose is decent, and that is Crime and Punishment. And only because the prose matches Raskolnikov's psychological condition.
I think with Dostovesky, novel bloats exponentially when he decides to cover more shit. The Brothers Karamazov being the worst for it, going over and over things once, twice, three times. Having a conversation, talking about the conversation, talking about the talk. And going over every tiny detail of the crime that took place a second timein the courthouse.
Constance Garnett.
>>7776450
Damn this is one constructive comment right here
I've read The Idiot and TBK, both translated by P&V, and C&P, in French (can't remember the translator, the edition is Pleiade though), and I must say I do find that I agree with you: I found a lot more 'magic' in my reading of C&P than in the former two, the words felt a lot more 'alive'
>>7776552
Don't use quotes like that.
>>7776556
Why don't you 'blow' me
Is it true that Dostoevsky spoke what would be written and his wife or something actually "wrote" the novel?
How would this work? Wouldn't he have to be very specific about the punctuation and stuff. Why not just write it himself instead of speaking it.
OK GUYS LET'S SETTLE THIS:
WHO IS THE BEST TRANSLATOR FOR DOSTOEVSKY'S WORKS?
>>7776586
P&V
>>7776589
This.
>>7776565
Yes, he dictated it to his wife. She was a professional so she probably understood what he wanted, or he read it quickly after she wrote it down. It let him write ~25 pages a day when he was really into it, and saved him from losing the rights to his works for 7 years by finishing The Gambler in no time at all.
>>7776586
I like Garnett
>>7776552
I am Brazilian and for a long time we only had Dostoevsky's works translated from French.
Since the 2000's some translators have translated directly from the original and it's kind of unanimous how the French "poticize" too much Dostoevsky.
These new translators hate how it sound in French so they've been trying to avoid that.
I have never read P&V, just saying that maybe you just don't like Dostoevsky's prose.
>>7776655
poeticize*
>>7776655
> translating translations
Wtf I've seriously never come across this, is this common? I mean I understand it might happen for languages that not that widely spoken, but Portuguese? They couldn't find anyone who spoke both Portuguese and Russian?
>>7776265
Slavic languages translate like shit in English.
But Tolstoy is a bit better in terms of prose.
Dostoevsky is still the undisputed master of dialogue.
>>7776696
Yes, unfortunately it is very common. The only Hamsun's work we have is translated from French, too (Hunger, translated by Carlos Drummond de Andrade - which is a decent translation). There are a loGerman authors and Russian authors who are translated from either English or German.
It's been changing throughout the last years, though. But it's still pretty sad. For a long time we didn't have Plato's Dialogue translated directly from the original. It's a scandal, a shitty country.
PS: Also, Portugal doesn't help very much.
>>7776758
A lot of German authors*
either English or French**
>>7776586
The answer to that might differ somewhat based on what someone is looking for. Here are some thoughts on some better translators of Dostoyevsky:
* Constance Garnett: There are some serious issues with her translation work, but it must be said that her wording has a really pleasing flow to it (cf. the 'literary' quality of the prose in the King James Version of the Bible vs. newer translations) and a feel that's less modern and more of the time the original works were written. Having said that, Garnett worked really quickly, making mistakes or skipping parts she didn't understand. In addition, she imposed her own sensibilities on the text, making changes and even adding when she saw fit. Because of all this, her work homogenizes the various authors and works she translated. One option that I highly recommend is Ralph Matlaw's revision of her translation of The Brothers Karamazov.
* David Magarshack: Another earlier translator, his work also has a more 'vintage' feel, but I would say he was a more careful translator than Garnett was.
* Andrew MacAndrew: I really liked his translation of Karamazov as one I would characterize as more 'modern'. It's fairly loose but still faithful to the spirit, and is still fresh today.
* David McDuff: One of the big names when it comes to recent translations. His translations are fairly definititive. I will say though that I've seen some (not major) issues from what I've seen so far of his Karamazov. I'd still recommend him though.
* Ignat Avsey: was a Russian lit professor iirc and focused exclusively on Dostoyevsky for his translation work. He used The Karamazov Brothers as the title of his translation, differing from the wooden word order that's been around since Garnett.
* Jane Kentish: A recent translator whose Notes from Underground and The Gambler was published by Oxford World Classics. I've only looked briefly at her work so far, but I like what I've seen.
* Oliver Ready: I haven't looked much at his recent translation of Crime and Punishment, but it is highly regarded.
The Russian language is a caveman language.
>>7776696
It used to be common in 19th century europe too. Many works were translated into German from French translations and vice versa
>>7776265
>From a strictly prose perspective
>seperating form from content
Mein gott!
>>7776696
Arguably the greatest work of SF, Solaris by Stanisław Lem, was for a long time only available in English as a double translation via French. I would agree with >>7776655 >>7776667 about this work being highly 'poeticized' in the process (to the extent of things like numbers being rounded off to like the nearest 500 for no apparent treason). I've suspected after reading the newer direct translation that the French intermediary translation was the culprit (the resultant English translation really is like a blurry Monet in comparison) but haven't gotten hold of it to check firsthand. I can't help but wonder what the deal is there, whether one can point a finger at a romantic dreaminess in the French psyche or something.
I've read MacAndrew TBK, Garnett (revised) C&P, P&V The Idiot and The Double.
I enjoyed them all. P&V translation of The Double is noticeably jarring, but I really enjoyed it that way, I think it was meant to be like that. The Idiot reads much smoother.
Anyways, don't get so hung up on translation, they are all quite good.
Garnett
>On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged
Pee&Vee
>At the beginning of July, during an extremely hot spell, towards evening, a young man left the closet in which he rented
Magarshak
>On a very hot evening at the beginning of July a young man left his little room at the top of a house
fucking magarshak
>>7776940
And you tell me what looks more like what Dostoevsky actually wrote
>>7776953
so P&V then?
>>7776958
Yes, clearly. If you want a literal translation, it seems to be the obvious choice.
How is McDuffs translation and prose
He's the one guy you fags suggested for me, I swear if you're memeing
I'm so glad I live in a country with only 1-2 decent translations of every russian book so I don't have to deal with this bullshit
>>7776970
They're not memeing, it's a great translation, it's just a bit wordier.
>>7776970
how did mcduff translate little room at the top of a house?
>>7776990
This is McDuff. Looks quite good.
>>7776265
>like he was writing insistently in a fever
Have you not noticed that many of his characters border on insane? They even talk about coming down with "brain fever" or being in hysterics.
>>7776801
I had no idea Garnett's translation was of such low quality.
At least that gives me another reason to reread TBK.
His prose fits perfectly with his characters. Purple prose isn't the only valuable aesthetic style when writing, f.am
Ignoring most of what's said above, but i've read C&P, TBK and the Notes in Dutch translations. I'm now reading the P&V translation of Demons and i feel like it's worse than the Dutch translations. Maybe i'm biased towards my native language, but i have been able to read Moby Dick in English so it's not that i'm just unable to comprehend or properly understand the prose..
Have any of you had similar experiences? (Typing this on my phone while shitting, excuse my probable mistakes.)
>>7777022
It's not as bad as it sounds, keep in mind it was studied in universities for decades too. Yes, that was quite a while ago, but still.
>>7777027
As has been said already, P&V are very literal translators. You are reading closer to how Dost. actually wrote now.
>>7776940
>the closet in which he rented
Wut. Please tell me that's not what it actually says.
Of those three I give it to Garnett.
>>7776801
and Tolstoy? what's the general consensus, or your personal preference, on his translators?
>>7776953
>came out of his closet
>>7777089
hahaha it was a pretty tiny room
>>7777060
>You are reading closer to how Dost. actually wrote
Eh, that's pretty debatable. They might translate word-for-word more literally, but if the result is really stilted English and the original isn't in really stilted Russian then it's not really how the author actually wrote it.
E.g. a really literal word-for-word translation of the Daodejing might start 'Way can way, not constant Way, name can name not constant name', but the original Chinese doesn't actually sound dumb as hell.
>>7777088
I don't mean the closet, I mean 'in which he rented'. Is that even grammatical? 'Rent' sounds bizarre without an object.
>>7777112
>a young man left the closet he rented from tenants
I copy pasted the wrong one
>>7777100
i thought that debate had ended long ago with word-for-word translations concluded as inferior. i really don't think it's really debatable anymore, but i guess there's always a cloud out there for old men to yell at.
>>7776265
Nah fy-fy's prose is pretty shit. Most people's are when they're written in a rush. P&V are also pretty shit despite their popularity. My vote's on MacAndrew or McDuff.
