I’m so far behind with blog postings that I am only now writing up my notes from a translation panel that to my mind was one of the highlights of this year’s PEN World Voices Festival: the inimitable Rosanna Warren moderating a discussion between Jonathan Galassi – president of Farrar, Straus & Giroux and also a translator and poet – and Joachim Sartorius, a prominent German translator-poet who has a diplomatic career behind him and for the past decade has served as director of the huge festival Berliner Festspiele. The panel, held at the New York Public Library, was ostensibly devoted to a discussion of Galassi’s new/old translations of Giacomo Leopardi’s Canti (“new”
because the book came out just last fall; “old” because Galassi says he began translating Leopardi at age 23). But by the end of the panel, the discussion had ranged far beyond the work of any one poet.
– the level of thought/thinking and philosophy
– cultural context
If you’re lucky, Sartorius says, you can capture 2 or maybe 3 of these 4 levels in any given translation of Stevens’ work.
JA: I can’t remember.
But in the end, Ashbery – who doesn’t know German – did wind up participating in the translation of his poems. Sartorius would read him the lines of the German translation, and the two would discuss the musical properties of the lines. For Galassi, this process recalls what he refers to as “rhythmic equivalence” in poetry translation: “You can replicate the movement of the sentences” he says, since poetry has a “rhythmic subtext that is translatable.” This subtext, he believes, “provides the baseline for a successful translation.” For Rosanna Warren the baseline is even more basic: she describes poetry translation as “an exercise in recombinant DNA.”
In the Q&A, both Galassi and Sartorius reported that their own development as poets was influenced by their translation activity. In Galassi’s case, Leopardi entered his writing life when he was still quite young. He says he always did translations as a way of “doing poetry,” and was always conscious of the need to create poems that worked as objects in their own right in English – “faithful, but not too faithful.” For Sartorius, too, translating a poem always meant writing a poem, but he cited a much more specific influence that translating Ashbery’s work had on him: it helped him move from abstract formalism to what he describes as a more “relaxed” mode of writing related to parlando that made him “more narrative and easy-going” in his work. As for the rest, he declared that translation is the best training a poet can have. And this is something I tell my students all the time.