What do you think?
Rate this book
Beowulf: A Translation
Many modern Beowulf translations, while excellent in their own ways, suffer from what Kathleen Biddick might call “melancholy” for an oral and aural way of poetic making. By and large, they tend to preserve certain familiar features of Anglo-Saxon verse as it has been constructed by editors, philologists, and translators: the emphasis on caesura and alliteration, with diction and syntax smoothed out for readability. The problem with, and the paradox of this desired outcome, especially as it concerns Anglo-Saxon poetry, is that we are left with a document that translates an entire organizing principle based on oral transmission (and perhaps composition) into a visual, textual realm of writing and reading. The sense of loss or nostalgia for the old form seems a necessary and ever-present shadow over modern Beowulfs.
What happens, however, when a contemporary poet, quite simply, doesn’t bother with any such nostalgia? When the entire organizational apparatus of the poem—instead of being uneasily approximated in modern verse form—is itself translated into a modern organizing principle, i.e., the visual text? This is the approach that poet Thomas Meyer takes.
What happens, however, when a contemporary poet, quite simply, doesn’t bother with any such nostalgia? When the entire organizational apparatus of the poem—instead of being uneasily approximated in modern verse form—is itself translated into a modern organizing principle, i.e., the visual text? This is the approach that poet Thomas Meyer takes.
312 pages, Paperback
First published August 25, 2012
3 people are currently reading
39 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
October 19, 2012
Anyone who sets out to review a translation of Beowulf, should at least be honest about the assumptions underwriting their reaction. So there are basically two orientations:
1) There is only one 'Beowulf' and it is written down in a language called Old English (or Anglo-Saxon) and exists in a sole copy.
2) There was a story about a character called Beowulf, and one version of that story was recorded by a scribe in OE.
If you believe in #1 then any translation is a doomed failure to ‘reproduce’ the Original. The translation will be assessed in terms of its “fidelity”. The irony is that the only people who can judge the translation on these grounds, and to whom this matters, are people who don’t need the translation. They are sometimes prepared to die on the barricades of their own hard won expertise rather than admit the translator’s choice of adjective in line 2,356 is acceptable. They worry about 'hwaet'.
But the only way to know Beowulf #1 is to learn the language it’s written in. Then you encounter this marvellous, awkward, alien thing that challenges modern concepts of poetry and poem.
The problem with Beowulf #1 is that it makes no sense. There was a story about someone called Beowulf, and one version of it was recorded by the scribe. It wasn’t the only version and given what we know about scribal practices the scribe’s copying of the poem is as much a performance as the performer’s. Nor was there an “original version” or “correct version” to uncover and be faithful to.
So translating Beowulf#2, you are simply retelling a story, and finding apt ways to do it.
Which bring me to Meyer’s 'Beowulf', written very much with Pound standing godfather to the process and according to Meyer, Bunting looking over his shoulder.
I think it's full of marvels.
The translation comes with a hefty lagging of “Critical apparatus”. A longish essay called “Relocating Beowulf” (no, they are not excavating his barrow) which I think the translation doesn’t need. It should stand or fall, in Pound’s school of translation, on its virtues as a poem n English. However, the interview with Meyer, shuffled to the end of the book, is illuminating.
And then there’s the translation. The Big B gets a makeover. The typographical pyrotechnics in the first section are what you notice first. No great slabs of even lines, but words jammed and jarring all around the page. I’m too cynical not to think that typography is vastly overrated. But it’s a approach which needs considering carefully.
What I think is most impressive and original is the last section, which Myer titles “Homelands”. Several things are happening: the repetition in the Anglo-Saxon where Beowulf returns then gives his version of his activities has been stripped out. Thank you.
Instead Myer inserts a short folk story about how Beowulf got his name, and whether the story is genuine folk tale or invention, as his poet says, A good story is/A good story.
The typography settles down in this last section to the point where it looks like you’re reading a sequence of short poems. Unlike most translations where seemingly unending slabs of text fill page after page, Myer breaks it up into short “poems”. This tightens and condenses, but he also juxtaposes them with very brief pieces on opposite pages or on their reverse. Two words or four words, split across two lines set up a dialogue with the fragments that face or precede them.
This I think will reward careful consideration.
The main gain in the final section is to focus the last part on Beowulf’s fight with the dragon. Both Beowulf and the reader know he’s going to be cooked. The poem reminds of this several times. We’re back with Medieval heroism; defeat is inevitable, its how you deal with it that defines your heroism. Wiglaf is still heroic, the Warband still reluctant.
So, it's useless if you're looking for a crib, but as a poem, and as a commentary on the poetry of the OE version, I think it will repay rereading and consideration. It remains to be seen how well the first part stands up in comparison with the last.
1) There is only one 'Beowulf' and it is written down in a language called Old English (or Anglo-Saxon) and exists in a sole copy.
2) There was a story about a character called Beowulf, and one version of that story was recorded by a scribe in OE.
If you believe in #1 then any translation is a doomed failure to ‘reproduce’ the Original. The translation will be assessed in terms of its “fidelity”. The irony is that the only people who can judge the translation on these grounds, and to whom this matters, are people who don’t need the translation. They are sometimes prepared to die on the barricades of their own hard won expertise rather than admit the translator’s choice of adjective in line 2,356 is acceptable. They worry about 'hwaet'.
But the only way to know Beowulf #1 is to learn the language it’s written in. Then you encounter this marvellous, awkward, alien thing that challenges modern concepts of poetry and poem.
The problem with Beowulf #1 is that it makes no sense. There was a story about someone called Beowulf, and one version of it was recorded by the scribe. It wasn’t the only version and given what we know about scribal practices the scribe’s copying of the poem is as much a performance as the performer’s. Nor was there an “original version” or “correct version” to uncover and be faithful to.
So translating Beowulf#2, you are simply retelling a story, and finding apt ways to do it.
Which bring me to Meyer’s 'Beowulf', written very much with Pound standing godfather to the process and according to Meyer, Bunting looking over his shoulder.
I think it's full of marvels.
The translation comes with a hefty lagging of “Critical apparatus”. A longish essay called “Relocating Beowulf” (no, they are not excavating his barrow) which I think the translation doesn’t need. It should stand or fall, in Pound’s school of translation, on its virtues as a poem n English. However, the interview with Meyer, shuffled to the end of the book, is illuminating.
And then there’s the translation. The Big B gets a makeover. The typographical pyrotechnics in the first section are what you notice first. No great slabs of even lines, but words jammed and jarring all around the page. I’m too cynical not to think that typography is vastly overrated. But it’s a approach which needs considering carefully.
What I think is most impressive and original is the last section, which Myer titles “Homelands”. Several things are happening: the repetition in the Anglo-Saxon where Beowulf returns then gives his version of his activities has been stripped out. Thank you.
Instead Myer inserts a short folk story about how Beowulf got his name, and whether the story is genuine folk tale or invention, as his poet says, A good story is/A good story.
The typography settles down in this last section to the point where it looks like you’re reading a sequence of short poems. Unlike most translations where seemingly unending slabs of text fill page after page, Myer breaks it up into short “poems”. This tightens and condenses, but he also juxtaposes them with very brief pieces on opposite pages or on their reverse. Two words or four words, split across two lines set up a dialogue with the fragments that face or precede them.
This I think will reward careful consideration.
The main gain in the final section is to focus the last part on Beowulf’s fight with the dragon. Both Beowulf and the reader know he’s going to be cooked. The poem reminds of this several times. We’re back with Medieval heroism; defeat is inevitable, its how you deal with it that defines your heroism. Wiglaf is still heroic, the Warband still reluctant.
So, it's useless if you're looking for a crib, but as a poem, and as a commentary on the poetry of the OE version, I think it will repay rereading and consideration. It remains to be seen how well the first part stands up in comparison with the last.
July 31, 2013
Let me just start off by saying that this should not be anyone's only Beowulf. Meyer himself says so. But, if you're already familiar with the classic, well, what can I say? The ebook is free and the POD version is worth every penny.
I'll also lead off by saying that postmodern poetry has always kind of baffled me, so I'm not qualified to discuss the poetics of this translation in any detail. I just sort of have to go with the flow, knowing the story, having poked at the original language here and there.
All that said, this is a tremendously fun and accessible version. Meyer's decision to break up the forms, setting off different sections in different styles, keeps the story moving nicely. He cuts and condenses intelligently, pruning the story for today's readers. And as a second (or, in my case, third) translation, his decisions about what to emphasize (and how to emphasize it) creates a fascinating commentary on the original.
I'll also lead off by saying that postmodern poetry has always kind of baffled me, so I'm not qualified to discuss the poetics of this translation in any detail. I just sort of have to go with the flow, knowing the story, having poked at the original language here and there.
All that said, this is a tremendously fun and accessible version. Meyer's decision to break up the forms, setting off different sections in different styles, keeps the story moving nicely. He cuts and condenses intelligently, pruning the story for today's readers. And as a second (or, in my case, third) translation, his decisions about what to emphasize (and how to emphasize it) creates a fascinating commentary on the original.
March 31, 2018
One of the all-time Geats.
A translation that won’t put you to sleep.
A translation that won’t put you to sleep.
September 27, 2018
This is my favorite translation of Beowulf ever. Fluid, riveting, contemporary, and startlingly bold.
November 12, 2012
Another struggle. Epic poetry, eh.
Again, when I got myself in the right head space, it slotted into place in my head right alongside The Hobbit. It's enough to make me want to learn Old English so I can have that 'alien experience' so often cited.
But I wasn't in that space often enough. I'm going to put this into the re-read pile and come back to it when I haven't put pressure on myself to read 50 books in a calendar year.
Again, when I got myself in the right head space, it slotted into place in my head right alongside The Hobbit. It's enough to make me want to learn Old English so I can have that 'alien experience' so often cited.
But I wasn't in that space often enough. I'm going to put this into the re-read pile and come back to it when I haven't put pressure on myself to read 50 books in a calendar year.
April 9, 2013
Simply brilliant!
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews