Classics and the Western Canon discussion
The Magic Mountain
>
Reading Schedule
date
newest »
newest »
Jan wrote: "This is my kind of book group and my kind of book. Ever since I took four years of high school German (100 years ago) from my MOST favorite teacher ever, I have absolutely adored the limited works..."And we're delighted to have you! Look for the first discussion threads on the Magic Mountain to be posted on Wednesday (or maybe Tuesday evening here on the West Coast so they'll be ready for East Coasters before I'm even awake. As for Europeans or our other friends around the world, well, my brain doesn't do time zones very well!
I'm really looking forward to visiting The Magic Mountain again. I find second readings of books like this always better than the first. Also I was lucky enough to visit the Swiss alps at xmas time so it's going to be great!
Peter wrote: "I'm really looking forward to visiting The Magic Mountain again. I find second readings of books like this always better than the first. Also I was lucky enough to visit the Swiss alps at xmas time..."I agree that second readings of books are a very different, and often better, experience than first readings.
And we'll be looking forward to your first-hand analysis of the scenes in the Alps. Did you take any photos to post when we get to those parts?
Everyman wrote: "Peter wrote: "I'm really looking forward to visiting The Magic Mountain again. I find second readings of books like this always better than the first. Also I was lucky enough to visit the Swiss alp..."Yes! I will trawl through them. This book was very much in my mind while I was there.
Peter wrote: "Yes! I will trawl through them. This book was very much in my mind while I was there. ..."Peter -- look forward to your photos!
For those with an hour to indulge, this train ride through Switzerland may be enjoyable (I suggest full screen):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APY-m9...
It is based on a 1913 travel book, so reflects train travel in the same time period as our book, prior to WWI.
Lily wrote: "For those with an hour to indulge, this train ride through Switzerland may be enjoyable (I suggest full screen):"Great find!
I'm going to post a thread for resources, so you might to post it there, too.
Lily,As it happens, I did have an hour to indulge, and what a delightful hour it was. Thank you!
Jan
Jan wrote: "...As it happens, I did have an hour to indulge, and what a delightful hour it was. Thank you!..."Jan, so glad you enjoyed it! I have actually watched it at least twice (when I first learned of it and again now) -- and not a habit of mine for lengthy videos. Our thanks chain, too, to a Goodreads poster on another board who brought it to my attention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APY-m9...
I am reading the Lowe-Porter translation while perusing the "modern" Woods translation. Woods is smoother in style, but seems a bit off for some reason. Lowe-Porter is a bit more convoluted, but has more of an old-fashioned style. Personally, Lowe-Porter pulls me in a bit more even though my copy is bruised and yellowing (like myself), but I wish I could read it in the original German..... Any German reader here that can comment on the flow of the translation compared to the original? I am all ears!!!!
I don't qualify as a German reader.
But I read that Mann knew English and personally approved the Lowe-Porter translation.
Sorry, I don't recall the source of that info.
But I read that Mann knew English and personally approved the Lowe-Porter translation.
Sorry, I don't recall the source of that info.
E-man: I am confused about where we are in the schedule. Are we limited to discussion only through "breakfast" or can we go all the way through "one word too many?"
For the first week, I posted three threads, since I thought there were three fairly distinct scenes -- HC's trip and arrival, his historical background, and his first day at the Sanatorium, and I though it would help to keep the discussions separate. Did people like this approach, or would they have preferred a single thread for the week?
For next week, there aren't the same clear separate scenes, with one somewhat exception, but there do seem to be several somewhat distinct areas for discussion. I'm wondering whether to post one or several threads. If anybody has a clear preference, particularly those who have finished next week's reading, I will be glad to consider it (but no spoilers in your justification for your choice, if you choose to explain your reasons, please).
I liked your approach.
I have read through "Table Talk."
I think there is way too much information for a single thread.
I have read through "Table Talk."
I think there is way too much information for a single thread.
I have no problem with your approach Everyman. And appreciated your efforts to explain the format. I got confused because I thought I saw a comment about Satana which is after the breakfast chapter.
Going forward, if you list the name of the chapter (within the larger chapter),I am sure it will be fine.
Glad to see the discussion off to such a good start.
Going forward, if you list the name of the chapter (within the larger chapter),I am sure it will be fine.
Glad to see the discussion off to such a good start.
Guilty.
Sorry.
Apologies.
I'll be more careful.
Sorry.
Apologies.
I'll be more careful.
Oh Adelle! I'm sorry. I wasn't pointing fingers. And I agree that there is so much information that breaking up the threads is probably best.
That said, for Everyman's consideration, I have also noted that posts about certain issues is appearing in multiple threads at the same time.
Glad I am not moderating this beast!
That said, for Everyman's consideration, I have also noted that posts about certain issues is appearing in multiple threads at the same time.
Glad I am not moderating this beast!
Adelle wrote: "I don't qualify as a German reader.But I read that Mann knew English and personally approved the Lowe-Porter translation.
Sorry, I don't recall the source of that info."
Thanks Adelle! I wasn't aware of Mann's views on any translation.
Well, maybe it's a mixed bag. I tried re-googling to see if I couldn't re-find the source. I didn't. But it was something along the lines of "Helen Lowe-Porter, Thomas Mann's lifelong English translator--and friend [has been maligned for errors...] but it is well known that she and Mann worked hand in hand as far as her translations of his works went--and Mann, after all, did speak English"
from articles.chicagotribune.com/1995
I see now, however, that wikipedia says that Lowe-Porter "was not Mann's first choice as translator" but was chosen by the American publisher.
wikipedia then adds: "Mann did express his appreciation to Lowe-Porter for her work, nicknaming her "die Lowe," but also added the caveat "insofar as my linguistic knowledge suffices".
So...
from articles.chicagotribune.com/1995
I see now, however, that wikipedia says that Lowe-Porter "was not Mann's first choice as translator" but was chosen by the American publisher.
wikipedia then adds: "Mann did express his appreciation to Lowe-Porter for her work, nicknaming her "die Lowe," but also added the caveat "insofar as my linguistic knowledge suffices".
So...
I just compared two passages of Lowe-Porter's translation which is onlinehttp://de.scribd.com/doc/31583019/Tho...
and my German copy of the MM.
One passage with no spoken words and
one dialogue with Settembrini.
Well ... without spoken words it was acceptable, the flow was there, too, but I had the feeling that in English it sounds strange to have longer sentences.
It is difficult in English to translate long and nested German sentences. And Thomas Mann is known for nested sentences even among Germans. Last year I made a translation of one of my own books into English with an American translator, and we often set a period where in German there was a comma. (With a text book this may be ok.)
The Settembrini dialogue was worse. Keeping the liveliness and spontaneity of spoken words is more difficult, of course. But Lowe-Porter missed even to imitate a play of words. It is page 81 (German 158), where Hans Castorp "could not recall saying anything of the sort". Well, in the German version there is at least a similarity in his words some lines above, in the translation it is gone. So the reader cannot follow how playful the words of Settembrini really are.
What to do? I just suggest to learn German! So many important works of Literature, Philosophy, etc. are German in original ... and it is a good exercise to learn Latin and Greek, later ;-)
I keep changing between the original and Lowe-Porter. But that is mainly because I much prefer reading EPUB on electronic paper to PDF on an Ipad. The difference between both text is considerable, the German clearly being much richer (as might be expected). Other than that I would not dare to comment. Just one little thing: the Tienappel boys have English names. Or at least James has (Peter would be the same).
Lol. So...;) I should learn Italian for Divine Comedy; Russian for Tolstoy; and English for Henry James ;) ?
Ah, that would be wonderul!
Lol. I love Henry James.
Well, here's the thing. I like reading the Constance Gardner (spelling?) translations. Lowe-Porter has somewhat of the same feel to me.
[I took four years of German in school, but ... There's a good deal of truth in that saying "Use it or lose it.")
Ah, that would be wonderul!
Lol. I love Henry James.
Well, here's the thing. I like reading the Constance Gardner (spelling?) translations. Lowe-Porter has somewhat of the same feel to me.
[I took four years of German in school, but ... There's a good deal of truth in that saying "Use it or lose it.")
Adelle wrote: "Lol. So...;) I should learn Italian for Divine Comedy; Russian for Tolstoy; and English for Henry James ;) ? Yes, you should learn all those. And then of course there is the Japanse and Chinese epics!!!! *coughs loudly*
I also like Constance Garnett even though it seems like her star is no longer as high over the horizon as it used to be. I still gravitate towards her in the Russian classics over the newer translations. There is something about her choice of words and sentence structures that I find appealing.
Regardless, I am fluent in two languages and would definitely agree with Thorwald's sentiment. I got rid of all the translations as soon as I mastered the language as I realized that they never were up to par with the original language. E.g. James or Dickens just cannot be translated, but I think it holds true for all works (especially poetry) with exception for tax documents. Ha ha!
I took German for four years as well, but it is too rusty for attempting Mann. This thread reminds me that I need to tackle the German language further (and with French and Spanish waving their hands in the distance). The original language weaves its own spell which never can be surpassed.
Haaze wrote: "Yes, you should learn all those. And then of course there is the Japanse and Chinese epics!!!! *coughs loudly*"After, of course, you have learned Greek to read Homer, Hesoid, et. al., Latin to read Virgil, Plutarch, Cicero, Ovid, and on and on. And maybe Persian to read Gilgamesh in the original. And Olde English to read Beowulf.
Those, with the ones you mentioned, should give you a start on reading the greatest literature in the originals. But only a start. [g]
As one who is not good with languages, I am feeling a little discomfort with an assumption in this conversation. All of us here, as readers, value language deeply. Part of that means that we believe, or at least want to believe, that there is, or at least can be, a proper word for every thing.
This discussion about translations seems to assume that this is impossible. Even a reasonably "straight forward" narrative cannot be rendered acceptably in translation.
And, if this is the case with languages that have common roots, how much more dire is the situation with non western languages?
My purpose is not to lead us into the "music expresses things words cannot" direction. I think music may be even more ambiguous than language.
But it is kind of depressing to realize the extent to which we still live with the Tower of Babel.
This discussion about translations seems to assume that this is impossible. Even a reasonably "straight forward" narrative cannot be rendered acceptably in translation.
And, if this is the case with languages that have common roots, how much more dire is the situation with non western languages?
My purpose is not to lead us into the "music expresses things words cannot" direction. I think music may be even more ambiguous than language.
But it is kind of depressing to realize the extent to which we still live with the Tower of Babel.
Zeke wrote: "...But it is kind of depressing to realize the extent to which we still live with the Tower of Babel...."Actually, I find it kind of wonderful! It seems to me we are dealing here with the incredible ability of the human mind to perceive and to communicate subtle ideas and discernment about this marvelous planet, its inhabitants, and out into the universe.
Additional ramblings about translations and languages: (view spoiler)
Zeke wrote: " All of us here, as readers, value language deeply. Part of that means that we believe, or at least want to believe, that there is, or at least can be, a proper word for every thing."Ah, but even when we are speaking the same language, we often perceive it differently! If we didn't, there would be no point in discussing literature. Everything would be crystal clear and beyond the need for questioning, explanation, interpretation, etc.
Zeke wrote: "This discussion about translations seems to assume that this is impossible. Even a reasonably "straight forward" narrative cannot be rendered acceptably in translation."I don't agree, or at least if that's your view we have different ideas of "acceptably."
There will be subtleties which can't be translated precisely, that's true. But OTOH, even in an English work, you and I will take different views of the same word. Your view and mine of "honor," for example, may be quite different. Or of "love."
I agree that it is impossible to precisely reflect the words of one language into another. But I think a good translator can represent the feelings, ideas, thoughts, events, of a work very acceptably into another language.
Maybe even better -- I remember one of the tutors at St. John's telling me that many German philosophers learned English so that they could read Kant in Smith's translation because his ideas were clearer in translation than in the original.
Everyman wrote: "There will be subtleties which can't be translated precisely, that's true. But OTOH, even in an English work, you and I will take different views of the same word. Your view and mine of "honor," for example, may be quite different. Or of "love." "Excellent point. We cannot adequately define justice, or knowledge, or virtue, as Plato has shown, and yet we still believe these things exist. And they exist in all languages.
I think the problem of translation is one of trust. It is good to be critical about translation, because it must be competent and objective. But if a translation is reasonably faithful (and reasonably readable in the target language) then the discussion can continue.
I love long, challenging, finely nuanced, and epic-like novels. The longer the better. To me, books are like relationships--I feel such a sense of loss when they are over. (Although occasionally it's good riddance.) And the fact that it's set in a sanatarium high in the Swiss Alps--to die for! (so to speak) Oozing with German romanticism. I love it.
I very much appreciate this group. You guys are awesome.
Jan