Welcome to the IB Community Weblog

Some random questions I try to answer every once in a while.

18. Pevear argues that the works in 17 above are not “definitive translations” but “works in themselves.” Discuss.

Pevear's argument that the works which have endured all these years are not simply translations, but are works in themselves, is justified. Translating a piece of text exactly while maintaining the original work at the same time is a work, or an art rather, in itself. Any translator who can achieve such a high degree of perfection in a translation may be regarded as a writer himself. His work is therefore a work in itself, although the fact still remains that his work is based on the work of an other individual. Any talented translator will know about the numerous obstacles and problematic situations that come across during the translation process. For example, while trying to convey metaphors, similes, idioms, etc., it often becomes quite an arduous task for the translator to maintain the same sense as that intended by the original author. Each language has its own set of rules and own set of literary and stylistic devices. This varied difference between any two given languages is the root cause of all problems encountered by translators. If in spite of all these predicaments the translator manages to convey exactly what the original author had meant in an entirely distinct language or dialect, he has definitely achieved something significant worthy of notice, and his work is indeed to be appreciated. Pevear's argument hence, without question, holds true that long-enduring translations are not merely "definitive translations,” but are undeniably "works in themselves."

19. What does utopian mean? How are translations (and all human efforts to communicate) utopian?

One would probably be faced with a considerably demanding task at hand if he tried to define 'utopia' in a single sentence. To put it into a nutshell, 'utopia' can be thought as the factor that governs why we do the things we do, and why we choose do it in that particular fashion. Perhaps a brief description of a Utopian order would be one in which everything and everyone is in perfect balance and harmony with one another. A 'utopian' deed would be one that is best in terms of the community at that given point in time. Utopianism may be characterized by perfect-doing and by error-free work. A utopianist—strictly in a communicative sense—would be one who puts effort into speaking perfectly, or in other words, one who aspires to convey exactly what he thinks without flaw. Translators who strive to be utopianists in their work would ideally aim to deliver a xerox-copy of the original writer's idea and thought. Utopian translators would try to retain as much from the original work, rather than brewing minute modifications here and there, just to make their translation seem "nice.” Consequently, such a "utopian" translation could potentially be called a "perfect'" translation, or one which is ideal and best suited to the prevailing time and and its associated culture. This kind of "utopian" translation is perhaps what all translators vie to reproduce in their works.

Some are successful. Others never quite get there.