/lit/ - Literature

bumping because i'm gonna read TBK soon as well

>>5030546
P&V is good, garnett is very dated.

>>5030546
what's the matter with the garnett version OP? you scoundrel! you wisp of tow!

I thought it was revealed that P&V being critially acclaimed was really shilling ?

Hate to break it to you, but Dostoevsky isn't lauded for his prose style. Critics appreciate the themes and structure of his work, but they're quick to say he's "sloppy." It doesn't matter what translation you read, you won't have the same epiphanic prose as you would find in superior prose writers.

>>5030649
Sauce?

>>5030686
>>5030649
Found it:
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/01/the-pevearvolokhonsky-hype-machine-and-how-it-could-have-been-stopped-or-at-least-slowed-down/

>>5030686
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-pevearsion-of-russian-literature/

Remember, never, EVER trust any modern industry when it comes to cultural output.

>>5030703

That critique, by a P&V competitor, with a single translation published, if I read correctly, is wholly unconvincing. You seem to be suggesting a conspiracy, which is telling. P&V are imperfect, but the quality is consistent across the board and merits praise by the host of professionals who have given it. If there are overall better translations of particular Russian works, I'd consider your comprehensive list. People who really want to get at Russian literature are reading it in Russian. Translation by its nature is a lesser product, so any critic can cherry pick imperfect passages.

>>5030694

Jesus, that is a shitty blog post.

"Most conservative websites will publish pieces denouncing a film or a novel for liberal bias or applauding it for its conservative moral message, but they run precious few proper reviews. Speaking as a reader of these websites, I say it’s all right for a good writer to say what’s conservative about a piece of art, but it would be so much better to have a conservative writer say what’s good about it."