/lit/ - Literature

yes, of course.

bum p

Yes.

I'm in the process of reading it. The main character just talked about a man following a girl around. Is the start really slow, will it eventually ensnare me or what?

This is my summer reading for school, but it seems like a yes so far

yes, of course.

Read the Lisa Pevear & Richard Kholokonsky translation. It's better than all the rest of them, and includes a very helpful set of footnotes that provide information about translation issues that would otherwise have been missed.

>>922233

How many versions have you read?

I only read Russian Lit in Russian. Translations are worthless.

>>922248

Like all people who go on about P&V, he's only read the one translation, is just parroting what he's heard from other posters, and in any case knows no Russian

>>922142
no.
its been on my bookshelf a while, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

>>922268
Well of course I don't know Russian, that's why I read the damn translation, you idiot.

I've also read Constance Garnett's translation, and I didn't like it as much. I thought Pevear & Volokhonsky (i butcher the spelling, sorry) had a better mood and tone to the writing style, as well as provided far more helpful notes indicating information that would otherwise be lost in translation. Context makes a huge difference, and they provide footnotes to indicate it where English speakers wouldn't naturally find it.

>>922138
SｔｏＰ ａtｔAckiｎg_AＮＤ ＦｕcKＩＮg WIｔh_ｗＷＷ.aｎＯＣＡｒＲOtＳｔａＬK.ｓE ｒepLAcＥ ＣarroTS_WitＨ N
jjtezpvc hadvgvck r z yp wc wb vkpdrg li v

I think it's pathetic when people advance the idea that reading a translation of a novel is worthless. Poetry, perhaps, but even then it is not worthless to do so.

>>922248

I'm sorry, let me just go and learn Russian, French, Spanish, Arabic, Japanese and German so I can appreciate literature. Obviously you have done so.

>>922376
Don't worry, we'll wait.

>>922248
>I only read Russian Lit in Russian. Translations are worthless.

I only read Japanese lit in Japanese, but saying things like that on this board just sounds so fucking pretentious.

Not everyone reads Russian, so for those people, a translation is better than nothing. Granted, some translations ARE worthless, but it's better than not reading it at all.

>>922376
Don't forget Chinese (modern vernacular as well as Classical), Greek, Latin...well, you've got a long road ahead of you Anon. See you in another life.

>>922364

Reading a translation is no better than reading the summary on the back.

>>922400

>>922400

>>922400
The amount of pretentiousness that you're showing is practically staggering.

>>922400

>>922400
You simply can't justify this. You are assuming that what is most important is maintaining and unbreakable link between the work and its creator. This is just simply cult of personality. Perhaps a translation will not convey the nuance of the original author, but it is a work unto itself and as a text is just as valid as the original. Not to mention English is the most poetic of all modern languages, and that anything written in Russian is bound to be a lot more crude than its english translation. Slavic languages are pig-languages.

>>922442
The first half of that paragraph was a pretty good argument, but it went downhill pretty quickly after that.

>>922442
Started real good, ended bad.

>>922442
>Slavic languages are pig-languages.

It's like I'm really on /int/

>>922442

XYNTA

>>922446
>>922447
Honestly, I was just trolling the troll because I mad.

>>922442

lol@ English being most poetic.

>>922442

Though they say you cannot polish a turd I assure you that Tolstoy can.