I am all for citing poetry that supports a concept. However, language is more than making a point, and translating Rilke’s words without precision, for example, the phrase ‘my tiny tears bloom’ are Rilke’s words, your translation reads ‘let my hidden weeping arise’, Rilke writes: “let my streaming face make me more radiant” your translation reads: ‘let my joyfully streaming face’ Rilke writes: “Why didn’t I kneel lower to receive you” Your translation reads: “Why didn't I kneel more deeply to accept you”. Do you see the delicate mistranslating?
But Rilkes work is mastery that should not be co-opted. Who translated this? And how can we share a deep concept without having to hit all the pop language trends taking artistic examples from people who have lived fully, casting a light on our own unlived lives. Rilke wrote the way he lived. Brilliantly. No amount of retranslating his words to fit a social reality of lack will infuse people to his level. We are all responsible to history, and not being user of great work is one of those responsibilities. Thank you for considering my concern.
2 REPLIES
MaryApr 18, 2025
Although I don't have the facility with German to translate Rilke, some of the passages struck me as a little 'off the mark' in their phrasing, and some just didn't convey as much meaning as I expected they would, given the prominence this author (Weller) gives to them. So, thank you, Jean Fogel, for remarking on the importance of accurate translation. I've heard similar concerns about liberties taken by modern 'translators' with the language of Rumi, and not to be too dramatic, I felt misled, and regretful, about lines I rendered in a way that I've since learned was much too loose a translation. Just consider what we've learned about the New Testament in the past half-century or more as a result of more recent, more accurate translations. Accurately rendering words, phrases, works from another language is essential to gleaning an author's meaning.
MaryApr 18, 2025
Although I don't have the facility with German to translate Rilke, some of the passages struck me as a little 'off the mark' in their phrasing, and some just didn't convey as much meaning as I expected they would, given the prominence this author (Weller) gives to them. So, thank you, Jean Fogel, for remarking on the importance of accurate translation. I've heard similar concerns about liberties taken by modern 'translators' with the language of Rumi, and not to be too dramatic, I felt misled, and regretful, about lines I rendered in a way that I've since learned were much too loose a translation. Just consider what we've learned about the New Testament in the past half-century or more as a result of more recent, more accurate translations. Accurately rendering words, phrases, works from another language is essential to gleaning an author's meaning.
ORIGINAL COMMENT
But Rilkes work is mastery that should not be co-opted. Who translated this? And how can we share a deep concept without having to hit all the pop language trends taking artistic examples from people who have lived fully, casting a light on our own unlived lives. Rilke wrote the way he lived. Brilliantly. No amount of retranslating his words to fit a social reality of lack will infuse people to his level. We are all responsible to history, and not being user of great work is one of those responsibilities. Thank you for considering my concern.
2 REPLIES