tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post5633951360535527178..comments2024-03-29T03:04:00.853-05:00Comments on Wuthering <br>Expectations: French literature in "selfish dictionary" formAmateur Reader (Tom)http://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-35319198238676256572019-09-30T17:24:05.116-05:002019-09-30T17:24:05.116-05:00The Mauriac (The Desert of Love, 1925) seemed like...The Mauriac (<i>The Desert of Love</i>, 1925) seemed like simplified Proust, which was about right for me. Regular Proust is still too hard.<br /><br />The book had sentences but also characters and some extra meaning taken as a whole - you know, the novel was a novel. I do not understand Jaccottet's line as applied to any of those writers. Unless he meant something more like "<a href="https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/phraseur" rel="nofollow">blowhard</a>," in which case, yeah, obviously, they're prominent French writers!Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-59838280276082402262019-09-30T16:53:09.269-05:002019-09-30T16:53:09.269-05:00Odd to see Gide lumped in like that! I would neve...Odd to see Gide lumped in like that! I would never have thought of him as a mere <i>phraseur</i>.Languagehathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285708503881129380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-66413522233260300332019-09-30T16:50:08.859-05:002019-09-30T16:50:08.859-05:00AR(T) how did you like the Mauriac? Did you agree ...AR(T) how did you like the Mauriac? Did you agree with Philippe Jaccottet's opinion: "Camus, Gide, Mauriac? They are mere writers of sentences (des phraseurs)."Cleanthesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15363416290397892659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-66543470604700379212019-09-19T09:24:55.156-05:002019-09-19T09:24:55.156-05:00Sartre's line is "L'infer, c'est ...Sartre's line is "L'infer, c'est les autres" and Dantzig's is "L'infer, c'était Sartre." Both have that extra rhetorical emphasis so common in French ("Me, I am etc.").<br /><br />I suppose there is no arguing with the more famous version of the line. The translator does not want to obscure the reference.<br /><br />I was surprised to see that Paul Bowles, in his 1946 translation, went with "“Hell is just – other people." He wanted that extra emphasis. It is dramatic.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-37297011124271396222019-09-19T08:09:16.113-05:002019-09-19T08:09:16.113-05:00Hell, it was Sartre.
Surely "Hell was Sartr...<i>Hell, it was Sartre. </i><br /><br />Surely "Hell was Sartre" (since this is a play on "Hell is other people").Languagehathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285708503881129380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-24098242667220162992019-09-17T21:52:43.941-05:002019-09-17T21:52:43.941-05:00You are obviously less of a cheapskate than I am.
...You are obviously less of a cheapskate than I am.<br /><br />Dantzig seems avoids not just anyone living, but anyone too recent, by who knows what standard. Maybe he does not want to offend his friends or colleagues, who may well have known these writers. Or maybe his opinions are not as set. Or maybe etc. etc.<br /><br />Anyway, Dumas, yes; Duras, no.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-748032364295980522019-09-17T15:18:38.676-05:002019-09-17T15:18:38.676-05:00I'm delighted to learn about Dantzig's jus...I'm delighted to learn about Dantzig's just-published global lit version of this book, which I had not heard about and will almost undoubtedly pick it up while in France next month. What a prodigious writer, yet one who's almost always entertaining - provocative and sincere in equal measure, sometimes laugh-out-loud funny, sometimes really quite moving. You've probably made it through more of the <i>Dictionnaire égoïste</i> than I have, but I still pull it down from the shelf once in a while to see what he has to say about some author or concept. In this way I've discovered that he omits a lot of French writers I'd like to have seen him cover, but perhaps he's put aside a few of those for his <i>mondiale</i> version. seraillonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654593356535433945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-46193818230562695442019-09-16T21:02:44.083-05:002019-09-16T21:02:44.083-05:00Now that there is the World Literature book, a tra...Now that there is the <i>World Literature</i> book, a translated "best of" selection would not be crazy. The whole book, that is probably logistically crazy.<br /><br />Dantzig claims, and I think he's right, that French literally does not have as many verbs to work with. Some subtle effects are possible, different than English, and a nice torment, or challenge, to literary translators.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-75433879205416110582019-09-16T19:08:31.537-05:002019-09-16T19:08:31.537-05:00Also, I yearn to read his book.Also, I yearn to read his book.Roberthttps://robertminto.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-61334484091779017182019-09-16T19:06:00.416-05:002019-09-16T19:06:00.416-05:00Dantzig's thesis about verbs sounds like what ...Dantzig's thesis about verbs sounds like what I have always taken to be the aesthetic principle behind the hatred of adverbs by everybody from V.S. Naipaul to Elmore Leonard. Let the verbs do the work.Roberthttps://robertminto.comnoreply@blogger.com