Pulvers and Beichman

These two articles made me realize that translation isn't always a formulaic process, especially in the case of poetry. I found Pulvers' description of his translation process particularly interesting, as he asserted that the translation of poetry requires the translator to become intimately familiar with the content and intent of the original poem in order to create the poem anew. Oftentimes, translating poetry requires one to focus on the delivery and sound/rhythm to the point that lines must be rearranged or rephrased with slightly different words. This got me thinking about the power of a translator. For those who are unable to read original versions of poems written in foreign languages, translators have complete creative authority over what the reader will get out of the poem. 

Beichman's comments on his translation process were similar to those of Pulvers. He writes, "...the aim of translation is not to produce a clone, but rather to evoke a sense of difference". In the examples he cites in his commentary, Beichman shows that he alters the meaning of some lines in his translated poems by changing words from negative to positive and vice versa while also preserving the meaning of the poem. He uses his creative authority to make changes while still preserving what he feels is the original feeling and intention behind the poem, which I find to be a remarkable skill to master. 

 

Alexa