Underated Spanish?

[stlukesguild]

Spanish literature... the literature of Spain and that written in Spanish in Latin-America etc... is surely one of the greatest bodies of literature among the whole of the West. Included here we find the great Hispano-Hebrew poets (Shmu'el Hanagid, Shelomo ibn Gabriol, Moshe ibn Ezra, Yehuda Halevi, Avraham ibn Ezra, Moses de León, etc... quite likely the greatest writers in Hebrew after the Biblical authors) and the great Arab-Andalusian poets. These poets had a profound impact upon the development of lyrical poetry in Europe via the French and Provençal troubadours. The German/Jewish poet, Heinrich Heine was profoundly inspired by the Spanish Hebrew poems (especially those of Halevi) while Lord Byron's Hebrew Melodies may have been inspired in part by exposure to these poems through a collaboration with the Jewish cantor Isaac Nathan. A selection of poems of Arab-Andalusia translated in the early 20th century by the scholar/translator, Emilio García Gómez, would serve as a profound example for the poet Federico Garcia-Lorca and the composer, Manuel de Falla (and subsequently the whole of the Spanish Renaissance of the 20th century and the rediscovery of the brilliance of the Spanish-Arab-Andalusian culture.

In the Spanish language itself we find among the early efforts such works as the epic Poem of the Cid, Juan Ruiz Book of Good Love, Jorge Manrique's Verses on the Death of his Father, Gil Vicente, and a large collection of anonymous ballads and folk songs that would again inspire later poets such as Garcia-Lorca.

Entering the so-called "Golden Age" of Spanish literature we are presented with the formidable achievements of Garcilaso de la Vega, Fray Luis de Leon, San Juan de la Cruz, Luis de Gongora, Francisco de Quevedo, Lope de Vega, Fernando de Rojas, Tirso de Molina, Calderon de la Barca, Joanot Martorell & Marti Joan de Galba's Tirant Lo Blanc, and of course Miguel de Cervantes. Of course nearly everyone has heard of (if not read) Cervantes Don Quixote... but how many of the rest of the figures of this period are more than just names? The great English poet Shelley declared that he had read "about 12 of (Calderon's) plays and some of them certainly deserve to be ranked among the grandest and most perfect productions of the human mind. He exceeds all modern dramatists with the exception of Shakespeare." And yet looking on-line I find only Calderon's play Life Is a Dream and an older translation by Edward Honig of 6 plays as well as the Victorian-era Edward Fitzgerald translation of some brief one-act plays... this from an oeuvre of some 120 full-length plays and 80 one-act dramas! And Calderon fares far better than Tirso de Molina, the inventor of the Don Juan narrative (no translation available!)... to say nothing of Lope de Vega, second in reputation only to Cervantes and the author of some 3,000 sonnets, 3 novels, 4 novellas, 9 epic poems, and about 1,800 plays. The works available in English by de Vega include one translation of three plays, another of two, and a few shorter poems included in anthologies such as Edith Grossman's The Golden Age: Poems of the Spanish Renaissance!! Luis de Góngora has only recently been available in English... and almost nothing exists by the great Spanish Romantic/Post-Romantic poet, Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer.

Now things are not so bad when we move into modern Spanish literature. Federico Garcia-Lorca, Antonio Machado, Juan Ramón Jiménez, Miguel Hernandez, Vicente Aleixandre, Rafael Alberti, Jorge Guillen, César Vallejo, Miguel de Unamuno, Pablo Neruda, J.L. Borges, Julio Cortazar, Gabriel Garcia-Marquez, Carlos Fuentes, Octavio Paz, Homero Aridjis, and many others have been well served by translators... and yet how often do we hear any of these writers beyond Borges, Garcia-Marquez, Garcia-Lorca, or Neruda discussed?

Anyway... just tossing this out there. In reality I suppose one might say that German and Italian and even French literature is just as underrated. beyond Goethe and one or two others how often do any German writers prior to the 20th century pop up in conversation? How many Italians after Dante but before Italo Calvino or Umberto Eco? The French fare a bit better... Montaigne, Moliere, Voltaire, Rousseau, Rabelais, and even Racine show up among the French poets before the Romantic era that make frequent appearances here. But how often does Ronsard, Marivaux, Beaumarchais, du Bellay, Agrippa d'Aubigné, François de Malherbe, or even figures such as Alphonse de Lamartine, Gérard de Nerval, Sully-Prudhomme, François Coppée, José María de Heredia, Leconte de Lisle, etc...?

And yet a literary moron like Charles Bukowski shows up about every second week.:shocked:

[JCamilo]

Well, for once, in brazil, nobody talks about Bukowiski, very few about Ambrose Bierce, only specialists read Carlyle or George Elliot, Leopardi? Montale? Hordelin? Yet, minor brazilian writers such Clarice Linspector pop up every now and then. I suppose it is matter of proximity, or maybe, we in america are too insular.

It is really surprising to hear people who could not identify the author of Don Quixote. In many aspects, it is the most famous fictional book ever. I could obviosly expect people who do not deal with literature or like to read to ignore the name of Shakespeare less famous plays or the name of the author of Moby Dick, but here? I think before buying a book there should be a test. "Who wrote Don Quixote?", you couldnt, you fail. Go buy a video-game or a dvd of Glee.

This is no surprise to see people who criticize the text of lets say Kafka, on basis on his parabolic style, full of disgressions, thinking the clean and swift style of likes of Flaubert (or however) is the only way to find a prose well written. Quixote is so full of dead end, lose threads, repetitions, non-sense... Cervantes capacity to create a character (and hell, not psychologically developed, Quixote is a caricature) and use it is so incridible, that nothing else matters.
Yet, there is a failure, no wonder, to consider him only for quixote. Some of his novellas are quite fine, best prose examples of spanish until Borges in my opinion. And Galatea is far from being bad. El conde lucanor, lazarido tormes, all together with Tyrant, made the prose of Spain a step ahead of all europe, it is not wonder Cervantes is from there...

This come with the notion that USA is accepting the hyspano population as part of europe. Because of programs or Shakira... but funny, not because the very language, or its best expression, which is literature...

[OrphanPip]

I was a little surprised by the Don Quixote thing that popped up in a thread a little while back. I read Don Quixote when I was in high school (on my own, not for school), and I'm reasonably sure I had seen cartoon depictions of the famous windmill scene. Yet, I can't say that my knowledge of Cervantes at the time was the norm for Canadian teens, I spent far too much time reading.

My knowledge of Spanish literature is horrible, but I'm not a broad reader to begin with. I imagine the lack of translation probably has roots in the historic antagonism between England and Spain, that was well established by the time people started translating vulgar languages, so French and German writers from the Enlightenment period managed to make their way to England, but Spain got shut out.

[Jozanny]

Niall Ferguson's work on the rise and demise of the British Empire is enlightening on the antipathy between Protestant and Catholic/authoritarian Europe, and he more specifically details how lucky Elizabethan England was to stick it to the Spanish Empire as it then existed as a power, which goes to Pip's point, but luke, I really can't help. I know some of the Hispanic theater, but I am using the last of my resources to buy more scholars like Dr. Ferguson. I follow him on twitter as well and believe he is confused by the enthused cripple who teases him :) We'll see. I know a little more than the average American, but I am just not there now.

[stlukesguild]

I imagine the lack of translation probably has roots in the historic antagonism between England and Spain, that was well established by the time people started translating vulgar languages, so French and German writers from the Enlightenment period managed to make their way to England, but Spain got shut out.

Of course the French were perhaps an even greater traditional enemy of the English and yet Spenser translated du Bellay, and Montaigne, Ronsard, Racine, Moliere, etc... were certainly known and admired by the English poets and dramatists, as later we find that the English recognize the importance of French poets, writers, and thinkers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, etc... There is a similar hermeticism to the visual arts of Spain. Few paintings by Velasquez, Ribera, El Greco, Goya, etc... make it into English or French collections, and consequently few English or French paintings made it into the Spanish collections, while the Prado boasts an incredible collection of Flemish, German, and Italian paintings. I imagine this owes much to the connections between the Spanish throne and the Spanish Netherlands (but certainly not the Protestant break-away Dutch), the Papacy in Rome, and the Germanic Holy Roman Empire. I suspect that the rigid Catholicism of Spain is as much responsible for its isolation from the increasingly Protestant and secular cultures of England and France. Spain was still reeling under the Inquisition at the time of Voltaire, the American, and French Revolutions and the church was still a powerful force at the time of the Spanish Civil War and a major supporter of anti-Republican forces. For all its wealth (gained largely through New World conquests) Spain must have seemed as as*-backward to the English and French as Russia.

[OrphanPip]

While it's true France and England have often fought, there was almost an imposed cultural importation caused by the Restoration, as a result of the Crown's exile spent in France. Not to mention that most of those early writers, apart from du Bolay, came in at that time when the French and English crowns were on good diplomatic terms, or were brought along as a result of Charles II's obsession with French literature. While France and England periodically fought, they also had numerous periods of long lasting peace and cultural exchange, the financial ties between them were pretty influential too. There's also just that fact of geographical proximity.

I think you're right though that there are likely numerous reasons why Spain has been largely ignored by English translators.

As an aside, Rousseau was Swiss and a Protestant, (though he flip-flopped between Calvinism and Catholicism a few times) which might account for his popularity with the English as well. The late 19th century was another period of close economic and political ties between England and France as well. I think the Enlightenment period is a difficult one because much of the major French, English, and German thinkers were in communication.

Another consideration is the fact that more English people speak French than Spanish, especially historically.

[stlukesguild]

This whole post is actually owed in part to the fact that I spent a good part of my Christmas gift cards in purchasing recent translations of Fernando de Rojas' Celestina, Calderon's Life is a Dream and Six Plays and Lope de Vega's Three Major Plays. I already have read works by all of these writers in anthologies including Eric Bentley's The Classic Theater Volume II: Six Spanish Plays.

I had to laugh at JCamillo's comments upon the US' acceptance of Spain and Spanish culture and the Hispanic population as part of Europe... "Because of Shakira... or Ricky Martin for that matter. Seriously, the US is a vast nation and the populations vary greatly from region to region. The South West has a large Hispanic population mostly coming from Mexico and Central America. Florida has a large Hispanic population... but more likely from Cuba and the other Islands as well as Central and South America. Where I live, on the other hand, the population is perhaps predominantly made up of persons of Central European ancestry : German, Italian, Polish, Hungarian, Czech, Slovenian, Slovak, Russian. There are sizable enclaves of a Hispanic population but most of these are are Puerto Rican or otherwise of Caribbean ancestry... the result of transporting such populations North to work in the big American automobile, tire, and steel factories during the 1960s. I'll agree with JCamillo that the average American concept of assimilating Spanish and latin-American culture owes more to pop culture, Taco Bell, and the like than it does to Cervantes, San Juan de la Cruz, and J.L. Borges. But I also agree with MortalTerror who refused to blame the American's for the general American lack of grasp of foreign cultures. Most nations make an attempt to export their culture as a means of further promoting understanding and ultimately economic gain. Unfortunately it is far more likely the popular culture... often the very worst aspects of that culture that get exported... not literature, classical music, and fine art.

[stlukesguild]

Another consideration is the fact that more English people speak French than Spanish, especially historically.

True... but I would assume that far more Americans speak Spanish than French... in spite of America's close ties with France from the very inception of the nation. Of course France remains a formidable economic and military power while Spain and most of Latin-America remain irrelevant in the eyes of many. Japan, China, Germany, Russia, the UK, Korea, etc... are perceived as far more important in terms of trade and international politics... while Latin-America is often seen as little more than our poor Southern neighbors and the source of illegal drugs and illegal immigrants. Undoubtedly the US would do far better to begin to develop closer relationships with the neighbors in the Americas.

[Jozanny]

I have been exposed to Caleron, and I am a little off here, but this *life is a dream* thread persists in Spain in its modern filmography as well. A critical paper I read on Cervantes had a name for it. Ecrit? Where is Etienne when you need him? Something with an E. It was a subversion Cervantes capitalized on and transformed magical realism into its Latin American strain, to the point that it was bollerized into stylized fizz.

[JCamilo]

The point is not even the obvious fact that every nation love his belly more than others, but if you consider than the effect of latin-american/hyspanic population is considerable today even affecting elections, it is a bit ironic to imagine the education of america is not actually embracing them. I do not judge it at all, but perhaps in 100 years, the word "chico" will be erased in many books and replaced by something like "Pablo" because of this. It is really surprising the country that seeks the great novel allow that Cervantes obscurity... At some point, the proximity of the war with Mexico produced good exchanges, B.Traven or Bierce, the bordeline literature and Zorro :D

I would say that we can not compare France-England to Spain-England. The rivalirity between France and England is longer, but mostly, because Normands are both. You do not have the same with Spain, which real enemy was the islamic population. The trade between France and England is much bigger because of this aspect. Just like the gnome of Andaluzia is pretty much caused by the "spirits" of the region where both cultures created more shadows. The war Spain and England was pretty fast, Spain faced a decadency (cultural even), while France is without doubt the longest tradition of europe after the italians. After the golden baroque age (and at that time Cervantes and Vega were translated) the greatest momment of spanish language was the south american boom... while france was pretty much steady...

[JCamilo]

Calderon and Vega are pretty much steady. They are not losing importance. Gongora and Quevedo pretty much losing importance as we talk.
I think overall, the baroque threatre of Spain (if we add the portuguese helper) was superior to elizabethean threatre or an equal. Vicente and Vega at their best were as good anyone else.

[mortalterror]

You know what, someday somebody over there is going to learn the English language and then that man will meet up with another man who owns a printing press. Problem solved. Why is everyone waiting for America to translate and publish their books?

I also don't believe that the problem is as bad as StLukesGuild makes it out to be. I'm pretty sure that he owns an English copy of every writer he's so far named. I sold most of my books, such as Don Quixote, because I like to travel light, but even I have a few Spanish language books. I have Lope de Vega's The Sheep Well in a book of continental drama. I have my eye on that Three Plays edition that StLuke's mentioned, but like he says, the dude wrote a play a week; so how good could most of them be? I figure that's the real limiting factor for Lope. I have my Eight Dramas of Calderon translated by Edward Fitzgerald. They are not one act dramas. They are full length plays, and I could easily read fifty more just like them. This has to be the single greatest omission of any one undertranslated Spanish author. I have Marquez's Love in the Time of Cholera, and Two Spanish Picareque Novels, which features Lazarillo De Tormes and Quevedo's The Swindler. They are very well written and funny. Then I have a book of world drama with Lope De Vega's The King, The Greatest Alcalde, Cervantes The Cave of Salamanca, and Calderon's The Constant Prince. On my nightstand I have Casares The Invention of Morel, and Fuentes' The Death of Artemio Cruz, although those are probably going back to the library, since I'm knee deep in Chinese right now.

My point is that, yeah, we got plenty of Spanish literature. The names you listed above StLukes, they are all over the map talent-wise. Don Quixote doesn't lack for translators. Gongora is like the Spanish Dryden, a major writer of a lesser period. you can't raise too big a stink if he doesn't make the best seller lists. Although, Becquer is another matter. That guy is good, though not as good as Leopardi who is probably even less well known.

Do I know why Calderon, De Vega, and Becquer, don't have the kind of fan base abroad that Cervantes, Neruda, Borges, and Marquez have? Not really. But I don't see why that's any reason to blame America. It's not a racism or an economic thing, or else we wouldn't have these others would we?

[JBI]

Well, for once, in brazil, nobody talks about Bukowiski, very few about Ambrose Bierce, only specialists read Carlyle or George Elliot, Leopardi? Montale? Hordelin? Yet, minor brazilian writers such Clarice Linspector pop up every now and then. I suppose it is matter of proximity, or maybe, we in america are too insular.

It is really surprising to hear people who could not identify the author of Don Quixote. In many aspects, it is the most famous fictional book ever. I could obviosly expect people who do not deal with literature or like to read to ignore the name of Shakespeare less famous plays or the name of the author of Moby Dick, but here? I think before buying a book there should be a test. "Who wrote Don Quixote?", you couldnt, you fail. Go buy a video-game or a dvd of Glee.

This is no surprise to see people who criticize the text of lets say Kafka, on basis on his parabolic style, full of disgressions, thinking the clean and swift style of likes of Flaubert (or however) is the only way to find a prose well written. Quixote is so full of dead end, lose threads, repetitions, non-sense... Cervantes capacity to create a character (and hell, not psychologically developed, Quixote is a caricature) and use it is so incridible, that nothing else matters.
Yet, there is a failure, no wonder, to consider him only for quixote. Some of his novellas are quite fine, best prose examples of spanish until Borges in my opinion. And Galatea is far from being bad. El conde lucanor, lazarido tormes, all together with Tyrant, made the prose of Spain a step ahead of all europe, it is not wonder Cervantes is from there...

This come with the notion that USA is accepting the hyspano population as part of europe. Because of programs or Shakira... but funny, not because the very language, or its best expression, which is literature...

Quick, name the author of Dream of the Red Chamber (The Story of Stone, Dream of Red Mansions). It's all about limitation, the Dream is equally as profoundly influential as Don Quixote, and any other number of other texts *cough, Genji, Shahnameh, Ramayana, etc.*

Now, onto the topic at hand, I am all for discussing the limited view and appreciation of Spanish texts, but perhaps we could keep this text toward textual analysis, and maybe move forward to get some serious discussion on certain central authors.

As of now, I am not quite familiar, and as such, do not exactly know what is available in translation. I would also like to take this as a stepping stone to perhaps have other traditions brought up, and other discussions, though perhaps that is too early. As of now, to be honest, cut off from any library and really any book store that stocks anything besides Chinese texts and English schoolroom classics, it is hard to get into much of a discussion outside of public domain texts.

Still, I will agree with the statement that Spanish literature is ignored by English readers. Then again, so is French, Italian, German - pretty much all languages, though perhaps Spanish has a future in terms of popularization, since really the Spanish language has become essential to the American experience (being the largest English speaking country in terms of population in the world, it means being monolingual in outlook is perhaps impossible now), perhaps this will transpire over to appreciating classics, I doubt it though.

Generally the early forerunners, and classic authors, from Spain, seem to have not done so well in being translated as say, Japanese classics have. Perhaps I am wrong though, and I just haven't been pointed to enough texts.

[JBI]

Another consideration is the fact that more English people speak French than Spanish, especially historically.

True... but I would assume that far more Americans speak Spanish than French... in spite of America's close ties with France from the very inception of the nation. Of course France remains a formidable economic and military power while Spain and most of Latin-America remain irrelevant in the eyes of many. Japan, China, Germany, Russia, the UK, Korea, etc... are perceived as far more important in terms of trade and international politics... while Latin-America is often seen as little more than our poor Southern neighbors and the source of illegal drugs and illegal immigrants. Undoubtedly the US would do far better to begin to develop closer relationships with the neighbors in the Americas.

It's interesting to note which authors get translated though. For instance, Japan has had a great time of being translated, as part of a military funded (and various organizations such as the Ford Foundation) dropping big cash into the American academy to first "understand the enemy" that is, the Japanese army at war in the pacific, and then "understand the occupied," that is, the country that the US was essentially governing for a decade after the war, and then with close ties until the 80s when the two kind of split.

IF we look at Russian, it is interesting to see what is there too - for instance, we talk mostly about anti-Communist literature when we think of it, books that seem to suit non-Russian tastes, the same way that Mishima has had a better time being translated than Soseki from the Japanese, since Mishima is far more in holding with Western Aesthetics, whereas Soseki is very Japanese, despite also having strong Western, especially English influence.

I would think an influx of Latin America would be more likely than an influx from Korea, since culturally, there isn't this burden of understanding - simply put, Korea imports a lot culturally from the West, but exports very little (Though now in terms of pop culture they have spread across East Asia and into Southeast Asia and beyond). But then what is the fascination now with Korean culture and Korean studies? Of course, none of that has really surfaced much, since it is still new, but I will say any institution with any bit of a study in Korean is getting a huge funding handout, Harvard, Princeton, The Universities of California, Oxford, University of Toronto, you name it, they all are getting fat hand outs for research in Korean related things. Latin America is right by the United States, and, lets face it, it has ceased to be a little stop where people go to get things done for cheap (Though that still exists). But still, we have a question, who gets exposure first? Who gets heard?

I think the same problem arises for those who do not read Spanish, who funds the translators, and why? The answer always ends up, in English, the biggest funders are the rather strong research basis, namely American universities, and who funds them? why then do we read what we do? When does it become culturally relevant? And with Spain, the motherland, by extension, why does it not retain its importance, and elicit new appreciation?

[JCamilo]

Quick, name the author of Dream of the Red Chamber (The Story of Stone, Dream of Red Mansions). It's all about limitation, the Dream is equally as profoundly influential as Don Quixote, and any other number of other texts *cough, Genji, Shahnameh, Ramayana, etc.*

Cao, X..somethingthisorthat. Isnt supposed to be somewhat auto-biographical? Anyways, how many languages is the Dream translated, how many Quixote is. How long Quixote is translated continuously and how long Dream is? How many countries had their publishing and format of literature changed due to Quixote and how many because of Dream? If Dream como close to Quixote numbers, permanency and spreading you can list Genji or Dream (Ramayana is not a "fictional" book as Quixote, for example, and I was unclear, should have said novel or prose book, because I wasnt equating him epic poetry as Iliad or Aeneid or Shahnameh are, albeit, wanting or not, Shahnameh is quite arguable.).

[stlukesguild]

JBI... of course politics and economics play a major role in what gets translated. It is surely almost common knowledge that during the 1950s the US government invested heavily in promoting American culture overseas. This included Abstract Expressionism and jazz... in spite of the fact that very few American politicians would have had the least use for either. They were promoting American expansiveness, openness, and the willingness to embrace the latest innovations. If there is major funding for Korean studies one might assume that the money is coming from the American government seeking closer ties with the rapidly growing Asian power and from Korea seeking something of the same.

In part I agree with MortalTerror that the "problem" cannot be laid upon the shoulders of the Americans (or the Canadians, Australians, English, and Irish who also speak English). On the other hand, I don't think the issue is that the Chinese or Italians or Spanish need to make their work accessible by translating their works into English. Almost none of my translations were made by non-English-speaking natives. Richard Howard isn't an English-speaking Frenchman, but rather a French-speaking American. Where the other countries come into play is in their financial support (or lack thereof) for translations and their publications.

[Jozanny]

I have Llosha on my wish list; at the risk of repeating myself, I am more current with Latin America than Spain itself. luke, is there someone or some text you'd like to read?

[mortalterror]

In part I agree with MortalTerror that the "problem" cannot be laid upon the shoulders of the Americans (or the Canadians, Australians, English, and Irish who also speak English). On the other hand, I don't think the issue is that the Chinese or Italians or Spanish need to make their work accessible by translating their works into English. Almost none of my translations were made by non-English-speaking natives. Richard Howard isn't an English-speaking Frenchman, but rather a French-speaking American. Where the other countries come into play is in their financial support (or lack thereof) for translations and their publications.

StLukesGuild has already agreed that it's not a translation problem, since he has all of the authors books he mentioned. It's an exposure problem. Why aren't they more popular among literati? Once they are translated, why don't they stay in print? Gustavo Adolfo Becquer, Joao Guimaraes Rosa, Ricardo Palma, Ruben Dario, etc. Why don't more people know who Machado de Assis is, and why is it always a surprise when Latin American writers win the Nobel prize?

When I want a good translation I can't find on Penguin or Oxford, I usually go to the American University Presses. But these are not major publishing house presses. They have a niche clientele and only run off a small number of books at a time. Random House, Scribner, Simon and Schuster, or Harper Collins aren't likely to mass produce these works, because they know that if a translation does sell well, other companies can undercut them by making their own translation or using an old copyright free translation. That is your economic barrier, international publishing law.

Now, why aren't StLukesGuild's medieval Hebrew books getting more play? Why don't most medieval books get more play? Because they are written in Latin, a language so few people can still speak that it and Hebrew might as well both be dead. We don't even translate Milton's Latin poetry or prose and he's a popular English author. Maffeo Vegio was considered the finest Latin poet of the fifteenth century, but the way we teach our curriculums vernacular literature is dominant after the 13th century. Seneca was from the area of modern day Spain. His influence is huge, but even he doesn't get much play around here. Back to your Hebrew poets, there's only like 9 million people in the world who could understand or translate them anyway; so of course they aren't everywhere.

[stlukesguild]

StLukesGuild has already agreed that it's not a translation problem, since he has all of the authors books he mentioned.

That's not exactly true. I have the few limited texts in translation by most of the writers I mentioned... but considering the scale of their oeuvre it would seem that I am barely scraping the surface. Hell, even your Racine... unpopular as he seems to be in the English-speaking world... exists in multiple English translations... and not merely a single play or two.

It's an exposure problem. Why aren't they more popular among literati? Once they are translated, why don't they stay in print? Gustavo Adolfo Becquer, Joao Guimaraes Rosa, Ricardo Palma, Ruben Dario, etc. Why don't more people know who Machado de Assis is, and why is it always a surprise when Latin American writers win the Nobel prize?

Now this is true as well. There is an exposure problem... and in part this exists because there are so few great translations. As JoZ suggests, she and many others are more aware of the contemporary Latin-American contributions such as Llhosa... or Fuentes, or Borges, or Garcia-Marquez than the great Spanish writers from Calderon and Gongora to Machado, Hernandez, Guillen, etc...

Ultimately you are right in the same sense as you confront JBI with concerning the need for other nations to promote their art if they wish it to be taken seriously. Of course I and others have all done as much to a given extent... JBI promoting Chinese and Canadian writers, you with Racine and your Romans, me with classical music, art, French symbolism, German and Spanish poetry (with three threads recently bumped up again)... but undoubtedly, such promotion takes time and effort... and all too often gets buried under the latest slew of threads on Charles Bukowski and George Orwell.

[Jozanny]

Hell lukes, if it was just a problem of self-promotion then disabled writers like myself would be taken seriously, and we're not, unlike ablest writers who appropriate our social disruptive tendencies for their own art. We're expected to keep to our place, and for all of my intelligence, crossing over with able bodied writers hasn't been easy for me. Thus the flux may be more complex than any one geopolitical factor. Japan is an important concern in the west, hence Japanese literature and film, and more recently, Chinese, gets critical play in the states from Ebert and his like. But Spain? We think bullfights, Hemingway, Man From La Mancha.

I do have to say though, that when I lived in the small presses, I had a great deal of contemporary multi-cultural exposure to poetry, and have a number of foreign poets lying about in translation. Miss it sometimes and don't get it so much surfing zine sites.

I'd take issue, however, with Latin and Hebrew being necessary for erudition in the modern era. Kids may not know Shakespeare, but do derive cultural recognition from Star Trek, to paraphrase; it's a balancing act.

I forgot to politely request that you stop snow-dancing in Ohio, as I may be forced to do food shopping online, and that is getting a bit too pricey :D

[mortalterror]

That's not exactly true. I have the few limited texts in translation by most of the writers I mentioned... but considering the scale of their oeuvre it would seem that I am barely scraping the surface.

I get the same impression whenever I compare everything in the Loeb Classical Library to what you can actually find in major modern translations by Fagles, Fitgerald, Lattimore, Humphries, or Arrowsmith. What's even worse is how they are mostly translating the same books over and over again. When's it going to be time for a new Statius, Lucan, Propertius, Persius, Tibullus, Callimachus, or Democritus translation? Don't we have enough Homers and Virgils?


Now this is true as well. There is an exposure problem... and in part this exists because there are so few great translations. As JoZ suggests, she and many others are more aware of the contemporary Latin-American contributions such as Llhosa... or Fuentes, or Borges, or Garcia-Marquez than the great Spanish writers from Calderon and Gongora to Machado, Hernandez, Guillen, etc...

Pessoa seems to be achieving a lot of zeitgeist penetration even though he hasn't had a lot of translation. Explain that one? There's what two, three different translations of his work out in English? Maybe he got a boost from Bloom or something. Sometimes it's who you know or which languages your work gets translated into. A million Mexicans might love you, but 18 Swedes will make you famous.


Ultimately you are right in the same sense as you confront JBI with concerning the need for other nations to promote their art if they wish it to be taken seriously. Of course I and others have all done as much to a given extent... JBI promoting Chinese and Canadian writers, you with Racine and your Romans, me with classical music, art, French symbolism, German and Spanish poetry (with three threads recently bumped up again)... but undoubtedly, such promotion takes time and effort... and all too often gets buried under the latest slew of threads on Charles Bukowski and George Orwell.

There's really only 7 Bukowski threads, and 8 Stephen Kings; so you may be overestimating their followings. Orwell is another matter. Ten years ago, he was one of my favorite authors. I still think he is a major twentieth century author, but he shouldn't have twice as many threads as Hemingway, Faulkner, or Joyce. That's a little weird.

[JBI]

As for Orwell, his problem is that his best work is not the one discussed - Animal Farm and 1984 are so meh as novels, they are perhaps the easiest novels now, culturally, to discuss without reading, leading to their widespread fame. As an essayist though, he was excellent - how tragic that we are reduced to mediocre allegories of events long passed.

As for Hebrew-Spanish poets not being necessary, well, their works have come out in great translation, and the bulk can be digested in 2-3 books lets say, so, I think they have achieved their needed exposure, and as such, are available to be enjoyed now in excellent English verse.

[JCamilo]

You should review Animal Farm at least, by your own very words. A fable (technically well explored, with the difficulty of the length) which can be applied to any popular revolution and now it is so well know that people can use its allegory without even reading it? Something Orwell must have done way beyond meh.

Apply it to Egypt right now. I am sure you already have some of the animals in Cairo.

[Jozanny]

Correction JBI: I was targeting fluency, not luke's appreciation for the poets.

[Petrarch's Love]

Can't quite tell if we're more concerned with a lack of appreciation for poets of other languages here on Lit. Net. or in the great world outside. If the latter, then I would contribute as a factor the fact that many Americans don't learn a foreign language and that not many students read works from other cultures in our high schools and universities. Even if they didn't end up fluent in another language, I think if every American child was required to learn at least one other language in school at an early age, that would help them feel connected and more comfortable with another culture and another literary tradition. In higher education, I personally am a big fan of the comparative approach and think it's a shame that the comp. lit. department hasn't been a greater success. I know for myself that I might have missed out on a lot, or at least have taken longer getting there if I hadn't had advisers in both my undergraduate and my graduate years with a strong comparative leaning and who got me taking classes with people who were interested in the French tradition, the Italian tradition, the Spanish tradition etc. and the way it relates to the English tradition.

Of course, if we're talking about making other literatures more popular on the forum, then nothing does it like controversy. I say in one corner we've got San Lucas de Quixote, heavy weight champion of Spanish verse, and in the other corner, Sun "JBI" Tzu, an artful fighter on the side of Chinese letters. When you hear the bell go at it!