I have no idea on how this post relates to mine, but ok.Originally Posted by Clovis
I have no idea on how this post relates to mine, but ok.
^ I suppose I thought you were being dismissive of my view that translations are a serious art form. As far as my being a little off topic, you are right there, but what a thread topic it is? Being a little off topic is almost inevitable.
No, I wasn't dismissing any of your views--I'm agreeing to it, in fact, lol. I'm studying translation. Disagreeing with your view of it as an art form would endanger my future potential for revenue. Why would I want that in a capitalist society? That's just plain nutty!
Seriously, I consider translation as art. That's why I hate most English translators who try to make the translated text more foreign in tone than English when they're translating it into English. That aspect of sacrificing prosody for perceived literal concreteness always tickles me on the wrong sides, because the charismatic idiosyncrasy of a language becomes awkward if tried to put into another language. I mean; try translating Kafka's works literally. It's ghastly.
Last edited by julian94; 12-27-2012 at 08:26 PM.
I missed your gist, sorry.
Needed if there's specialization involving literature from England.
^ I'll try and say things which are more productive, less uselessly sarcastic and spur of the moment.
That's right. In cases where there is specialization on literature from England, then literature in English is used to refer to works from different parts of the world that are written in English.
Don't get me started on Poscolonialism.
Are you an enthusiast?
Obviously, valid arguments could be (and have been) made either way. In my opinion, however, I do thing that there is substantial ground for regionally/ culturally classifying literature when studying lit history. Firstly, it's a convenient and logical way to track the development of a culture's evolution in writing styles and themes. England's literary development is different than that of America's, and therefor, there is value to assigning the cultural labeling to the writing. I also think, though, that this value diminishes when it comes to more contemporary writing as the overlap of cultures, access to world wide information, and themes relating to global concerns as opposed to just regional have created something new in the literary wold which cannot be bound by geographical labels. In the end, it's all context. Quite frankly, I makeup answers to these kind of things that only make sense in my own logic. For example, I say Hemingway is a French American author, T.S. Eliot is an Europeanish poet, and Rushdie is an Indian author even though he's technically British.... Lesson being, when no one knows, make it up!
The opposite actually.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
