CC BY
55
«Magister Dixit» - научно-педагогический журнал Восточной Сибири
№3 (15). Октябрь 2014 (http://md.islu.ru/)
УДК 811.111 ББК 81.432.1-8
И. А. Мунро
ЧТО ОТЛИЧАЕТ FRO ОТ «ФРО»?
В своем произведении «Братья Карамазовы» Ф. Достоевский нередко обращается к читателю: «Это я прошу читателя заметить с самого начала», «Это надо запомнить». Андрей Платонов тоже просит нас «запомнить» и «заметить», но делает это лишь на эстетическом уровне и, таким образом, ставит перед нами сложнейшую задачу - от слов перейти к художественным образам, а из художественных образов собрать картину целостного художественного произведения. В данной статье мы анализируем перевод рассказа «Фро» на английский язык, выполненный Робертом и Элизабет Чендлер. На основе эстетического литературного анализа мы пытаемся восстановить целостное произведения и узнать, удалось ли переводчикам «заметить» и «запомнить» важные художественные образы.
Ключевые слова: эстетический анализ литературного произведения, художественный образ, перевод
I. A. Munroe
THE GAP BETWEEN «ФРО» И FRO
In The Brothers Karamazov Fyodor Dostoyevsky often addresses the reader, «This, too should be noted», or «A fact worthy of note». Andrei Platonov, in his turn, also urges us to make a mental note, but does it primarily on the aesthetic level. Therefore, the task of a reader is to step beyond the level of words/text and decipher literary images that create the aesthetic unity of Platonov’s work This article analyzes English translation of Platonov’s Fro by Robert and Elizabeth Chandler and strives to determine how successful were the translators in preserving the literary images that are note-worthy on the aesthetic level.
Key words: aesthetic literary analysis, literary images, translation
The book cover of Platonov5s stories Soul praises the prizewinning English translation by Robert and Elizabeth Chandler, which is highly regarded for its stylistic qualities. The Observer commented on the translation, «Rarely does literature come this close to being music» [Dostoyevsky, 2005]. This article explores the imagery of Platonov’s short story «Фро» and highlights its essential aesthetic elements to deter-
© Мунро И.А., 2014
mine what got lost in translation. Scholar Nikolai Antipiev first addressed the problem in his article «Творческая дуэль перевода с подлинником», where he discovered inconsistencies in Boris Pastemak5s translation of Romeo and Juliet [4]. We apply Antipiev’s method of aesthetic analysis to the translation of «Фро». The very imperfection of the existing translation opens a field to further research on the subject. Below is our literary analysis of Platonov’s «Фро», which highlights the deviations in the existing translation.
Fro-Frosya - a riddle appearing from the very first lines. The work is full of powerful elements; separation from a dear husband, a fake sickness that may not be all that fake, an endless tryst empty in its essence and devoid of any social human task, a husband’s departure and, dispersed throughout, music such as the song of a grey-feathered working bird in a field, chirping of the crickets, and the celestial journey of the blissful pines.
Her heart. Her heart is full of love. The outside world does not exist. It appears as a dream. Transparent and empty. Those are the signs of her future sickness - no air to breathe. The life of her father, Nefed Stepanovich is locomotives. Steam and iron. The name of the engine driver, Нефед // Nefed almost literally means НЕ-ФЕДОР («not Fyodor»). That is why Frosya is avoiding him - he is not her husband, Fyodor. In English translation, «Nefed» this meaningful coincidence is lost.
Frosya is cold towards her father, Ne-Fed. However, she opens the window to let the nature into her room and her heart; she listens to the night sounds of the wind blowing, the movement of blissful trees, the chirping of the crickets, and the night guards. Russian сосны is contrasted with елм/ сосны start «a y〇urne_y into celestial Aap尸少 5^ace», while елм appears in a jolly song of the railway collective guard’s choir. Both were rendered as pine trees in the English translation.
Ель is a fake rejoicing and leg shaking, while сосны are the magical trees, which are reaching out for the blissful divine space, they are lullabied by the night birds and crickets, and not the petty lifeless songs of the collective choir. Сосны is an important literary image, since the little musician is walking in their mysterious shade.
We cannot afford to lose the contrast of the original, and should come up with a way to distinguish between the two images, between the superficial and the blissful.
Quite macabre sounds the song of the choir in Russian: in «办-所少-所少-所少》，《尸少-ру-ру-ру», «пыр- пыр-пыр-пыр» we can almost hear the word «труп», these sounds precede an odd reference to «说евелмлсл кожный гроб» that can be literally translated as wov /и where every person dancing is compared to a
coffin [Antipiev, 2014, p. 51]. This phrase seems to fall out of context and startle the reader. Why mention a coffin among all this joy? Among all this fake joy of the battle of flowers...The English translation “shake a leg, even in the tomb!” [Platonov, 1978, p. 190] creates a very different picture where dancing is not empty and lifeless but a lot of fun and we can almost see a jolly skeleton shaking his bones in a twist. The sounds «zoom, zoom, zoom, zoom, toot, toot, toot, toot» also do not create the association similar to Russian [Ibid. P. 190].
Opposing the rejoicing is exhausting work in the railroad pit (шлаковая яма in Russian). There is a common saying «шлак выводит мз организма», which means that the human body is ridding itself of all that is undesirable and impure. It is a physical cleansing and purification. Шлаковая яма - fumes, gas; they are hard to breathe and at the same time there is a purification of mind through hard physical labor. At this moment, «love was sleeping peace/wlly in her heart» [Ibid. P. 192]. Russian шлаковая яма is a liberating hard labor, labor that cleanses and revives human body and soul and overcomes passivity. Frosya is in a lethargic state throughout most of the story but work brings back the feeling of life. English translation “ash pit” preserves the hint of regeneration and rebirth. However, we are losing the image of purification [Ibid. P. 191]. In the ash pit we find Frosya5s double, a lower Frosya, who signs her name as “Eva with hammer and sickle at the end” [Ibid. P. 191]. The appearance of this woman with the same name is meaningful; it presents a possible life-path for our Frosya. Eva (or Eve) is the mother of humanity and hammer and sickle are the symbols of liberating labor.
The main character appears under many names. Fro, Frosya, Fe/rosinya Yevstafieva. The last name is a formal name used in official situations: to sign one’s name in the office and in class. However, even in that name we can hear sounds resembling «Eva». We follow her throughout the story mostly as Frosya. Her father calls her by that name. The name Fro always appears in relation to Fyodor. In the dance scene, she denounces her father, and says that her name is Fro, and she is not Russian. By that name Fyodor calls her in his telegram: «Дорогая Фро, я люблю шебя м во сне» and should have been translated as «Deor Fro, I love you and drea所 o/you» [Antipiev, 2014, p. 56]. The use of the name Fro in this instance is not capricious and it seems strange that Frosya was used instead in the English translation: «Dear Frosya, I love you and dream o/you» [Platonov, 1978, p. 196].
Fyodor comes back home and we hardly even notice his sadness described as he says, «I love you, I was m/ss/ng you» [Ibid. P. 207]. Would she have died, if he had not returned? She goes through the days as if she were in a dream. In the moment when her «^rea/^ "g^tens» and she screams in a «А/gA s/ng/ng vo/ce»，her heart does not «stort to race» as it was rendered in the translation [Ibid. P. 205]. Russian original «сердуе закашмлось» is closer to «Aer Aear/1 stopped beat/ng» or «her heart sk/pped a beat». Fro’s love is the root of her sickness. In her telegram, Fro writes that she is «dy/ng /om compl/cat/ons o/ resp/ratory tracts» [Ibid. P. 206]. There is a meaningful coincidence between the tightening of her breath when she cannot endure her pain anymore and the reason for her sickness.
According to Andrei Platonov, love should not be a thing in itself. Such love destroys human beings. Passion needs to be accompanied by engagement in socially relevant activities [Platonov, 2008, p. 102-103].
Frosya looks at Fyodor’s childhood picture at the beginning of the story. It shows «a l/ttle boy w/th a b/g ch/ld/sh head /n a poor sh/rt, cheap trousers and bare/oot; there were mag/cal trees grow/ng beh/nd h/m, and /n the d/stance, beyond them a /ounta/n and a palace» [Platonov, 1978, p. 188]. Now Fyodor is a microfarad. He is a flowing electrical current. His passion is the resistance of the machine’s bodily metal.
Through her love for her husband, Frosya starts to see those things as simple and natural as the grass in the field (maybe the same blade of grass that is in the hand of a little boy). Fyodor is thinking about the humanity, communism, and machines. His sky is «stratosphere at the height of a hundred kilometers» [Patonov, 1978, p. 208] Frosya5s magical pines are reaching out for the «celestial happy space» [Ibid. P. 209]. He is talking about “a radical change to a man's wretched soul,” while Frosya discovers the eternal harmony and beauty in a human being [Ibid. P. 189].
The story has one more mysterious character. A little boy who almost descends from a dream and plays harmonica. He walks among the blissful trees and listens to the sounds of the night guards, the crickets. The beauty of life was present there in this little boy. In her class, Frosya is told about «влмлнмм железо но иоявленме высших гармоний» [Antipiev, 2014, p. 58] // «the effect of iron saturation on the appearance of higher harmonics» [Platonov, 1978, p. 199]. However, all she hears in her memory is the child’s harmonica. His musical instrument was translated as «a mouth organ»，which interferes with the aesthetic unity of the story; it deafens the leitmotiv of harmony. The contrast between the Fryodor’s physical «higher harmonics» and Frosya’s harmony in music and within her own soul. We remember «sorrow and happiness are united inseparably in music» [Ibid. P. 194]. Happiness is in the celestial space, it is made by nature from “all her own pure _/0rces so that haziness could come from her and penetrate a human being” [Ibid. P. 201]. When Fyodor leaves, Frosya hears the music, which she had forgotten. She looks outside, and sees «a barefot boy with a large childish head» on a log [Ibid. P. 210]. He brings back a memory of Fyodor’s childhood photograph. The little boy’s music offers an alternative. It liberates Fro from overpowering love for one single person, which makes the whole world transparent and empty. The little boy’s music overcomes love as the selfish center of the universe, which had made Fro not care about her father, Nefed Stpanovich. Fro opens up to nature and simplicity. She is standing in a nightshirt like the little boy, who is wearing a poor shirt. [Ibid. P. 209]. She is reborn. Frosya takes the little boy’s hand in hers, and recognizes the image of humanity in the child. She
knows «Aow to 所？wo 灸opefo rnto 加〇 гм^/es» [Platonov, 1978, р. 211]. Her
heart does not stop beating upon Fyodor’s departure. Instead, it starts to beat in the rhythm of humankind.
In conclusion, I would like to say that this article points out meaningful coincidences within Platonov’s short story and their inadequate rendering in the English translation. The examples of the most significant deviations include the name of Frosya’s father transliterated in English as Nefed, which does not carry his opposition to Fyodor. The contrast between ели и сосны is lost when both of them are translated as pines. English translation lacks the effect of sound writing in the song of the choir. The article also emphasized inadequacy of the translation of гармоника as a mouth organ, which breaks the association of higher harmonics in a class and harmonica played by a little boy. The very existence of these deviation proves that aesthetic analysis with its focus on aesthetic unity of a literary work could be a useful tool for translation practice.
References:
1. Antipiev, N.P. Tvorcheskaya Duel Perevoda S Podlinnikom [Text] / N.P. Antipiev // Vestnik ISLU. - 2014. - №2 (18). - P. 32-42.
2. Dostoyevsky, F. Bratya Karamazovy [Electronic resource] / F. Dostoyevsky // Internet Biblioteka Alekseya Komarova. - 2005. - 07 July. - URL: http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/index.html. (дата обращения: 04.10.2014).
3. Dostoyevsky, F. Constance Garnett, and Ralph E. Matlaw [Text] / F. Dostoyevsky // Constance Garnett, and Ralph E. Matlaw. The Brothers Karamazov: The Constance Garnett Translation Revised by Ralph E. Matlaw: Backgrounds and Sources, Essays in Criticism. - New York: Norton, 1976 [7. Print].
4. P/atonov, A. New York Review Books [Electronic resource] / A. Platonov. - URL: http://www.nybooks.com/books/authors/andrey-platonov/ (дата обращения: 02.10.2014).
5. P/atonov, A.P. Izbrannye Proizvedeniia [Text] / A.P. Platonov, M.A. Platonova. - Moskva: Khudozh. lit, 1978. - P. 47-68.
6. P/atonov, A.P. Razmyshleniya Chitalyelya [Text] / A.P. Platonov. - Munich: Im Werden Verlag, 2005. - P. 102-103.
7. Р1ш〇1^о^^, A.P. Robert Chandler, and Elizabeth Chandler [Text] / A.P. Platonov // Soul and Other Stories. - New York: New York Review Books, 2008. - P. 185-211.
8. The Brothers Karamazov: The Constance Garnett Translation [Text] / Revised by Ralph E. Matlaw: Backgrounds and Sources, Essays in Criticism. - New York: Norton, 1976. [7. Print].
