I found "A Declaration of Poetic Rights and Values" a very interesting read (especially after reading Cage - words? sound? meaning? anyone?). It brings up a question I've asked myself before when confronted with poetry - especially poetry performances - in other languages, or in translation: if meanings are at all embedded in sounds, can poetry ever be translated properly from culture to culture? Of course it can be translated in the sense that we can know what the words mean, but as we all know, poetry is about so much more than words. And interesting related thought: would the logical conclusion of this be that sound poetry that uses no words at all, only sounds, should be understood universally? I want to say yes, but then again, languages have different speech sounds, inflection, intonation, etc., so even sounds might carry different associations with them. But: is that a bad thing where poetry is concerned? In fact: in a text class as subjective as poetry, is there even such a thing as a bad or wrong translation of a poem? Again, lots of questions.
"Oral traditions precede written poetry; but written traditions do not supercede the oral" - why is it that our culture always insists on viewing everything as linear, with "our" cultural practices being the (for now) final, the best? I'm glad to see the "return" of oral poetry and poetic performance, but I have no doubt that there will always be those who refuse to acknowledge this as "real" poetry.
Something about oral poetry, translation, performance: Back in Germany, I used to attend local poetry slams on a regular basis and became friends with Sadi Safavi, a Persian poet who's been living in Germany for many years. He writes and performs his poetry exclusively in his native language. Usually he attended as a guest reader, outside the actual contest. He was very popular and a very interesting performer; people would just listen to the sounds and enjoy them. For the longest time, he would have a translator read the German version of his poems after he was done performing - this translator would not "perform" the poems, but simply read them. These translations were only there to give the audience a context of what the poems "were about." after a while, though, he teamed up with a popular local slammer (Casjen Ohnesorge), and together they worked on creating a German performance of the piece. After Saadi's performance, Casjen would do his "interpretation of the piece" - this was typically slightly different in style from Saadi's, but not in a bad way. It was a great way to experience a poem in two completely different ways, while still being very aware that it was the same poem.
I'm telling this story because it is indicative of my belief that poetry can (and should) be translated; however, whenever one translates poetry (or anything, really), something new is created. The result is more like a cover or a remix, and no one should claim that it is the exact same thing - and it doesn't have to be! So, while translations will never be a copy of the original, they are still incredibly worthwhile. But: both the translator/performer and the audience must be aare of this, which is why I loved Saadi's and Casjen's combined performance. Hearing only the translation, you always run into the danger of taking for granted that that's what the poem really is; hearing the original with it, even if you don't understand it, will at least make you aware that there is more to the poem, sound-wise and possibly meaning-wise: some of it you can get to, and some you can't, but you should at least know that it's there.
PS: I tried to find youtube videos of Saadi Safavi, but there are none. There's plenty of Casjen Ohnesorge's stuff, but none of the translated poems. =(
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment