This is a thought-provoking question. I do have opinions on this. On one hand, I think a lot of people would thank you for it, and you'd do a good job. On the other hand, I don't like the concept behind your fixing the style.
Not that I'd try to stop you, like an author trying to suppress fanfic. More that... well, the book is already the way the author wanted it to be, style and all. There are plenty of people who can't stand its bogus archaic style (I like it, which is why I'm joining this discussion) but when you get down to it, you wouldn't be translating something which no one can understand. You would be rewriting something readers can understand if they want to, but which they think sucks.
This becomes a slippery slope when you look at how many other genre writers get criticized for style. You must have heard people assert, "Oh, Lovecraft couldn't write," or talk about how they'd like to cut out all his adjectives. (Maybe you dislike his style that much, in which case this is a bad example.) Or look at Mervyn Peake or William Morris. One reader's "individualistic" is another's "phony and clunky."
Or why stop there? Wouldn't you love to go through Titus Groan and cut out all the bits with Keda in them? I would, and I think it would be a better book for it, but I wouldn't do it, if by some fluke I had the power. For my money, if it's a book instead of oral tradition and if we know what the author wanted to put into print, we should deal with the book as the author told it. (Yes, this is a generalization and I realize there can be huge issues with editing, etc., in discerning the author's intent. This is still how I almost always feel.)
Ah, well, there are enough people urging you to try the project that I feel OK about voicing a contrary opinion. I'm kinda hoping now that you do try it, so I can read your work. If you do it, though, I don't think it will be a translation--rather a posthumous collaboration or an adaptation.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 05:17 am (UTC)Not that I'd try to stop you, like an author trying to suppress fanfic. More that... well, the book is already the way the author wanted it to be, style and all. There are plenty of people who can't stand its bogus archaic style (I like it, which is why I'm joining this discussion) but when you get down to it, you wouldn't be translating something which no one can understand. You would be rewriting something readers can understand if they want to, but which they think sucks.
This becomes a slippery slope when you look at how many other genre writers get criticized for style. You must have heard people assert, "Oh, Lovecraft couldn't write," or talk about how they'd like to cut out all his adjectives. (Maybe you dislike his style that much, in which case this is a bad example.) Or look at Mervyn Peake or William Morris. One reader's "individualistic" is another's "phony and clunky."
Or why stop there? Wouldn't you love to go through Titus Groan and cut out all the bits with Keda in them? I would, and I think it would be a better book for it, but I wouldn't do it, if by some fluke I had the power. For my money, if it's a book instead of oral tradition and if we know what the author wanted to put into print, we should deal with the book as the author told it. (Yes, this is a generalization and I realize there can be huge issues with editing, etc., in discerning the author's intent. This is still how I almost always feel.)
Ah, well, there are enough people urging you to try the project that I feel OK about voicing a contrary opinion. I'm kinda hoping now that you do try it, so I can read your work. If you do it, though, I don't think it will be a translation--rather a posthumous collaboration or an adaptation.