Quote from: David Lanoue on March 11, 2011, 10:16:20 AM
1.
Cuarenta y tres años.
Por primera vez
un violín en mis brazos.
Age forty-three.
For the first time
a violin in my arms.
The fact that the violin is in his "arms" and not his "hands" suggests to me a world of difference. I think the violin could be a lover, responding to the poet's embrace like a finely tuned Stradivarius. If so, it's sad to think he had to wait 43 years for such a feeling. Better late than never? Or is the violin just a violin?
2.
En el dedo que lo señaló
quedó eterno el meteoro
de la otra noche.
In the finger that pointed it out
the other night's meteor
is eternal.
This one is mysterious to me. It vaguely reminds me of Carl Sagan proclaiming that we are made of stardust (remember that TV astronomy series, Cosmos?). Why and how is the meteor "eternal" in the finger of the poet or whoever did the pointing? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
3.
La última gota
del rio cintila
en el ojo del pez.
The river's last drop
shines
in the fish's eye.
Now and then in Fernando's book, his haiku echo Basho. This one reminds me of the image of a salted sea bream in a fish shop with Basho's focus zooming in to its cold gums. It also brings to mind my early morning visit to Tsukiji, the fish market in Tokyo, which inspired me to write, on the spot, "fish in plastic bags/ one/ still flapping." But the interesting thing about Fernando's haiku, to me, is the expression, "last drop" (última gota). Has the river dried up, leaving its last drop of moisture in the eye of a dying fish? Or is the poet using the word "last" in a different way? Could the drop of water in the fish's eye be the "last" remant of the river that it has been taken from? This poem, to me, is apocaplytic. Your impressions?
I thank you in advance for your thoughts. Hearing feedback on these translations-in-process should help a lot as I refine them.
What a treat to find this thread! As someone who has a degree in translating poetry (Spanish and French), I love these kind of discussions. And I also realize how painstaking translation from one language to another can be as you attempt to capture the nuances of the original's passion. Your first translation definitely conveys the emotion of the original. I'm wondering as I read the translations, though, if you've thought about alternate punctuation? Since you're dealing with translating a living poet, you might run that idea by him. It occurs to me that the first haiku might be more powerful if L1 did not end with a period, but, perhaps, a colon or em-dash, to connect the poet's amazement at the joy he feels in holding an instrument of music for the first time. Just a thought . . .
Haiku 2: I love that you made the choice of leaving the article "the" in this one. I definitely think the ambiguity adds to the experience, which also has a surreal/metaphysical quality.
Haiku 3 seems more problematic to translate. I like your choice for line 1, and, although I understand why Karen made her suggestion, "the last drop" seems a bit more prosaic than the poem's intention. For me, the problem is more with "shines." Not only does it make for a much shorter line, it also feels a little less powerful than say "shining," which gives the idea that the action of shine/life/river is still ongoing--a part of the fish even though it has been removed from the source of its life. Or, possibly, you might think of using "glimmering" instead of "shining," which, I think is closer to the original's intention . . . as "glimmer" gives more of an impression of something that has faded but still remains and, also, has that playful reference to the English expression a "glimmer in the/my eye." So much to think about! Here's one idea:
The river's last drop--
still glimmering
in the fish's eye.
-or-
The river's last drop--
a still glimmer
in the fish's eye.
Thanks for letting me play here.
Best, Maggie