Emily Wilson

 Alexander Pfau

Emily Wilson


    Emily Wilson brought more questions than answers. One of her major points was that a literal translation is not the most truthful version of the text. Is this not a paradox, since the most truthful form of the text should be the direct translation? She disagrees, and her translation follows her ideal, creating a modern text that is yet faithful to the original. Emily Wilson says she has "failed to define translation". Her opinion that, as long as a translator is trying to define the work in their own way, they're doing something right, and doing their job. She tells us her text is not modern, which to me is insane after reading Alexander Pope's text, but her point is based in fact. Phrases like "cataclysmic wrath" are not modern by any means, and so Wilson is often confused about the definition of her text by the media.


    I've read the Iliad in 2 languages (kind of). Emily Wilson's was by far the most pleasant (probably because it was made recently). Her attention to detail is spot on. She mentioned that translating idioms are impossible, which makes total sense, but she does illustrate that making different choices is a part of being a translator. Her translation, while not the most literal, conveys more emotion than any of the other translations I've read. The passage she presented as her own for the most emotional part of the Iliad was estranged from previous translators. She depicts Achilles falling into madness, and deep emotion, while many of the other translators do not do this, and leave the scene without conveying the necessary impression on the audience.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yasmine Seale

Yasmine Seale's lecture

Report on Megan McDowell