I'm reading Brothers Karamozov for the first time. The Richard Pervear or whatever translation. A couple questions

I'm reading Brothers Karamozov for the first time. The Richard Pervear or whatever translation. A couple questions.

What does he mean by "strain"? I couldnt quite pick up the meaning from the context. Best guess have is some type of burden people carry that compels them to do things.

And that poem that Ivan recites to Alyosha. I noticed in another poem earlier that it rhymed, as in the translator decided to reinterpret it to make it rhyme. But when he gives this allegory of the high priest and jesus, it doesnt rhyme at all, its just a story. Did it rhyme in russian? I also had a bit of a hard time extracting the exact meaning of it. Im not a very sharp reader, it was a little too wordy for what it was trying to put across other than that it was speaking to how the religion became perverted and men took it to fulfill their own needs and how free will was a curse. Thanks.

Bump if self bumps work

Why the fuck are you reading that translation when you have access to the internet? Or did you read the first comments in a goodreads thread and just bought the book?
Read Avsey or McDuff.

Whats wrong with that translation? I just went by reviews and google yeah. Plus someone here even suggested in a thread. I read Crime and Punishment translated by this guy and it was far easier to read than the Constance one.

So who should we choose as translator when reading Dostoevsky?

it's fine, he's memeing

depends on if you want more or less literal

ask yourself if you want your russians to engage in a "polite conversation" or a "conversation of decency." if the former, go with constance garnett, pref in revised form. if the latter, go with pevear and volokhonsky.

Lmao he was talking about what strain of bomb ass kush he bout to smoke senpai :^)

Like i mean comon, this board aint called lit for no reason XD

Garnett, Magarshack, Avsey

Yes, but which one do I choose?

its really not a big deal

>tfw you read the Gannett translation and still loved it

s-scoundrel

It's a translation of the Russian word "nadryv." It literally translates to “strains” but truly refers to “selfish self-sacrifice” or false humility and a pleasurable self-hurting. It's a theme throughout the novel and you see it in a lot of characters. People act like they're suffering to do good but really they're doing it just to feel good about themselves.

So like there is no truly selfless act of charity? Thank you. What about the ryhming thing?

Thank you again. I mean it. One user to another.

Cqn you explain the meaning of the allegory? Please help out here.

I'm reading the Garnett translation, is that the best?

No literally the most akwRard

Garnett is actually the least awkward. She was a great English stylist, and her translations are awkward only if you have trouble reading Victorian prose. Pevear and Volokhonsky are the most awkward; their translations are more literal than Garnett's. They're the ones who translate "polite conversation" as "conversation of decency." Their translation of Dostoevsky's House of the Dead is titled Notes From a Dead House.

What do you even mean?

Can you put this in retard terms?

>Their translation of Dostoevsky's House of the Dead is titled Notes From a Dead House.

The full Russian title is Zapiski iz Myortvogo doma, so 'Notes' is completely appropriate.

Bump

Lol. Is Veeky Forums shitposting the highest form?

Bamp

In the Grand Inquisitor? Sorry for a late reply, couldn't get on till now. I would say it fits with this concept of selfishness. The Inquisitor believes he is doing good and is pure while he is literally talking down to Jesus himself and locked him in a cell. Al kisses Ivan like Jesus kisses the Inquisitor in an attempt to open Ivan up to his sins. Al believes (and it's pretty true) that the Inquisitor is just Ivan projecting himself into a character. Ivan has a lot of pride, I mean look at how he spends like a full page talking about how great his poem is going to be because it's sort of like an old opera about the Virgin Mary. Ivan needs to check himself is basically the message to get out of it on the surface of the reading. Katya has this in her too. She acts like she's so sacrificial when she turns out to be a bit of a selfish bitch. Grushenka (dont remember the spelling) however admits she's a bad person but turns out to be a good one. Rather than this being the idea that true charity doesn't exist, I think it's more trying to present the Christian idea that we all must admit our sins so we may be forgiven. Dostoyevsky aimed to teach Christian ideas in his work, after all.

Excellent. This gives me a lot to think about. Thanks. There is a lot more to it than I thought. I'll probably end up having to give it a second reading.

It sounds comical in English