Eciochefalaprima,el’altresanno,Addossandosialeis’ellas’arresta,Sempliciequete,elo’mperchenonsanno。“
Francesca’sexclamationtoDanteisthusrenderedbyMr。
Longfellow:——
“Andshetome:ThereisnogreatersorrowThantobemindfulofthehappytimeInmisery。“
“Edellaame:NessunmaggiordoloreChericordarsideltempofeliceNellamiseria。“
Inferno,V。
Thisisadmirable,——fullofthetruepoeticglow,whichwouldhavebeenutterlyquenchedifsomeRomanicequivalentofdolorehadbeenusedinsteadofourgoodSaxonsorrow。[53]So,too,the“Paradiso,“CantoI。,line100:——
“Whereuponshe,afterapityingsigh,HereyesdirectedtowardmewiththatlookAmothercastsonadeliriouschild。“[54]
Yetadmirableasitis,IamnotquitesurethatDr。
Parsons,bytakingfurtherlibertywiththeoriginal,hasnotsurpassedit:——
“Andshetome:ThemightiestofallwoesIsinthemidstofmiserytobecursedWithblissremembered。“
“Ond’ella,appressod’unpiosospiro,Gliocchidrizzovermeconquelsembiante,Chemadrefasoprafiglinoldeliro。“
And,finally,thebeginningoftheeighthcantoofthe“Purgatorio“:——
“’TwasnowthehourthatturnethbackdesireInthosewhosailthesea,andmeltstheheart,Thedaythey’vesaidtotheirsweetfriendsfarewell;
Andthenewpilgrimpenetrateswithlove,IfhedothhearfromfarawayabellThatseemethtodeplorethedyingday。“
“Eragial’orachevolgeildisioAinaviganti,eintenerisceilcoreLodich’hendettoaidolciamiciaddio;
Echelonuovoperegrind’amorePunge,seodesquilladilontano,Chepaiailgiornopiangerchesimore。“
Thispassageaffordsanexcellentexampleofwhatthemethodofliteraltranslationcandoatitsbest。Exceptinthesecondline,where“thosewhosailthesea“iswiselypreferredtoanyRomanicequivalentofnavigantitheversionisutterlyliteral;
asliteralastheonetheschool-boymakes,whenheopenshisVirgilattheFourthEclogue,andlumberinglyreads,“SicilianMuses,letussingthingsalittlegreater。“Butthereisnothingclumsy,nothingwhichsmacksoftherecitation-room,intheselinesofMr。Longfellow。Foreasygraceandexquisitebeautyitwouldbedifficulttosurpassthem。TheymaywellbearcomparisonwiththebeautifullinesintowhichLordByronhasrenderedthesamethought:——
“Softhourwhichwakesthewish,andmeltstheheart,Ofthosewhosailtheseas,onthefirstdayWhentheyfromtheirsweetfriendsaretornapart;
Orfillswithlovethepilgrimonhisway,Asthefarbellofvespermakeshimstart,Seemingtoweepthedyingday’sdecay。
Isthisafancywhichourreasonscorns?
Ah,surelynothingdiesbutsomethingmourns!“
Settingasidetheconcludingsentimentalgeneralization,——whichismuchmoreByronicthanDantesque,——onehardlyknowswhichversiontocallmoretrulypoetical;butforafaithfulrenderingoftheoriginalconceptiononecanhardlyhesitatetogivethepalmtoMr。Longfellow。
Thusweseewhatmaybeachievedbythemosthighlygiftedoftranslatorswhocontentshimselfwithpassivelyreproducingthedictionofhisoriginal,whoconstituteshimself,asitwere,aconduitthroughwhichthemeaningoftheoriginalmayflow。Wherethedifferencesinherentinthelanguagesemployeddonotintervenetoalloytheresult,thestreamoftheoriginalmay,asintheversesjustcited,comeoutpureandunweakened。Toooften,however,suchisthesubtlechemistryofthought,itwillcomeoutdiminishedinitsintegrity,orwillappear,bereftofitsprimitivepropertiesasamereelementinsomenewcombination。Ourchannelisatrifletooalkalineperhaps;andthatthetransferredmaterialmaypreserveitspleasantsharpness,wemayneedtothrowinalittleextraacid。ToooftenthemeredifferencesbetweenEnglishandItalianpreventDante’sexpressionsfromcomingoutinMr。Longfellow’sversionsopureandunimpairedasintheinstancejustcited。Butthesedifferencescannotbeignored。Theyliedeepintheverystructureofhumanspeech,andarenarrowlyimplicatedwithequallyprofoundnuancesinthecompositionofhumanthought。ThecauseswhichmakedolenteasolemnwordtotheItalianear,anddolentaqueerwordtotheEnglishear,arecauseswhichhavebeenslowlyoperatingeversincetheItalicanandtheTeutonpartedcompanyontheirwayfromCentralAsia。Theyhavebroughtaboutastateofthingswhichnocunningofthetranslatorcanessentiallyalter,buttotheemergenciesofwhichhemustgraciouslyconformhisproceedings。Here,then,isthesolepointonwhichwedisagreewithMr。Longfellow,thesolereasonwehaveforthinkingthathehasnotattainedthefullestpossiblemeasureofsuccess。Notthathehasmadea“realistic“
translation,——sofarweconceivehimtobeentirelyright;butthat,bydintofpushingsheerliteralismbeyonditsproperlimits,hehastoooftenfailedtobetrulyrealistic。Letushereexplainwhatismeantbyrealistictranslation。
Everythoroughlyconceivedandadequatelyexecutedtranslationofanancientauthormustbefoundeduponsomeconscioustheoryorsomeunconsciousinstinctofliterarycriticism。Asisthecriticalspiritofanage,soamongotherthingswillbeitstranslations。Nowthecriticalspiritofeveryageprevioustoourownhasbeencharacterizedbyitsinabilitytoappreciatesympatheticallythespiritofpastandbygonetimes。Intheseventeenthcenturycriticismmadeidolsofitsancientmodels;
itacknowledgednoseriousimperfectionsinthem;itsetthemupasexemplarsforthepresentandallfuturetimestocopy。LetthegenialEpicureanhenceforthwritelikeHorace,lettheepicnarratorimitatethesupremeeleganceofVirgil,——thatwastheconspicuousidea,theconspicuouserror,ofseventeenth-centurycriticism。Itoverlookedthedifferencesbetweenoneageandanother。Conversely,whenitbroughtRomanpatriciansandGreekoligarchsontothestage,itmadethembehavelikeFrenchcourtiersorCastiliangrandeesorEnglishpeers。Whenithadtodealwithancientheroes,itclothedtheminthegarbandimputedtothemthesentimentsofknights-errant。Thencametherevolutionarycriticismoftheeighteenthcentury,whichassumedthateverythingoldwaswrong,whileeverythingnewwasright。Itrecognizedcrudelythedifferencesbetweenoneageandanother,butithadawayoflookingdownuponallagesexceptthepresent。Thisintoleranceshowntowardthepastwasindeedameasureofthecrudenesswithwhichitwascomprehended。BecauseMohammed,ifhehaddonewhathedid,inFranceandintheeighteenthcentury,wouldhavebeencalledanimpostor,Voltaire,thegreatmouthpieceandrepresentativeofthisstyleofcriticism,portrayshimasanimpostor。Recognitionofthefactthatdifferentagesaredifferent,togetherwithinabilitytoperceivethattheyoughttobedifferent,thattheirdifferenceslieinthenatureofprogress,——thiswastheprominentcharacteristicofeighteenth-centurycriticism。Ofallthegreatmenofthatcentury,Lessingwasperhapstheonlyonewhooutgrewthisnarrowcriticalhabit。
Nownineteenth-centurycriticismnotonlyknowsthatinnoprecedingagehavementhoughtandbehavedastheynowthinkandbehave,butitalsounderstandsthatold-fashionedthinkingandbehaviourwasinitswayjustasnaturalandsensibleasthatwhichisnownew-fashioned。Itdoesnotflippantlysneeratanancientcustombecausewenolongercherishit;butwithanenlightenedregardforeverythinghuman,itinquiresintoitsorigin,tracesitseffects,andendeavourstoexplainitsdecay。
ItisslowtocharacterizeMohammedasanimpostor,becauseithascometofeelthatArabiaintheseventhcenturyisonethingandEuropeinthenineteenthanother。ItisscrupulousaboutbrandingCaesarasanusurper,becauseithasdiscoveredthatwhatMr。MillcallsrepublicanlibertyandwhatCicerocalledrepublicanlibertyarewidelydifferentnotions。ItdoesnottellustobowdownbeforeLucretiusandVirgilasunapproachablemodels,whilelamentingourownhopelessinferiority;nordoesittellustosetthemdownashalf-skilledapprentices,whilecongratulatingourselvesonourowncomfortablesuperiority;butittellsustostudythemastheexponentsofanageforevergone,fromwhichwehavestillmanylessonstolearn,thoughwenolongerthinkasitthoughtorfeelasitfelt。Theeighteenthcentury,asrepresentedbythecharacteristicpassagefromVoltaire,citedbyMr。Longfellow,failedutterlytounderstandDante。TothemindsofVoltaireandhiscontemporariesthegreatmediaevalpoetwaslittleelsethanaTitanicmonstrosity,——amaniac,whoseravingsfoundrhythmicalexpression;hispoemagrotesquemedley,whereinafewbeautifulverseswereburiedundertheweightofwholecantosofnonsensicalscholasticquibbling。Thisview,somewhatsoftened,wefindalsoinLeighHunt,whosewholeaccountofDanteisanexcellentspecimenofthissortofcriticism。Mr。Hunt’sfinemoralnaturewasshockedandhorrifiedbytheterriblepunishmentsdescribedinthe“Inferno。“HedidnotdulyconsiderthatinDante’stimethesefearfulthingswereanindispensablepartofeveryman’stheoryoftheworld;and,blindedbyhiskindlyprejudices,hedoesnotseemtohaveperceivedthatDante,inacceptingeternaltormentsaspartandparcelofthesystemofnature,wasnevertheless,indescribingthem,inspiredwiththatineffabletendernessofpitywhich,intheepisodesofFrancescaandofBrunettoLatini,hasmeltedtheheartsofmeninpasttimes,andwillcontinuetodosointimestocome。“Infinitepity,yetinfiniterigouroflaw!
ItissoNatureismade:itissoDantediscernedthatshewasmade。“[57]Thisremarkofthegreatseerofourtimeiswhattheeighteenthcenturycouldinnowisecomprehend。ThemenofthatdayfailedtoappreciateDante,justastheywereoppressedordisgustedatthesightofGothicarchitecture;justastheypronouncedthescholasticphilosophyanunmeaningjargon;justastheyconsideredmediaevalChristianityagiganticsystemofcharlatanry,andwerewontunreservedlytocharacterizethePapacyasablightingdespotism。Inourtimecultivatedmenthinkdifferently。Wehavelearnedthattheinterminablehair-splittingofAquinasandAbelardhasaddedprecisiontomodernthinking。[58]WedonotcurseGregoryVII。andInnocentIII。asenemiesofthehumanrace,butreverethemasbenefactors。WecanspareamorselofheartyadmirationforBecket,howeverstronglywemaysympathizewiththestalwartkingwhodidpenanceforhisfoulmurder;andwecanappreciateDante’spooropinionofPhiliptheFairnolessthanhisdenunciationofBonifaceVIII。ThecontemplationofGothicarchitecture,aswestandentrancedinthesublimecathedralsofYorkorRouen,awakensinourbreastsagenuineresponsetothemightyaspirationswhichthusbecameincarnateinenduringstone。AndthepoemofDante——whichhasbeenwelllikenedtoagreatcathedral——wereverentlyaccept,withallitsquaintcarvingsandhieroglyphicsymbols,astheauthenticutteranceoffeelingswhichstillexist,thoughtheynolongerchoosethesameformofexpression。
Carlyle,HeroesandHero-Worship,p。84。
SeemyOutlinesofCosmicPhilosophy,Vol。I。p。
Acenturyago,therefore,atranslationofDantesuchasMr。
Longfellow’swouldhavebeenimpossible。Thecriticismofthattimewasinnomoodforrealisticreproductionsoftheantique。
Iteithersuperciliouslyneglectedtheantique,orelsedressedituptosuititsownnotionsofpropriety。Itwasnotlikeaseven-leaguebootwhichcouldfiteverybody,butitwaslikeaProcrustes-bedwhicheverybodymustbemadetofit。ItsgreatexponentwasnotaSainte-Beuve,butaBoileau。ItstypicalsampleofareproductionoftheantiquewasPope’stranslationoftheIliad。Thatbook,wepresume,everybodyhasread;andmanyofthosewhohavereaditknowthat,thoughanexcellentandspiritedpoem,itisnomoreHomerthantheageofQueenAnnewastheageofPeisistratos。OfthetranslationsofDantemadeduringthisperiod,thechiefwasunquestionablyMr。Cary’s。[59]Foramanbornandbroughtupinthemostunpoeticalofcenturies,Mr。
Carycertainlymadeaverygoodpoem,thoughnotsogoodasPope’s。ButitfellfarshortofbeingareproductionofDante。
Theeighteenth-centurynoteringsoutloudlyoneverypageofit。
Likemuchotherpoetryofthetime,itislabouredandartificial。Itssentencesareofteninvolvedandoccasionallyobscure。Take,forinstance,CantoIV。25-36ofthe“Paradiso“:
Thisworkcomesattheendoftheeighteenth-centuryperiod,asPope’stranslationofHomercomesatthebeginning。
“ThesearethequestionswhichtheywillUrgeequally;andthereforeIthefirstOfthatwilltreatwhichhaththemoreofgall。
Ofseraphimhewhoismostenskied,Moses,andSamuel,andeitherJohn,Choosewhichthouwilt,norevenMary’sself,Havenotinanyotherheaventheirseats,Thanhavethosespiritswhichsolatethousaw’st;
Normoreorfeweryearsexist;butallMakethefirstcirclebeauteous,diverselyPartakingofsweetlife,asmoreorlessAfflationofeternalblisspervadesthem。“
HereMr。CarynotonlyfailstocatchDante’sgrandstyle;hedoesnotevenwriteastyleatall。Itistooconstrainedandawkwardtobedignified,anddignityisanindispensableelementofstyle。Withoutdignitywemaywriteclearly,ornervously,orracily,butwehavenotattainedtoastyle。ThisisthesecondshortcomingofMr。Cary’stranslation。LikePope’s,itfailstocatchthegrandstyleofitsoriginal。UnlikePope’s,itfrequentlyfailstoexhibitanystyle。