Nec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus Nor word for word too faithfully tranflate, as the Earl of Rofcommon has excellently rendered it. Too faithfully is, indeed, pedantically it is a faith like that, which proceeds from fuperftition, blind and zealous. Take it in the expreffion of Sir John Denham to Sir Richard Fanshaw, on his version of the Paftor Fido. That fervile path thou nobly doft decline Of tracing word by word, and line by line. It is almost impoffible to tranflate verbally, and well, at the fame time: for the Latin (a moft severe and compendious language) often expreffes that in one word, which either the barbarity, or the narrownefs, of modern tongues cannot fupply in more. is frequent alfo that the conceit is couched in fome expreffion, which will be loft in English. Atque iidem venti vela fidemque ferent. It What Poet of our nation is fo happy as to exprefs this thought literally in English, and to ftrike wit, or almoft fense, out of it? In short, the verbal copier is incumbered with fo many difficulties at once, that he can never difintangle himself from all. He is to confider, at the fame time, the thought of his author, and his words, and to find out the counterpart to each in another language: : and, befides this, he is to confine himself to the compafs of numbers, and the flavery of rhyme. It is much like dancing on ropes with fettered legs: a man can fhun a fall by ufing caution; but the gracefulness of motion is not to be expected: and when we have faid the best of it, it is but a foolish tafk; tafk; for no fober man would put himfelf into a danger for the applaufe of efcaping without breaking his neck. We fee Ben Johnfon could not avoid obfcurity in his literal tranflation of Horace, attempted in the fame compafs of lines: nay Horace himself could fcarce have done it to a Greek Poet: Brevis effe laboro, obscurus fio: either perfpicuity or gracefulness will frequently be wanting. Horace has, indeed, avoided both these rocks in his tranflation of the three first lines of Homer's Odyffey, which he has contracted into two. Dic mihi, mufa, virum, captæ poft tempora Troja, Qui mores hominum multorum vidit & urbes. Muse, speak the man, who, fince the fiege of Troy, So many towns, fuch change of manners faw. ROSCOMMON. But then the sufferings of Ulyffes, which are a confiderable part of that fentence, are omitted: [Ὃς μάλα πολλὰ πλάγχθη:] The confideration of thefe difficulties, in a fervile, literal, tranflation, not long fince made two of our famous wits, Sir John Denham, and Mr. Cowley, to contrive another way of turning authors into our tongue, called, by the latter of them, Imitation. As they were friends, I fuppofe they communicated their thoughts on this fubject to each other; and, therefore, their reasons for it are little different. Though the practice of one is much more moderate. I take imitation of an author, in their fenfe, to be an endeavour of a later Poet to write like one, who has written before him, on the fame fubject: that is, not to tranflate his words, or to be confin'd to his fenfe, but only to fet him as a pattern, and to write, as he fuppofes that author would have done, had he lived in our age, and in our country. Yet I dare not fay that either of them have carried this libertine way of VOL. III. P rendering rendering authors (as Mr. Cowley calls it) fo far as my definition reaches. For in the Pindaric Odes, the cuftoms and ceremonies of ancient Greece are still preferved. But I know not what mischief may arise hereafter from the example of fuch an innovation, when writers of unequal parts to him fhall imitate fo bold an undertaking. To add and to diminish what we please, which is the way avowed by him, ought only to be granted to Mr. Cowley, and that too only in his tranflation of Pindar; because he alone was able to make him amends, by giving him better of his own, whenever he refused his author's thoughts. Pindar is generally known to be a dark writer, to want connexion, (I mean as to our understanding) to foar out of fight, and leave his reader at a gaze. So wild and ungovernable a Poet cannot be tranflated literally; his genius is too ftrong to bear a chain, and Samfon-like he shakes it off. A genius fo elevated and unconfined as Mr. Cowley's was but necessary to make Pindar speak English, and that was to be performed by no other way than imitation. But if Virgil, or Ovid, or any regular intelligible authors, be thus used, it is no longer to be called their work, when neither the thoughts nor words are drawn from the original: but inflead of them there is fomething new produced, which is almost the creation of another hand. By this way, it is true, fomewhat that is excellent may be invented, perhaps more excellent than the first defign; though Virgil must be ftill excepted, when that perhaps takes place. Yet he who is inquifitive to know an author's thoughts, will be disap pointed in his expectation. And it is not always that a man will be contented to have a prefent made him, when he expects the payment of a debt. To state it fairly imitation of an author is the moft advantageous way for a tranflator to fhew himself, but the greatest wrong which can be done to the memory and reputation of the dead. Sir John Denham (who advifed more liberty than he took himself) gives his reafon for his innovation, in his admirable preface before "Poetry before the translation of the second Æneid. is of fo fubtle a fpirit, that, in pouring out of one language into another, it will all evaporate; and, if a new fpirit be not added in the transfufion, there will remain nothing but a Caput Mortuum." I confefs this argument holds good against a literal tranflation; but who defends it? Imitation and verbal verfion are in my opinion the two extremes, which ought to be avoided: and therefore, when I have proposed the mean betwixt them, it will be feen how far his argument will reach. No man is capable of tranflating Poetry, who, befides a genius to that art, is not a master both of his author's language, and of his own: nor must we underftand the language only of the Poet, but his particular turn of thoughts and expreffion, which are the characters that distinguish, and as it were individuate him from all other writers. When we are come thus far, it is time to look into ourselves, to conform our genius to his, to give his thought either the fame turn, if our tongue will bear it, or, if not, to vary but the dress, not to alter or destroy the substance. The like care must be taken of the more outward ornaments, the words. When they appear (which is but feldom) literally graceful, it were an injury to the author that they should be changed: but fince every language is fo full of its own proprieties, that what is beautiful in one, is often barbarous, nay fometimes nonfenfe in another, it would be unreasonable to limit a tranflator to the narrow compass of his author's words. It is enough if he choofe out fome expreffion which does not vitiate the fenfe. I fuppofe he may ftretch his chain to fuch a latitude; but, by innovation of thoughts, methinks, he breaks it. By this means the fpirit of an author may be transfufed, and yet not loft: and thus it is plain, that the reafon alledged by Sir John Denham has no farther force than to expreffion: for thought, if it be tranflated truly, cannot be loft in another language; but the words that convey it to our apprehenfion (which P 2 (which are the image and ornament of that thought) may be fo ill chofen, as to make it appear in an unhandsome dress, and rob it of its native luftre. There is, therefore, a liberty to be allowed for the expreffion; neither is it neceffary that words and lines fhould be confined to the measure of their original. The fenfe of an author, generally fpeaking, is to be facred and inviolable. If the fancy of Ovid be luxuriant, it is his character to be so; and if I retrench it, he is no longer Ovid. It will be replied, that he receives advantage by this lopping of his fuperfluous branches; but I rejoin, that a tranflator has no fuch right. When a painter copies from the life, I fuppofe he has no privilege to alter features, and lineaments, under pretence that his picture will look better: perhaps the face, which he has drawn, would be more exact, if the eyes or nose were altered; but it is his business to make it refemble the original. In two cafes only there may a feeming difficulty arife ; that is, if the thought be notoriously trivial, or difhoneft: but the fame answer will ferve for both, that then they ought not to be tranflated: -Et qua Defperes tractata nitefcere poffe, relinquas. Thus I have ventured to give my opinion on this fubject against the authority of two great men, but I hope without offence to either of their memories; for I both loved them living, and reverence them now they are dead. But, if, after what I have urged, it be thought by better judges, that the praife of a tranflation confifts in adding new beauties to the piece, thereby to recompence the lofs which it fuftains by change of language, I fhall be willing to be taught better, and to recant. In the mean time, it seems to me, that the true reason, why we have fo few versions which are tolerable, is not from the too close pursuing of the author's fenfe, but because there are so few, who have all the talents, which are requifite for tranflation, and that there is fo little praife, and fo fmall encouragement, for fo confiderable a part of learning. CANACE |