Previous Page of 68Next Page

Faust

spinner.gif

FAUST ***

Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Charles Bidwell and the PG Online Distributed Proofreading Team

FAUST

A TRAGEDY

TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN

OF

GOETHE

WITH NOTES

BY

CHARLES T BROOKS

SEVENTH EDITION.

BOSTON TICKNOR AND FIELDS

MDCCCLXVIII.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, by CHARLES T. BROOKS, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Rhode Island.

UNIVERSITY PRESS: WELCH, BIGELOW, AND COMPANY, CAMBRIDGE.

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.

Perhaps some apology ought to be given to English scholars, that is, those who do not know German, (to those, at least, who do not know what sort of a thing Faust is in the original,) for offering another translation to the public, of a poem which has been already translated, not only in a literal prose form, but also, twenty or thirty times, in metre, and sometimes with great spirit, beauty, and power.

The author of the present version, then, has no knowledge that a rendering of this wonderful poem into the exact and ever-changing metre of the original has, until now, been so much as attempted. To name only one defect, the very best versions which he has seen neglect to follow the exquisite artist in the evidently planned and orderly intermixing of _male_ and _female_ rhymes, _i.e._ rhymes which fall on the last syllable and those which fall on the last but one. Now, every careful student of the versification of Faust must feel and see that Goethe did not intersperse the one kind of rhyme with the other, at random, as those translators do; who, also, give the female rhyme (on which the vivacity of dialogue and description often so much depends,) in so small a proportion.

A similar criticism might be made of their liberty in neglecting Goethe's method of alternating different measures with each other.

It seems as if, in respect to metre, at least, they had asked themselves, how would Goethe have written or shaped this in English, had that been his native language, instead of seeking _con amore_ (and _con fidelità_) as they should have done, to reproduce, both in spirit and in form, the movement, so free and yet orderly, of the singularly endowed and accomplished poet whom they undertook to represent.

As to the objections which Hayward and some of his reviewers have instituted in advance against the possibility of a good and faithful metrical translation of a poem like Faust, they seem to the present translator full of paradox and sophistry. For instance, take this assertion of one of the reviewers: "The sacred and mysterious union of thought with verse, twin-born and immortally wedded from the moment of their common birth, can never be understood by those who desire verse translations of good poetry." If the last part of this statement had read "by those who can be contented with _prose_ translations of good poetry," the position would have been nearer the truth. This much we might well admit, that, if the alternative were either to have a poem like Faust in a metre different and glaringly different from the original, or to have it in simple and strong prose, then the latter alternative would be the one every tasteful and feeling scholar would prefer; but surely to every one who can read the original or wants to know how this great song _sung itself_ (as Carlyle says) out of Goethe's soul, a mere prose rendering must be, comparatively, a _corpus mortuum._

The translator most heartily dissents from Hayward's assertion that a translator of Faust "must sacrifice either metre or meaning." At least he flatters himself that he has made, in the main, (not a compromise between meaning and melody, though in certain instances he may have fallen into that, but) a combination of the meaning with the melody, which latter is so important, so vital a part of the lyric poem's meaning, in any worthy sense. "No poetic translation," says Hayward's reviewer, already quoted, "can give the rhythm and rhyme of the original; it can only substitute the rhythm and rhyme of the translator." One might just as well say "no _prose_ translation can give the _sense and spirit_ of the original; it can only substitute the _sense and spirit of the words and phrases of the translator's language_;" and then, these two assertions balancing each other, there will remain in the metrical translator's favor, that he may come as near to giving both the letter and the spirit, as the effects of the Babel dispersion will allow.

Previous Page of 68Next Page

Comments & Reviews

Login or Facebook Sign in with Twitter
library_icon_grey.png Add share_icon_grey.png Share

Who's Reading

Recommended