I think the first translation in better in a poetic sense. However, I think the second translation is easier to read and is more modern. As for which one I think is better, I would have to say neither one is better than the other. They both are two different translations that have many of the same aspects, but they also express their words in very different ways. I think this, even though they are so closely related, makes it too hard to compare one to the other in terms of which is better.
I thought the first translation provided better imagery. I could actually see a "golden grove" with silent cranes flying overhead. I also thought that this translation was referring to death. I thought that it was saying that everyone dies eventually, but one should live without regret. Death happens to everyone, so we should take it peacefully, and not worry about what we have or have not done up to this point.
The second translation, seemed a bit more bitter. Although it still says the same kind of thing, I couldn't picture it as well as I could the first. The second translation uses the word "mournful" as opposed to "pensive," in the first. It says "I find nothing I would relive today," while the first translation says, "There's nothing I regret."
Both versions, I found to be kind of sad, even though, I think the point was to find happiness and peace, instead of regret. The whole picture of someone standing alone in a silent, dying field, however, did not give me the feeling of being at peace before death or before leaving. They spoke of no regrets and how everything will continue to grow on, die, and grow back again, but also gave me the sense that is was trying to say no one would really be remembered once they are gone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is a very thoughtful response. The initial statement in your first and second paragraph give away your bias:) and you are right: even from the point of view of meter, the first translation is closer to the original.
Post a Comment