第36章

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。