Issues regarding translations don’t matter because works of art are merely mediums through which audiences get acquainted with their own emotions and feelings – when we read, we are not looking into the minds of the authors, but rather mirroring them with our own thoughts and experiences. In this sense, authors’ original purposes don’t matter – what matters is how they are perceived. Translations can never be wrong then because it means not just translating the language but translating the words and tweaking the ideas to make the feelings that the translator perceives more assimilable.
shotgun (personal vendetta, individual family) – machine gun (impersonal)
Edwards – ambiguous, irrational, dreamlike realm; Hughes – direct, rational mother (devil, too early on)
If “translations” inevitably lead to dilution of / distortion of original meanings, does that mean editing by the same author over the span of two weeks is the same as well? We are fluid
Which culture is more likely to foster surrealism?
Flexible or rigid? One inspires and the other forces.
Duende is only possible if the quality is already high
The Importance of Being Ernest‘s duende? Can you expose yourself through sarcasm? Maybe it’s underneath the sarcasm? Does the semi-opaque nature of duende makes it all the more genuine? relatable?
“duende is only possible if the quality is already high” — I love that, Nimisha. But I wonder . . . I can imagine a very amateurish actor exposing their own fears and feelings —to the point where it’s a distraction from the material. The same with a singer or writer, I guess — okay, okay, you’ve got me. I agree.
But I want to say that there are some blues singers, for example, or punk —or poets— who succeed even though they are not, technically, very accomplished. They can’t do the same thing twice in a row —no craft— but they really give it their all each time. That seems real to me too!
Hi, This is Libby – I don’t know why someone moved my post to Nimisha’s row on the homework sheet