DOCTORAL THESIS Ruby: A Contemporary Re-interpretation of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam Ahanchian, Michael Zand Award date: 2014 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Ruby: A Contemporary Re-interpretation of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam by Michael Zand Ahanchian MA (Cantab), MRes A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD Department of English and Creative Writing University of Roehampton Abstract This study is a practice-based creative writing project with an accompanying thesis. It consists of Ruby, a work of poetry and prose, along with a thesis that seeks to contextualise it within literary poetics. The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is the creative point of origin of Ruby. It is not a translation of The Rubaiyat in the traditional sense but rather a re-interpretation of the earlier text. Whilst Ruby heavily references The Rubaiyat in terms of content and narrative structure, it is an original piece of work set in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Ruby is strongly influenced by contemporary British and American poetry, and the references for the poem have partly been shifted to modern-day Britain. I have included a range of recognisable forms of “conventional” poetry, including quatrains, sonnets and haiku. However, there is also creative re-working and development using a variety of more experimental methods, through original poetic compositions, the use of “found material” (i.e. texts and images from other sources carefully placed for poetic effect) and via word montage. The result is a hybrid piece of work, which incorporates a variety of textual and visual forms. The thesis is divided into four chapters: the first is an introduction to the nature and aims of Ruby, and an overview of how it fits with other current research activity in the field of “poetic translation.” The second chapter explicates the format and structure of the creative piece, particularly its visual layout. The third chapter contains the text itself and a detailed critical commentary, which explores specific allusions in the text and how they connect the work to broader literary themes. The final chapter is a conclusion, exploring the implications of the poetics of Ruby to the subsequent treatment of re-interpretative translations of this kind. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... 1 Chapter One: Something Old, Something New .............................................................. 2 Chapter Two: This is “What It Is” ................................................................................ 24 Chapter Three: “Ruby” ................................................................................................. 27 Chapter Four: Forging Omar Khayyam ..................................................................... 182 Ruby vs. The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam – Table of Comparison ........................... 190 Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 193 Acknowledgements I would like to express my deep gratitude to Professor Peter Jaeger and Jeff Hilson, my research supervisors, for their patient guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and useful critiques of this research work. I would also like to thank Dr. Mark Knight, for his invaluable advice and assistance during the early days of the project. My grateful thanks also extends to the rest of the Department of English and Creative Writing at the University of Roehampton, in particular Professor Laura Peters, Professor Jenny Hartley, Professor Martin Priestman and Ariel Kahn. I would like to offer my special thanks to Jenny Watt and Sarah Solly – their willingness to give their time and resources so generously has been very much appreciated. I wish to thank all the poets and writers who have made such an important contribution to the creative development of Ruby, none more so than Marcus Slease, but also Dr. Tim Atkins, Harry Gilonis, Alex Davies, Chris Gutkind, James Harvey and the Writers’ Collective at The Camden Creative Colony. I would also like to thank Paul Davies for his generous support and encouragement during the latter stages of the project. Finally, a very special thank you goes to my family for their support and encouragement throughout my study, especially to my wife Carolyn – without her patience and love, none of this extraordinary adventure into the world of Omar Khayyam would have been possible. 1 Chapter One: Something Old, Something New Persian poetry has suffered badly from those who are determined to find an arbitrary mysticism in everything … you would think there was nothing else than nightingales which are not birds, roses which are not flowers, and pretty boys who are God in disguise. (Bunting, in Pound 5) Ruby is a contemporary reinterpretation of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, which is a series of poems originally written in Persian and attributed to the poet and mathematician Omar Khayyam (1048–1131). A reinterpretation of a Middle Eastern text of this kind produces at least two distinct but inter-connected challenges. The first is to create a poetic re-working of the original that avoids the Orientalist cultural stereotypes often associated with Middle Eastern literature.i The second is to produce a new piece of work that is relevant to contemporary British culture and is integrated within a framework of contemporary poetics. Underlying both these challenges is the assertion that a re-interpretation of The Rubaiyat should do more than simply attempt to accurately translate its original representational ‘meanings’.ii Instead, the aim is to create a new piece of work connecting with a field of activity which Tim Atkins describes in The Seven Types of Translation (2011), as “translation as it is understood and practised by poets – poetic translation” (2). Poetic translation, according to Atkins, is the practice of using source texts as a springboard from which to write. In other words, this is a poetic process that is more concerned with the creativity of the translated piece than with preserving the authenticity of the original. Poetic translation 2 often uses foreign texts as sources for inspiration in the creation of new work, with varying degrees of fidelity of form or content to the original text. These two inter-linked challenges, to reflect Middle Eastern culture whilst integrating with contemporary British and North American Poetics, require a delicate interplay between “the old” and “the new.” The old is represented by the original text, in this case The Rubaiyat, which is the inevitable starting point of this research, whilst the new is my contemporary response to it. Both of these challenges require a sophisticated treatment of the old, avoiding cultural clichés but providing a recognisable historical and literary context. Yet both also demand originality in the new – they require a creative act that Kent Johnson describes in his essay “Prosody and the Outside” as “an imaginative transformation of the original” (25). In his preface to Omar Pound’s Arabic and Persian Poems (1970), Basil Bunting laments what he believes to be the poor state of Persian poetry in translation. Whilst he acknowledges the linguistic faithfulness of many translations of Persian verse, he is frustrated by the inability of these texts to reflect the cultural richness embedded in the original works. Too frequently, for instance, there is an over-emphasis on mystical allusions or naturalistic imagery. There is often, Bunting argues, no reflection of the subtleties and ambiguities of the original Persian works. These issues are compounded by an over-reliance on exotic or archaic language, which assigns the texts to being of historical interest rather than contemporary relevance. He contends that the workings of translation itself are at the heart of this predicament. Translation, in the conventional sense of the word, is usually based on the premise that an accurate transference of representational meaning is a primary purpose. Bunting, however, highlights that in the process of seeking accuracy in representational meaning, key aspects of Persian poetry 3 are being lost. He cites Hafez, for instance, whose work depends almost entirely on sound devices, literary references and contemporaneous cultural contexts – none of which are reflected in English translations. Bunting also gives the example of Manuchehri, who applies a variety of motifs and conceits in his poetry that are deliberately ambiguous and laced with multiple meanings. Translations of Manuchehri, Bunting contends, often focus on a single perspective (such as a specific school of Islamic philosophy) rather than