sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bragi Boddason, Dvalinn, Heimdallr, Kenning, List of kennings

THE SNORRA OF JORGE LUIS BORGES

Philip Lavender

ne of the last pieces of work to be produced by Jorge Luis Borges, Oalthough certainly one which had been a lifetime in the making, was a translation of part of a medieval Icelandic treatise on and mythology published under the title La alucinación de .1 The treatise in its entirety is sometimes called the or the Younger Edda, to distinguish it from the Poetic or Elder Edda, a collection of mythological, gnomic and heroic poems, a great deal of which find themselves inter- polated piecemeal into their younger namesake. The work is also called Snorra Edda (the title used from here onwards), after its author, Snorri Sturlusson (1179–1241). For scholars of - this work is considered a vital link not only to the medieval world but also to pre-Christian Scandinavia. This link came about tangentially, since

1 The translation is said to be by Jorge Luis Borges and María Kodama but the extent of the latter’s role (as with Borges’s other female collaborators) is difficult to determine. See Margrét Jónsdóttir’s article (139) for a theory on the matter. In the absence of further evidence, it is only Borges’s role as translator that will be assessed here.

Variaciones Borges 37 » 2014 Philip Lavender 2 (“Skáldskaparmál” and“Háttatal”), on Borges’s earlywork on La alucinacióndeGylfi Icelandic Subtext: The Model” (385–86)while Sigrún’s article on discussed. An analysis of the translation itself will be employed an at in Snorri pagan explains mythology, despite itsno longer an object being within the “,” thatisthefirst section the“Gylfaginning,” of within will serve asastarting point. This isfollowed byanexample of how anu with theoriginal text. which thepathof northerninfluence istraced through Borges’s life. Fi Legacy of ,” plays upon the title and emphasises the iden [Borges’s] literary presentation of illusory andreal worlds” (247)and of the influence of of firmbelief,in order to explicate themythologically-infused poetic al ance present Borges’s in remodelled treatise isintegrated one par into article, Brljak’sand Vladimir fascinating “Borges andtheNorth” (110), in haps themostnoteworthy example ‘Tlön, being Uqbar, OrbisTertius.” and thestrong influence thatthese may have had on Borges’ oeuvre, per Eiríksdóttir’s article, dellector: “LaAlucinación Jorge Luis Borges andthe Poetic Artof theIcelandic ,” thebasics of outlines -lore Borges andkennings, “‘Elverso incorruptible’: Jorge Luis Borges andthe life towards anoutlook more conversant withthematerial encapsulated itscomparison in larly of thiswork toBorges’s widertranslation practices, lation itself. The lusions deemed necessary for thecomprehension of thegradually disap lation tification of Borges withSnorri butsays very little aboutthe work of trans the earliestliterary aEuropean manuals in vernacular. ticular later fictional work, namely “Undr.” From there,laterin theshift the argumentation issomewhat weakened lack byKristal’s of familiarity in Margrétin Jónsdottir’s “Borges literatura y la medieval” islandesa (124) particular avividin analysis of “ElSur”elicits thisparallelism. Asimilar nally, Efraín Kristal devotes asection of his pearing traditionpearing of court, orskaldic, poetry. The brief mention isprovided anotherarticle bythesame in author, “Borges’ In thefollowing article afurther contribution isoffered. Adiscussion Little hasbeen written about to La alucinacióndeGylfi Snorra Edda Snorra Edda does notcome thelatter into andismerely named issaidtohave influenced “unquestionably . While it is a welcome contribution, particu , particular the secondin and third sections La alucinacióndeGylfi Invisible Work: Borges and Trans Snorra Edda Snorra Edda isalsoone of . Sigrún Á. , will be ------A 3 2 (called a“catálogo divino”), for hisexamples (371). Literaturas germánicas medievales The very act on of kennings writing establishes suchalink, butifanydoubt considered. Faulkes isalsoresponsible for anEnglish translation which may beof use to In 1932Borges’s article “Noticia delos dinavian source material. Snorri stone. (371) sets it in His short article, although ostensibly polemi cal andcritical of thisrhetorical device (they are called “fríasaberraciones” were toremain, Borges’s comments afootnote in thatheisone of only work, the “Háttatal,” that certain uses of kennings are defective orexces Jónsdóttir refers Jónsdóttir toit[127, 133], butIhave been unabletoconsult it). Iwill take thetext elements (7–8). [los escaldos] prodigaron” las (377). This persisted, opinion as later on, in of (e.g. calling asword afish of battle andasnake of battlein he mentions, withreference tothekennings, “el orden torrencial enque an advocate of skaldic poetry, hedoeswarnthefinal section usin of his able usage. Afew years later, anextended in redaction, Borges admitsto linking together of kennings where toapoint there are more thanfive sive, i.e. badtaste. The twoissues main which heidentifiesare themixing journal was 1933on thesame publishedin theme(presumably slightly extended—Margrét two otherintellectual traitors, asfar asheknows, who are comparable to tempt toreveal certain facets of themature Borges’s approach tohisScan the same verse—both, however, acceptable theirown in right) andthe in the firstline),in lists and kennings even suggests aparadigm of accept from the1936 “Laskenningar” asthebasisof mydiscussion here. thus in thus in those unfamiliar withOldNorse-Icelandic. tion, except when thediscussion of Borges’s sources requires previous editions tobe particularly deviations from, hissource. While Snorri himself was clearly thesecondplundering section of the been discussed elsewhere, Iwill here focus on Borges’s adaptation of, and n earl References to thetext of This appears afew years later, revised andexpanded, in Since theultraist polemical of slant thisrevised piece haspreviously Obras completas Sur y Skáldskaparmál andaconnection withthe 3 Borges seems tohave agreed withthelatter judgment, as under the title “Las kenningar.” It would seem that a booklet Snorra Edda after thelinking of kennings, describing will be toAnthony Faulkes’s four-volume edi Snorra Edda Snorra Edda kenningar was definitively forged. ” (sic) appeared the in , the“Skáldskaparmál” Historia dela eternidad and 2 - - - - -

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 3 Philip Lavender 4 “espada” pose particular problems. Neither appears thetwo in texts pre “fragua del canto: cabeza la del 4 A footnote expands upon thisincongruity: (339). InArthurGilchristBrodeur’s translation of theformer (alsoinclud The isnowhere rule Snorri’s mentioned workof in meta andwithchains Snorra Edda 5 gives “espada boca” dela and“remo boca” dela Borges’s in list. Yet not generación poesíadeIslandia” dela (137). While suchcomments present Óðinn’s ravens) of Wilhelm Ranisch’s Eddalieder, which nevertheless contains few skaldic kennings, being viously mentioned. Alook atRudolph Meissner’s monumental work on with song” (68)and“roedor deyelmos: espada” la from “helmgnawer” ed in Borges’sed in bibliography) we find: “menmay call [...]thetongue oar or tiller of theship [...]sword of speech orof themouth” (238), which he states suchaprocess that in “está compendiada de historiadela la all thekennings’ sources are soeasilylocated. Infact, theregressive ken saga byFelix Niedner from 1920)and“Inglinga saga,” anote mentioned in (373)(per an edition of the seamlessly themix, into are additions withnoNorse provenance. ferred thebibliography toin attheendof theessay). ing the overalling definition somewhere themix. within ideas heavily influenced bythemedieval source, others, while blending nings “primo delcuervo” “primo nings for “cuervo” and“dragón espada” dela for haps theWilliam Morris andEiríkur Magnússon translation) may alsohave contributed. kenning delcuervo” “primo which we are toldisused tosignify “cuervo.” kennings reveals (“descendant niðr” that “Hugins i.e. of Hugin,” of one of phors there was nojudgmentof poor taste reserved for kennings contain In theoriginal article in “Óðinn” isfrequently anglicised to“.” The mostnotable regards circular definitions. Inhislist appears the Of thelistof kennings given byBorges, themajority are traceable to de la espada: la espada definitium indefinitioneingredi nondebet desgaire enuntarjetero. (372) definición. infraccionesRisueñas como esta (yaquella venidera de en trance deocultar unacarta curiosidad ala policial, exhibe la como al or tothe 5 can beused asakenning for “raven” theskaldic andin Sur Njáls saga . Die Geschichte vomGodenSnorri several are credited toRaimundoLidaandmention ismade ) recuerdan elartificiodeaquelpersonaje de Poe que (in the translation(in of Webbe Dasent re ” seems to be “the forge” seems to be “the which foams es la segunda es la regla menor de la (atranslation of 4 Thus from thelatter, Eyrbyggja Eyrbyggja dragón ------“quarrel of swords” snake and“the is“battle” of battle” isthesword [7]). (“Hugin’s brother”) appears once translation Niedner’s in of Jon Stewart’s article on the matter). Book III, Chapter IV of Locke’s work Essay Concerning Human Understanding saga Hugin makesHugin iteven less comparable withthereductive use of thecom It isworth thatSnorri noting uses thisverse asanexample of good style deals withthe problem of date, was familiar with(see thereference “Funes in elmemorioso” and commentators. conception of dragons atthetimetended towards thesnakelike—drag wounds/battle/shields, etc. (153–54). It is worth that the Nordic noting while Borges’s regressive examples were notnecessarily fabulations, they examples of andtowards which nocriticism was directed bymedieval elements, can befound “Háttatal”: in sennu sverða” “linnr meansliter example, however, “sword” the which thefinalmeaning within includes essay, butisnotacommon kenning andtheuse of theproper name on andsnake were interchangeable synonyms. However atwo-element of basic logic, itistempting tosee connected itasbeing toLocke’s 6 ally “the snakeally “the of thequarrel of swords” andultimately “sword” (since the sein” (28). Borges theeditorialprologue doesmention itin eternidad” to“Historiadela appeared 1921, in thebibliography buthedoesnotmention itin appended to “Las since all of the“sword” kennings (there are theverse othersin asawhole) to the damascened patterns made upon the blade, as well as their “writh recorded (119). represent an insignificant usage which he would have struggled to find refer tosnakes andthusdonotmix metaphors (see above). Ultimately, ing” movementing” battle) in butare nearlyalways referred toassnake of mon noun “primo delcuervo/Raben/raven”mon noun“primo listed byBorges. in the1974edition ofin thestatement desGanzenincluding that“ImGrundwort darf nicht derSinn enthalten kenning “snake/dragon of thesword” isnottobefound. Anextended poetry corpus “Hrafns(“namesake nafni” of theraven,” i.e. raven) isalso kenningar.” That workkenningar.” hasanextensive treatment of the“Abgrenzung derKenning” It ispossible that Borges may have been familiar withMeissner’s work, which Although thenon-regressive of definition rule isa commonplace Swords, according toMeissner, are often called “snakes” (perhaps due (44), which islistedthebibliography in attheendof Borges’s 1936 6 Aloose translation based on theformer, Brüder” “Hugins Obras completas circulus in definiendo (351). , which Borges, atleastalater and in particular regressiveand in Eyrbyggja An - - - -

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 5 Philip Lavender 6 “Toward aHistory of theKenning” isnamed HerbertLocke (3:57)?What (3: 48). Intheknowledge thatthelearned framework of theforemost me Borges’s Kenning-L gests more abouthispersonal concerns abouttheuses of poetic language dieval authorityon skaldic alluded poetryisbeing to, we may interpret dynasties from thepagan gods (oratleastfrom Trojan refugees as posing descriptions were apparently a particular target for his ultraist and disdain in the definitions following terms: itisagreed, “Ithink thatadefinition is Scandinavian ones, Borges’s within work activity. is a fruitful The trained van casas suestirpelas reales deInglaterra ydeotras naciones delNorte” work by Adán, or Adam, of Bremen) is Ulf Sigurdarson’s account of his first-person narrative interpolationappearing an a within found within fictional world represented. The heart of thestory(itisdoublyframed, a eye can spotnumerous suchallusions superficially in non-septentrional ever thesource, however, Borges’s decision tohighlight thisfeature sug ous coincidence that the character a book “Elsoborno,” writing entitled in he imposes thisassessment on the medieval material. as well asinstigating apoetic crisis. Finding referencesFinding tomedieval texts andauthors, andeven medieval years after theessay on kennings), thepossibilities are nearlyendless. To later details of thetale accordingly. such as “Undr” (fromsuch as“Undr” stories. Inthecase of those which take theNorth astheirexplicit theme, journey urnos.”Inthatplace of amysterious totheland “los word, re ferred toandthenspoken hispresence, in for putshimon therun hislife than adesire toaccurately represent theOldNorse context. Literalizing the Nordic pagan gods), can already beintuitedatthestart when we hear in Adán’sin voice of “[el] sangriento culto de los demonios, de los que deri non-synonymous terms” (2: 33). Inthisrespect, could itbejustacuri of else but the showing onethe meaning nothing word by several other paid to a connection between Borges’s above-mentioned essay and the themallpoint outhere would besuperfluous. Instead, attention will be The presence of Snorri Sturlusson, who derives theScandinavian royal El libro dearena ore inPractice , 1975, publishedin around forty ------“Me repetí que renunciar al hermoso juego decombinar palabras hermo (“battle”“definitium inain definitione” is used kenning forbattle) could 50–51). The identification of Ulfasapoetis ambiguous. While hehasbeen praised Kennings always linked theriskof extensive being run into butthe chains word, heisimmediately accosted byBjarni Thorkelsson who tells himthat work. That nod, bydrawing attention totheearlieressay’s modification of theworks ofwithin Borges, perhaps here we are alsopresented withan expected offer of sanctuary, theterms bywhich hisabilitiesare recognised of meaning ontoof fewer meaning signifiers isponderedin his byUlf years of exile: almost seems tobecatching outhisyounger self. are one. one “good” kenning andoneHisbreaking “bad” of of therule although itisapparently hispoetic abilitywhich encourages un Bjarni’s and given atalisman bytheking for his Perhaps abroader reading would see thisasasubtleallusion tothenon- lier idiosyncratic pronouncements of upon skaldic therules versifying. sas era yquenohay insensato porquéindagaruna sola, acaso ilusoria” (3: structure which governs this verbally-constructed world—are different. side (althoughthismight leadustoquestion of why heproffers hishelp). such knowledge putshislife jeopardy in thefollowing andspeaks words: Doubt may be cast on Ulf’s talents,Doubt may oraslydig becast on Ulf’s may befelt from Bjarni’s to the topic ofto thetopic kennings. There isanod to andrecognition of thatprevious ironic extradiegetic reference tohisyouthful over-exuberance withregard medieval material, subtlychallenges itsauthority. The older, wiser Borges non-orthodox aninfinite kenning into regress, twiststhatchain atype of normativity of theworld we have entered—the metrics, theagglutinative paradox, where one of thecomponent partsisthereferent. This collapsing several in point directions, butonly ifone isfamiliar with Borges’s ear While theproblematic andunityisa of infinity common conceit Following thescene theking’s in court where Ulfhearstheimpossible sangre ybatalla dehombres batalla. ala Recuerdo haberoídoesasfiguras Soy deestirpe al padre demipadre. Tú yyo somospoetas; te salvaré. (3: 49) skalds . Entuditirambo apodaste agua espadaala dela drápa (or“praise poem”), and - - -

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 7 Philip Lavender 8 “calmoso Gradus adParnassum” (thesame book which Borges thecharac A L (which somecommentators believe tobealater interpolation) followed by The Perón regime’s penchantfor Argentine socialrealism pushedBorges The tension between continuity andchange Borges’s in relation with alucinación deGylfi given “Laskenningar” in isalmostidentical tothatin Germanic greatness thewar during years, healsoemphasises thesteadily Old Norse literature makes summarydescriptions dubious. While Brljak, germánicas challenge, byBorges’s judging earlierdescription of the various women his life, in from Norah Lange toMaría Kodama. The works vouched for byBorges’s own “automythographical” interpretations of whole are identified, again byBrljak (110)andalso Margrét Jónsson (138), find their wayin an only slightly revisedintroduction into the form of ends of theliterary spectrum. Yet alongside thisdevelopment, which is etic language. The second, already discussed, is“Skáldskaparmál,” where of mythological stories which are useful interpreting kennings in andpo of the as acritical example stage of the“terminal of theconventionalization of among others, notes thattheyoung ultraist Borges used thekennings as almostidentical. Moreover thesections on Snorri andthe his passion, we findsurprising consistency. Brljak suggests a continu Borges’s interest Snorri in andskaldic poetry. Itwould have alsobeen a stay the same, seems curiously aptthiscase. in just theSecond World War butalsodomestic political issues played arole. themselves alsoresist large-scale change. For example, thelistof kennings rebelliously towards themore obscure geographical andchronological the 1950sonwards “acult which into illuminates (122). [his]destiny” Not influence rising of Old Norse and Germanic materialin Borges’s life from the three sections. main To recap, a collection thefirstis“Gylfaginning,” ter gives toFunes “Funes in order elmemorioso” in toquashhisbudding interest ). in As already stated, Borges chose to translate only one part Borges’sity in use of OldNorse asaromantic of connection point with ” (102)anddistances himself from (certain interpretations of) ate The latter work ustotheculmination (andperhaps brings acme) of Snorra Edda Gylfaginning and Literaturas germánicas medievales . The work asawhole isdivided ashortprologue upinto . The cliché thatthemore change, things themore they . The latter two works asa Antiguas literaturas Snorra Edda Snorra Edda asa La - - -

“Borges removes divine elementsfrom theoriginal toemphasize magical While thelatter isacloser translation, GilchristBrodeur translates with“, they La alucinacióndeGylfi Literaturas germánicas medievales 7 Curiously enoughitisnotimmediately apparent. Intheintroduction to certainly thecase. verdadera” (151). Borges inverts this: byomitting theprologue thepagan way for of theprimacy mythic continuity. This isperhaps further high of themore mature Borges. The withpoetical fascination ingenuity makes also pointed in thedirectionalso pointedin of Felix Niedner andGustav Neckel’s German aspects anddreamlike qualities”(80)andaslong aswe take divine tore and thematically from distinct skaldic poetry), withonly two verses of shifts theemphasisfrom deceit todream (80–81). The original word is“sjónhverfingar” shapechangings” becomes aseries “Iplanned of hallucinations for you” andthusBorges suffice. He states thattheoriginal wordingla Byock) (à “Ihave tricked you withmagical say, Aye (40). has his housing” If Borges were influencedlatter by the then he isnot pur lish (already connection mentioned in with“Laskenningar”), suggesting cosmogoníala pagana, quiere recordar a los lectores otra, la cristiana, la la lighted byBorges’s dropping of theperhaps non-authorial prologue. In skaldic present. poetrybeing This issignificantinterests of thechanging Borges erases thedivine “ bytranslating lives” insteadof Heimdall, “there they say, over rules sacred places” (174). which, while justifiablytranslatable as “optical illusions” or‘magical deceptions,” con fer only toChristianelementsandnotpagan divinities thenthisismost those kennings are out. laid Athird section, which focuses on questions of to atranslation of the translation of 1925. A third translation Germanandappended (againinto that it may have been influential. In is, moreover, mostlyeddic (i.e. taken from the is theone thatcontains theleastpoetry. That poetrywhich itdoescontain tains thebasic elements‘sight-twistings.” GilchristBrodeur translates itas“eye- mention ismadeof ArthurGilchrist Brodeur’s 1916translation Eng into material issubjected tonocorrective. Kristal perspicaciously observes that metrics isnamed “Háttatal.” Ofthethree sections, main the illusions” (66)withnoapparent intent toskew theinterpretation. Kristal alsosays that posely erasing divine elementsbutsimplyaccurately reproducing aprecursor’s work. As already noted Kristal falls error into so. bynotdoing Acouple of examples may In considering Borges’s translation, itisworth identifyinghissource. , when thecharacter of Snorri Sturluson isdiscussed, Poetic Edda he explains that“Snorri,he explains antes deexponer ) is mentioned in theshortbibliography) ismentioned in Literaturas medievales germánicas þar Heimdall kveðja valda véum Poetic Edda andmetrically Gylfaginning ” as“where we are 7 - - - - -

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 9 Philip Lavender 10 Jónsson directly, since GilchristBrodeur’s seemingly haphazard addi Gilchrist Brodeur, and Niedner andNeckel, bothtook astheirsource text 9 of the20 a different direction from Borges’s work. GilchristBrodeur’s listis, on Niedner and Neckel’s attempts to elicit the etymology of the names by Finnur Jónsson’s Icelandic edition from 1907(xxi; 8). Borges’s translation of thecoordinating conjunction andhisre “and” upon which saidedition isbased. wasin 1982, firstpublished appears not tohaveinfluenced Borges and presents aslight found attheendof theearlieressay “Noticia kenningar,” delas (sic) that the sixteenth Borges’s verse “Gylfaginning,” in source main becomes ap text, despite several available. being tions three translations butnever anOldNorse-Icelandic edition of the tions tohissource—an between “Nordri” “and” and“Sudri,” semicolons the otherhand, almostidentical toBorges’s. The only differences liein themwithcognatetranslating morphemesfrom Germantakes themin ing nomenclatureing for characters his Middle residing Earth),in which is may satisfyourselves thatBorges theOld Norse isnotusing text of Finnur moval of theletter “ parent. ly different text from thatappearing Borges’s in translation. 8 being Hugo ofbeing 1892. Gering’s Thus, throughout his career Borges men Alþjófr, , Austri, Vestri, (1907) Bífurr, Báfurr, etc. Nípingr, Dáinn, Nár, Náinn, Norðri, Suðri, Nýi okNiði, Finnur JónssonFinnur Numbering of verses differs somewhat according totheedition andthemanuscript See, for example, Anthony Faulkes’ Taking thelistof names (familiar tofans of Tolkien for provid 9 th

century editorial history(xxxiii–xxxiv). Faulkes’s edition, incidentally, which Aldieb, Dwalinn, Öster, Wester, Biwur, Bawur, etc Niping, Da-inn, Nar, Na-inn, Norder, Süder, Neu undNid, Neckel (1925) Niedner and ý ,” since suchaletter doesnotexist Spanish. in We Edda: Prologue andGylfaginning 8 The two later translations, those of Althjófr, Dvalinn; Austri, Vestri, (1916) Bifurr, Báfurr, etc. Gilchrist Brodeur Nípingr, Dáinn, Nár, Náinn, Nordri andSudri, Nýi andNidi, Althjófr, Dvalinn; Austri, Vestri, Bifurr, Báfurr, etc. Nípingr, Dáinn, Nár, Náinn, Nordri ySudri, Nyi yNidi, Borges (1984) for abrief summary ------“warlocks areof Wilharm” (since the Icelandic verb“meiða” “to means Abismo” (30). In other cases, however, Borges shows a conservatism Thus “,” atype of primeval bottomless pit, istranslated by Gilchrist Brodeur as“Yawning Void” (20)andthenbyBorges as“Gran graph, which is marked as optional by Gilchrist Brodeur, considering a give thenames of thecharacters theirstories tothemselves in (andthus Christian frame tointerfere withthetransmission of thepagan material. Icelandic edition, aswell Niedner andNeckel’s asin Germantranslation, cal circular andtheOldNorse ) verse ispreceded byaprose passage cerning previous editions’ acceptance orrejection of thepassage. Borges, cluded withoutcomment GilchristBrodeur’s source, in Finnur Jónsson’s whereby GilchristBrodeur’s creative translations are implicitly shown to omission of thefinal paragraph of harm” andGilchristBrodeur presumable wishestoemphasise theinsalu Brodeur’s. When thelatter translates “ Borges was notworking withoutanOldIcelandic text. Many terms used Borges’s translation. lates “Sólr.”The referent here isthe“sun” (i.e. thewheel of , magi hechiceros simplyas“los line [descienden]deVilmeithi” (27)showing latable, deep orasconstructs gaining significance from etymological reso logue to the entire work, possibly addition. a later Christianizing It is in falsely propagate themselves beliefin aspagan divinities), is, like thepro following names suchas“Dvalinn”—are carried over seamlessly into text, 106)as“Elfin-beam” (84), Borges backtrackslaconically and trans that hemusthave been looking atanIcelandic text aswell asGilchrist rendered otherlanguages into thecase (in of Germanic languages much in in more easilyduetocognates withshared roots) withabitof ingenuity. nances andtheallusiveness of compounding, andthuscapable of being presumably asaresult of hispaganist bias(Brljak 111), omitsthispara paragraph, which in following theirlengthy discourse theÆsir decideto but Gilchrist Brodeur sets it off with a statement squared in brackets con brious nature of thebirthplace of thewarlocks) (18). Borges translates the be superfluous. GilchristBrodeur translates“vitkar allir frá Vilmeiði” as Gylfaginning Although GilchristBrodeur’s translation source, isclearlythemain Another clearsign of Borges’ reliance upon GilchristBrodeur ishis can eitherbeconsidered proper names andthusuntrans Gylfaginning Álfröðull ” (from Finnur Jónsson’s . The authenticity of this ------

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 11 Philip Lavender 12 10 does nottrytocapture thepoetic variety of theOldNorse text butreduces contain kennings. Two are theskaldic verses (thefirstto bequotedin the work asawhole) andone isaneddic verse. Itshouldbenoted thatBorges isreferredthe “sól” where Icelandic and in todirectly isfeminine (“sól” his treatment of thekennings present theworkorder. in isin Oftheap his reduction of thepoetic compounds justmentioned, anassessment of Nevertheless, considering Borges’s withkennings earlierfascination and show aninsight theoverall into tone of Borges’s work. rounding text). translates theverses prose, into italicized albeit andset of from itssur translation. treatment of it. of theprose Hishandling isbyandlarge aclose literal rial. the synonyms, thepoetic compounds, including down tothefinalmean addition of isamasculinizing uncertain ending purport).the “-r” Borges ing of thewholeing trope. Inthisheshows anextreme rejection of theword proximately sixty-six verses contained in play favour of thepoetin of of theclarity thetransmitter of mythic mate ennitungl glöð (12) svát afrennirauknum Gefjun dró frá Gylfa vallrauf, fjogur haufuð. fyr vineyjar víðri rauk, Danmarkar auka.; Finnur JónssonFinnur (1907) báru øxn okáttabáru The first reads as follows (kennings andtranslationsin italics): Having identifiedBorges’s source we can look more closely athis A full assessment isnotpossible here. observations, Kristal’s despite theirflaws, djúpröðuls öðla , þarsgingu 10 Much thesame can besaidfor themajority of thepoetry. , gladly over, eight The oxen bore, more Till from therunning freehold Gefjun drew from Gylfi O’er the field’s wide O’er thefield’s Gilchrist Brodeur (1916) Denmark’s increase; the plowing. (14) browlights booty, andfour headsin beasts sweat reeked, to the wave-trove’s , , eyes, gleaming Gylfaginning - de frente cabezas ensutarea. (22) alegremente acreció elterritorio de sacó deGylfi Dinamarca. Losbueyes tenían ocho hasta queelsudorde Borges (1984) los animalesquecorren botín delcampo, ycuatro only three of them , sobre elancho ojos, luces el tesoro , - - - - “gold”—the would “treasure once of thefatherland” again beZealand, a When thereferent isgiven theriddleisnegated andtheaddition words (“röðull”) istreasure ora“trove.” Borges renders thissimply as“el tesoro.” (“forehead-stars”) isacompound word which functions like akenning The debates over theinterpretation of skaldic suchcruxes in poetryre This verse, which therelocation explains of aclodof Swedish andthe land Edda gestion of (which an island could be deemed to be a circular the object in quires thatwe atraining can befairly sure hadnotbeen available toBorges difficulties. “ conundrums which atone time preoccupied Borges hadlost a great deal with thesea there could, however (andpossibly addition), in bethesug fits nicely withthe is rest plough of the of the fatherland” verse—“the one commentator has read as a kenning for a plough (Frank 109), which of their charm. and sowe may forgive himfor sidestepping suchissues. Itisnevertheless thegenitivea nounin (nom. “ Brodeur’s translation, andthenisdutifully reproduced Borges’s in own. lation of thekenning ispassed over. This strongly suggests thatthepoetic sea” thecase (orin “sunof thedeep”) isacommonly used kenning for sure might alsobeimplied, since acircle can bethesunand“fire of the would alsobeZealand. of island thefatherland” sea)—“the Goldortrea ferent story: fertile and strategically important location. the plough that drags Zealand into existence.the ploughthatdrags into Zealand Since “deep” is associated the sea (composed of “djúp” and“öðla,” “deep-fatherland”) anditssun ing whiching is taken wave’s up by Gilchrist Brodeur—“the freehold” is “ofing thefatherland.” “Djúpröðull” means“deep-circle” which atleast noteworthy thateven theopportunity torender Gilchrist-Brodeur’s trans mythical origins Denmark, of in Zealand isthefirstto appearin become poetic adornment. but gets placed apposition in totheoverall (“eyes”) meaning Gilchrist in The interpretation of thekenning “djúpröðuls öðla” presents more The following verse, alsocontaining akenning, presents aslightly dif Interpretative difficulties aside, it would seem to be this final read . It is attributed to century). Boddason (mid-ninth “Ennitungl” Öðla ” could beanadverb “swiftly”oritcould meaning be öðli ”), andthuspartof akenning, mean Snorra ------

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 13 Philip Lavender 14 This verse theprose isinserted into text order in toelucidate thefact that Óðinn’s hall hasshieldsfor tiles. The fact isshown through theuse of certain types of , theoddkenning doesappear (Clunies Ross 103): eddic poetryismuchmore restrained thanskaldic poetrywithregard to final meaning were given, thenthe reader would not interveningsee the of thekenning, rather thanreducing ittoitsbase meaning, since itisthese of rocks. BothGilchristBrodeur andBorges theconstituent maintain parts Eddic verse, taken from unpacked, describessomeVikings protecting themselves from abarrage sented. steps which give sense totheverse thecontext within which in itispre that justify the inclusion ofthat justifytheinclusion thetext andnotthefinalmeaning. If only the the kenning “Sváfnis salnæfrar” (thatis, thehall-tiles of Sváfnir, which is aname for Óðinn)tomean“shields.”The of theverse, meaning when Á baki léku blíkja, grjótbjörg gnata, en himinn klofnar.en himinn (16) en gífrrata; Sváfnis salnæfrar sól valtíva; skínn afsverði seggir hyggjandi. (13) ferr sunnan með troða halirhelveg, Finnur JónssonFinnur (1907) JónssonFinnur (1907) barðir váru grjóti, The final in verse sviga lævi , Gylfaginning Völuspá The rock-crags crash; the Surtr fares from thesouth On hissword shimmers Heaven iscloven. (17) Heroes tread -way; Gilchrist Brodeur (1916) with fiends are reeling; the sunof theWar-Gods; Odin’s hall-shingles shrewd sea-farers. (14) stones, On theirbacks they let Gilchrist Brodeur (1916) beam, sore battered with switch-eating flame , atype of prophetic cosmogony. Although thatcontains akenning isactually an , the ,- del Infierno. El Cielo se espada brilla elsoldelos Sale delsurSurtr con monios se retuercen. Los Héroes elCamino pisan Dioses Guerra. dela Las rocas se rompen. Losde Borges (1984) parte. (26) llama quedevora de Odín diestros navegantes con piedras. (23) cargaron Sobre sushombros los Borges (1984) quehabíanpulido las tejas dela sala . Enesa una - - “Sviga lævi” means “the destruction of brushwood” andisakenning“Sviga of destruction brushwood” for means“the lævi” Gylfi Gilchrist Brodeur translates thisbyexplicitly stating “flame” andgiving definitions. laterThe much reference showsin “Undr” an acute tothis debió irse desvaneciendo el interés exótico de estas amplias comparaciones claimed to be pushing theboundariesof research. tobepushing claimed Hisaimwas apparently cated on thebestway totranslate kennings, theolderBorges looked back with awrysmileandcontented himself withdrawing from themeanings way andgo straight tothesource. Perhaps alsoamore humbleapproach fire (see“perdición in Borges’s delosárboles” in “Las list kenningar”). other talented individuals’ efforts. his approach, particular from translating in atranslation, might notmeet awareness of hisprevious specialuses (andabuses?) of Nordic material. In and stagnation. Yet even earlyon hewas making interventions the into ambitions. 1980, In an interview with Daniel Bourne in Borges to claimed his lists. This omission ismitigated when, asLynnandShumway rightly have been obliged toanswertheaffirmative. in onthe Inhisfirstwritings By theendof hislife, however, Borges could bypass thatenigmatic path later life Borges returned toSnorri butthistimewith anew focus. While lovingly collected kennings while them as asign criticising of decadence metáforas[?]las state, kennings come to represent for Borges de acceso “vías al mito” (130). subject Borges explicitly leaves outthekennings mythological involving según elBorges maduro empezaba adenunciar falsa la originalidad en sense of an intense fire. Again the riddling constituent parts of the ken references, passing over alarge section of “Skáldskaparmál” when making tion gets ridof anymention of brushwood orswitches leaving merely the the exacting standards of professional academics thefield, in Borges never to his linguistic abilities contributed down to thisscaling of hisskaldic it theattributive accompaniment of “switch-eating.” Borges’s transla material presented bySnorri, aswe can see hisattitude in toregressive arening collapsed. bivalent attitude toitrevolved around questions of poetic ingenuity. He be “attempting OldNorse” andsoalthoughayounger Borges had pontifi In conclusion, Borges was early on attracted to Snorri’s work. Hisam Lynn andShumway, theirarticle on in Borges andkennings, ask“ suggests thathadthey followed thetrail right totheend, they would ” (129). They answer thenegative, in but La alucinaciónde ¿no - - - - -

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 15 Philip Lavender 16 entire life. Creating novel imagery hadgiven way toadesire topropagate humility in thefacehumility in of theriddleof skaldic verse, which ledhimtoforego age-old traditions andperhaps itwas amixture of adesire for and clarity therein. the challenge blocks of of thebuilding thekennings translating contained to transmit mythsandlegends thathadcaptivated himthroughout his University of Copenhagen Philip Lavender —. —. —. —. —. Works cited Gilchrist Brodeur, Arthur. Clunies Ross, Margaret. Kristal, Efraín. Frank, Roberta. Finnur Jónsson, ed. Faulkes, Anthony. Brljak, Vladimir. “Borges andtheNorth.” Bourne, Daniel. “AConversation withJorge Luis Borges.” Borges, Jorge Luis andMaría Kodama. Borges, Jorge Luis andMaría EstherVázquez. Borges, Jorge Luis. “Noticia deloskenningar.” Snorri Sturlusson: Edda: Skáldskaparmál Snorri Sturlusson: Edda: Prologue andGylfaginning Obras completas Obras completas 1998. Alianza, 1984. 99 (1980) (accessed from http://www.artfuldodge.sites.wooster.edu/ Cornell UP, 1978. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005. germánicas Kristjánsson, 1907. Scandinavian Foundation, 1916. Society, 1982. Society, 1991. content/jorge-luis-borges on 12thFebruary 2014) UP, 2002. – 128. Invisible Work: Borges andTranslation Old Norse Court Poetry: The . Madrid: Alianza, 2005. . 4vols. BuenosAires: Emecé, 1996. . BuenosAires: Emecé, 1974. Snorri Sturlusson: Edda: Háttatal Edda Snorra Sturlusonar A History of OldNorseA History of Poetry andPoetics The Poetic Edda La alucinacióndeGylfi . New York: The American- . 2vols. London: Society, Studies inMedievalism Dróttkvætt . Reykjavík: Sigurður Literaturas medievales Sur . London: Viking 6(1932): 202 . Nashville: Vanderbilt . London: Viking Stanza Artful Dodge . Ithaca: . Madrid: . 20 (2011): – 08. 2

The Snorra Edda of Jorge Luis Borges 17 Philip Lavender 18 —. dellector’: “‘LaAlucinación Jorge Luis Borges andtheLegacy of Snorri —. “‘Elverso incorruptible’: Jorge Luis Borges andthePoetic Art of the Webbe Dasent, Geroge. Meissner, Rudolf. Margrét Jónsdóttir. “Borges literatura yla medieval.” islandesa Stewart, Jon. “Borges’ Refutation of ‘Funes Nominalism in el Sigrún Á. Eiríksdóttir. “Borges’ Icelandic Subtext: The Saga Model”. Lynn, Karen andNicolas Shumway. “Borges kenningar”. ylas Locke, John. Ranisch, Wilhelm. Niedner, Felix. Niedner, Felix andGustav Neckel. 1966. Reprint of 1925edition withaddedmaterial. 1959. 28 (1984): 122 Verlagshandlung, 1903. Verlag, 1920. ersten grammatischen Traktat Neophilologus Icelandic Skalds”. Sturluson”. poética Edmonston andDouglas, 1861. memorioso’”. 16 (1995): 123 An EssayonHuman Understanding Die Geschichte vomGodenSnorri Ibero-amerikanisches Archiv Die Kenningar derSkalden Eddalieder 71 (1987): 381 – Variaciones Borges 30. Variaciones Borges The Story of BurntNjal The Storyof – 57. . Leipzig: G. J. Göschen’sche . Düsseldorf: Eugen Diderichs Verlag, – Die jüngere Edda mitdemsogennanten 87. 2 (1996): 68 2 (1996): 37 . Bonn: Kurt Schroeder, 1921. 12:3(1986): 247 . Vol. II. Edinburgh: . Jena: Eugen Diderichs . 2vols. New York: Dover, – 86. – 53. – Texto Crítico 60. Acta