The ‘ P O E T S of M O D E R N F R A N C E by L U D W I G L E W I S O H N ‘ M . iI T . T D . A , pno m sson AT TH E OHIO STATE UN IVERSITY Y B HUEB S‘CH MCMXIX W. N EW O RK . C O P Y R I G HT , 1 9 1 8 . B Y W HUE B B . S C H Fir s t r in tin r il 1 9 1 8 p g, A p , n in r S ec o d pr tmg, Fe b r ua y , 1 9 19 D A P R N TE . S . I I N U . PREFACE IT e the which we is tim that art of translation , of h e e e e h av many b autiful xampl s in English , s ould b h e e strictly distinguished from t e trade . Lik the e acting or playing of music, it is an art of int r r etation e ffi e he h e e p , mor di cult than it r in t is r sp ct that you must interpret your original in a medium e e e e h . e e n v r cont mplat d by its aut or It r quir s , at e an e a n e h h its b st, x cti g and imaginativ sc olars ip, for you must understand your text in its fullest and most livin g sense ; it requires a power over the instrument of your own language no less com ’ l ete the e the e h p than virtuoso s ov r pianofort , t an ’ the actor s over the expression of his voice or the e e e g stur s of his body . Its aim , too, is id ntical with the aims of th ose sister arts of interpretation to give a clear voice to beauty that would else b e e ffle e e e e dumb or quit mu d . For v n to int llig nt lo vers of the arts a subtl e or intricate poem in a lan guage not their own is as lifeless as a page of Beethoven which th ey have not h eard e play d . What now should b e th e aim of th e translator of poetry ? For it is with poetry that I am here e b e . e cl earl conc rn d It should , h e pr po m. e has not don h he h e e e the e n t at may av s rv d caus of i formation , n e he h as e of la guag study . In art committ d a e e he h as e e plain in ptitud . If produc d a b autiful e h ho be i e him h po m , muc s uld forg v n , alt ough a e e n o t n e e b e e b autiful po m may , c ssarily, a b au b e h cer tiful translation . To t at it must sustain n e . e tai r lations to its original It must, to b gin h b e h — n o t e n e e wit , fait ful p da tically, but ss n tiall n o t n th e e e n e the o r y, o ly to g n ral co t nt of igin al poem but to its specific means of embodying he b e that con ten t . T re should e as littl e definit e n e . In alt ratio , addition or omission as possibl the translations in this volume there will not b e h n e h e h found, I t i k, mor t an a doz n words t at e e in the e e h n h en w r not t xts , or mor t a alf a doz he e actual verbal substitution s . T associativ e ffe e n e h valu s of two di r nt li guistic m dia s ould , vi be e e e m e . n e of cours , s nsitiv ly born in ind O idiom must b e made not only to copy but rightly to h h e h n e e t e e . e e e i t rpr t ot r It is b tt r, ow v r, to risk a slight obscurity which time an d the growth of n ew artistic insights may remove than to s ub sti ’ tute an easy meanin g for your author s trouble n some o e . The secon d relation which the tran slated poem must sustain to its original con cerns the far more ffi n he l an di cult a d exacting matter of form . T e n e o f the h guag i volv d will , m c arac ’ he e n t er of the tran slato r s probl em . If is d ali g with lan guages that have practically the same pr o e an e n u e in sodic syst m , y two G rmanic la g ag s for n e he e e e th e sta c , must scrupulously pr s rv music, he n he n t exact cadences o f his origi al . If is tra s latin g from a language that h as a quite different h th e en h h e n e e prosody, suc as Fr c , must i t rpr t h h t e origin al forms by analogous forms . T us I have ren dered all poems written wholly in al ex an d rin es n h he e e h e into E glis roic v rs , but I av sought to make that verse as fluid an d as various in movement as the types of al exan drin e in my hen h e . t e originals W prosodic contour of a po m , vii h e e e e e e e n he ow v r, d p nd d d finit ly upo t contrast of e n e h e h e e e h e al xandri s wit long r or s ort r v rs s , I av e e e the e e h pr s rv d xact syllabic l ngt s . In lyrical e e the b e e he the m asur s aim must , of cours , to ar h e e h c aract ristic music, to transf r t is and to follow its modulations from line to line and stanza to stanza . But these ar e only the external properties of h e e e e . e e form What c aract ris s a po t, abov all ls , is the wi w W e and uni lue method o f mo uldmg his lan guage— ia t e spit bo th f diction and rh thm— for the expres 18 he e h sion of his personal sense of life . It r t at he e h e k t translator com s upon his ard st tas . For he h h e e h ee us e his s ould try, op l ss as t at may s m , to medium of Speech in a given translation even as he e the original poet used his own . T translat d e e h be the e po m, in bri f, s ould such as original po t ’ would have written if the translator s language h a ee e on e d b n his nativ . e e h the e I am quit awar t at, in sixty translat d e e e n o t e e a po ms in this volum , I hav always v n p pro ached my own ideal of what a translation of viii h be h e e e he poetry s ould . But to av att mpt d t task h e e n o t be h upon suc principl s may, of its lf, wit out h he service to t e practice of t art . For my critical introduction on the poets of e h e e modern Franc I av no such apology to mak . Critics of power and place have told me repeatedly - e h Let how wrong headed my critical m t od is . me e n he who so h e e h r mi d t m , know it muc b tt r t an the e e . I, of history of lit ratur and of criticism For if that history makes but o n e thing admirably and in disputably cle ar it is this : In every age the d the N ew in so far as the r o duced celle t work accord xx p y p “ “ ' y g W w M r W M W W fi fi-fl ' M ‘ W e e a e the e mo mmaims , In v ry g critical cons r ‘ v atives have protested in the name of eternal prin ci l h es ar e e e . p whic , alas , not t rnal at all And e e e the g n rally, for such is human natur , innova in h o n e e e o n e tors art and thoug t of g n ration, of e e e h e e e he e e d cad at tim s , av b com t cons rvativ s of the next .