Reading Response 3-3 Lauren M

 I enjoyed the thematic cohesiveness of this week’s readings and the thorough exploration of the dynamics that exist between the translator and the author. Nabokov’s letters and postcards to Pertzoff were quite touching. I also loved the play in this piece with the word “dragonize.” This term is first brought up by Nabokov on p.130 in his correspondence, as a promise for how he will handle Pertzoff’s translation, then later its origins are explored by the authors (131). Vanderschelden’s article seems to further explore the dynamics (dragon-like or not) between author and translator. I was interested in Borges’s thoughts on translation in this article, and the author’s interpretation that “authors are endowed with the authority to shift the concepts of faithfulness and equivalence from the text to its spirit, and in so doing, they help ease the pressure on the translator, who knows that choices and decisions are supported—sometimes encouraged—by the author” (p. 27). In reading the two translations of Borges, I didn’t feel I had a remarkably different reading experience (maybe because each time I had to really grapple with the strangeness of the piece), although I feel strongly Hurley’s choice of “cheery bonfire” was much better than Irby’s “merry bonfire" (and perhaps one of the best uses of a footnote I have ever seen).