The Press.
London, England, 1853-06-04 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

The parlenes de sit yloire" of Beranger
may or may not be as perfect in its kind, and
may or may not be out kind as tine. as the " .1 oltu
Anderson, my jo, John: of Robert Burns.
Yet it might, and we think does, so happen
that the English language affords immea-
surably better means of translating the
mnireniot du people than the French languag•
would supply to any poet who wishes' to give
his countrymen a full appreciation of the
famous Seottish fireside song for the down•
hill of life: Translation is never better,
when at the best, than the decanting of an
effervescent wine ; and, as for the translation
of poetry. and. above all, of that species of
poetry which is racy of the peculiar soil in
which it sprang stud has been fostered by the pe-
culiar influences of that climate under which it
bloomed. you had better try to transplant the
vine to Nova 'lend& or daisies to the Sahara.
The greater and nobler languages resemble
the various lands which lie under the tempe
rate zone, and can each naturalise at home
most of the spontaneous products of the
other. In that they are nearly equal : stud in
that can interchange the advantages of trans-
lation. The ordinary, the every-day. and the
universal ideas of social life are, like the
vegetables and the minerals of these latugnages.
an easy matter of reciprocal commerce. Each,
however. has its own productions of literary
art. which are as difficult to render as it would
be to give an epicure ant idea of the pate; de
Perigord by placing before hint a Staffordshire
pie. The muse of Babel was limited to
speech ; had it been extended, we should now,
for instance, be offering to the French or
Radians sculptures by Flatxman or Hogan as
translations of the works of Canova. Would
not. something, and that something excellent,
arising out of the genius Ist nations and the
inspiration of individual artists, always remain
inappreciable and lost to those who see but
the copy of great and admirable productions?
It is far from our meaning, however. to con-
demn, or to assail, or to underrate translation.
Translators (under that decree we stand) sire a
necessary evil, and their labours arc at thank-
less service. All that we say is, that in eminent
books those parts are the most easy to render
into another language which are least worth
the rendering ; and that the qualities which
render works inunortal are probably the very
qualities which defy translation.
It. is no wonder that we should be ls.ai into
these rem mrks when we see at Frenchman
undertaking to let his countryinen judge for
themselves, in. his French, of our charming
fabulist. Gay. Whatever missy be the general
difficulties Of translation, they are certainly'
greater to the Fmuch than to any other civi-
lised people on the thee of the earth. In
Europe, the Russians are probably the best
linguists, the French unquestionably the
worst. Even from Spanish or Italian they
translate badly ; but they translate better
insist Spanish or Italian than Insist English.
It would lend us away from our subject were
we to trace the causes of this. The fart will
be admitted. Now, we Sholliti I►c' merciless,
indeed, if in criticising the attempt which M.
de Chatelain here makes to turn, under difficul-
ties so elna'lllollS, Guy's fables into French,
we made no allowances. If the positive excel-
lence of his performance be not very great,
the relative exeellence of it is astonishing.
Creditable as very many of these versions are,
there are some appended to the fables, speci-
mens, in M. de Chatelain's French, of other
and more serious English authors, in higher
departments of poetry—specimens in which,
we are in justice bound to acknowledge,
most thorough appreciation of the originals rK
evinced, and in which their merits shine
through the rendering with very little abate
meat of lustre, and with no alteration of chit
meter, spirit, or tone. The reader will be
equally charmed stud surprises! by these sam-
ples, culled, as we gather, front a collection
preparing for publication.
We cannot speak so highly of the versions
from Gay. Some half dozen are us good as
they could well be. In most of the rest there
are serious blemishes. First, we have nearly
twice as many lines in the French as ill the
English, and the majority of those lines nearly
twice as long. The effect may be conceived.