Poetry translation - a waste of time?

This quote that I came across recently struck me odd at first. However, the more I thought about it, the more it made sense.

Poetry, indeed, cannot be translated; and, therefore, it is the poets that preserve the languages; for we would not be at the trouble to learn a language if we could have all that is written in it just as well in a translation. But as the beauties of poetry cannot be preserved in any language except that in which it was originally written, we learn the language. - Samuel Johnson, lexicographer (1709-1784)

I know English, Hindi, and Punjabi. I have read some poetry in all three languages. I have also read some Urdu ghazals translated into English. Samuel Johnson got it right: the translated poetry, although a valiant effort, does not ever come close to the impact, the rhythm, the cadence, and the spirit of the original. I know it sounds harsh, but that's the way it is. The original cannot be imitated. It is like the difference between actually eating something and describing the taste of something. The latter is a very remote echo of the real thing.

That being said, translations on their own can sometimes be great and even greater than original. I can only give examples from what I have read. One of the good examples I came across a while ago was Paradise Lost in Plain English by Joseph Lanzara. I had bought the Oxford Classics version of Paradise Lost and was totally lost (no pun intended). This book made the story very accessible, although I know there is a massive loss of the rhythm and cadence here, but better to read the thing and make sense of it than be turned off by it totally.

Anyhow, I think this whole thing is a total shame because when you know a language and are quite proficient in it, then only you can see the magic of poetry written in that language. Otherwise it does not click, your Rosetta stone courses be damned! There is a whole lot of time needed for someone to truly appreciate the language. Only then can they taste the poetry.

Mr. Johnson is right. Poetry is what keeps a language alive. It is also such a pity because so many languages have died and are dying every year. Think of the poetry that is also dying with it. And that is something we cannot revive with a handful of speakers. Would Paradise Lost be saved if we had 100 speakers of English left in the world? I doubt it.

Poetry is also concentrated thought. There are years and years of wisdom encapsulated in a single line of a poem. Poetry represents the sacred and exalted values of a culture. For example, consider these lines from Heer, an epic Punjabi poem written by Waris Shah:

Original (Punjabi):

ਹੀਰ ਆਖਦੀ ਜੋਗੀਆ ਝੂਠ ਆਖੇਂ, ਕੌਣ ਰੁੱਠੜੇ ਯਾਰ ਮਿਲਾਂਵਦਾ ਈ ।
ਏਹਾ ਕੋਈ ਨਾ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਮੈਂ ਢੂੰਡ ਥੱਕੀ, ਜਿਹੜਾ ਗਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਮੋੜ ਲਿਆਂਵਦਾ ਈ । 

Roman version:

heer aakhdi jogiya jhoot aakhein, kaun ruthade yaar milaavanda eee

aisa koi na milya main dhoond thaki, jehda gayan nu mohd layavanda eee

 

English translation:

Heer says, jogi you tell a lie, parted friends cannot be reunited 

I have searched far and wide but have found no one, who can return those that have parted

The love story of Heer and Ranjha, as written by Waris Shah, also encapsulates here the beliefs of the people living at that time.

Now listen to or watch this version of the couplet as sung by Gurdas Maan, a popular Punjabi singer. 

 

 

Ask any native speaker of Punjabi, and I doubt he or she will not be moved by the rendition. The same, however, cannot be said about the translation. It's a damn tragedy, but it is true nonetheless.