# Queries about the translation of Zorba



## Theseus (Nov 25, 2016)

Wildman translates certain phrases, to me inaccurate, which may be due to my ignorance of the Cretan dialect:

Κάμποση ώρα γύρω από το μαγκάλι οι δυο μας σωπαιναμε. = we stayed silent by the brazier* until far into the night*.
Άπλωσα το χέρι, τον άγγιξα = I stretched forth my arm & touched him with the tip of my fingers.
Ο Ζορμπάς έξυσε νευρικά το λαιμό του = Zorba scratched his head vigorously. 

I know that my colleagues can enlighten me! :s:)


----------



## Palavra (Nov 25, 2016)

Gosh, this reminds me of why Kundera started correcting the translations of his books in French. The translator has taken great liberties here:


Theseus said:


> Κάμποση ώρα γύρω από το μαγκάλι οι δυο μας σωπαιναμε. = we stayed silent by the brazier* until far into the night*.


The "until far into the night" is an addition by the translator. The same goes for "with the tip of my fingers" below.


Theseus said:


> Άπλωσα το χέρι, τον άγγιξα = I stretched forth my arm & touched him with the tip of my fingers.





Theseus said:


> Ο Ζορμπάς έξυσε νευρικά το λαιμό του = Zorba scratched his head vigorously.


"Vigorously" is not that bad of a choice here. «Νευρικός» means "fidgety" or "restless" in this case, but nothing better comes to mind right now.
And, of course, he scratched his neck, not his head. :)


----------



## Theseus (Nov 25, 2016)

Thanks, Pal Αύρα. I gather Peter Bien has retranslated it from the Greek this time but I can't find the ISBN or the right edition. Peter Bien, as you have observed somewhere is an excellent translator.


----------



## daeman (Nov 25, 2016)

Theseus said:


> ...
> Κάμποση ώρα γύρω από το μαγκάλι οι δυο μας σωπαίναμε.
> 
> Άπλωσα το χέρι, τον άγγιξα.
> ...



Peter Bien translates: 

"The two of us spent quite some time around the brazier without speaking.
...
I extended my hand and touched him.
...
Zorba thought for a moment, nervously scratching his neck."

https://books.google.gr/books?id=ZXPbBQAAQBAJ


----------



## Theseus (Nov 25, 2016)

Thanks for the Peter Bien clip, Daeman. Νευρικά I might translate best as meaning 'uneasily'. 'Vigorously' is different; 'nervously' also is fine but I think that 'uneasily' conveys just the right nuance. I wait for any comments.


----------



## m_a_a_ (Nov 25, 2016)

_Uneasily_ puts a kind of extra weight on the character's inner state.. As does _anxiously_, which came into my mind..
_Nervously_, just like _νευρικά_, leaves it kind of open: is he sensing unease or was it just a brisk move?
Not sure how _edgily_ sounds...


----------



## Theseus (Nov 25, 2016)

I like 'edgily'. I interpreted the gesture to be a 'displacement activity' (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_activity). In other words, pressed by his interrogator to say how often he had married, he scratched his neck, caught in a dilemma between saying or refusing to reply. This results in the physical action--this action shows that he is caught between to stools. His reply is a typical hyperbole, a characteristic of Zorba. Silence followed by the opposite! 
By the way how many of our colleagues would agree with this review of Kazantzakis's book:

This is one of the books that is recommended as one of the thousand books to read before you die. I am slowly working my way through them. I see that it is one of those books many people feel passionately about and defend to the death.

I cannot, for the life of me, see why.

The hero, such as he is, seems totally unable to connect with life in any meaningful way except through a homoerotic, parasitical friendship with Zorba, who acts as a conduit to what the hero perceives is 'real' about life. He justifies his own lack of connection with the world, and his stultifying failure to do anything at all by hiding in his faux Buddhist learnings and writings. I felt that his inability to have real relationships with anyone, and his constant running away from everyone and everything rendered any insights he might have totally useless. He strikes me as a coward, wrapping up his shortcomings in a kind of mystical 'get out of jail free' card.

As for Zorba, I did not find him in the slightest bit engaging in any way. His philosophy is basically 'do what you will for tomorrow we die,' which is fine if you are the one doing what you will, and not fine if you are the one/s dealing with what is left behind. The freedom in the book is bought at a heavy price, which everyone pays except for the two main characters. Zorba and the narrator understand that life is suffering, but they don't seem to mind that their suffering is lessened when they heap misery upon the heads of others.

The treatment of women in the book is frankly appalling. I appreciate it may reflect a reality of the past which may ameliorate the horror of it slightly, but it strikes me in a book that is meant to be a great treatise on the nature of humanity, that it is a very one sided humanity that only works if you are a man, and allows those men to justify slicing a woman's head off outside a church as 'the way things are'.

I would value brief critique of this review from someone Greek!


----------



## Palavra (Nov 25, 2016)

Well, this was a book I really liked when I first read it in my late teens, but I now disagree with many of the author's views about the word. I think Kazantzakis was a _sui generis_ romantic -in the philosophic sense of the word- and that his views can be quite controversial at times. I am not referring to religion, of course, since I genuinely believe he was a deeply religious, God-fearing man. I am speaking, for instance, about his views on race as shown in _Askitiki_.



His language is, however, a whole other matter, as I believe it to be very expressive, innovative and resourceful. He was an amazing language-maker.


----------



## SBE (Nov 25, 2016)

I'll only say that my own advice to whoever want to read Kazantzakis is to read Report to Greco and nothing else. When I read it my reaction was "why did I bother reading the others", not because of its superiority but because it is a mash-up of all his other work. It's like reading an anthology. You get what the fuss is all about and you don't waste your time with the rest.
Other than that, I find his tone deliberate, like he wants to write in epigrams, his women are caricatures and lesser creatures, even for the time (of course in real life he was considered a gentleman and very pleasant company) and this mixture of early 20th century mysticism, German philosophy and eastern quasi-religion is not very original and definitely dated (and too close to what gave birth to certain ideologies that messed up the 20th century). He is an elitist and completely ignores common people (despite his proclamations to the contrary). 

Overall, if you take out the mysticism, he appears to have all the negative traits that I - and many other Greeks- associate with Crete and Cretans. The μαγκια and κουτσαβακισμός that one can see when one considers for example the case of Zoniana and other such moments of brilliance from the island, the superiority that we are constantly reminded of thanks to the flattery of Crete in media and political discourse in Greece- which I think dates from the time political parties realised it's a crucial electoral area etc etc. 
Zorba the movie is an improvement on the book, because at least it concentrates on the positive and cheeerful stuff (more or less). 

Anyway, if you are interested in Kazantzakis the man, it might be worth reading his first wife's Galateia's fictionalised account of their time together, Ανθρωποι και Υπεράνθρωποι. I've only read part of it, but it's an unflattering portrait, written 30+ years after their divorce. In it the protagonist is a man who seeks admiration above all. As always, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle between his self-prerception and what his wife observes.


----------



## SBE (Nov 25, 2016)

And to add up to what Palavra says about reading Kazantzakis as a teenager, because I also read some Kazantzakis as an older teen, I hate to think the damage he has done to all the young people who read about all this objectification of woman and all the philosophising about women's inferiority and are told at the same time that this is a great thinker of the 20th century. Thankfully, there's other stuff to read to balance all that.

Personally, I prefer Papadiamantis and other 19th c authors. His women are real people, with realistic problems, not caricatures (Christmas must be coming, if I mention Papadiamantis).


----------



## Theseus (Nov 26, 2016)

How strange! I was, for a little bit of light bedtime reading, going through Tales from a Greek Island. I think that Papadiamantis's character sketches are subtle & realistic: they do create the ethos of 19th century life in the poverty of a Greek island. They are riveting vignettes, although I have still to get hold of a copy of the Murderess, which by all accounts creates the background of grinding poverty in Skiathos which allows Hadoula to work & commit infanticide.
Thanks to Palavra & SBE for your perceptive reviews of the review I submitted. The distinction Palavra makes between Kazantzakis's views on women & race and the language he uses in his writings is excellent. 
I think all colleagues would appreciate reading the British newspaper, The Inependent's, obituary by Peter Bien of Lili Zographou at http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/obituary-lili-zografou-1178314.html. Thank you to all.


----------



## daeman (Nov 28, 2016)

...
Since the discussion has veered so widely from the thread subject, I have created a new thread better suited to the new topic:

*Literature and gender issues in the past*


Because someone has to do the tidying up; be it man, woman, or daeman.


----------



## Palavra (Nov 28, 2016)

Thanks, man!


----------

