thoughts on the most recent translation of Crime and Punishment?

who cares dude its just a book

>>8759737
>translation

>>8759737
is that the dickens version

>>8759753
Oliver Ready translated it

"This acclaimed new translation of Dostoyevsky’s “psychological record of a crime” gives his dark masterpiece of murder and pursuit a renewed vitality, expressing its jagged, staccato urgency and fevered atmosphere as never before. "

It's good.

>>8759737
does it gave a different cover?
I've been meaning to reread C&P but that cover looks like a joke

>>8759839
dont be so superficial

>>8759879
I'm not, I don't like having covers that conflict with the atmospheric content of the book. Seeing a Nickelodeon sketch of Abraham Lincoln with a hatchet every time I open and close the book is going to fuck with my mental image and tone of the book. Crime and Punishment is my favorite book, I don't want a cartoony version of it

>>8759893
>I'm not,
> I don't like having covers that conflict with the atmospheric content of the book.

Oh you "aren't" being superficial got it

>>8759901
the only thing you got is a shitty edition of a good book

>>8759893
>Crime and Punishment is my favorite book, I don't want a cartoony version of it

Please tell me how this changes the content?

>>8759839
>>8759893
>>8759903
>literally judging a book by its cover

>>8759893
I have the Oliver ready translation with a different cover.

>>8759737
Raskolnikov (however the fuck you spell it) looks much too old in that cover art.

File: 1478932505886.jpg (27KB, 480x642px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x642px

>>8759737

> Described by Dostoevsky as being good-looking.

Illustrated as a Jew fresh out of Auschwitz.

>>8760059
>Russian
>Good looking

Seems to be spot on

>>8759737
Which idiot thought this is a good artwork? Zero dignity, zero subtlety.

>>8760075
>It's so wacky and looks like Dr. Seuss haha!

Monolingual plebs will eat it right up

Not touching that cover, no. Call me superficial: if I'm buying a classic, I don't need to cringe every time I look at it, when there are thousands of other bindings to choose from.

a lot of autism in this thread to be quite honest

This thread is about the translation, not the cover art. Also, I think it's fine. The only time I draw a line is the "now a major motion picture" cover with a stillframe from the movie.

Now, has anyone read the Oliver Ready translation and how did it compare to P&V?

>>8760364
>this entire fucking post

>>8759916
What's wrong with that?

Only slightly related, just started reading Notes From Undergtound translated by Mirra Ginsburg. Anyone read this translation? What did you think of it?

always go with P&V for the russians

>>8762275
>how to spot someone whose only read P&V translations

>>8762275
Hello pleb.

>>8762151
Michael Katz’s, is the superior. But no reason to swap editions and start reading that.

File: boxxy disgusted gross barf.jpg (12KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x360px

>>8759737

>that cover "art"

>>8759911>>8759901
>>8759916
Are you retarded? He literally told you that the cover is fuckin with his mind, setting up the wrong atmosphere before he starts reading it.

>>8759920
It's honestly the worst cover I've ever seen.

>>8759737
Read the JESSIE COULSON one for Oxford World Classics, it's fantastic.

>>8762408
What is good about it compared to others?

this translation (ready) is really good. it's very readable and won't have you stopping every 5 seconds to re-read or consider the translator's word choice. i just wish i had started with it :'(

i have P&V and gave up around 250 pages in : it was far too awkward to read.. i have garnett as well but that carries its usual constance-touch onto all russian works. i even replaced my P&V copy of notes from underground with the almaclassics edition. no idea what to do with them. probably just keep them looking pretty on the shelf.

>>8759737
That's a really shit cover for a book so good

i have the book, at part 3 around the moment when razumikhin becomes all tsun tsun for avdotya.

thinking of reading brothers next, which translation is best for that?

>>8759911
Look up Jerome McGann's Textual Condition. Though we typical scoff at the idea of judging a book by its cover because muh text, we subconsciously engage with everything from the cover design to the typeface to the look of the text setting to the heft of the book's physicality (or not, in the case of e-readers). And, in the end, who the fuck cares if anon doesn't like the cover? Let him dislike it and find another one without the senseless bile. I personally like the pic in the op.

>>8762690
Constance Garnett is my waifu. She can do no wrong.

>>8762975
>brothers
If you want a modern translation, Avsey is the best for Dostoyevsky (for the works he got to before he died).
For something more vintage, get either Magarshack or a revision of Garnett. Norton Critical Editions has two different choices for the latter, both of which are highly praised

>>8763013
define "modern" and "vintage"

i just want something that gives off the most successful "karamazov" or "dostoevsky" feel, yknow?

>>8763013
>Norton Critical Editions

1st (grey cover) is the Garnett Translation revised by Ralph E. Matlaw
2nd (new shitty cover and older BROWN cover) edition is the Garnett translation revised Susan McReynolds Oddo


Both are turbosex both you might as well get the newer version, Oddo based her revision on the groundwork laid by Matlaw's translation and it also features more footnotes.

>tfw learning Russian

Soon I'll be able to read based PycckNN literature without shitty meme translations

is V&P really that bad? I bought their translations of Notes and C&P, should I return them and buy other translations?

>>8763346

Buren them.

>>8763307
>soon

>>8763346
I think returning books is an odd thing to do but yes you got meme'd

>>8763382

I've been learning for more than a year already. I already can read them but with a lot of dictionary referring. I'm working up to them at the minute

>>8763346

Yes, they really aren't very good. Volokhonsky, whose English isn't that great, produces a very stiff English gloss, and Pevear, who prides himself on not knowing Russian well, smooths out the grammar. Their guiding principle is being literal in translation, but their method presents double the opportunity for mishandling things like idiom, not to mention being on the wrong side of the letter-versus-spirit question.

>>8759893
The book is a joke though
You obviously don't 'get' Dosto

>>8762403
Then he's a child
If the cover of a book ruins the book for you then you're a little kid who should be reading Dr. Seuss and other picture books

>>8763346
No, they're not. Stop getting all of your opinions from /lit/. Literally everyone else sans that one bitter dude (who is the only person /lit/ references) loves P&V

>>8763307
>>8763524
how many hours a week have you dedicated to learning russian?
method?
tips?

>>8763744
>Crime and Punishment
>written as a joke
throw all of your books away and find a new hobby

>>8764057
>>written as a joke
Oh man he still doesn't 'get' it

>translation

Lol cyka

File: 51lO1bJParL.jpg (45KB, 313x500px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 313x500px

What is it with Dostoyevsky and covers?

>>8763738
This is true, but from what I've seen, they havent botched any translations. For the most part they range from okay-very good (while other translations may still be superior).

Their notes are really good though.

>>8759737
It's shit any way it's translated, in any language, and that's all I've ever really wanted to think about it since I last read it.

>>8765218
>they havent botched any translations

Notes from Underground is one example. They make a deliberate and misguided decision in translating the word злoй in the first sentence as 'wicked'. In their notes they explain that the word always and inherently carries that meaning. This is a very mechanical and undiscerning principle of translation that in this instance results in a complete misrepresentation of the main character and the scope of the book. The book isn't dealing in moral or spiritual terms but sociological and psychological ones, a point picked up by basically every other translator of the work, who all go with some variation of 'spiteful.'

>>8759916

>not judging books by their covers

pleb detected

>>8759839
That cover is amazing

>>8759916
Slave morality

>>8764067
the only thing you got is autism my dude

File: 1479662128569.png (41KB, 489x454px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 489x454px

>>8763346
This isn't even why I dislike them, it's just for keks

>>8765358
lol woops, I guess I don't have it.

Anyways they're too old and out of touch to realize they accidentally put in some sexual innuendo

Is there any widespread opinion on who did the best translation of The Idiot or should I just go with P&V?

>>8759737
>in the book he didn't use the axe head to murder, he used the handle
>the illustration has blood on the head

>>8767026

It's one of the works that Avsey translated, so you should go with him

I love how OP asks about the translation and 90% of the answers are sperging out about the cover.

Stay plebeian /lit/.