This is the most pitiful thing I've seen in recent memory.

>>9962509
Rumi is shit anyway. Nothing of value was lost.

>>9962509
I'm pretty sure this is fairly common

>>9962553
Gee I hope not. Examples?

Merton did this with Chuang Tzu but he had support from an actual chinaman and it's actually a good "translation"

>>9962509
I don't see the problem with this. A good translator isn't necessarily a good writer, if what he's doing is cleaning up blocky translations into an aesthetic cohesion then its a worthy endeavor

File: Coleman_Barks_2.png (47KB, 553x263px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 553x263px

>>9962573
>A good translator isn't necessarily a good writer
pic related
So you'd choose a bad translation with a good writer over a literal translation with an artless writer? Even for ancient works?

>>9962639
have you ever read translated rhyme and meter, let alone translate it yourself>? fucking awful, 19th-century sounding stuff

>>9962647
I did with Latin poets years ago, and for the record I don't mind if it's unrhymed, but you'd have to be a shitty translator if you can't even fit stuff to meter. Part of what makes poetry beautiful is how it's constrained and how it's easy to remember. Free verse translations don't communicate these beautiful aspects of the original.

I actually mostly agree with you. These are just my misgivings.