• No se han encontrado resultados

Translations  of  Ibsen’s plays first appeared in the Soviet Georgian periodicals in the 1950s, more than forty years after the work of the Norwegian playwright, namely The Wild Duck was last published in Georgia under the Russian Empire. After the October revolution, the main agenda of the Soviet officials was introducing a different social order in the Soviet republics and spreading the communist ideology and values among them. Therefore, it is not surprising that in the era when social-realism was the leading trend of literature, the works of Ibsen focusing on subjects not related to question that were topical during the Soviet Union, as the role of the proletariat and communist values, did not attract the attention of Georgian translators. However, in the 1950s, alongside with commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the   death   of   the   playwright,   interest   towards   Ibsen’s   oeuvre   revived   in   Georgia. In 1958 მოჩვენებანი (Ghosts) and ჰედა გაბლერი (Hedda Gabler) translated by Akaki Gelovani were   published   as   a   book.   After   twenty   years,   one   more   book   −   Henrik   Ibsen’s   dramas   translated into Georgian, consisting of Brand translated by V. Betsukeli, Peer Gynt, Ghosts, An Enemy of The People and Hedda Gabler translated by Akaki Gelovani, Nora or A  Doll’s   House translated by Eliso Betsukeli, with an introductory note and remarks by D. Lashkaradze was published by the editorial house საბჭოთა საქართველო (Soviet Georgia). In 1988, Akaki Gelovani and

Vakhtang Betsukeli translated and published Catiline and The Master Builder.

Retranslations   of   Ibsen’s   plays   were well received by Georgian readers and literary critics. In 1959 a translation review was published in საბჭოთა აჭარა (Soviet Achara). The author of the article, S.Turnava claimed that translations of A. Gelovani sounded melodic in Georgian, even though the translator preserved Ibsen’s   style   of   writing in his

Brand Hedda Gabler A Doll's House Ghosts An Enemy of the People Cataline

The Master Builder Emperor and Galilean The Wild Duck

Fig. 10. Chart over the relative proportions of translations of Ibsen’s  plays.

67 translations. Furthermore, according to Turnava, Gelovani successfully relayed idiomatic expressions into Georgian. The only criticism was  the  fact  that  Engstrand’s  language  is  over- provincialized (თურნავა 1959). However, it seems that the translator took this comment into consideration and in the next edition of the translation changed the weak parts Turnava had pointed out. In the late 1980s, translations   of   Ibsen’s   dramas   made   by   an   outstanding   Georgian translator, Bachana Bregvadze, appeared in Georgian periodicals. In 1988 the first translation of Emperor and Galilean was published in საუნჯე, followed by the retranslation of The Wild Duck, published in საბჭოთა ხელოვნება (Soviet Art).

The  translations  of  Ibsen’s  plays  into  Georgian  during  the  Soviet  Union  were  not  relayed  only   through Russian.  On  the  cover  page  of  the  book  of  Ibsen’s  dramas  including  Catiline and The Master Builder one can read that those plays were relayed into Georgian through German (იბსენი, გელოვანი et al. 1988). Even though translations of Bachana Bregvadze do not indicate which languages he was translating from, in a telephone interview, the translator told me that when relaying the works of the Norwegian playwright into Georgian, he used Russian and French translations (Bregvadze 2012). Everyone who translated Ibsen’s   plays   into   Georgian during the Soviet Union were professional translators. Akaki Gelovani and Vakhtang Betsukeli mostly translated German literature into Georgian, namely works of Goethe, Heine, Zweig and Schiller. It seems that Betsukeli was particularly interested in Norwegian literature, since besides   Ibsen’s  works  he  translated Mysteries by Knut Hamsun. As for Bachana Bregvadze, he is one of the best known literary translators in Georgia whose translations of the works of Plato, Dante, Cervanates and Marcus Aurelius are highly appreciated by both Georgian readers and translation critics.

Donald Rayfield in his article “Censorship in Georgia” claims  that  the  Russian  “thaw”  came   to Georgia twenty years later, in the 1970s. In 1973, Shevardnadze was appointed as head of the Georgian party and Government. Shevardnadze, unlike his predecessors, was rather liberal and even supported the works of some progressive Georgian authors of the time to get past censors (Rayfield 2005).   As   a   result   of   the   “thaw”, translating European literature into Georgian became more common. Most of the new translations were published in a bimonthly journal საუნჯე (Treasure). The Censorship machine was gradually weakened and finally was brought to a halt in 1989, two years before Georgia became one of the first Soviet republics to declare its independence (ibid.). Bachana Bregvadze who started translating

68

Ibsen’s  works  in  the  1980s  and  continued  after  the  declaration of independence, stated that his translations were never censored by the Soviet officials, probably due to the fact that he was a well-established and respected translator. However, as translations of historical dramas by Ibsen such as Catiline and Emperor and Galilean first appeared in Georgia in the late 1980s proves  that  it  was  due  to  the  “thaw”  that  translating  and  publishing  works  that  were  formerly forbidden became possible in Georgia.

Having studied the Georgian translation of An Enemy of the people published in 1974, I discovered  that  the  “misunderstandings”  regarding the concept of freedom that were frequent in Georgian translations made   during   the   Russian   tutelage   are   absent   in   Gelovani’s   translation. For example, Doctor  Stockmann’s  promise  to  his sons:  “men  jeg  vil  få  jer  til  at   bli’   fri,   fornemme   mænd”   (HIS 7:735), was   translated   as   “და ვეცდები თავისუფლების მოყვარული და პატიოსანი ვაჟკაცები გამოგიყვანოთ“  (იბსენი 1903:82) [I will try to make you freedom-loving and honest men] by Ivane Polumordvinov, was relayed by Gelovani as “მე თქვენ ნამდვილ, თავისუფალ, მოწინავე ადამიანებად უნდა გაქციოთ“ (იბსენი and გელოვანი 1974:852) [I am going to make you real, free, forward men].  Even  though  this  translation  is  relatively  close  to  the  original,  Gelovani’s  version  still   sounds like a communist motto.  The  problem  with  the  translation  is  that  “fornemme  mænd”,   translated   as   “noble-minded   men”   into   English   by   Eleanor   Marx-Aveling (Ibsen and Marx- Aveling 2013),  is  translated  by  Gelovani  as  “მოწინავე“[forward]. “Forward”  was  an  epithet   that was used in the Soviet periodicals for describing successful Soviet citizens. Articles on “forward  collective  farmers”,  “forward  dairymaids”  and  “forward  tea  collectors”   were daily published   in   the   Soviet   printing   press.   For   this   reason,   the   word   “forward”   awakes   associations with the Soviet proletariat and gives a different subtext to the translated text. The  part  of  the  original  where  Doctor  Stockmann  claims:  “jeg  vil  ha’  ret  til  at  se  mine  gutter  I   øjnene,  når  de  engang  blir  voksne  fri  mænd” (HIS 7:607), [I want to have the right to look into   my   sons’   eyes   when   they   are   grown   free   men]   is   relayed   by   Gelovani   as   “მე მინდა მოვიპოვო უფლება, რომ გაბედულად შევხედო თვალებში ჩემს პატარებს, როცა ისინი გაიზრდებიან და პატიოსანი, თავისუფალი ადამიანები გახდებიან”   (იბსენი and გელოვანი 1974:787-788) [I want to obtain the right to boldly look into the eyes of my youngsters when they grow up and become honest, free people]. As one can see, unlike the translation made by Polumordvinov in the early 1900s, where the textual information was

69 altered that led to changing the conceptual information,  Gelovani’s  translation  has  correctly   translated the textual information given in the original and therefore managed to maintain the conceptual information.

Jauss proposes that the previous experience of people has an inevitable influence on their understanding of new literary works. I believe that this idea can be extended to translation. The experience of the translator can have an impact on how he interprets and translates this or that part of the original. For example, the comment of people on  Doctor  Stockmann’s  speech:   “Hoho,   er   ikke vi folket? Er det bare de fornemme,   som   skal   styre!” (HIS 7), translated as “Oho!—we   are   not   the   People!   Only   the   superior   folk   are   to   govern,   are   they!”   by   R.   Farquharson Sharp (Ibsen 2010), is relayed by Gelovani as   “ოჰო! მაშ ჩვენ ხალხი არა ვართ. ან იქნებ მხოლოდ ბატონები გამოდგებიან მმართველებად?”   (იბსენი and გელოვანი 1974:824) [Oho! –so we are not the people. Or only the maseters are useful for governing?]. Furthermore, the paragraph where Doctor  Stockmann  states:  “Men  slig  går  det   altid, så længe det almueagtige sidder i kroppen på en, og så længe en ikke har arbejdet sig ud til   åndelig  fornemhed”   (Ibsen 2008) translated  as  “But  that  is   always  the  way,  as  long   as  a   man retains the traces of common origin and has not worked his way up to intellectual distinction”   by   Farquharson   Sharp   (Ibsen 2010),   is   relayed   as   “მაგრამ ასე მოსდით ყოველთვის მათ, ვის ძაღვებშიაც ჯერ კიდევ ჭარბობს გლეხური დვრიტა, ვინც ჯერ კიდევ ვერ გარდაქმნილა სულიერ არისტოკრატად”     (იბსენი and გელოვანი 1974:826) [but that always happens to those in whose veins there is more blood of peasants and those who have not transformed themselves into spiritual intellectual yet]. I believe that   the   reason   why   Gelovani   chose   to   translate   “fornemme”   as   masters   and   “almueagtige   sidder”   as   “peasant   blood”   was   that   his   “horizons   of   expectations”   encompassed   the social reality of Georgia in the second part of the nineteenth century, when the peasants, the former serfs who were granted liberation but no property, still remained dependent on their masters. Juxtaposing masters with peasantry in Georgian translation causes Georgian readers to draw parallels  between  Ibsen’s  drama  and  the  social  hierarchy  existing  in  Georgia  before  the  Soviet   annexation.

There is one more detail that I find interesting   in  Gelovani’s   translations.     Even   though   the  translator  does  not  tend  to  ”Georgianalize”  professions  or  the names of the characters as „kamerherre   Alving“   is   translated   as   ”კამერჰერი ალვინგი“   [Chamberlain Alving],

70

”byfogd  Peter  Stockmann”  is  relayed  as  „ბურგომისტრი პეტერ სტოკმანი“  [burgomaster   Peter Stokmann], in the list of characters of the   Georgian   translation   of   ”Ghosts”, Pastor Manders   is   relayed   as   „მოძღვარი მანდერსი“   [priest/father   Manders]   (იბსენი and გელოვანი 1974:670). Moreover, other characters of the play often address the pastor as ”priest/father  Manders”.  During the Soviet era atheism was preached, churches were closed, clergymen were arrested and those who remained religious were mocked. Glergymen were looked as the negative power hindering the progress of Soviet citizens. Many Soviet writers mocked priests in their works and portrayed them as corrupt and egoistic. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Ibsenian pastor whose main concerns were his own reputation rather than the welfare of his parish; who interfered with the lives of others, showed them the wrong way and forced them to put up with the ruling injustice, was associated by the Georgian translator with the Orthodox clergymen who were social and political outcasts during the Soviet era. To  conclude,  all  in  all  nine  translations  of  Ibsen’s  plays  were  published  in  the  Soviet  Republic   of Georgia, although some of them were translated more than once. All translations were made by professional translators. Unlike their predecessors who relayed the plays of the Norwegian playwright during the Russian tutelage, Soviet Georgian translators did not choose to   translate   Ibsen’s   works   for   political   purposes   but   rather   for   their   literary   value.   Interestingly, alongside with the realistic dramas of Ibsen, also the symbolic and historical dramas of the Norwegian playwright attracted the attention of Georgian translators. However, the  historical  dramas  only  appeared  after  the  Russian  “thaw”  arrived  in  Georgia  in  the  1970s.   Having compared  the  Soviet  Georgian  translations  of  Ibsen’s  dramas  to  the  original  led me to the conclusion that they were much more close to the original than their predecessors. Furthermore, I could not trace any cases of censorship or ideological changes in those translations. However, in a number of examples that I have chosen for examples, one can see that  the  “horizons  of  expectations”  of  the  translator had an impact on his understanding and in the translating of some parts of the original that led to altering or introducing new subtextual information in the translation.

71

Documento similar