Thursday, December 18, 2014

The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam: Second Edition, Quatrain XXVIII


Second Edition: Quatrain XXVIII

Another Voice, when I am sleeping, cries,
"The Flower should open with the Morning skies."
     And a retreating Whisper, as I awake--
"The Flower that once has blown forever dies."


This quatrain is yet another one that FitzGerald added to the Second Edition but then was dropped from the Third Edition.  What is also interesting is that the last line--"The Flower that once has blown forever dies"-- appears in the First Edition in Quatrain XXVI, but with three very different lines:


First Edition:  Quatrain XXVI

Oh, come with old Khayyam, and leave the Wise
To talk; one thing is certain, that Life flies;
    One thing is certain, and the Rest is Lies;
The Flower that once has blown for ever dies.


As you can see, the two quatrains have nothing in common, except for the last line.


The opening line refers to "Another Voice."  This refers us back to the previous quatrain in the second edition, Quatrain XXVII, in which a "Muezzin from the Tower of Darkness cries,/'Fools! your Reward is neither  Here nor There,'";  the Here and the There refers to those who work for present and future rewards.  What seems confusing is the relationship between the two Voices and also the statements by the voices  in Quatrain XXVIII. Are they the same voice, one that "cries" when he is asleep and then again "whispers" when he awakes?
 


              Another Voice, when I am sleeping, cries,
              "The Flower should open with the Morning skies."
                   And a retreating Whisper, as I awake--
              "The Flower that once has blown forever dies."


If he is asleep, then how does he know what this other Voice says?  Quatrain XXIX offers no help here, for it is almost identical to XXV in the First Edition in which this quatrain does not appear.
One point the quatrain seems to make is that, for flowers anyway, there is no reincarnation.  It blossoms and dies and does not return. 

This quatrain seems to have been just inserted, and it is, perhaps, for this reason that FitzGerald dropped it in later editions.

13 comments:

  1. You touch again upon something that always points to nettlesome issues for me: (1) the problems with translations (especially in poetry); (2) the instability of texts through revisions and editions. I am one of those OCD-types who irrationally obsessives over "discovering" the one true text. Ah, it is a fool's errand, to be sure, but I nevertheless cannot help myself even though I know that "intentional fallacy" is a danger zone. That is one of the reasons I do not care for translations from other languages into English (i.e., I am distrustful of the accuracy -- the divergence from the author's intent). And that is one of the reasons I become so weird about the different versions of Shakespeare's plays -- I obsess over the desire to experience the actual performance texts, and that can never happen. Alas, my obsessions are absurd follies. However, my obsessive self nevertheless admires your dogged pursuit of the "true" text in your Fitzgerald project. Bravo! (But better you than me . . . )

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "That is one of the reasons I do not care for translations from other languages into English."
      => Same here. Obviously I'm limiting myself, but I only read poems (original) in 2 languages. I know translators try their best, but poetry's harder to translate than prose and some languages are simply so different.

      Delete
    2. Di,

      True, translations do pose problems, but without them I would not have any knowledge of writers and poets and their marvelous works. I'll put up with the weaknesses.

      Delete
    3. Oh of course, of course. I also have to read novels translated from other languages because after all I can read only in 2 languages, or 3 if I try hard. It's just that I feel differently about poetry, in which every single word matters and the beauty lies in the sounds, rhyme, rhythm... and I have conflicted feelings about the English translations of our national epic poem (by no means am I blaming or criticising the translators- it's rather the differences between the 2 languages).
      Please don't misunderstand, it's only a personal and crazy view of mine, and I know I'm limiting myself. I suppose in a few years I'll think differently.

      Delete
    4. Di,

      If one thinks about the misunderstandings and misinterpretations that occur between two people who speak the same language, I suspect the problems of translation between languages are insurmountable. Approximations are the best we can hope for.

      Delete
  2. R. T.,

    If I were to look for the "true text" of the Rubaiyat, I certainly wouldn't be looking at FitzGerald, or at least not alone. I would look at a variety of translations and then try to figure out the original wording. The best way, of course, would be to learn Persian.

    While teaching class, I would initiate a discussion on the issue of translations and the associated problems. As an example, I gave them a handout with various translations of one of Basho's haiku. I did post them here on June 13, 2009, if you're interested. The title of the post is "Basho's eight nameless hills."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks! I will look into the Basho haiku posting. In the meantime, the rest of my morning is set aside for a few more chapters in The Moonstone, a novel that I have posted about this morning at CDI.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. R. T.,

      Enjoy.

      I too have a mystery to finish up shortly--Upfield's _Murder Down Under_. And then, Powell's _A Dance to the Music of Time_, Vol. 2.

      Delete
  4. We are always discussing translations in the FrenchLiterature group. Poetry is extremely problematical, but just in general, the biggest gripe is with translators who actually change or omit things to suit their own purposes. From what I've learned from you and Benny, it appears FitzGerald is guilty of this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Madame Vauquer,

      I remember reading somewhere (should have made a note of it) that FirzGerald himself had said that he wasn't doing a strict translation, but a ??? Memory fades.

      Comparing the three editions definitely shows FitzGerald did not see his work as being definitive.

      Translations are always a problem--a word-for-word literal translation or an attempt to capture the sense and sound and imagery and put it in another language.
      Basho's nameless hills are a good example of this.

      Frost was asked, frequently--what is poetry? One of his answers was--poetry is what gets left out in a translation.

      Delete
  5. John Ciardi, who did a wonderful translation of Dante in the 1950s (I think) defined translation as "the art of failure."

    When I read the "voice while sleeping" line I thought it was a dream voice, especially since it retreats as he awakes.

    This is my first time on your blog, Fred, and it's a knockout.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Timothy Hallinan,

    When I decided to read The Divine Comedy, Ciardi's was one I considered but I went with Lawrence Binyon's because it was a Viking Portable and included other works by Dante. Economically it was a better deal, and now I've grown to really appreciate Binyon's version. Maybe some day I'll take a look at Ciardi's.

    "the art of failure" I like that. It may be a failure, but he grants it the status of a art form.

    Yes, that could be a dream voice. The dream voice speaks of beginnings, but when he's awake, he hears harsh reality?

    Thanks for the kind words--they're always appreciated. I hope you find some time to drop by again,and comments are always welcome.

    ReplyDelete