# Let's talk about libretti translations



## Schopenhauer (Jan 9, 2020)

For example, for Wagner's ring I usually read the booklet that came with my Solti's ring copy, but to be honest, I don't know if the translation is good or not. And I think it is important to fully understand an opera.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Stewart Spencer and Barry Millington's book has a wonderful libretto translation of _Der Ring_ with footnotes about the details and different alternative translations. I warmly recommend  !

Does anyone have recommendations for a good _Tristan_ libretto translation? It's so poetic and semi-philosophic that I feel I really need a good translation to make any real sense of it.


----------



## vivalagentenuova (Jun 11, 2019)

I haven't done any careful study of Wagner translations, but I can tell you that Puccini translations are sometimes very bad, especially on DVDs or Live in HD screenings. Translations often actually _overdo_ the poetry, turning fine if ordinary poetry in an opera like _Tosca_ into risible nonsense. There's a lot of turning simple Romantic expressions into purple verses of the worst kind. The sad part is, someone unfamiliar with opera would think that the text actually said those things, and that the operas have stupid libretti. They actually have very good libretti as far as operas go, and a few of them, from _Madama Butterfly_ on are excellent to truly great (_Il tabarro_, _Gianni Schicchi_, and large parts of _La fanciulla del west_). The latter had its libretto translated very poorly in its recent Live in HD screening (I think it was November 2018?), probably because there are a lot of politically incorrect statements made by various characters. Personally, I think they should have left it alone. The racism of the miners actually tells us a lot about them and fits thematically with their attempt to scapegoat Johnson for their own troubles (though I doubt that was the _intended_ meaning, and this is a good example of how the intentions of the author sometimes are overthrown by what they create, in this case for the better). One omission was rather amusing. When Johnson first enters in Act I, his first line is "Who's going to curl my hair for me?" This was translated as something like, "Who's going to set me straight?" As though that couldn't also be taken the wrong way by someone...

CD booklet translations tend to be much better, but not always. The translation included in the Pretre _Louise_ was terrible (the recording wasn't that great either -- Fournet is much better).

Of course the issue of what makes a good translation in the first place is a fascinating and maddening topic.


----------



## Sieglinde (Oct 25, 2009)

I prefer raw translations over old poetic ones. I want to see exactly what they are singing, not "well vaguely about this".


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Sieglinde said:


> I prefer raw translations over old poetic ones. I want to see exactly what they are singing, not "well vaguely about this".


I find well-translated libretti both poetic and accurate. Raw translations from particularly German (the word structure is somewhat special) can be rather unnatural. For example Wagner used a lot of composite nouns (Schopenhauer didn't like that...) which are characteristic to German but difficult to translate. Some earlier drafts of Wagner's _Siegfried_, if not the final version, supposedly included words like eidechsenartiger schlangenwurm (lizardlike serpent-worm) to describe Fafner. The difficulty of translating German is among the reasons why it's been said that Goethe is not _as_ great in any other language compared to German. I'm not a German-speaker but that's what I've heard and read.

My knowledge of Italian is even more limited though...


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

annaw said:


> I find well-translated libretti both poetic and accurate. Raw translations from particularly German (the word structure is somewhat special) can be rather unnatural. For example Wagner used a lot of composite nouns (Schopenhauer didn't like that...) which are characteristic to German but difficult to translate. Some earlier drafts of Wagner's _Siegfried_, if not the final version, supposedly included words like eidechsenartiger schlangenwurm (lizardlike serpent-worm) to describe Fafner. The difficulty of translating German is among the reasons why it's been said that Goethe is not _as_ great in any other language compared to German. I'm not a German-speaker but that's what I've heard and read.
> 
> My knowledge of Italian is even more limited though...


I agree. I just don't like translations that take too many liberties with the text. Like Sieglinde says, I don't want approximations, but want exact words as much as is possible. The translation with the Kubelik _Der Freischütz _recording is an example of an overly poetic translation. Poetic translations with rhyming and such should be for singing, not a reference. I can't speak or read German, but sometimes I can tell if a translation is loose. It was somewhat interesting to find that the translation with the Kubelik recording opted for a somewhat euphemistic translation of one of the lines of Kaspar's drinking song. Poetic language can also sometimes be harder to follow when trying to keep up with the music.


----------



## adriesba (Dec 30, 2019)

Anyone ever use the libretti translations here? - http://www.murashev.com/opera/

Are they good?


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

adriesba said:


> Anyone ever use the libretti translations here? - http://www.murashev.com/opera/
> 
> Are they good?


Really depends, some are okay but some are not so much. I think you'd spot a bad translation rather quickly. They either sound just weird or include a few words in the original language.


----------



## gvn (Dec 14, 2019)

annaw said:


> I think you'd spot a bad translation rather quickly. They either sound just weird or include a few words in the original language.


True, and yet translations that are "bad" in that sense may not be bad for all purposes. A translation in very clumsy unidiomatic English that follows the sense of the original closely (e.g., most of the translations in old Supraphon LP sets) may be preferable _for some purposes_ to a translation that is written in flawless elegant English and always looks plausible, but departs widely from the sense of the original (e.g., the Auden & Kallman translations of the Mozart operas).


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

gvn said:


> True, and yet translations that are "bad" in that sense may not be bad for all purposes. A translation in very clumsy unidiomatic English that follows the sense of the original closely (e.g., most of the translations in old Supraphon LP sets) may be preferable _for some purposes_ to a translation that is written in flawless elegant English and always looks plausible, but departs widely from the sense of the original (e.g., the Auden & Kallman translations of the Mozart operas).


Agreed! I was talking more specifically about Murashev's translations. Some of them have for example untranslated Italian or German phrases, which I've sometimes even translated with Google.


----------



## gvn (Dec 14, 2019)

In its day, probably the most admired libretto translation in English was Frederick Jameson's translation of Wagner's _Ring_ for singing. Jameson also did a not-for-singing translation, but the singing one is the really extraordinary achievement. Not only does it fit the music throughout and render the sense of the original accurately phrase by phrase, but it even matches the various alliterations and assonances. And the style of its English is a remarkably close match for the style of Wagner's German. (Of course, it's written in 19th-century English, so it wouldn't be suitable for most readers nowadays.)

Even that exacting critic Donald Tovey praised it: "The translation by F. Jameson (1897) of the text of the _Ring_ (first published in the pocket edition of the full scores) is the most wonderful _tour de force_ yet achieved in its line. A careful reading of the score to this English text reveals not a single false emphasis or loss of rhetorical point in the fitting of words to music; and wherever the language seems stilted or absurd the original will be found to be at least equally so, while the spirit of Wagner's poetry is faithfully reflected. Such work deserves more recognition than it is ever likely to get."

Here, as a sample, is Jameson's rendering of the opening & closing lines of Siegmund's sword monologue:

A sword, my father foretold me,
should serve me in sorest need.
….
Deep in my breast alone yet
glimmers a dim, dying glow.

(Try singing that aloud, if you fancy yourself as the next Melchior.)


----------



## gvn (Dec 14, 2019)

annaw said:


> Agreed! I was talking more specifically about Murashev's translations. Some of them have for example untranslated Italian or German phrases, which I've sometimes even translated with Google.


Yes. I've even seen bits of Russian (Cyrillic script and all) in English translations of _French_ operas. Funny place, the internet!


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

English critic Andrew Porter wrote a much-admired *singing* translation for English National Opera in the 1970s.


----------

