The language is so emotionally-charged and sets the scene as Goldmund being morally superior to Konrad and Eberhard. Goldmund’s fascination with the younger girl seems creepy instead of a normal level of interest in a pretty girl. If Goldmund is a gamma, then translation 1 is spot on. Translations 2 and 3 describe a young man who is earnest and focused dealing with attraction that, for him, is temptation and, therefore, sin.
I chose "A". It does the best job of immersing the reader inside Goldmund's head. The language best conveys his shyness, his moral certainty, and especially his temptation. "C" is next. "B" is last, with clunky word choices and clichés.
I am a big fan of Thomas Hardy, and "A" has the most poetic and lyrical word choices. As there is almost no dialog and the plot of "schoolboys sneaking out at night and having innocent fun with girls" is straightforward, a clunky narrative was very jarring.
A specific example:
A: "No, he would never come back here, yet he could feel his heart thumping apprehensively in the dim lamplight of the humble kitchen."
B: "No, he would never come back here. But his heart pounded with anguish in the flickering half light of the poor kitchen."
C: "No, he would never come again. But his heart beat hard and anxious in the dim lamplight of the humble kitchen."
Both A and C choose "humble" vs "poor". "B"'s "heart pounded with anguish" is clunky and cliché. "A"'s "...yet he could feel his heart thumping apprehensively" is lyric immersion in Goldmund's head.
Translation 3 is my favorite. It combines the good parts of the other translations very well. T1 is poetic; T2 is straightforward. For example, one uses manure, escapade, and dallying, whereas the other uses dung, adventure, and playing. T3 takes the best of both worlds, not undercutting the vocabulary but also making it easy to follow, giving enough context into Goldmund's mind, and using excellent punctuation for pacing. The first translation is a forerunner.
edit: I posted this 2nd comment b/c I thought my first one didn't make ir through, but now I see it, so this is TLDR.
Here goes my vote for 3. Three is bomb! It combines the good parts of the previous two translations, which I will highlight shortly. Translation 1 is rich in detail, providing very good context of Goldmund's thoughts [oh! the agony]. The prose is poetic, dramatic, and romantic. It's vocabulary is fire, but it won't be everybody's cup of tea because the language is a little too elite (like modern readers will have to look up many words to know what is going on). Translation 2 is practical, more straightforward, easier to understand, and therefore less poetic. Of the three, it's as dry as gluten-free, dairy-free pizza, get my drift? No real need to define any vocabulary with that one. That said, Translation 3 gets the vote for not underplaying the vocabulary--keeping it poetic, yet easy-to-follow--providing enough context, and having great punctuation for pacing. The forerunner is 1, which still beats 2 by a long shot.
Number three felt smooth and lightly poetic and flowed, more emotional. But I chose number one after rereading it because it had that detail that made me love Hesse when I read him in my early twenties (early 1990’s). Number two felt stilted. Siddhartha which I remember as the simplest read is still my fave.
I thought translation #3 had the best overall mix of descriptive prose and ability to spark interest in the story being told. Number 2 sounded perhaps a bit too modern. Never read the original Hesse in German, so have nothing with which to compare the three. I would vote: 3,1,2.
Overall, I agree with Kristen. I chose Translation Three. Two was a little too modern.
Translation One felt somehow creepy, as if the visit to the young women was prostitution rather than affection. If the rest of the novel really is on the creepy side, if there is less love and affection and more despair and coldness, then Translation One would be the better choice.
And now, on reading the comments, I feel the indignity of the masses and the abstract rage of the literate when confronted with the peasantry’s vernacular tastes!
#1 was easier to read as long as it gets formatted better. #3 seemed more accurate to the time period. #2 was kind of in the middle and I liked some parts of it more but it was a bit more awkward overall.
At first I thought that #1 might have been my favourite only because I have never read Hesse, and although each translation drew me in, I encountered #1 first. So it became my favourite.
But I kept returning the two paragraphs of the childish kiss in each translation, and by far #1 captured the magic, the innocence - and perhaps resurrected a few lost memories of 60 years ago. For me, #1 no doubt.
I enjoyed One the best, and by a lot more than the others. Two felt the most contemporary, was the quickest to read and had the smallest vocabulary. I didn't like it. I liked the longer read of One. There were handfuls of things I enjoyed about Three, but in the end Three reads almost as a mashup between One and Two. One came out well above the rest. One is the longest, and uses the longest words. One and Three have the exact same number of _unique_ words, both almost twenty more than Two.
2 or 3. Please not 1.
What don't you like about 1, particularly?
The language is so emotionally-charged and sets the scene as Goldmund being morally superior to Konrad and Eberhard. Goldmund’s fascination with the younger girl seems creepy instead of a normal level of interest in a pretty girl. If Goldmund is a gamma, then translation 1 is spot on. Translations 2 and 3 describe a young man who is earnest and focused dealing with attraction that, for him, is temptation and, therefore, sin.
Agree. Translation #1 did not match my recollection of reading the English N&G earlier this year. #3 was more aligned.
two, seemed to flow toward crecendo.
I chose "A". It does the best job of immersing the reader inside Goldmund's head. The language best conveys his shyness, his moral certainty, and especially his temptation. "C" is next. "B" is last, with clunky word choices and clichés.
I am a big fan of Thomas Hardy, and "A" has the most poetic and lyrical word choices. As there is almost no dialog and the plot of "schoolboys sneaking out at night and having innocent fun with girls" is straightforward, a clunky narrative was very jarring.
A specific example:
A: "No, he would never come back here, yet he could feel his heart thumping apprehensively in the dim lamplight of the humble kitchen."
B: "No, he would never come back here. But his heart pounded with anguish in the flickering half light of the poor kitchen."
C: "No, he would never come again. But his heart beat hard and anxious in the dim lamplight of the humble kitchen."
Both A and C choose "humble" vs "poor". "B"'s "heart pounded with anguish" is clunky and cliché. "A"'s "...yet he could feel his heart thumping apprehensively" is lyric immersion in Goldmund's head.
First translation, perhaps because the writing is so good and it was the first I read moving me. For some reason the vote button did not work.
It didn't work for me until I signed in and subscribed
still (3+ hrs. later) does not.
Translation 3 is my favorite. It combines the good parts of the other translations very well. T1 is poetic; T2 is straightforward. For example, one uses manure, escapade, and dallying, whereas the other uses dung, adventure, and playing. T3 takes the best of both worlds, not undercutting the vocabulary but also making it easy to follow, giving enough context into Goldmund's mind, and using excellent punctuation for pacing. The first translation is a forerunner.
edit: I posted this 2nd comment b/c I thought my first one didn't make ir through, but now I see it, so this is TLDR.
Here goes my vote for 3. Three is bomb! It combines the good parts of the previous two translations, which I will highlight shortly. Translation 1 is rich in detail, providing very good context of Goldmund's thoughts [oh! the agony]. The prose is poetic, dramatic, and romantic. It's vocabulary is fire, but it won't be everybody's cup of tea because the language is a little too elite (like modern readers will have to look up many words to know what is going on). Translation 2 is practical, more straightforward, easier to understand, and therefore less poetic. Of the three, it's as dry as gluten-free, dairy-free pizza, get my drift? No real need to define any vocabulary with that one. That said, Translation 3 gets the vote for not underplaying the vocabulary--keeping it poetic, yet easy-to-follow--providing enough context, and having great punctuation for pacing. The forerunner is 1, which still beats 2 by a long shot.
Number three felt smooth and lightly poetic and flowed, more emotional. But I chose number one after rereading it because it had that detail that made me love Hesse when I read him in my early twenties (early 1990’s). Number two felt stilted. Siddhartha which I remember as the simplest read is still my fave.
I voted for 3, but really it's a toss-up between 1 & 3. While 2 is competent, it lags behind the style of the first and third imo.
I thought translation #3 had the best overall mix of descriptive prose and ability to spark interest in the story being told. Number 2 sounded perhaps a bit too modern. Never read the original Hesse in German, so have nothing with which to compare the three. I would vote: 3,1,2.
Overall, I agree with Kristen. I chose Translation Three. Two was a little too modern.
Translation One felt somehow creepy, as if the visit to the young women was prostitution rather than affection. If the rest of the novel really is on the creepy side, if there is less love and affection and more despair and coldness, then Translation One would be the better choice.
Twenty years ago, I would have said 1, as Goldmund seems a bit more... flawed.
But I enjoyed reading 3 and was disappointed the text ended.
2 has stillted prose.
Translation 2 was so bad, I knew after the first paragraph it would be the least popular
Hemmingway vs Fitzgerald
And now, on reading the comments, I feel the indignity of the masses and the abstract rage of the literate when confronted with the peasantry’s vernacular tastes!
I like how you think.
1. More evocative and I think closest to the original
#1 was easier to read as long as it gets formatted better. #3 seemed more accurate to the time period. #2 was kind of in the middle and I liked some parts of it more but it was a bit more awkward overall.
At first I thought that #1 might have been my favourite only because I have never read Hesse, and although each translation drew me in, I encountered #1 first. So it became my favourite.
But I kept returning the two paragraphs of the childish kiss in each translation, and by far #1 captured the magic, the innocence - and perhaps resurrected a few lost memories of 60 years ago. For me, #1 no doubt.
I enjoyed One the best, and by a lot more than the others. Two felt the most contemporary, was the quickest to read and had the smallest vocabulary. I didn't like it. I liked the longer read of One. There were handfuls of things I enjoyed about Three, but in the end Three reads almost as a mashup between One and Two. One came out well above the rest. One is the longest, and uses the longest words. One and Three have the exact same number of _unique_ words, both almost twenty more than Two.