Monday, May 25, 2009

Ramon de la Serna: Greguerías

For an updated version of this project

This may well be a lifetime project, but I have decided to translate the entire work into English. There doesn't seem to be an existing translation of the entire work in print, although collections of selected greguerías are out there. I also hope it will improve my Spanish. There are thousands of them, so check back to this post regularly as I slog my way through them, bit by colloquial bit. Since this is not to be seen as a scholarly translation, I have taken liberties to make them sound more natural in English. I am under the impression that translators do this regularly anyway . . . for those of you who don't know, the Greguerías is a collection of traditional saying from the Spanish populace.

The inside of a piano is a loom, and weaves tasseled veils.

Garlic practically drops onto amateurs chefs.

How strange life is! Always, the brush is left, but the glue is gone.

To prepare a bath carefully is like brewing good tea.

The violin bow sews, like needle and thread, notes and souls, souls and notes.

The spine is the cane we swallow at birth.

When a woman orders fruit salad for two, she perfects the original sin.

"Ditto" is a good pseudonym for plagiarism.

He who splits sausage is a false purse (this one clearly contains some figure of speech that escapes my translation skills).

The laboratory rabbits murmur, "They wouldn't dare to do this if we were bears!"

The poet feeds himself on cookies from the moon.

Sometimes we wonder how terrible people survived The Great Flood with Noah and his family--but we have to realize that they stowed away.

That unique, passionate fruit, the pomegranate, holds life ajar so we can see it.

The machine gun was born from the hunter's crazy desire to have a belt between the trigger and the barrel.

The unit of power for airplane engines shouldn't be horsepower, but hippogriffpower.

The artichoke is the food of carpenters, cabinetmakers and woodcarvers.

The hussars go around dressed as X-rays of themselves.

The train seems like the firecracker of the landscape.

I never know if the rooster's comb is a king's crown, or a peasant's cap.

When we call a shotgun wedding a "nuptial feast", it feels like the festival of the last dance.

The moon of the skyscrapers is not the same as the moon of the horizon (one of my favorites so far).

The usher's flashlight leaves a stain of light on the suit.

Eve was born from Adam's rib, but she later returned it with interest in the form of children (I've probably taken the most liberties with this one).

Photographs plant us in the most unnatural poses, while pretending that they are the most natural.

The pari of eggs we eat seem like twins, but they're not even third cousins.

Mushrooms and toadstools come from the world of gnomes.

Every Saturday, Dante went to the theater to trim his laurels.

Plumes of grain tickle the wind.

A chicken is the only cook who knows how to make, out of a little corn with no eggs, an egg with no corn.

A man who cups his hand to his ear to hear seems to hunt for the fly of what is said.

Wednesday: a long day by any account--even by number of letters (again, a few liberties taken).

Whoever spills the last beer might as well have taken the butler in his arms (even my students couldn't help translate this one. I expect this is a terrible translation).

"Penguin" is a word attacked by flies (WTF? I bet they're talking about the umlaut over the word, not a common punctuation in Spanish).

Only the poet can take the full measure of the moon (liberties).

The moon is a little mirror in which the nearby playful and impertinent sun reflects as he peeps over the balcony.

Women are so silly: pantyhose can't be wrinkled, but gloves can.

Ice sleeps in a glass of whisky like a crystal bell on a goat.

The spade is the ultimate friend of man: at first in the sandbox, at last in the grave.

Dogs show us their tongue as if we had taken them to the doctor.

The horsefly sings dirges for the flowers.

A monologue means a mono (monkey) talking to himself (this hinges on a play on words, and loses something in the translation).

Haikus are poetic telegrams.

"T" is the hammer of the alphabet.

You know the chicken is grilled perfectly when it is the color of a violin.

Sparks are the sneezes of Satan.

Hosting a party is like playing a musical instrument (liberties taken).

The most important thing in life is not to die.

There aremore germs on a banknote than dollars in a bank.

The have to use both your nostrils to perceive distant gardens.

There are no magicians anymore. Nowadays, everybody has crystal shoes!

Falcons are the hunting dogs of the sky.

Academics have to have the right to use their sleeping caps during lessons.

El Cid made a knot in his beard to conciliate those about to die.

The electric iron seems to serve coffee to the shirts.

The wind rides the weather vane like a bicycle (liberties).

The crocodile is a suitcase that travels on credit.

An orator is a wind instrument that one plays solo.

Dogs anxiously search for a dream they had in a past life.

The moon needs cats, but she cannot make what nobody gives her back.

Frogs are always right in the heat of a swimming contest.

English Saturday is a graft of Sunday and Friday.

A demon is nothing more than the smartest of monkeys.

The camel is always moth-eaten.

The moon is the bank of ruined metaphors.

The sculpture museum is where fathers listen to their kids saying, "Papa! It hasn't even stuck a leaf out at me!" (translation doubtful).

The crocodile is a shoe with the nails pulled out.

A caterpillar of toothpaste.

"Bring me a bottle of carbonated water."
"Ah yes, the water that cramps and tastes like a sleeping foot."

The moon is the eye of an ox on the boat of the night.

All the jewelers blushed. They had seen a communist!

All cameras want to be accordions, and vice versa.

The moon and the sand made frenzied love.

The green lobster gets its red choler up when boiled.

We can't really enjoy the song of the nightingale, because we always doubt if it is really a nightingale.

The man carrying a double bass seems like an ant carrying a splinter that is too big for him.

The accordion juices musical lemons.

The Dictionary wants to say "Millionaire" in words.

The sea is always wanting to make corkscrews, but never quite succeeds.

The banana is a fruit dressed up in red skin.

Nostalgia: neuralgia of the memories.

The edges of the fog are rags.

The real turkey is a jubilant myth.

The swallow shrinks its shoulders in mid-flight

Camoens and Cervantes are like two friends in an asylum: one missing an eye, the other missing a hand.

First Motion Animation

To this sequence, I added a photo and sank it into the background and motion tracked it to move with the camera. 


Thursday, May 07, 2009

Text Shmext

Roland Barthes: The Pleasure of the Text

The only time I have had more difficulty with a book, had to look up more words, was in trying to read Immanuel Kant. Like that text, I feel like I only incompletely understood Barthes' meaning. Unlike it, however, I don't feel guilty or inferior as a result. Barthes lays out early that the pleasure of a text does not come from comprehensive comprehension. It is "our very avidity for knowledge impels us to skim or to skip certain passages . . . has anyone ever read War and Peace word for word?" (11).

I did grasp it enough to resonate with its central premise: that getting bliss (literally: orgasm) from a text is different from getting pleasure. Bliss cannot come from words, sentences, it is inscrutable and comes unbidden. It is the act of the writer cruising, yes cruising the reader without the two ever meeting. The writer of bliss does not speak to the reader; he makes love to him.

This is much like what Lin Yutang writes in The Importance of Living. There, he describes love affairs he has had with certain authors, insatiably devouring all of their works in a lustful frenzy. I have never had this experience, although I keep expecting to encounter an author who makes love to me. It was not Lin Yutang, and so far, it is not Barthes, but I plan on revisiting this quick and impossible read anyway. Perhaps next time my literary morals will be a bit more lax.

Gabriel Garcia Marquez: Leaf Storm and other stories

My trouble with Marquez has always been similar to my trouble with Toni Morrison: they have a run in every literary suit but theme. Each marvelous, magically realistic story remains but a story. I know, I know, who says that literature has to say anything? But I am not a postmodernist, and it is unlikely I shall be one ever. Text can have, as Morrison and Marquez always do, indelible characters, inventive and surprising situations, and a superhuman gift for the laying down of words, but if they do not go even further, their attempts to make love to me result in blue balls.

Which is why I am so grateful to Marquez for at least trying to give this collection thematic unity. If I didn't know better, I would say it was written after One Hundred Years of Solitude, for it feels even more sophisticated in parts. The two books treat the same fictional village of Macondo, and have a similar texture, but the stories of Leaf Storm, both individually and collectively, have more of the thematic rhythm that I enjoy so much. Robert often chastises me for my insistence that movies and books be tied up with neat little bows, but he is only partly right. I have no problem with plot lines, character arcs, sentences or anything else dangling incompletely in a text. What I object to is for themes to be left incompletely treated, without a proper arc.

Marquez does himself a service in this regard by giving Leaf Storm etc. an epigraph that tips his hand thematically. The selection from Antigone regarding Creon's refusal to bury her brother perfectly mirrors the way things can never be buried in the little village of Macondo. In the eponymous story, the entire town conspires to refuse a literal burial, but the theme opens up further with the exposed memories of the three narrators. Likewise, the title character in "The Handsomest Drowned Man in the World" is unburiable, and it is fitting that these two stories are the first in the collection. They represent the exposition in the thematic arc, and the beginning of rising action. My favorite, though not the best in the book, "Blacaman the Good, Vendor of Miracles", raises the action with a variation: a man who is buried, but is resurrected in his very tomb. The climax then comes with "Monologue of Isabel Watching the Rain in Macondo". This structurally vague but emotionally desperate story takes the theme to its ultimate length, one hinted at in "Leaf Storm": for Isabel, even time itself never truly passes. The denouement then comes with "Nabo", which is engaging, but not challenging, as a denouement should be.

I realize all of this makes me a heathen among literary critics. But for me, the metanarrative is not yet dead. It lives, it will always live, for books like this one are beats of its heart. Wow, that was melodramatic.

Sylvia Plath: collected poems of 1956

I decided to tackle this project in bits, as though each year of Plath's collected works are individual books. It would be easy to read through this quickly and cross it off my list, but I've been leaning in the other direction lately, as seen from my ponderous posts on The Bible. Sorry about those, BTW.

I've never had a particular taste for Plath. All of her famous poems (especially the Ariel set) seemed woefully confessional for me. These earlier poems, however, have had an interesting effect. I find that the content of them is not what grabs my attention, but rather the texture. I found myself hypnotized by the rhythm, the unique way she has with consonants and syllables, that I had never appreciated before. I guess the obligatory teaching of silly little things like alliteration and assonance has had an effect on me, but often I was so taken in by the tactile layer of the poems that I didn't even know what they were about. Let us take a random example, and I will show you what I mean. Let's see . . . the book falls to:

Channel Crossing

On storm-struck deck, wind sirens caterwaul. (already we see example of some of her neatest tricks: "storm-struck" is, of course, alliteration, and Plath is seemingly addicted to it, but it is also an example of her tmesis:the taking out of intermediary words to make new and rhythmically stronger hybrids. "Wind Sirens" is another example of this in the same line.)

With each tilt, shock and shudder, our blunt ship (more alliteration, and a nice example of her parsimony with words: blunt is an almost onomatopoetically precise and surprising choice)

Cleaves forward into fury; dark as anger, (the semicolon here is not grammatically appropriate--a colon would have been a better choice--but in Plath's world "dark as anger" is a complete thought and requires its own clause.)

Waves wallop, assaulting the stubborn hull. (more alliteration, and the first instance in this poem of her other favorite: slant rhyme. Her rhyme scheme and meter are so subtle as not to be noticed unless you have been teaching Freshman English: these lines are pentameter [ish], but they don't feel like it. They rhyme [sorta] but do not seem to.)

Flayed by spray, we take the challenge up (assonance flanked by more slant rhyme)

Grip the rail, squint ahead, and wonder how much longer (a sly variation on her meter that accents the very word such variations would in Shakespeare: longer).

I had intended to break apart a whole poem, but as you can see, even one stanza has so much packed into it that it would be a real undertaking, and I think I have Swine Flu. I had better not tax myself too much.

All of this is very well, but I have to say that Plath overdoes it a bit. It comes across as a bit too forced, almost pretentious, as though she were modeling for a poetry textbook. It got in the way of her content, which took a second reading to even notice, let alone grasp. Once grasped, the content revealed things that could never be taught: mad, cold, biting, desperate, these poems make the reader want to lash out--whether at himself or at the nearest piece of furniture. Her affectionate images of nature invariably are dashed to pieces, and revealed in the fragments are more jewels of longing, discontent and hatred. I am especially fond of "Street Song", and can relate to the narrator's disbelief that passersby don't notice her gaping metaphorical wounds, each of which "reeks of the butcher's cleaver / its heart and guts hung hooked / and bloodied as a cow's split frame" (7-9) . "Resolve" even reminds me of something I might have written, though I would have undoubtedly taken more words to do it. In fact,I did write one called "Re:solution", now that I think of it. In the "bent bow of thorns" which she addresses lie the same gaping wounds as in "Street Song", but in a more subtle expression (16). Happily, despite these wounds, hers and mine, "Miracles occur, / if you care to call those spasmodic / Tricks of radiance miracles". All is not completely dark, and in spite of the hurt that drove Plath and has driven me to terrible ends, "with luck, . . . I shall / patch together a content / Of sorts" ("Black Rook in Rainy Weather, 32-38).

Liveblogging The Bible: Luke III

13:3 Still depressing. He even answered the question succinctly: not typical.

13:9 He seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth: on the one hand, violent death is not to be considered an ordained punishment for sin. On the other, if the people to whom he is talking don't shape up, they will die violently.

13:12 He simply affirms the truth, and it happens. Again, very Ernest Holmes.

13:18-21 In this context, the KOG is a truth, an idea, not an event.

13:28 but in this context, it is a place or condition.

13:30 An important distinction: some who are last will be first (being last in itself is not a virtue).

14:11 Wait a minute. He already said this once, but differently and better. The same, now that I think of it, with v5. Does this mark the point of Luke's dual authorship? Is this where one stops and another begins?

14:15 And here the kingdom is once again a place, not an idea or a person.

14:26 is he trying to winnow the crowd down to a more manageable size?

14:34 this is another one that feels out of place with the preceding dialogue.

15:6,9 The unlikeliness of these reactions in a real context saps the strenth of these parables a little.

15:12 Again, how likely is this to really happen? The father giving up his legacy before he gives up the ghost?

15:28 The way this parable is told, this seems like a perfectly rational reaction. In fact, to react otherwise would be almost superhuman.

16:9 I had forgotten about this parable. What a strange thing to encourage people to do, and a rather oblique application as well.

16:12 And isn't this the exact opposite of the preceding parable?

16:16-18 Wow. This shapter just keeps getting weirder. I'm not even sure what he's saying here.

16:19-31 There was an old Witness in Belize who was a member of what they call "The Anointed", those specially blessed and going to be rulers in heaven. He used to say that the entire Bible was explained in this one parable. I wish I had asked him to explain what he meant. This whole chapter feels out of place, even anachronistic.

17:5-6 This doesn't seem like much of a response. If they had said, "We're hungry", and he replied, "If you had food, you wouldn't be so hungry," the point might be clearer.

17:10 So, it wasn't just the preceding chapter that made Jesus seem angrier, more taciturn. I put the shift at between chapters 10 and 11. Either there was a change in authorship, or a shift in the ministry itself.

17:19 So, the others had the same amount of faith? They too were made well . . .

17:30 What day would that be? The day of the transfiguration? Or the resurrection?

17:37 Even his parables have gotten macabre.

18:1,9 This way of framing a parable doesn't match up with the rest of the book of Luke.

18:15 What possible reason could the disciples have had for objecting?

18:26 This is a silly question.

18:31 This part feels revisionist.

18:39 Again with this. What makes the disciples not want Jesus to perform miracles? Jealousy? Propriety? Fear?