Derrick Storm: A Bloody Storm - Vom Sturm getrieben (German Edition)

Every imagination of a community becomes overcoded as a nation, and hence our conception of community is severely im- poverished. Just as in the context of the dominant countries, here too the multiplicity and singularity of the multitude are negated in the straitjacket of the identity and homo- geneity of the people. Once again, the unifying power of the subaltern nation is a dou- ble-edged sword, at once progressive and reactionary Nationalism, it must be admitted, despite its savagery and ideologically fraudulent drawbacks, has been one of the major driving forces of the Western 6 Eric Hobsbawm puts the moment at around in his critique of the ethnic origins of nationalism.

In German discourse the rise of modern nationalism has, until recently, not been seen as a part of the age of Enlightenment and the so-called Weimarer Klassik. Die deutsche Nation im Jahrhundert that eighteenth-century nationalism in Germany was de-nationalised after to rescue the greats of the Enlightenment from the shadow of national ideology 9- This raises the question of whether or not the cosmopolitan Germans of the Enlightenment were aware of the nationalist movements in other countries. In all cases, however, there was a strengthening of the state as a political and national entity, a development that precedes modern nationalist politics and in the end defines the goal of most lat- ter day nationalist movements.

The development of the nation state may be one of the reasons for the di- lemma Scottish nationalism has faced since As long as Scottish interests 7 In his Nation und Nationalismus in Deutschland Otto Dann sets the starting point at , around the time that Sturm und Drang started to make its mark in German letters. He also discusses briefly the preceding development. Scottish scholars have been very industrious lately: Michael Fry has written in his The Scottish Empire on the great part Scots played in building a British Empire, and argues that this experience was among those that shaped the modern Scottish nation.

These works and many others reflect the major current orientations on the subject of nationalism: At the same time, it must be kept in mind that just across the Irish Sea, and a few thousand kilometres south-east of Scotland, nationalism has continued to cause the shedding of blood through the murderous rage and mad- ness that only nationalism seems to be capable of producing.

It is in the light of this dialectic of achievement and insanity that the subject of nationalism needs to be discussed. My primary concern, however, is not with nationalism as such, but with one of its major pillars, national literature, and its ideological function. It is in that combination of referral and dis- placement that translation plays a decisive role in the construction of national literature, one of the main pillars of any culture aspiring to become one of the collective national subjects of the world — with a name and a family, with a his- tory and genealogy, with its own flag and a poetic tradition strong enough to compete in the Olympic arena of world literature.

Fiona Stafford provides an interesting literary survey on these sorts of myths in her The Last of the Race. At least since Kant, academics have considered it their duty to define the terms of their discourse with as much precision as possible. In the humanities, a paper must be wissenschaftlich; otherwise it has no justification. Despite the considerable onslaught of post-structuralist and deconstructivist dis- courses, the demand for a stylistically clear and unambiguous message based on empirical detail retains its hold on the mainstream, and that of course not only in Germany.

On the other hand, his colleagues in the natural sciences seem to be unafraid to use terms from the humanities and redefine them for their own purposes. Modern genetics uses a host of terms that could derive from modern translation studies or linguistics or medieval theology for that matter. The terms translation and transcription are, for example, used in genetics without a blush and it would be easy to prove that this metaphorical usage was initially not entered in any comprehensive dictionary.

The natural sciences can, it seems, use language freely and give extant terms a new meaning, whereas mathematical equations are unambiguous are they for everybody? On the one hand, there is the necessity of defining the con- cepts clearly; on the other, both defy definition. While keep- ing this breadth in mind it is necessary to narrow down the fields with which I will be working to those that have direct implications for the topic.

I will begin by discussing a few aesthetic and social concepts prevalent in the eighteenth century which are relevant to the transla- tional conceptions I will be developing. This has not resulted in much discussion on translation in literary critical discourse, despite, for example, the immense attention given to the concept of imitation. Not only have translators themselves been invisible Venuti for a long time, but also the discourse on the genre as such. The concept of translation, both as an act and as a term defining an action precisely, has, on the other hand, been under constant scrutiny, often resulting in polemics.

From Luther or even St. Jerome , onward such polemics have often been in the form of defences — defences whose sole purpose has been to state that the text in question is a translation and noth- ing else. Original works often need a diametrically opposite mode of verifica- tion. In order to discard the mimetic stamp, authors have reverted to strategies of removal, such as, for example, calling an original text a translation: That this novel, by any standard, is not consid- ered to be a forgery shows at once a fundamental moral difference, for both a translation that pretends to be one but is not and a translation that pretends not to be one and is, are, by most standards, morally reprehensible.

Instead of fighting the hopeless battle for an all-encompassing definition of translation, scholars could enrich the debate by focusing on the productive as- pects of translation, on its capabilities and how creative solutions emerge in practice, and theorising on their implications and ideological positions: By implication it is taken for granted that everything that is said or written can be translated. They often indicate fixed meanings: An epic con- tains certain structures which form the content according to particular rules, and the same applies to the lyric, drama, etc.

The form itself produces expectations that are reflected in the content. Certain forms demand content of certain kinds and exclude others.

iTunes is the world's easiest way to organize and add to your digital media collection.

Changes in these demands are possible, and are indeed most often epochal, because conventions in literary forms reflect the symbolic and social order of their time. Different forms have different values. A limerick, for example, is not con- sidered to be as serious as an ode. A ballad was trivial literature until Thomas Percy redefined the formal heritage of balladry.

• Category: Dubstep.
• Posts navigation!
• Made to Mistress (BDSM Erotica Book 11).

Even the old opposition of poet- ry and prose was a question of formality, poetry being bound by forms concep- tualised into the social hierarchies. Forms can be translated. First, with the foreign content, for example when an epic such as the Iliad is translated. It is at that point where we come to a di- viding line between genre and form; the former is a more general concept taking into account the narrative structure and the characters, whereas the latter in- cludes the verse form.

The form of the Iliad can then be translated if the metre and the content are simultaneously translated, an almost impossible task. Forms alone can be translated. The Renaissance solution to the translation of the hexameter form was the invention of blank verse. It is also often named as the work that introduced blank verse into epic poetry. In any case Trissino introduced the form for both genres. The significance of this development lies in the fact that the introduc- tion of blank verse was a translational in its conception, and b an attempt to achieve the sophistication of form of the ancient sources being imitated or trans- lated.

This is the method that leads to translation without an original: The method is of course more complex than that; the imitations of Pindaric odes as practised by Ronsard in sixteenth-century France and Cowley in seven- teenth-century England exemplify another aspect, whereby the spirit of the orig- inal is translated, but neither content nor form are directly translated, because poets considered the Alexandrine and heroic couplet to be equivalent to the an- cient hexameter.

In all these cases, however, there was an attempt to increase the pres- tige of the poetry through the form adopted, and in many cases this was explicit- ly expressed as a national project, as an attempt to raise the native language and its modern literary tradition to Parnassian heights. Toury defines the concept thus: In fact, the essay shows well how fixed the category of an original national literature — as opposed to a secondary literature in trans- lation — is, both empirically and theoretically, in the mind of a renowned transla- tion scholar.

• Derrick Storm 3: A Bloody Storm - Vom Sturm getrieben Richard Castle | DOC!
• Two Brides and the Check, Please!.
• a bloody storm derrick novellas 3 richard castle;

The question is whether this is a fact at all. Translation is only secondary when there is a strong subjective identity working in a native language with a simultaneous awareness of foreign languages; the Romans provide the first example of this in the West, and the nations of the modern age have followed suit. Nevertheless, translators have been truly innovative with their different approaches and methods and have introduced novelties into the target culture.

In fact, pseudotranslations are usually second- ary to the translations they imitate.

Derrick Storm 3: A Bloody Storm - Vom Sturm getrieben

Toury himself puts it thus: By enhancing their resemblance to genuine translations they simply make it easier for their texts to pass as such The examples Toury uses are also very informative and affirm my position. This mixture of translation, adaptation and plain fiction was carefully reworked into an epic form, probably under the masterful guidance of Hugh Blair, whose theo- retical knowledge must have been indispensable when the young Macpherson was constructing the poems.

Indeed, Macpherson himself revealed his use of pre-texts, some origi- nal Milton and some translated Homer , at several points in his footnotes in the editions he saw through the press, and after his death, in , Malcolm Laing published a hostile edition of Ossian which is, in effect, a massive indict- ment of plagiarism, yet another bizarre turn in the Ossianic controversies. The influence was wide ranging and went well beyond the aspect of translation, firstly, in the method of collecting balladry and translating it or editing it into an epic form; the Finnish Kalevala is a case in point;28 secondly, in the translation of epic poetry in Brit- ain, where the traditional forms gave in to more experimentation towards blank verse and even hexameter; and thirdly, in the spirit and style of writing in an age of sentimentality, particularly in Germany.

Simultaneously, it must be remem- bered that the greatest forgery perpetrated in connection with the Poems of Os- sian was committed in the paratexts that functioned as verification. The pseudo- translation of The Poems of Ossian insofar as it fits that definition, for there were more sources than Toury claims did, however, lean on the textual strate- gies of existing translations to achieve its objective. One relates to the Book of Mormon, which is also an example of a pseudotrans- lation that refers to previous translations, as Toury admits in a footnote They are native speakers of German and their pseudotranslation turned out to be an original.

But as Toury himself asserts, they did not take the features that comprise the so- called novelties directly from Norwegian, or from any other Scandinavian literary works, to which the two had no access anyway. Rather, they were linguistic, textual and literary features pertinent to German translations of impressionistic and naturalistic texts of Scandinavi- an origin 51, emphasis in text. Why the translations, rather than the imitative pseudotranslations, are not given credit for the introduction of these novelties into German literature is dif- ficult to understand. But this truly insightful essay or Chapter shows very clearly how translations are constantly marginalised, even by a sympathetic commentator such as Toury.

What it shows best, however, is that in order to be original one must be national, and vice versa. It is a necessary illusion, or at any rate, an illusion accepted, if grudgingly at times. Rewriting, plagiarism and palimpsest overlap to an extent, but these ideas of transtextuality have flanks not covered by each of them.

Herder translated, Goethe rewrote, the form was a ballad. Pseudotranslation has been discussed above, and it gets its own category despite the fact that it could be defined as forgery. But then again, many of his texts resemble what Macpherson and Percy had already published; there was simply no pretence of translation. It was one form of translation without an orig- inal text.

Editing includes not only scholarly editing of older texts, but also the colla- tion of manuscripts and other interventions into previous texts, be they minor corrections of typos or active selection of text material and all kinds of euphe- mising. Parody and satire are put into the same box, although the concepts are dis- tinct in degree as Genette has shown very well in Palimpsests The first printing presses of Europe almost invariably printed trans- lations into the native languages before anything else.

The Renaissance is rarely spoken of in a translational context, although in itself it was a massive translational movement. Rather than being a rebirth, it was a re-newal of the ancient heritage in the native language. This is the major point, for the re- newal consisted not only in the discovery of the ancient heritage, as the standard interpretation goes, but in a re-writing in a new language.

The impulses of the Renaissance and their effects on national literatures have often been mentioned, but it is the translational aspect which I want to emphasise, for it represents the method of what I refer to as a translation without an original text. What made the Renaissance different from the previous periods and indeed, as schoolchildren are taught, presents a decisive cut in European history, was among other things the change in attitude towards the ancient heritage and its systematic application as an aesthetic model, through theoretical, translational or both kinds of ap- proaches.

derrick storm a raging storm im auge des sturms german edition Manual

The beginning of native language ideology can, then, probably be ascribed to two cultural events. In this text Dante Alighieri makes his claim for writing poetry in the native language, although this does not mean leaving the classical paradigms; no, it is exactly a way of retaining them and at the same time be able to use the vernacular.

It is a major step in re-evaluating the native language and, in effect, sets it up as an equal, or at least as a potential equal, of the classical languages. This in itself became a paradigm in Europe as a whole, and one of the major effects of the Renaissance was that writing in the vernacular exploded. The other event is of course the Reformation with its evangelical focus on the word of god.

The next centuries are the success story of the native languages and there are many milestones to be seen for that movement. I will mention only a few: The market for books in the vernacular grew steadily in print capitalism as Benedict Anderson has pointed out and the demand shows simultaneously the increasing importance of native languages.

Another aspect of that development is the broadening base of texts being translated, either from the Latin or even other languages. Key literary texts such as Homer and Virgil etc. Whatever the label of their epoch, they certainly provided renewal in their native language on such a scale that they have themselves become classics. A language that could not master the poets and forms of antiquity remained parochial.

These could take the form of a defence of poetry of which there were numerous, or instructions for poets, such as the one by the German Martin Opitz who wrote Buch von der Deutschen Poeterey, a kind of handbook for young poets in , advising them amongst other things to translate poetry in order to learn to write it. Opitz also wrote a defence for the writing of poetry in the native language, in Latin like Dante.

Another famous defender of the native language amongst others was, curiously, the German philopsopher Leibniz, curiously because he himself wrote mostly in French. The seventeenth century was eventful for the native language movement: It would be possible to list many other events in this vein such as the beginning of writing native language grammars and dictionaries, but I will only mention one more, and that is the establishment of chairs in the native language and liter- ature at the universities, a relatively recent phenomenon.

It was only in the nine- teenth century that professors of languages such as English and German started teaching at universities, thus marking the true victory of the Moderns and native language ideology. The first consists of the temporal and psychological levels of narration. Auerbach points out that the old Platonic accusation that Homer is a liar is irrelevant for its worth as an imitation, whereas the Biblical text does not pretend to be a suc- cessful imitation i.

One consequence of this is a dire need for an exegesis if the reader is to accept the text as a living truth for him or herself, which becomes more difficult the farther away the reader is from the original in space and time: The most graphic instance of this which Auerbach does not mention can be seen in the structural parallels of the two biblical sto- ries of multilingual miracles.

The first narrative, the negative one of the tower of Babel, is a constant in translational discourse. On the political level, and in order to take the Old Testament beyond the Jewish tradition, this translation by inversion defines the invention of difference between Jews and Christians, for the evangelical as- signment of Christianity, as opposed to the retentive one of Judaism, demanded a cultural translation for different cultural areas: The third level Auerbach refers to is the stylistic relation of the sublime and class, i.

Yet in a way he does not, for what is mimesis but a certain kind of transla- tion? One textual reality is translated into another, the same logos, in Platonic terms, is repeated in a different lexis, a thoroughly mimetic operation. Apparently, the Koran is seen in Islam as the completion of the biblical heritage. We remember that Socrates imagined Homer United by this Sympathetick Bond, as the arch-imitator at the very moment he You grow Familiar, Intimate and Fond; was imitating the words of someone else, talk- Your thoughts [sic], your Words, ing like someone else, becoming another.

Melberg rejects his argument on the grounds of its being too dialectical and, citing Gadamer, hence more Platonic than Plato This search, I argue, could be and is as well done through translation as through mimesis, despite a slight difference of quality that has most often been interpreted by implication as difference in essence. This difference is often seen not as qualitative, but as absolute. The parallel is hardly ever drawn, so the proof lies in the absence of analogy.

But it is not ar- bitrary, or even radical, to try to shift the perspective a little without taking cov- er behind a metaphor. Translation is, if anything, a mimetic operation. Even prior to translation the term was a trouble- maker. Why would Plato have cho- sen the form if not to create a distance between himself and those who are speaking? In this charming account, Di- otima argues through Socrates that Love is neither a god nor a human, but half- way between the two: Socrates asks her for another example and she gives it by drawing an analogy: Any action which is the cause of a thing emerging from non- existence into existence might be called poetry, and all the processes in all the crafts are kinds of poetry, and all those who are engaged in them poets.

In the following I will refer to the page numbers. Melberg summarises it into three points: Aristotle translates by inversion and invents catharsis in order to let immoral characters improve morals. It is a solid, simple and classical idea of mimesis, aware of its imitative qualities prior to the Roman translation of mimesis with imitatio; why else would Aristotle say so de- fensively in the ninth Chapter of the Poetics: Here the concept became acutely a problem of translation through its actual translation as a term and the cultural translation of the Greek heritage into the Roman.

The Greek version of mimesis also referred to re- writings of previous work in competition, rewritings which were presented in competitions. The idea was to present a better representation of events than the former writer had done. Not particularly for the Romans themselves, who were happy to imitate, translate and lift without bothering much about the sources, in fact preferring this. There is, however, an uneasiness present in Horace that is decisive for the ideas on translation in Western thought, and that not only in connection with the often repeated, indeed very much Horatian, dialectic of lit- eralism versus free translation.

Horace deserves more attention than this, though, for the pejorative paradigm of transla- tion as a secondary act can actually be traced to his influence. Ironically, or ra- ther obviously, his classification had the ideological objective of upgrading his and other Roman work; that is, to apply what was later termed translatio studii to make the Greek original Roman.

See Albrecht on Cicero and Horace The poet should not use obscure and abstruse terms except when absolutely necessary and then very sparingly and only those of Greek origin ll. When he discusses the correct use of poetic form a little later, the tone becomes harsher and more didactic: Why through false shame do I prefer to be ig- norant rather than to learn? A little further on in the text the famous nec verbo verbum appears, and it is interesting to see how exactly the context has been translated by different trans- lators ll.

The passage begins simply: Similarly, or rather more elegantly, Roscommon translates: Inventively conservative as he is, Horace does not recommend this method of inventing new traditions and contradicts it force- fully in the next passage, the translations of which we will examine side by side: Prescribe at first such strict uneasie rules, As they must slavishly observe, Or all the laws of decency renounce In both cases the mimetic operation is translational, for the sources of public domain Horace points to are Greek.

Two hundred years of copyright make some difference. The manner in which the two translators treat the famous phrase referring to their own activity is also revealing. Roscommon, being a poet, is perhaps a bit more honestly subjective than the scholar and he is also much more aware of the art of translating than the latter, who indeed must be expressing the way he feels when translating, though with an accuracy that reveals an ideological stance more than perfect scholarship.

It is exactly this act which removes translation from the mimetic op- eration, making it simultaneously mechanical and worthless in itself. This attempt at redefining the Latin adjective fidus through repeated translation gives the impression Horace was advising translators specifically, which he was not, just imitators. This is the method by which the translatio finally succeeds in translating while removing all no- tions of translating, what I refer to as a translation without an original: I was the first to show Latium the iambics of Paros, following the rhythms and spirit of Archilochus, not the themes or the words that hounded Lycambes.

And lest you should crown me with a scantier wreath because I feared the measures and form of verse, see how manlike Sappho moulds her Muse by the rhythm of Archilochus; how Alcaeus moulds his, though in his themes and arrangement he differs, looking for no father-in- law to besmear with deadly verses, and weaving no halter for his bride with defaming rhyme. Him, never before sung by other lips, I, the lyrist of Latium, have made known. It is my joy that I bring things untold before, and am read by the eyes and held in the hands of the gently born What he has really done is to translate the forms themselves into Latin, thereby showing the means by which the Latin could be moulded to the needs of the foreign form, could be given the sublimity of the foreign form.

What Horace achieved, however if not in his own day then at least in latter-day discourse was to create a mimetic imbalance and, through the nec verbum verbo, a distinctive relegation of translation out of the first class of mi- mesis. Whereas he was of course translating himself — everything but words: Thus Horace created a problem of translation, for although he had succeed- ed in expelling it from the state of legitimacy, he left it with the one contradicto- ry justification it has retained through the ages: For example, in the eighteenth century Homeric translations were cleansed of Ro- man deities and names, which were replaced with the original ones, an act not as scholarly as it may at first sight seem, for it also served the new translatio of na- tionalism in the eighteenth century, with the aim of getting rid of the middle- men, the Romans, in order to lay the true claim to the original Greeks.

One of those who noticed this was Nietzsche. The short Chapter on translation is worth quoting in full: Sie scheinen uns zu fragen: Denn tot ist er nun einmal: There are only two things for which translators are condemned; for translating the words wrongly and translating the words literally. In the age of Corneille and even of the Revolution, the French took possession of Roman antiquity in a way for which we would no longer have courage enough — thanks to our more highly developed historical sense. And Roman antiquity itself: How they translated things into the Roman present!

How deliberately and recklessly they brushed the dust of the wings of the butterfly that is called moment! Thus Horace now and then translated Alcaeus or Archilochus; and Propertius did the same with Callimachus and Philetas poets of the same rank as Theocritus, if we may judge. What was it to them that the real creator had experienced this and that and written the signs of it into his poem?

As poets, they had no sympathy for the antiquarian inquisitiveness that precedes the historical sense; as poets, they had no time for all those very personal things and names and whatever might be considered the costume and mask of a city, a coast, or a century: They seem to ask us: Should we not have the right to breathe our own soul into this dead body? For it is dead after all; how ugly is everything dead! Indeed, translation was a form of conquest. In fact, his example from Horace refers exactly to that passage quoted above. The poetic language of genius is capable of transcending this distinction [between expe- rience and its representation] and can thus transform all individual experience directly into general truth.

The subjectivity of experience is preserved when it is translated into language; the world is then no longer seen as a configuration of entities that designate a plurality of distinct and isolated meanings, but as a configuration of symbols ultimately leading to a total, single, and universal meaning During the age of originality of genius , mimesis was transformed and re- named as originality and translation was firmly consigned to the role Horace originally conceived, indeed for the same purpose.

Such an inherent contradiction is bound to lead to tensions that can be kept under control only by ideology — an ideology that fictionalises the unity of the mimetic operation by denying its translational aspects; indeed these aspects must necessarily be taken out of the equation if that imagined unity is to be pa- raded as a reality.

It is the same sort of operation the nation requires in order to see itself as one. The interpretation of the thing as hypokeimenon and then as subjectum does not only produce itself as a slight linguistic phenomenon. The absence-of ground Boden- losigkeit of Western thought opens with this translation. Beneath the seemingly literal and thus faithful translation there is concealed, rather, a translation of Greek experience into a different way of thinking.

Roman thought takes of the Greek words without a corresponding, equally authentic experience of what they say, without the Greek word. Je souligne fondamentale Grunderfahrung. It amounts to a Babelian ban on speech: The ground of thought comes then to be lacking when words lose speech [la parole].

According to the American art historian Meyer Schapiro, Heidegger creates this meaning by ignoring experience, but as Derrida points out in his commen- tary, both Schapiro and Heidegger are essentially restituting, returning the work of art to an owner through the object represented; it matters whose shoes are painted, it may be seen as implied that the deictic act of pointing to a farmer Heidegger or the artist himself Schapiro is a parallel if not a synchronic ges- ture: Whose shoes are they? While Schapiro and Heidegger disagree over their attribution, the colloquy of Derrida and his interlocutors finds a secret correspondence beneath the overt disagreement: From out of this gulf arise specters or ghosts of a recent German past, one that left mountains of abandoned shoes all over the European landscape Between And what are the con- sequences?

In this long essay his steps need to be carefully traced, backwards, in order to see the carefully constructed contradictions that are everything but anti- thetical. Close to the end Heidegger couples history with art, i. This happens through a shove which transports his- tory into movement, not as a linear account of events but as the movement of a people from what it has left behind forgotten? Immer wenn Kunst geschieht, d.

Geschichte meint hier nicht die Abfolge ir- gendwelcher und sei es noch so wichtiger Begebenheiten in der Zeit. True, Heidegger does not use this terminology, but he translates into his private lan- guage. Despite this the thought is clear: Sie geschah im Abendland erstmals im Griechentum. Das geschah im Mittelalter. Dieses Seiende wurde wiederum ver- wandelt im Beginn und Verlauf der Neuzeit. History means here not a sequence in time of events of whatever sort, however important. Jedesmal brach eine neue und wesentli- che Welt auf It is, however, obviously a Heideggerian translation of the translatio.

The contradiction seems blatant, raising the question of how this is possible in the space of 70 pages. The answer I suggest is the closing off of mimesis and translation, a forget- ting of words while taking advantage of the process.

• Other Books in This Series!
• Foreign Policy for Civilians.
• Free Books Download Derrick Storm A Bloody Storm Vom Sturm Getrieben German Edition Pdf Chm;

This regres- sion takes place through the medium of language, native language, because this is the route to the well of origins and the essence of poetry: Die Sprache selbst ist Dichtung im wesentlichen Sinne. Considering that this context is partly the myth of the translation, it contains almost the eschatological feeling of the German thirties: This foundation happened in the West for the first time in Greece. What was in the future to be called Being was set into work, setting the standard.

This happened in the Middle- Ages. This kind of being was again transformed at the beginning and in the course of the modern age. Beings became objects that could be controlled and seen through by calculation. But since language is the happening in which for man beings first disclose themselves to him each time as beings, poesy—or poetry in the narrower sense—is the most original form of poetry in the essential sense.

Das ent- werfende Sagen ist jenes, das in der Bereitung des Sagbaren zugleich das Unsagbare als ein solches zur Welt bringt. In solchem Sagen werden einem geschichtlichem Volk die Begriffe seines Wesens, d. It has to be kept in mind that he is of the opinion that language is es- sentially poetry His division of language into two functions, banality and an almost mystical function of art, is reminiscent of two famous essays on trans- lation.

Projective saying is saying which, in preparing the sayable, simultaneously brings the unsayable into the world. Um das zu sehen, bedarf es nur des rechten Begriffes von der Sprache. Aber die Sprache ist nicht nur und nicht erstlich ein lautlicher und schriftlicher Ausdruck dessen, was mitgeteilt werden soll. Wo keine Sprache west, wie im Sein vom Stein, Pflanze und Tier, da ist auch keine Offenheit des Seienden und demzufolge keine solche des Nichtseienden und des Leeren In the current view, language is held to be a kind of communication.

It serves for verbal exchange and agreement, and in general for communicating. But language is not only and not primarily an audible and written expression of what is to be communicated. It not only puts forth in words and statements what is overtly or covertly intended to be communicated; language alone brings what is, as something that is, into the Open for the first time. Heidegger uses different argu- ments to draw this division, but nonetheless makes language, native language it must be, the essence of being human.

Der Satz vom Grund accepts the translatability of ex- perience, indeed sees it as an experience in itself: For Heidegger, art is the origin of the work of art and the artist: Heidegger, then, sees the origin in a movement that brings truth to light in the form of works of art. This has taken art radically away from the idea of mimesis as we have seen it in some forms, or so at least Heidegger himself asserts: Indeed the pedagogical power of literature in the eighteenth century was seen in terms of claims to truth; in the enlightened circles it was usually enough that moral truth was beauty, to see it the other way around probably took a Romantic like Keats.

The reproduction of what exists requires, to be sure, agreement with the actual being, adaptation to it; the Middle Ages called it adaequatio; Aristotle already spoke of homoiosis. Agreement with what is has long been taken to be the essence of truth His origin of the work of art is art that constitutes itself from its own source, which he does not name divinity but which has a mystical touch to it. Neither in his adaptation of the Longinian para- digm with all the philosophical discursive additions nor his simple cut between truth and beauty as if aesthetics up to that point had only been occupied with the latter.

What is important in this context is the way in which Derrida examines two aspects of the terms used in connection with translation problems: First and foremost, Derrida accepts the term and its idea, whereas Heidegger rejects it explicitly, as we have seen above: Heidegger, interestingly, mentions both Aristotle and the medieval notions in his dismissive sentence quoted above. Derrida also hinges his definition on that definitive break, the source of the translatio in the broadest sense: In that case it can more readily be translated as imitation.

This translation seeks to express or rather historically produces the thought about this relation. The two faces are separated and set face to face: A good imitation will be one that is true, faithful, like or likely, adequate, in conformity with the phusis essence or life of what is imitated; it effaces itself of its own accord in the pro- cess of restoring freely, and hence in a living manner, the freedom of true presence , emphasis in text. And yet translation is not fully there, or only implicitly as a linguistic referential opera- tion.

If he has, he is certainly not alone, but it is noteworthy that the notion of mimesis was itself not very visible during the age of originality.

Elle se laisse alors plus facilement traduire par imitation. As Bern- hard F. Scholz notes in a preface to a recent collection of essays bearing the same title, Auerbach konnte [ On the other hand, as we have seen, not even Plato and Aristotle agreed on that point. Gabriel, whose intention is to disqualify scepticism and postmodern criticism per se by leaning on the authority of Kant, uses the oft-noted subtitle to round off his essay: The full German title is Mimesis: And, as a matter of fact, it is constructed via translation. Considering the fact that he is explicitly attacking postmodern criticism, both his method and results are surprising.

Such moments, not to forget the joking comment on the table of contents, or the ironic postscript of the second edition, dated April 13, , in which he expressly underlines mistakes other authors would have silently corrected, do not allow for an interpretation of his terminology or conclusions that is in key with German conventions in critical discourse.

This is what she prefers to call transposition rather than intertextuality: In his Leistung der Form. To which I firmly agree. The cultural context of all ancient, medieval and any texts more than a few years old is different than that of the receiver, native or foreign. By disclaiming totality and being confined to particularity, interpretative representation is only able to grasp individual shades of representative knowledge and that always and only within the parameters of its position.

An adequate grasp of the whole representation is, if at all, only possible in the temporally unforeseeable history of its reception, i. So the artist is forced to lie in order to tell the truth. It is the necessarily added truth that turns fact into knowledge. Reflecting upon this, Handke asks himself: Less, when one is satisfied with mere reporting; more, the more exactly one tries to formulate?

Page 24 in the first edition. See also my Damit wir wissen, was sie geschrieben haben The re- newal of reality can then follow when the facts are reinterpreted with the aid of the desire of knowing what one does not know, the desire that Diotima told Soc- rates in the Symposium and he Agathon was at the basis of love; as soon as it has been fulfilled there can be no desire anymore. What makes the desire strong is the lack of transparency. The wish to know what is beyond the known has been the major drive of human epistemological desire, the mystery being the battlefield of humanist humanity and the divine.

And now, when the limits of knowledge have almost been reached, when the di- vine unknown has, as Nietzsche prophesied, lost the battle, humanity stands be- fore the frightening moral questions previously delegated to divinity, i. It is not a new moment in history, but one that recurs when humans become victims of their own hubris and think they know everything, and that they are able to control nature through that knowledge. As always, they forget them- selves, the cause of all instability, and forget that all transparency is imagined, the true folly of security that imagines everything can be translated into meaning and that all fictions have been interpreted.

The feeling that there is an end — the end of history, first prophesied in the Bible, but also by Hegel and Fukuyama among others; the end of work Rifkin ; the end of humanism Sloterdijk — is prevalent, but perhaps all these endings can be translated into the end of truth as truth. That would also mean the end of imitation, beginning it anew.

So that we can experience and know therefrom the unsaid of a thinker, of any type, we must attend to what he says. The literary anxiety of influence Bloom is perhaps more an anxiety of language, natively powerful as a sublime manifestation and sublimely frightening as a foreign power. We have visual dreams in order to es- cape the logic of language. Imitation is the translation of a reality into words. Words are the primal instrument of power. Of the trio of translation, imitation and metaphor, translation is a kind of tertium comparationis, an operative element that makes possible the connection between a vision and its metaphor, between a reality and its imitation.

Meta- phors, the textual manifestations of imitations, have been translated from their non-verbal state, formed to the logic of language through the act of translation. That this method could be applied to move these objects across the hurdles of different languages is what truly made humanity godlike; for it is the ultimate rebellion against the curse of the tower of Babel and in itself a new spiritual ver- sion of that tower, a tower of translation.

It is the way in which Christ the human God made his word known through his apostles, translators of words into many languages and not of visions into one language as the previous prophets had been. In the moment of conclusion, when Umberto Eco, in effect, admits that his search for the perfect language has foundered, he comes to translation as a kind of tertium comparationis: This is like a kind of dream which imagi- nes an Italian speaking his native language to an Englishman who understands Italian and answers in English, a language the Italian understands.

This Utopia leaves out the necessity of translation, and holds desperately to the native lan- guage at the same time. As long as there are different languages, translation will be the substitute, if not the perfect language. It is the human an- swer to the divine wrath of Babel.

Through the most radical and microscopic of all acts of transla- tion, Frankenstein, originally a pathological metaphor, has finally been translat- ed into a real possibility. It reproduces a text in anoth- er language, another culture, another world, and at the same time it begets it with the previous text. Geneticists have therefore chosen the right term, transla- tion, to describe one of the most important operations of reproduction within the cell.

But ordinary, mundane sexual reproduction is also a sort of translation in this sense, the combination of two different codes to create a third that is formed only of what the parent codes have contributed. This is best proven when one examines the rela- tionship between the previous and the following. If identical, the following is automatically detested; it is only a repetition and nothing new. In the antiquarian bookshop, the second edition of a book is almost always worth less than the first, and anyone knows the difference in price between an original painting and a copy, even if both are made by the same artist.

It is not coincidental in this context. This metaphorical vocabulary refers to the procreative activity within the cell. When someone else produces the copy, however, then the copying is an act that may even raise the price of the original, for why should one copy a second- rate work? When reproduced in a book, the copy of a painting is as good as worthless in itself and yet in that form probably raises the fame and worth of the original; it has displaced it in reality and raised its spiritual relevance.

The same can be said of books; in the end, the nth edition may be worth lit- tle more than its raw production costs and at the same time displace the original object. Similar reasons might keep most people from reproducing themselves through the act of cloning, not the fact that they find it morally reprehensible, because it simply is not, when considered as a moral issue. The fear of the exact copy is probably stronger, for it kills the original through its likeness. In an age of originali- ty, it works the same way as the copy made by another artist, even more so. A translation not only raises more money for a copyrighted text, but also increases its literary or spiritual worth.

This is achieved through the coeval sameness and difference as well as through greater distribution. Translation works as procrea- tion metaphorically masqueraded as cloning with only the language gene changed. In our current social and reproductive terms, translation produces the legit- imate children of marriage, begotten within acceptable norms securing that the offspring will be formed according to the standards of bourgeois society.

Art, on the other hand, begets the illegitimate children of illicit love whose formation may be impossible to manage with the instruments of bourgeois society. As Aldous Huxley foresaw in Brave New World, only the latter is endangered by the absolutism of information. Even human- istic education since the Renaissance has not produced great numbers of Greek and Hebrew scholars who could really tackle these works in the original what originals would they have had? Their interpretations would have been — and are, no doubt — learned and important, but only for them and their peers; the rest of the world, poets rewriting and readers reliving, would not have been influ- enced to a great extent.

The hypothetical question above is justified because it sheds light on the reception of works that have been given universal artistic and religious hence canonical status and that have been read in one translation or another by most of their readers. The Bible was, furthermore, long read in a translation into a language already dead; St.

The question of translation and canon is complex. Firstly, the concepts seem to be almost inseparable, which is perhaps not surprising, for it is through biblical translation that the question of canonising texts becomes relevant. Sec- ondly, translation is also a significant criterion for the potential canonicity of a work of literature: Authors are eager to be translated and if they have been, the publishers are sure to mention that in a blurb on the jacket of the next edition or book.

Thirdly, as has been noted, many authors have tried to authenticate an inaccessible often literally inaccessible! Finally, canon is related to language from various perspectives: To which it might be added that when a language has gained an almost absolute hegemony translation is drastically reduced. He also chooses the translations, thus canonising certain English translations of the works. Before going any further, it is right to consider the term canon.

There are two points worth making in this context: Although evidently polemically intended, some of his assertions go beyond the ironic in their Johnsonian moralism and reveal the age-old paradigm of old age that the world is going down the drain, once again. This anxiety of decline is indeed strange from someone so familiar with the can- on, for how can one prophesy doomsday now, after three-thousand years of suc- cess? Bloom does not of course claim that the canon is closed and that he provides the reader with the definitive one.

See OCB on canon, apochryphal books and translation. To compare, one can look at a recent essay by Andreas F. Kelletat in which he examines the German canons of World literature as published in the s and 70s: Both criticism and translation are caught in the gesture which Benjamin calls ironic, a gesture which undoes the stability of the original by giving it a definitive, canonical form in the translation or in the theorization.

In a curious way, translation canonizes its own version more than the original was canonical Resistance De Man refers here to the original text itself; one must assume that an imitation of the logos is another thing, as was discussed above. The question is whether the translator translates the original text or the original logos.

Derrick Storm 5: Wild Storm - Wilder Sturm

The translator, the exegetist, the reader is faithful to his text, makes his response respon- sible, only when he endeavours to restore the balance of forces, of integral presence, which his appropriative comprehension has disrupted. By virtue of tact, and tact intensified is moral vision, the transla- tor-interpreter creates a condition of significant exchange.

As already noted, the terms are no synonyms and yet they all refer to the intangible, if not meta- physical, aspect of literary art and indeed all art, irrespective of its form of rep- resentation. I say metaphysical, for although that term often represents what au- thors want to avoid when using the former terms, perhaps fearing accusations of superstition or theological ideology, it is what in the end makes literature able to be sublime, to go beyond the body in time and space, to be worthy of canonisa- tion.

Bloom certainly stresses more than once in The Western Canon that his po- sition is not metaphysical, and yet he is certain that some authors, strong au- thors, create a logos not his term that survives translation, which is, admittedly, no metaphysics, but hardly a strictly empirical observation. Bloom notes that the authorial influence is necessarily defensive, but when he, howev- er, turns to language in the following, problems arise: The issue is not Oedipal rivalry but the very nature of strong, original literary imagin- ings: Fresh metaphor, or inventive troping, al- ways involves a departure from previous metaphor, and that departure depends upon at least partial turning away or rejection of prior figuration 9 Bloom brings up only intralingual examples in what follows, but this surely would have deserved an interlingual examination, as metaphors and tropes bor- rowed from a foreign language can most certainly have the same result; indeed in standardised languages direct translation of metaphors is avoided banned?

This means in practice that an original metaphor might in translation be replaced by an idio- mised one, when in fact this idiomised metaphor may itself have been intro- duced through unacknowledged translation. Many commentators and editors, therefore, busied themselves in proving the opposite, that Shakespeare had had great learning and uncovered the ancient sources which unfortunately had been corrupted by others.

Decoration colorful carpet for hallway,bedroom, living room Turkey style bedside groundmat for bedroom t, easy care. Facotry direct sales, NOT a distributor; 2. Careful check before shipping out; 3. Quick response to your questions Shipping 1. Orders processed within hours of payment verification. We will track the shipment and get back to you as soon as possible with a reply. Our goal is customer satisfaction! Due to stock status and time differences, we will choose to ship your item from our first available warehouse for fast delivery. For all return products customers MUST contact us for the returning address.

In all cases, buyers pay shipping fees at their own cost to return products for exchange or refund. We will be responsible for the postage of replacements. Refund will be made upon receipt of the returned item.