As a Spanish who once read the first 11 or 12 chapters of book 1 and bits from everywhere, the only English translation I was able to bear is the Tom Lathrop one, which is kind of infamous, but I could for the first time read the whole two books, sorry if people think this one is terrible translation.
I’ve read Don Quixote 5 or 6 times over the years. My favorite translation is Walter Starkie, unabridged, Signet classics (not the most recent Signet classics). Walter Starkie also did an abridged translation, which I haven’t read. But his unabridged version gives just the right amount of older language feel. And his translation of Sancho’s proverbs in the second part are the best I’ve read. I am currently reading the Grossman translation. It seems pretty good, but some of her choices for translation are a bit disappointing to me compared to the Starkie. Don Quixote is probably my all-time favorite novel. J
I was lucky enough to read the Grossman translations for my first and only recent reading of the masterpiece. Just gearing up for my own little Quixote-related video, and yours helped stoke my fire when I was lacking motivation to get moving on it. Your translation taste-tests are the best! Thank you sir.
Also, I would love to see this as a series. I always try to do research on best translations of non English classics and have variable luck in finding a good consensus sometimes.
I SO enjoy Benjamin’s talks on RUclips, that really inspire reading these classic (often challenging) books. His encouragements for slowing down and absorbing and re-reading are especially valuable (and cautionary) for me. I’m also glad - and it doesn’t hurt at all - that he’s quite easy on the eyes, as well! 🙃 imho of course. Thankful for his marvelous work, sharing his love of reading.
I cast his channel on my TV and binge watch making notes. I have now cancelled Netflix and all other shit and read… buying one book at the time recommended by Ben…. I jokingly say Ben is my literary soul mate why not ! Same vibe and mental outlook on life … thank you Ben for this beautiful gift ❤
In this sample I found the Smollett translation to be the most enjoyable. The description felt slightly richer to me as he is justifying his desire to dispatch the giants, while the overall text is easily understandable. I also enjoyed the Grossman then the Rutherford translations rounding out my top three.
After watching your clip on the various translations of Don Quixote, I became intrigued which translation I had read. As their was no indication on the books who the translator was, I found to my surprise it was the Motteux version. Prior to seeing your clip I had every intention to reread the novel in the future, which goes to show what a powerful novel it is.
Excellently done. I too would love more of this for differents works as I'm always trying to find the best translation of a work if possible. That said, I'm curious if you have read the Lathrop version from 2010 published by Oneworld Classics . Lathrop talks about having done extensive research and consulting the original work (some translations were based on older English translations apparently) and he kept all the inconsistencies, contradictions and "mistakes" that Cervantes purposely put into the text whereas a lot of them were edited out by later editors and translators.
I usually read DQ in the original but yesterday I purchased a copy of the Rutherford translation and have delved into it with great delight. It is truly DQ despite the jump into another linguistic dimension.
That makes me so happy to hear, Peter. I adore the Rutherford. Whenever I need a good chuckle, I pick up my Rutherford translation. I had wondered how faithful it was to the original, so this makes me delighted :)
@@BenjaminMcEvoy I have been reading DQ's acorn discourse (ch. XI) and yes it is the same discourse as in the 17th C Castilian...already the glorious Beatus ille of those old golden ages is leading us toward Marcela...
I've only read Smollett's translation. Although his syntax can be long and winding, and he can have a penchant for using large, archaic, latin-root words that can distract from the scene, for the most part his older English just adds to the humour. It gives the narrative more pomp, which only adds to the contrast between the elevated style of writing and the ridiculousness of Quixote's adventures. Don't be scared b/c it's old. Very funny read. How it relates to the OG Spanish, I don't know. Also, I read this book in a club with two others. We all have different translations. It's a great way to read the book. We compared passages to see who had the funniest description. Would highly recommend doing it this way for a first read
I am currently reading both the John Ormsby and the Edith Grossman translations. I read a chapter or two from Grossman in the morning and in the evening I read the same chapters from the Ormsby. I love both translations. The Grossman is very clear and in modern English albeit a little dry in places. The Ormsby, being in older English, is richer, more colourful and to my senses seems more appropriate to the time period of the novel. I highly recommend either version but I personally lean towards the Ormsby. I intend to read the Rutherford next as I think it will be brilliant.
I’ve been trying to read Don Quixote for the last month and couldn’t figure out why everyone else found this so funny or enjoyable. However after watching this and looking back at my edition it is the Motteux edition, so I think I might try another translation!!
Finally decided to read don quixote, bookstore near me only had the Smollett translation, and after listening to them all I think I made the right choice. I’m on chapter 2 as of now, already like it a lot
It's very close between Rutherford and Grossman, but what tipped the scale for me was Grossman’s additional footnotes that provide context of the times. For example, the lady of his thoughts, Aldonza, had a name that was considered common and had comic connotations at the time, similar to today’s ‘Sheila’ and ‘Karen’ monikers.
Motteux: 4/10 Rutherford: 8/10 Grossman: 7.5/10 Ormsby: 7/10 "...and if thou art afraid, away with thee..." The most dismissive, and funny, thus far. Smollett: 5/10 Shelton: 6/10 Putnam: 7/10 Phillips: 4.5/10 ?: 6/10 Favorite: Grossman, by a hair, though I like the more pompous, condescending Quixote of Ormsby and Phillips; it does better portray the treatment of lowborn squires by their knights.
Grossman seems very similar to Rutherford, except that she has the Don speaking in an archaic voice, presumably the voice he’s imbibed so deeply by reading all those novels of chivalry, the “thou arts” and the like. But Rutherford doesn’t employ this device. Possibly he gets there through other means; I’d have to read on to find out.
I love Walter Starkie’s translation, having almost fallen at the first hurdle (Motteaux). I have just acquired a copy of the mystery translation by Heron Books, mainly for Dore’s illustrations. Thank you for showing it.
You opened another game here, and in such a sparkling and appetising way, again! Thanks. My favourites are equally the Rutherford and the Ormsby translations. The former being the most humorous one, the latter feels quite comfortable with the thou and thee vintage style. I’m though keen to settle with the one you’ll choose to work with for your upcoming lectures. I’ve ordered the Spanish Kindle book alongside. You asked if we were interested in further lectures in the art of translation: my answer is: yes!
Thank you, Florian :) Very nice - Rutherford and Ormsby. I love your impressions of them. You're really adept at these taste tests, very much a literary connoisseur. I agree, Rutherford renders the humour excellently, and that's a nice observation about the thees and thous being comforting. I never thought of the archaisms being comfortable before, but now that you mention it they do seem comfy, like some snug slippers. It will be interesting to compare with the original Spanish, which I'm hoping to do some of myself :)
@@BenjaminMcEvoy what a brilliant idea. I’ll have myself some old-fashioned snug slippers embroidered with thee on the left and thou on the right! Once I’ll have them I won’t leave house anymore
My high school lit class tackled the Walter Starkie (copy right 1957, Signet Classic printing) back in 1973 which I still have. Just difficult enough to appeal to a full of himself high school senior, with footnotes to fill in the gaps. I'm guessing this would be the one most intro to lit students encounter in the USA. I purchased a Motteux from a library book sale and didn't get very far with it. It is still on my shelf, as decoration more than anything else. The Ormsby was a copy I enjoyed, and also still have. I plan to hit bookfinder for a Rutherford or Grossman. I was a little disappointed that Starkie wasn't on the list. Just found this channel and really like it
I almost purchased the Everyman’s edition, which I learned is the worst (by several sources). I’m intrigued by the Grossman translation, which I am inclined to pick up. I’ve contemplated reading this since I was a kid. I feel like I could handle it finally. After the madness of the past couple of years, I think the timing is perfect.
Ah, yes, the Everyman is the Motteux... And can be a bit of a chore to get through lol. I think you'll enjoy this one, Jeremy, so I say go for it! Let me know what you make of the work :)
I am ordering Don Quixote hence wanted to know which translation to go for, and I am also split between the Grossman and the Rutherford so I'll probably buy both and probably start with the Grossman. Interestingly enough my third choice is also the Smolett, even though it is dated, I like the stylistic choice of words. Though I'll have to figure out where to get that translation. Thanks for the taste test 👍.
1)John omsbey 2)Edith Grossman these two have same kind of translation...they are easy to visualise...these books language is mix of both modern and old English 3) Rutherford translation is so straight to point... 4)Putnum translation was also very good I didn't read any of these just saw your video and paused the video and read it on screen...I would like to buy don Quixote I'll buy Edith Grossman.
Thank you so much for this video. It made my choice so much easier. I have chosen the Rutherford translation. When you read it, it just made me smile ear to ear.
Thank you, Duan :) I’m so glad it helped! And very nice choice with the Rutherford. This one makes me smile, and often laugh out loud, too. Let me know what you think of the novel, and happy reading!
I also read Motteux’s translation first and I have never fought harder with a book before. I put it away more than 3 times but always came back to it because I knew something worthwhile was there. I immediately ordered Edith Grossman’s translation after completing the book and look forward to reading it.
At the beginning of the year (and after watching this video) I bought two copies of Grossman's translation. Me and my wife are reading it together, taking turns reading aloud and following in our own copy: we've never read a book together before. Now we are on the 31st chapter of the First Part. We've laughed. We've condemned the characters' selfishness. We've laughed. I thought he was about to do something actually good once. I love the experience of reading with my wife-why are we only now beginning to do that? And to be honest that's the best part of the adventure. I'm having trouble with the characters' selfishness and almost wish that Sancho would not have abandoned his wife and kids; it makes it harder to like him. Yet I laugh. And my young daughters laugh when they sometimes sit by us as we read. I like Dorotea's account of her hardship, which seems like I was able to peer into a woman's reality of making horrible no-win choices in the midst of being taken advantage of by a man and someone she trusted: it was gripping. Oh, and one scene was like a Frasier episode, when a woman was climbing over Sancho and Don Quixote to get to her lover. That was awesome. We plan to take a break in October to read Frankenstein together. Then, after Don Quixote, we shall read The Count of Monte Cristo.
I am coming to the end of my first reading of this book. I paid not much attention to the Translator but now having checked, I find that I have been reading the Motteux. I find this captures something of the archaic nature of narrative and gives a flavour of the seventeenth century and I would rank this easily as the best.
i just came back to this video after seeing that a mass market Signet edition I have is translated, with an introduction, by a gentleman named Walter Starkie. Judging by the comparisons made from the excerpt of chapter VIII, it looks like a smart, sensible and smooth translation. Already liking it in many places (from said excerpt) more than the Rutherford translation.
Hello from Arizona!🌵 Am reading it for the first time. I have 3 translations. Ormsby, Rutherford and Grossman. Ormsby translation I have great affection for. Grossman is a good one, straight forward. I feel that it's the most popular right now because it's the newest. Rutherford is the one I'm sticking with for this first read. It's spirited. Love the humor so much!📚
Hello Margaret! I spent some time living in Scottsdale when I was younger :) Great choices - I completely agree with you. Spirited humour - absolutely!! Let me know how you get on with it!
😊😊I've read three different English translations since my mid 20s and one in Spanish; I'm 55 yrs old now. My grad school professor was Edith Grossman. I believe it's the best English translation. 😉 🤓✌️📖
i am curious no interest in burton raffel ? i find his the most straightforwardly funny, i have it in the norton critical edition, which aside from a little too small print i love. great channel, subscribed !
I find it interesting how the more modern translations also break the scene up into paragraphs on the page making it easier to digest. I tend to favor the Grossman and Rutherford translations as well to read the whole book but at the same time do find the charm of older styles especially of Motteux and Phillips in smaller doses. The other ones seem somewhat average without much that stands out.
Great insight :) And thank you for sharing your favourites. I agree with you about the charm of the older ones in small doses. I would struggle to read the entire novel in those versions, but a little taste here and there is definitely fun. And, as you say, the rest do seem unable to stand out, almost blending into one!
@@BenjaminMcEvoy Take this with a grain of salt since I am only a heritage speaker so my spanish is not fluent. But comparing the first chapter of some of the translations to the original, the spanish does not sound as archaic as the older translations make it seem. But I agree, they have their charm.
I have in no way read that many to be able to compare. I've read an abridged version many year ago (can't remember translation author) which I enjoyed, and when I decided to read an unabridged version it was a beautiful old hardcover with thin but strong rice paper pages that I had acquired among a purchase of a group of second hand books. It is little over 400 pages long, making it easy to think the story is not as long as it is, though the layout and quality production made it surprisingly easy to read despite the small font. It is a John Ormsby translation, and I quite enjoyed it. But I do think enjoying the quality book helped there too. Looking at the layout and text of some of those copies (thank you for showing them) I'm sure some would have detracted from my reading experience for simply not enjoying the layout and/or font. I have obtained the Vintage Cervantes edition so when there is a group read of Don Quixote happening, that will be the next translation I'll be reading. I'm sure I'll get more out of the story for a reread in any event but I'll find out when it happens how much I enjoy this one.
Beautiful! Thank you for sharing, Nicole. I love the way you describe your reading experience, the love of old books really seeps through your writing. John Ormsby is a solid choice, and I believe would have been quite standard for a while. Having a book that is a gorgeous artefact, something nice to hold, with good illustrations really makes the reading experience all that more special. The Vintage one is a solid choice (Grossman) and that's (along with Rutherford) is my top recommendation for the group read :)
Personally, the phrase "enormous giants" doesn't seem very literate to me. So that sort of put me off the 2003 translation. The 2000 is cool but seems really easy. Like I'm losing all the beautiful language. It doesn't even seem the work of the past. I quite like the Smollett one. Seems like a nice mixture between the 1 and the 2. But then you said it's not precisely faithful. So now I don't really know.
Clifton Fadiman in his "The Lifetime Reading Plan" recommends the abridged Walter Starkie, which I read and enjoyed. Want to read an unabridged version; leaning towards Grossman.
Thank you for this engaging video ... My rating: 7 for Rutherford, Grossman, Ormsby and Smollet 6 for Putnam and Mystery trans 5 for Shelton and Philips 3 for Motteux I have decided to buy Grossman trans based on your recommendation :) as always ...love and respect
Fantastic choice, Shabir! The Grossman is a really wonderful translation of DQ. I find myself alternating between the Grossman and the Rutherford, and always enjoy a good chuckle!
Read Rutherford (Penguin), Ormsby (Easton Press), and Putnam (Modern Library), and it’s hard to pick one as my favorite. There’s parts I like and dislike about all of them.
Your video earned my "MAV'= much added value tag, - i would like to compare you to the conscientious, committed insurance broker or realtor on an invaluable mission in quest of the best deal for his/her trusting clients. Well done, thanks a lot. ... and the (my) winner iiiiiz: TOV, the Spanish version.💪 Disclosure: I'm a self-taught Spanish reader/speaker, with listening and reading comprehension of Spanish beyond the survival skills of ordering from a menu in restaurants or deciphering graffitis and captions on public toilets and busses.😉
I have had a copy of the Smollett version for years and that is all I know. I think perhaps I should do an annual or biannual reading in different versions. Unfortunately my Spanish is bad so I don't think I'd get much out of the original.
Casual reader here - I love Don Q, I lol’d whilst reading. Only PG Woodhouse makes me lol as much. I think for those debating whether to read the humour comes from the genius and endlessly believable premise which I think is best revealed by surprise - so don’t be put off if you don’t find the passages funny in isolation. PS I actually found the first translation the funniest
I'm exactly the same. P.G. Wodehouse has been my pre-bed reading lately - I'm trying to read all of the Jeeves and Wooster novels. Great point about the humour coming from the premise! I hope that encourages readers to pick up, read, and reread the entire thing. It's awesome that you like the Motteux translation - I'd be more than happy to give you my copy of that one!
Ormsby's translation is the best I've read through. While I'm unable to read the original Spanish, I felt he brought more humor and better flow than anyone else. Don Quixote's language is especially verbose and funny the way he translates it.
My novel looks suspiciously like your mystery novel at the end of your clip. It has the same type face in red and the some of the same illustrations by Gustave Dore. I would assume yours is another translation printed by Heron Books London. Printed and bound in England by Hazel Watson and Viney Ltd, Alesbury, Bucks. My novel has The 'Authors Preface to the Reader' at the beginning of the book. In volume two there is 'The Author's Preface' again..it reads: "Bless me! reader, gentle or simple, or whatever you be, how impatiently by this time must you expect this preface, supposing it to be nothing but revengeful invectives against the author of the second Don Quixote"... there are approximately three and a half pages more of Cervantes ruminating on the plagiarism served upon him and his disdain for such an act. Its wonderful to hear Cervantes, as it were, speaking to me personally.
I pray you come across the Prentice Hall illustrated edition by Rafaello Busoni assisted by Johanna Johnston. It's exquisitely simple and we'll illustrated.👍🏾
I just ordered my copy translated by Tom Lathrop, but after seeing this I worry that it wouldn’t be as enjoyable as the best translations. Any feedback who has red this translation?
@@BenjaminMcEvoy I now have the Lathrop and Grossman translation, I already like this book that I bought two translations. Ishall enjoy this one! Thank you!
Lathrop is the one I want to read for my first experience to DQ. And bc I don’t appreciate the papyrus style paper of Vintage to be fair. 😊. So thank you very much for including it in the comments! ✌🏼🎄
I can’t see what is so execrable about Motteux’s translation. It strikes me as perfectly good, if stylized, seventeenth century prose and I tend to like the older translations better than what impress me as the more prosaic and less romantic modern ones. Motteux seems to me to capture something of the archaic quality of Don Quixote’s mind and to breathe the same poetic atmosphere. After all, the point of the story is that Don Quixote was not modern even in his own time and place. Granted, Quixote is not the narrator, nor even the truly prosaic Sancho, and there should be, ideally, a contrast between the romanticism of one and the realism of the other. Grossman attempts something of the sort, but it just doesn’t work for me. It seems too self-conscious. Better to let the misty air be Quixote’s and the realism of the rest have to fight its way through. I think that adds a dimension. It is, after all, Don Quixote’s story.
I lucked out and read the Grossman text as my first go at the book and absolutely fell in love. This is my favorite book and I want to re-read it. Would you recommend I now switch to Rutherford text for my second reading or simply revisit Grossman?
I do find Grossman’s the clearest read. It was all very understandable, flowed well, and the humor wasn’t lost. It retains the heightened language suited to the character without feeling antiquated in the prose. Plus, I much prefer how it describes the events of the spar between Quixote and the windmills to the Rutherford-the latter barely decipherable on first-read.
Hey, do you know of the translation by Walter Starkie? I found his translation in my school library and I’m reading it right now. With all of the different translations you mentioned in this video, I wonder if I’m reading a good translation?
@@RH-fr2ch Actually Lathrop explains in his version that inconsistencies like the theft of the donkey, but Pancho riding it anyway are found in the original book, because Cervantes wanted to make fun of the hack writers of the time. Editors and translators however saw the need to edit out "mistakes" like these, sometimes ending up rewriting whole passages. Lathrop talks about how he made an entire study of the original texts and kept all the inconsistencies, contradictions and "mistakes" Cervantes put in the work, because he assumes that they were done on purpose imitating the careless writing style of the ancient chivalry authors.
I downloaded the Omsby translation from Project Gutenberg some time ago and am now beginning to read it. I'm pleased to discover, based on your readings, that Omsby isn't bad at all. My pick of the litter, again based solely on what is heard here, leans toward Grossman. Rutherford ain't bad either. Motteux is easily my least favorite. As for the rest, I'd need to give the video a few more hearings to sort think out.
How about Tom Lathrop's Translation? What's your say about it? Hi, new subscriber here, been starting to read classic books and would love to read Don Quixote next, although I find it difficult to find a cheaper copy of Grossman's Don Quixote online (I live in a small city where there's no book shops), and the only thing that I can find that's cheap is Lathrop's translation.
Have you read it yet? I am currently reading the Rutherford translation [after reading the Lathrop version and part of a rather bad translation in my native language]. In comparison to the Rutherford the Lathrop translation seems to be more 'modern' to me in the sense that it is very easy to read. His sentence structure and vocabulary are simpler but it's not bad or anything - for me, it certainly was a good translation to start with :) From the little section discussed in this video the Lathrop version seems closest to the Grossman version, they had lots of similarities. But now that I'm reading Rutherford I find his translation more...engaging in a way. He makes me imagine things quite differently and more vividly than Lathrop did. But I have to look up way more words than I needed to with Lathrop which makes it more time consuming [and more rewarding - but I still wouldn't have liked that for my first encounter with the book].
Read it at school, I don't remember who translated it, but we read Candide and Gulliver's Travels that same year, so perhaps a curriculum theme of some sort. It was probably Putnam 1949 translation if Google can be trusted, but I enjoyed the book and whatever year the Rutherford seems a easier read. Is it Buchan of The Thirty-nine Steps? No, that was John Buchan, goodness, I love that book, maybe William is his cousin.
Wow, what a tremendous syllabus! Putnam makes sense - I believe it was quite a popular one for a while. But you're right that Rutherford is an easier read - smoother in my opinion. I was intrigued about Buchan following your comment. It seems as though he may have been a physician who wrote books about medicine for the lay person. From the looks of it he was John Buchan's father :)
As a Spanish who once read the first 11 or 12 chapters of book 1 and bits from everywhere, the only English translation I was able to bear is the Tom Lathrop one, which is kind of infamous, but I could for the first time read the whole two books, sorry if people think this one is terrible translation.
I absolutely love Ormsby's version. On my third read of his. Grossman was quite good too, but i love the old english feel of ormsby
Ah, yes, I totally get that :) It's no surprise why the schools used the Ormsby for so long.
I would pick the Rutherford translation just for the phrase “windmills on the brain” lol I love that rendering.
That is a nice phrase! I love that!
I’ve read Don Quixote 5 or 6 times over the years. My favorite translation is Walter Starkie, unabridged, Signet classics (not the most recent Signet classics). Walter Starkie also did an abridged translation, which I haven’t read. But his unabridged version gives just the right amount of older language feel. And his translation of Sancho’s proverbs in the second part are the best I’ve read.
I am currently reading the Grossman translation. It seems pretty good, but some of her choices for translation are a bit disappointing to me compared to the Starkie. Don Quixote is probably my all-time favorite novel. J
This is the one I’m reading. I had a Harvard Classic from 1611 and the language bogged me down. Found the Starkie at my used bookstore and loving it!
I was lucky enough to read the Grossman translations for my first and only recent reading of the masterpiece. Just gearing up for my own little Quixote-related video, and yours helped stoke my fire when I was lacking motivation to get moving on it. Your translation taste-tests are the best! Thank you sir.
Also, I would love to see this as a series. I always try to do research on best translations of non English classics and have variable luck in finding a good consensus sometimes.
I'll definitely do a series of these. These are my personal favourite videos to make :)
anything under wordworth edition..
I SO enjoy Benjamin’s talks on RUclips, that really inspire reading these classic (often challenging) books. His encouragements for slowing down and absorbing and re-reading are especially valuable (and cautionary) for me. I’m also glad - and it doesn’t hurt at all - that he’s quite easy on the eyes, as well! 🙃 imho of course. Thankful for his marvelous work, sharing his love of reading.
Aw, thank you, Scott :) I really appreciate that! I'm so happy you're reading along with me, my friend!
I cast his channel on my TV and binge watch making notes. I have now cancelled Netflix and all other shit and read… buying one book at the time recommended by Ben…. I jokingly say Ben is my literary soul mate why not ! Same vibe and mental outlook on life … thank you Ben for this beautiful gift ❤
In this sample I found the Smollett translation to be the most enjoyable. The description felt slightly richer to me as he is justifying his desire to dispatch the giants, while the overall text is easily understandable. I also enjoyed the Grossman then the Rutherford translations rounding out my top three.
After watching your clip on the various translations of Don Quixote, I became intrigued which translation I had read. As their was no indication on the books who the translator was, I found to my surprise it was the Motteux version. Prior to seeing your clip I had every intention to reread the novel in the future, which goes to show what a powerful novel it is.
Ah, you have a Motteux too! I'm glad you think it's a powerful novel too :) happy reading!
Excellently done. I too would love more of this for differents works as I'm always trying to find the best translation of a work if possible. That said, I'm curious if you have read the Lathrop version from 2010 published by Oneworld Classics . Lathrop talks about having done extensive research and consulting the original work (some translations were based on older English translations apparently) and he kept all the inconsistencies, contradictions and "mistakes" that Cervantes purposely put into the text whereas a lot of them were edited out by later editors and translators.
I usually read DQ in the original but yesterday I purchased a copy of the Rutherford translation and have delved into it with great delight. It is truly DQ despite the jump into another linguistic dimension.
That makes me so happy to hear, Peter. I adore the Rutherford. Whenever I need a good chuckle, I pick up my Rutherford translation. I had wondered how faithful it was to the original, so this makes me delighted :)
@@BenjaminMcEvoy I could also adore the Rutherford translation....the introduction is also very good, packed with information.
@@BenjaminMcEvoy I have been reading DQ's acorn discourse (ch. XI) and yes it is the same discourse as in the 17th C Castilian...already the glorious Beatus ille of those old golden ages is leading us toward Marcela...
I've only read Smollett's translation. Although his syntax can be long and winding, and he can have a penchant for using large, archaic, latin-root words that can distract from the scene, for the most part his older English just adds to the humour. It gives the narrative more pomp, which only adds to the contrast between the elevated style of writing and the ridiculousness of Quixote's adventures. Don't be scared b/c it's old. Very funny read. How it relates to the OG Spanish, I don't know.
Also, I read this book in a club with two others. We all have different translations. It's a great way to read the book. We compared passages to see who had the funniest description. Would highly recommend doing it this way for a first read
Rereading the Don in the beautiful penguin clothbound which is in the Rutherford translation. Humour is rendered well. Beautifully written stuff!
I am currently reading both the John Ormsby and the Edith Grossman translations. I read a chapter or two from Grossman in the morning and in the evening I read the same chapters from the Ormsby. I love both translations. The Grossman is very clear and in modern English albeit a little dry in places. The Ormsby, being in older English, is richer, more colourful and to my senses seems more appropriate to the time period of the novel. I highly recommend either version but I personally lean towards the Ormsby. I intend to read the Rutherford next as I think it will be brilliant.
I’ve been trying to read Don Quixote for the last month and couldn’t figure out why everyone else found this so funny or enjoyable. However after watching this and looking back at my edition it is the Motteux edition, so I think I might try another translation!!
Ah, this is a common experience! Do try again with the Rutherford or Grossman if you can get them :) I think you'll enjoy it this time around!
Edith Grossmans footnotes are incredible by themselves.
Finally decided to read don quixote, bookstore near me only had the Smollett translation, and after listening to them all I think I made the right choice. I’m on chapter 2 as of now, already like it a lot
I recently reread the Smollett and loved it - very special translation! So glad you’re enjoying it, Collin!
It's very close between Rutherford and Grossman, but what tipped the scale for me was Grossman’s additional footnotes that provide context of the times. For example, the lady of his thoughts, Aldonza, had a name that was considered common and had comic connotations at the time, similar to today’s ‘Sheila’ and ‘Karen’ monikers.
Motteux: 4/10
Rutherford: 8/10
Grossman: 7.5/10
Ormsby: 7/10 "...and if thou art afraid, away with thee..." The most dismissive, and funny, thus far.
Smollett: 5/10
Shelton: 6/10
Putnam: 7/10
Phillips: 4.5/10
?: 6/10
Favorite: Grossman, by a hair, though I like the more pompous, condescending Quixote of Ormsby and Phillips; it does better portray the treatment of lowborn squires by their knights.
Grossman seems very similar to Rutherford, except that she has the Don speaking in an archaic voice, presumably the voice he’s imbibed so deeply by reading all those novels of chivalry, the “thou arts” and the like. But Rutherford doesn’t employ this device. Possibly he gets there through other means; I’d have to read on to find out.
The Grossman translation is just plainly superior and has a Shakespeare feel to it
I read the translation by J.M. Cohen many years ago, & am now reading the one by Walter Starkie.
I love Walter Starkie’s translation, having almost fallen at the first hurdle (Motteaux). I have just acquired a copy of the mystery translation by Heron Books, mainly for Dore’s illustrations. Thank you for showing it.
You opened another game here, and in such a sparkling and appetising way, again! Thanks. My favourites are equally the Rutherford and the Ormsby translations. The former being the most humorous one, the latter feels quite comfortable with the thou and thee vintage style. I’m though keen to settle with the one you’ll choose to work with for your upcoming lectures. I’ve ordered the Spanish Kindle book alongside. You asked if we were interested in further lectures in the art of translation: my answer is: yes!
Thank you, Florian :) Very nice - Rutherford and Ormsby. I love your impressions of them. You're really adept at these taste tests, very much a literary connoisseur. I agree, Rutherford renders the humour excellently, and that's a nice observation about the thees and thous being comforting. I never thought of the archaisms being comfortable before, but now that you mention it they do seem comfy, like some snug slippers. It will be interesting to compare with the original Spanish, which I'm hoping to do some of myself :)
@@BenjaminMcEvoy what a brilliant idea. I’ll have myself some old-fashioned snug slippers embroidered with thee on the left and thou on the right! Once I’ll have them I won’t leave house anymore
Awesome editing, Sir. Great content as always. 👍
I read the John Ormsby translation, and loved it.
Thank you, Soumava :)
My high school lit class tackled the Walter Starkie (copy right 1957, Signet Classic printing) back in 1973 which I still have. Just difficult enough to appeal to a full of himself high school senior, with footnotes to fill in the gaps. I'm guessing this would be the one most intro to lit students encounter in the USA. I purchased a Motteux from a library book sale and didn't get very far with it. It is still on my shelf, as decoration more than anything else. The Ormsby was a copy I enjoyed, and also still have. I plan to hit bookfinder for a Rutherford or Grossman. I was a little disappointed that Starkie wasn't on the list.
Just found this channel and really like it
I almost purchased the Everyman’s edition, which I learned is the worst (by several sources). I’m intrigued by the Grossman translation, which I am inclined to pick up. I’ve contemplated reading this since I was a kid. I feel like I could handle it finally. After the madness of the past couple of years, I think the timing is perfect.
Ah, yes, the Everyman is the Motteux... And can be a bit of a chore to get through lol. I think you'll enjoy this one, Jeremy, so I say go for it! Let me know what you make of the work :)
I am ordering Don Quixote hence wanted to know which translation to go for, and I am also split between the Grossman and the Rutherford so I'll probably buy both and probably start with the Grossman. Interestingly enough my third choice is also the Smolett, even though it is dated, I like the stylistic choice of words. Though I'll have to figure out where to get that translation. Thanks for the taste test 👍.
Great to hear it :) You have listed my personal top three favourites there! I look forward to hearing what you think of the novel!
Your reading makes the first translation sound good.
Thanks, Ben :)
1)John omsbey
2)Edith Grossman
these two have same kind of translation...they are easy to visualise...these books language is mix of both modern and old English
3) Rutherford translation is so straight to point...
4)Putnum translation was also very good
I didn't read any of these just saw your video and paused the video and read it on screen...I would like to buy don Quixote I'll buy Edith Grossman.
Thank you so much for this video. It made my choice so much easier. I have chosen the Rutherford translation. When you read it, it just made me smile ear to ear.
Thank you, Duan :) I’m so glad it helped! And very nice choice with the Rutherford. This one makes me smile, and often laugh out loud, too. Let me know what you think of the novel, and happy reading!
I also read Motteux’s translation first and I have never fought harder with a book before. I put it away more than 3 times but always came back to it because I knew something worthwhile was there. I immediately ordered Edith Grossman’s translation after completing the book and look forward to reading it.
At the beginning of the year (and after watching this video) I bought two copies of Grossman's translation. Me and my wife are reading it together, taking turns reading aloud and following in our own copy: we've never read a book together before. Now we are on the 31st chapter of the First Part. We've laughed. We've condemned the characters' selfishness. We've laughed. I thought he was about to do something actually good once. I love the experience of reading with my wife-why are we only now beginning to do that? And to be honest that's the best part of the adventure. I'm having trouble with the characters' selfishness and almost wish that Sancho would not have abandoned his wife and kids; it makes it harder to like him. Yet I laugh. And my young daughters laugh when they sometimes sit by us as we read. I like Dorotea's account of her hardship, which seems like I was able to peer into a woman's reality of making horrible no-win choices in the midst of being taken advantage of by a man and someone she trusted: it was gripping. Oh, and one scene was like a Frasier episode, when a woman was climbing over Sancho and Don Quixote to get to her lover. That was awesome.
We plan to take a break in October to read Frankenstein together. Then, after Don Quixote, we shall read The Count of Monte Cristo.
I am coming to the end of my first reading of this book. I paid not much attention to the Translator but now having checked, I find that I have been reading the Motteux. I find this captures something of the archaic nature of narrative and gives a flavour of the seventeenth century and I would rank this easily as the best.
i just came back to this video after seeing that a mass market Signet edition I have is translated, with an introduction, by a gentleman named Walter Starkie. Judging by the comparisons made from the excerpt of chapter VIII, it looks like a smart, sensible and smooth translation. Already liking it in many places (from said excerpt) more than the Rutherford translation.
So good 😂 not sure which one ! Both the Rutherford and Grossman translations are hilarious!
Hello from Arizona!🌵 Am reading it for the first time. I have 3 translations. Ormsby, Rutherford and Grossman. Ormsby translation I have great affection for. Grossman is a good one, straight forward. I feel that it's the most popular right now because it's the newest. Rutherford is the one I'm sticking with for this first read. It's spirited. Love the humor so much!📚
Hello Margaret! I spent some time living in Scottsdale when I was younger :) Great choices - I completely agree with you. Spirited humour - absolutely!! Let me know how you get on with it!
@@BenjaminMcEvoy Really! Great! Scottsdale is where I’m at.🌵🌴Thanks! Yes spirited! Will do.
😊😊I've read three different English translations since my mid 20s and one in Spanish; I'm 55 yrs old now.
My grad school professor was Edith Grossman. I believe it's the best English translation. 😉 🤓✌️📖
i am curious no interest in burton raffel ? i find his the most straightforwardly funny, i have it in the norton critical edition, which aside from a little too small print i love. great channel, subscribed !
Ah, yes, a great choice of translation with a unique tone of voice :) And thank you for watching and subscribing, Jonathan!
I find it interesting how the more modern translations also break the scene up into paragraphs on the page making it easier to digest. I tend to favor the Grossman and Rutherford translations as well to read the whole book but at the same time do find the charm of older styles especially of Motteux and Phillips in smaller doses. The other ones seem somewhat average without much that stands out.
Great insight :) And thank you for sharing your favourites. I agree with you about the charm of the older ones in small doses. I would struggle to read the entire novel in those versions, but a little taste here and there is definitely fun. And, as you say, the rest do seem unable to stand out, almost blending into one!
@@BenjaminMcEvoy Take this with a grain of salt since I am only a heritage speaker so my spanish is not fluent. But comparing the first chapter of some of the translations to the original, the spanish does not sound as archaic as the older translations make it seem. But I agree, they have their charm.
I have in no way read that many to be able to compare.
I've read an abridged version many year ago (can't remember translation author) which I enjoyed, and when I decided to read an unabridged version it was a beautiful old hardcover with thin but strong rice paper pages that I had acquired among a purchase of a group of second hand books. It is little over 400 pages long, making it easy to think the story is not as long as it is, though the layout and quality production made it surprisingly easy to read despite the small font.
It is a John Ormsby translation, and I quite enjoyed it. But I do think enjoying the quality book helped there too.
Looking at the layout and text of some of those copies (thank you for showing them) I'm sure some would have detracted from my reading experience for simply not enjoying the layout and/or font.
I have obtained the Vintage Cervantes edition so when there is a group read of Don Quixote happening, that will be the next translation I'll be reading. I'm sure I'll get more out of the story for a reread in any event but I'll find out when it happens how much I enjoy this one.
Beautiful! Thank you for sharing, Nicole. I love the way you describe your reading experience, the love of old books really seeps through your writing. John Ormsby is a solid choice, and I believe would have been quite standard for a while. Having a book that is a gorgeous artefact, something nice to hold, with good illustrations really makes the reading experience all that more special. The Vintage one is a solid choice (Grossman) and that's (along with Rutherford) is my top recommendation for the group read :)
So very enlightening, many thanks. Grossman captures for me with the folly, and the passion and wit of it all. ….. “Be quiet, Sancho my friend…” ;-)
Personally, the phrase "enormous giants" doesn't seem very literate to me. So that sort of put me off the 2003 translation. The 2000 is cool but seems really easy. Like I'm losing all the beautiful language. It doesn't even seem the work of the past. I quite like the Smollett one. Seems like a nice mixture between the 1 and the 2. But then you said it's not precisely faithful. So now I don't really know.
Clifton Fadiman in his "The Lifetime Reading Plan" recommends the abridged Walter Starkie, which I read and enjoyed. Want to read an unabridged version; leaning towards Grossman.
Thank you for this engaging video ...
My rating:
7 for Rutherford, Grossman, Ormsby and Smollet
6 for Putnam and Mystery trans
5 for Shelton and Philips
3 for Motteux
I have decided to buy Grossman trans based on your recommendation :) as always ...love and respect
Fantastic choice, Shabir! The Grossman is a really wonderful translation of DQ. I find myself alternating between the Grossman and the Rutherford, and always enjoy a good chuckle!
Read Rutherford (Penguin), Ormsby (Easton Press), and Putnam (Modern Library), and it’s hard to pick one as my favorite. There’s parts I like and dislike about all of them.
Your video earned my "MAV'= much added value tag, - i would like to compare you to the conscientious, committed insurance broker or realtor on an invaluable mission in quest of the best deal for his/her trusting clients. Well done, thanks a lot.
... and the (my) winner iiiiiz:
TOV, the Spanish version.💪
Disclosure: I'm a self-taught Spanish reader/speaker, with listening and reading comprehension of Spanish beyond the survival skills of ordering from a menu in restaurants or deciphering graffitis and captions on public toilets and busses.😉
I have had a copy of the Smollett version for years and that is all I know. I think perhaps I should do an annual or biannual reading in different versions. Unfortunately my Spanish is bad so I don't think I'd get much out of the original.
An annual reading in different versions sounds like a very rewarding thing to do! I do hope one day I can read the original myself :)
The copy I have, the one by J.M. Cohen, has been superseded by Rutherford at Penguin.
Nice!
Casual reader here - I love Don Q, I lol’d whilst reading. Only PG Woodhouse makes me lol as much. I think for those debating whether to read the humour comes from the genius and endlessly believable premise which I think is best revealed by surprise - so don’t be put off if you don’t find the passages funny in isolation. PS I actually found the first translation the funniest
I'm exactly the same. P.G. Wodehouse has been my pre-bed reading lately - I'm trying to read all of the Jeeves and Wooster novels. Great point about the humour coming from the premise! I hope that encourages readers to pick up, read, and reread the entire thing. It's awesome that you like the Motteux translation - I'd be more than happy to give you my copy of that one!
@@BenjaminMcEvoy Cheeky no nonsense correction of 'Wodehouse' I like it
Ormsby's translation is the best I've read through. While I'm unable to read the original Spanish, I felt he brought more humor and better flow than anyone else. Don Quixote's language is especially verbose and funny the way he translates it.
The Ice Cube and Snoop translation: "If you scared go to church."
My novel looks suspiciously like your mystery novel at the end of your clip. It has the same type face in red and the some of the same illustrations by Gustave Dore. I would assume yours is another translation printed by Heron Books London. Printed and bound in England by Hazel Watson and Viney Ltd, Alesbury, Bucks. My novel has The 'Authors Preface to the Reader' at the beginning of the book. In volume two there is 'The Author's Preface' again..it reads: "Bless me! reader, gentle or simple, or whatever you be, how impatiently by this time must you expect this preface, supposing it to be nothing but revengeful invectives against the author of the second Don Quixote"... there are approximately three and a half pages more of Cervantes ruminating on the plagiarism served upon him and his disdain for such an act. Its wonderful to hear Cervantes, as it were, speaking to me personally.
I pray you come across the
Prentice Hall illustrated edition by Rafaello Busoni assisted by Johanna Johnston. It's exquisitely simple and we'll illustrated.👍🏾
I just ordered my copy translated by Tom Lathrop, but after seeing this I worry that it wouldn’t be as enjoyable as the best translations.
Any feedback who has red this translation?
It's a good one! Enjoy the story, my friend :)
@@BenjaminMcEvoy I now have the Lathrop and Grossman translation, I already like this book that I bought two translations. Ishall enjoy this one! Thank you!
Lathrop is the one I want to read for my first experience to DQ. And bc I don’t appreciate the papyrus style paper of Vintage to be fair. 😊. So thank you very much for including it in the comments! ✌🏼🎄
I have a 1951 hardcover of the Putnam translation. Looking to add the Grossman and Smollett interpretations.
great content. subbed.
Thanks, Phillip :)
What about J. M. Cohen ? Is that a good transition ?
How can I change the language of the transcript? It's in Dutch. I want it in English.
I can’t see what is so execrable about Motteux’s translation. It strikes me as perfectly good, if stylized, seventeenth century prose and I tend to like the older translations better than what impress me as the more prosaic and less romantic modern ones. Motteux seems to me to capture something of the archaic quality of Don Quixote’s mind and to breathe the same poetic atmosphere. After all, the point of the story is that Don Quixote was not modern even in his own time and place.
Granted, Quixote is not the narrator, nor even the truly prosaic Sancho, and there should be, ideally, a contrast between the romanticism of one and the realism of the other. Grossman attempts something of the sort, but it just doesn’t work for me. It seems too self-conscious. Better to let the misty air be Quixote’s and the realism of the rest have to fight its way through. I think that adds a dimension. It is, after all, Don Quixote’s story.
I am also reading Motteux's translation and I find it better than other translations because it is an easy read for me...
I lucked out and read the Grossman text as my first go at the book and absolutely fell in love. This is my favorite book and I want to re-read it. Would you recommend I now switch to Rutherford text for my second reading or simply revisit Grossman?
Both 😉
.... starting at age 25 I have read it every 10 years 😊 I'm 55 now.... I've enjoyed it each time..... ✌️
I do find Grossman’s the clearest read. It was all very understandable, flowed well, and the humor wasn’t lost. It retains the heightened language suited to the character without feeling antiquated in the prose. Plus, I much prefer how it describes the events of the spar between Quixote and the windmills to the Rutherford-the latter barely decipherable on first-read.
Brilliant :) Thank you for sharing. It looks like Grossman is coming out as a clear favourite!
I much prefer Rutherford.
I just began to read the novel and bought myself the Motteux's translation and then came across this video. Such misfortune
could somebody give me insights on the jarvis translation
Hey, do you know of the translation by Walter Starkie? I found his translation in my school library and I’m reading it right now. With all of the different translations you mentioned in this video, I wonder if I’m reading a good translation?
Does Don Quixote translated by Edith Grossman has an abridge version? I'm worried if my copy is an abridge.
Ormsby.
I like lathrop
Did your lathrop translation also have a missing section in chapter 23, the part where Sancho’s donkey is stolen?
@@RH-fr2ch Actually Lathrop explains in his version that inconsistencies like the theft of the donkey, but Pancho riding it anyway are found in the original book, because Cervantes wanted to make fun of the hack writers of the time. Editors and translators however saw the need to edit out "mistakes" like these, sometimes ending up rewriting whole passages. Lathrop talks about how he made an entire study of the original texts and kept all the inconsistencies, contradictions and "mistakes" Cervantes put in the work, because he assumes that they were done on purpose imitating the careless writing style of the ancient chivalry authors.
I downloaded the Omsby translation from Project Gutenberg some time ago and am now beginning to read it. I'm pleased to discover, based on your readings, that Omsby isn't bad at all. My pick of the litter, again based solely on what is heard here, leans toward Grossman. Rutherford ain't bad either. Motteux is easily my least favorite. As for the rest, I'd need to give the video a few more hearings to sort think out.
Hey I also did same thing I downloaded just now what u say I read the omsby version or rather read grossman version
Currently reading the Grossman translation. Ormsby sounds good too
Nice one! :)
How about Tom Lathrop's Translation? What's your say about it?
Hi, new subscriber here, been starting to read classic books and would love to read Don Quixote next, although I find it difficult to find a cheaper copy of Grossman's Don Quixote online (I live in a small city where there's no book shops), and the only thing that I can find that's cheap is Lathrop's translation.
Have you read it yet? I am currently reading the Rutherford translation [after reading the Lathrop version and part of a rather bad translation in my native language]. In comparison to the Rutherford the Lathrop translation seems to be more 'modern' to me in the sense that it is very easy to read. His sentence structure and vocabulary are simpler but it's not bad or anything - for me, it certainly was a good translation to start with :)
From the little section discussed in this video the Lathrop version seems closest to the Grossman version, they had lots of similarities.
But now that I'm reading Rutherford I find his translation more...engaging in a way. He makes me imagine things quite differently and more vividly than Lathrop did. But I have to look up way more words than I needed to with Lathrop which makes it more time consuming [and more rewarding - but I still wouldn't have liked that for my first encounter with the book].
@@passio-735 i have read that the best thing of Lathrop's translation is his footnotes.
Read it at school, I don't remember who translated it, but we read Candide and Gulliver's Travels that same year, so perhaps a curriculum theme of some sort. It was probably Putnam 1949 translation if Google can be trusted, but I enjoyed the book and whatever year the Rutherford seems a easier read. Is it Buchan of The Thirty-nine Steps? No, that was John Buchan, goodness, I love that book, maybe William is his cousin.
Wow, what a tremendous syllabus! Putnam makes sense - I believe it was quite a popular one for a while. But you're right that Rutherford is an easier read - smoother in my opinion. I was intrigued about Buchan following your comment. It seems as though he may have been a physician who wrote books about medicine for the lay person. From the looks of it he was John Buchan's father :)
Grossman is the best!
Ah, yes, I'm definitely leaning that way myself :)