Kitto's Version Of The Play example essay topic

Antigone – A Contrast Of Two Translations Antigone – A Contrast Of Two Translations In the undertaking of the translation of any literary work from one language to another, many things must be considered. The first of these things is the way in which the translator will handle the cultural differences that have no parallel in the language into which he is translating. Also, how he will attempt to retain the original meanings of words that may no longer exist, or that do not make sense in any language but their own, and how closely he can adhere to the original text without it losing comprehensiveness. This is especially true for a play as ancient and highly revered as Sophecles' Antigone. This play was written around 441 BC. A translator must take caution in the reproduction of a play as classic as Antigone because any version of it that strays too far from the original will lose the mystique and grandeur of a play written in such a different time.

The antiquity of the play may also prove beneficial to the translator, however, because it is this which enables him to have extensive creative license; no one alive today can claim to know exactly how the play is intended to be read. This opportunity for individual technique is exemplified and exercised by the two authors whose works are the basis of this essay, H.D.F. Kitto, and Michael Townsend. The first difference I noticed between the two translations was that the one produced by Kitto was substantially more proper than Townsend's. It gives the initial impression of being more of what a Greek tragedy should be; florid, formal, and full of imagery. Through this, the translator succeeds in making his version of the play seem older.

Even in the very beginning of the play, Kitto is able to make Antigone's opening line sound more dramatic. While Townsend opens his version with the simplistic, modern sentence structure of "My darling sister Ismene, we have had a fine inheritance from Oedipus' (Townsend, 3), Kitto has the heroine say "Ismene, my own sister, dear Ismene, How many miseries our father caused!' (Kitto, 9). This rough, unfamiliar sentence structure makes it seem to the reader much more foreign, and therefore more authentic as an ancient Greek play. Many examples of this occur throughout the play.

One such example occurs when Ismene is recollecting the story of Oedipus, her father, in an attempt to show Antigone how foolish her idea of bestowing on Polynices a proper burial is. In Kitto's version of the play, Ismene's line is written as a huge run-on sentence; "Think of our father, dear Antigone, and how we saw him die, hated and scorned, when his own hands had blinded his own eyes because of sins which he himself disclosed; and how his mother-wife, two names in one, knotted a rope, and so destroyed herself' (Kitto, 10). In Townsend's version, the line reads as such: "Oh God. Have you forgotten how our father died, despised and hated? How he turned detective to discover his own crimes, then stabbed his own eyes out with his own hands? And then Jocasta, who was both together his mother and his wife, hanged herself with a rope?' (Townsend, 4).

While admittedly more concise, Townsend's version lacks a certain flare that sends the readers' minds back thousands of years to a time of ancient Gods, warlords, and kings, and sounds much less theatrical. Antigone and Ismene are discussing the bad news of Creon's decree concerning their brother's death. In Townsend's version, Ismene asks of her sister, "You " ve something on your mind. What is it then?' (Townsend, 3). In Kitto's version, Ismene's line is "What is it? Some dark shadow is upon you' (Kitto, 9).

Later in this same conversation, Ismene remarks that Antigone is not remorseful of the decision she has made. In Townsend's translation, Ismene observes, "You " re very cheerful' (Townsend, 5), and in Kitto's translation, the line is "Your heart is hot on wintry work' (Kitto, 9). This is an example of another difference in the two versions. Kitto's use of imagery corresponds with the general conception of how people spoke way back when this play was written, and adds further to the authenticity of the work.

Townsend's simplistic diction merely makes his translation sound hollow and boring. Another difference following the same example is present when Creon is speaking to his council members. In describing the deaths of Eteocles and Polyneices, he says", Since they have fallen by a double doom upon a single day, two brothers each killing the other with polluted sword (Kitto, 12). ' In Townsend's translation, he says ' Well, now they " re dead ' (Townsend, 6). There is really no comparison as to which one sounds better. Another difference between Kitto's and Townsend's interpretation is the mention of the Greek Gods.

Although this is a difference that is slightly less involved than sentence structure and imagery, it nonetheless greatly adds or takes away from the authenticity of an ancient Greek work. None can deny that the ancient Greeks were a polytheistic people, yet Townsend seems to be doing just that. Early in the play, the chorus describes to us the attack that Polyneices led on Thebes. While Kitto's translation of part of this speech is "For the arrogant boast of an impious man Zeus hateth exceedingly' (Kitto, 11).

Townsend writes this as "God hates presumption' (Townsend, 5). Later on in the same speech, War is a god in Kitto's version, and a horse in Townsend's. When the chorus later speaks of celebrating the victory, Kitto's line is "Come! Let all thank the gods, Dancing before temple and shrine all through the night, following thee, Theban Dionysus' (Kitto, 12).

Townsend ignores all mention of gods and recites the line as "Let us forget the war, and dance at every temple all night long' (Townsend, 6). The gods were not only a huge part of the Greek culture, but they also play a significant role in the play. When the blind prophet Tiresias comes to Creon to tell him of the curse upon the city, it is the gods' doing. Practically everything that happens in the play is done out of fear of angering the gods, or in an effort to please them. To deny the existence and importance of these gods by failing to mention them is a huge mistake and practically drains the play of all its history and uniqueness... Townsend's translation of Antigone is much easier to read, having eliminated any material that would need further explanation, knowledge or footnotes.

Also, the sentence structure is obviously simpler and more contemporary. Despite this, my purpose in reading a play by Sophecles would be to examine how people wrote, spoke, thought and acted back in the days of ancient civilization. If I had only read Townsend's version, I would find myself just as clueless as to these things as before I had read it. The only way I was able to gain any insight into their culture, and thus a setting for the play, was by reading Kitto's interpretation. I wouldn't expect this play to be easy to read, and I think I would have found myself disappointed by Townsend. After having contrasted to a substantial extent the two translations, my preference definitely lies with Kitto's version.

Bibliography

Sophocles. Antigone. Trans. H.D.F. Kitto. In British and Western Literature, eds. C. Robert Carlsen and Miriam Gilbert, 9-36. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979.
Sophocles. Antigone. Trans. Michael Townsend. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.