Celestina (review)

To have a second new English translation of the twenty-one-act Tragicomedia de Calisto y Melibea available when so many are now out of print (Singleton, Hartnoll, Cohen, Woolsey) is a pleasure (see my review of Peter Bush [translator], in this same issue, for the other recent translation). In her Translator’s Note, Peden acknowledges having consulted only Singleton and Cohen. She mentions also Lesley Byrd Simpson’s translation, still in print, but Simpson’s work –used in most courses of comparative literature– is the sixteen-act Comedia. Of the longer version, still available is the James Mabbe English version (1631) with Dorothy S. Severin’s Spanish edition.

The dilemmas that face any translator of words meant to be read and savored in 1500 are palpable. The choices seem to be double: one can try to transpose and safeguard the flavor of the original in the English, or try to capture the spirit of the work in a more modern or colloquial (accessible) English. Peden defines the philosophy behind her translation (quite distinct from Peter Bush’s) in a summation worth quoting in full:

If we decide that some aspects of the Celestina are relatively modern while some remain markedly sixteenth century, how does that affect the rhetorical level of the translation? Is it best presented in a contemporary language? That is something I considered carefully. The advantage would be a much more accessible text, a book that sounds familiar to the ear of a contemporary reader. I decided, however, that I did not want to take that approach, that I wanted what appeared on the English language page to be as close as possible to the original Spanish, whether the content be unique to that period or applicable to the course of human history. That cannot, of course, be achieved, but I wanted to change as little as possible the tone of the original, which would be the inevitable effect in creating a more readable version.

(viii)

And this meritorious goal, maintaining the tone of the original, I believe she has achieved with great aplomb. She is not comfortable with the idea of a “book that sounds familiar to the ear of a contemporary reader” (my italics), which is what Bush has achieved in his translation. Let us consider in more detail what is on offer here.

Peden keeps the dramatic dialogue format, retains the order of the paratextual materials as they are presented in the Tragicomedia, reproduces the arguments to the acts, and introduces each new speech act with the name of the speaker. She is following earlier translator’s choices in so doing, which distinguishes her text from the translation by Bush. The first (spoken) words in Bush’s translation are: “Melibea, I look at you and see why God is Great”. The syntax and rhythms of the original are different: “En esto veo, Melibea, la grandeza de Dios”, has a tripartite poetic and metrical flow. Peden reproduces this almost exactly: “In this, Melibea, I see the greatness of God”. One notices the difference right away between the prosified speech act (Bush) and the rhetorical lilt maintained by Peden.

Since Peden chooses to preserve the older tone in making her choices as a translator, an approach that Singleton attempted also (but whose choices are not always to her liking; see Translators Note, ix), it would be interesting to compare the same two Singleton passages used in the review of Bush. Let us first compare the passage from Act V:

The original: Celestina: ¡O rigurosos trances, o cuerda osadía, o gran sufrimiento! Y qué tan cercana estuve de la muerte, si mi mucha astucia no rigera con el tiempo las velas de la petición. ¡O amenazas de donzella brava, o ayrada doncella! ¡O diablo a quien yo conjuré, cómo compliste tu palabra en todo lo que te pedí! En cargo te soy; assí amansaste la cruel hembra con tu poder y diste tan...