-
Translator's Note
- Penn State University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
translator’s note This translation of Iphigénie, Racine’s ninth play, is one of a series, which, when complete, will offer in English translation all twelve of Racine’s plays (eleven tragedies and one comedy), only the third such traversal since Racine’s death in 1699. This traversal, in addition , is the first to be composed in rhymed iambic pentameter couplets . My strategy has been to reconceive Racine in that pedigreed indigenous English verse form in order to produce a poetic translation of concentrated power and dramatic impact. After all, as Proust observes, “the tyranny of rhyme forces good poets into the discovery of their best lines”; and while subjected to that tyranny, I took great pains to render Racine’s French into English that is incisive, lucid, elegant, ingenious, and memorable. For I believe that the proper goal of a translation of a work of literature must be, first and foremost, to produce a work of literature in the language of the target audience. For a considerably more expansive discussion of my approach to translation and a powerfully argued rationale for my decision to employ rhymed couplets, I direct the interested reader to the Translator’s Introduction that appears in Volume I of this series, devoted to my translation of Racine’s first play, La Thébaïde (The Fratricides in my version). This translation is based on the definitive 1697 edition of Racine’s theater as it appears in the Bibliothèque de la Pléiade edition of 1980, edited by Raymond Picard. The 1697 text represents Racine’s final thoughts on this play, which, with one exception, differ insignificantly from his earliest. (Racine’s few emendations, however x S translator’s note minor, are nonetheless to be preferred to the earlier versions.) The one notable discrepancy is the absence in the 1697 edition of four lines for Iphigenia (III.vi.95–98), an omission that I agree with Picard represents a printer’s error, rather than a deliberate deletion by Racine. (See note 15 for Act III for a brief rationale for my believing so.) The translation of Racine’s preface is my own, as are the translations of passages from the critical commentaries in the Picard and Forestier editions that appear in the Discussion and the Notes and Commentary. In my own critical commentaries, when I refer to a play or a character, I use the title or name as it appears in my translations. It should be noted, however, that where any other commentators (writing in English) retain the French spellings, I have respected that preference and beg the reader to pardon the discrepancies. I have preserved the scene divisions as they are given in the Pléiade edition (each new scene marking the arrival or departure of one or more characters) and have, likewise, listed the characters participating in each scene just below the scene number. I have, in addition, furnished these translations with line numbers (every fifth line being numbered, and the numbering beginning anew for each scene) for ease of reference for readers and actors and to enable me to cite passages precisely in the Discussion and the Notes and Commentary. It should be noted that these line numbers do not conform to those of any French edition, the Picard, for example, providing no line numbers at all and the Forestier using unbroken numbering from beginning to end; besides, I have sometimes expanded one of Racine’s couplets into a tercet (or even, more rarely, into two couplets), a procedure that would vitiate any linefor -line correspondence. The Discussion is intended as much to promote discussion as to provide it. The Notes and Commentary, in addition to clarifying obscure references and explicating the occasional gnarled conceit, offer, I hope, some fresh and thought-provoking insights, such as are occasionally vouchsafed the sedulous translator. But whatever the merit of the ancillary critical material, I wish to make it clear [18.232.66.188] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 08:54 GMT) translator’s note S xi that I believe the enduring value of these volumes will reside in the excellence of the translations. New approaches to studying Racine will undoubtedly be discovered and developed, opponent schools of thought will continue to clash, arguments may be challenged or overturned, but I am hopeful that the value of these translations will prove indisputable. Once again I can think of no support, either moral or amendatory, worthier of acknowledgment than that unstintingly provided by Leslie...