All Astir

All Astir “ . . . He was ever dusting his old lexicons and grammars, with a queer handkerchief, mockingly embellished with all the gay flags of all the known nations of the world.” Moby-Dick, “Etymology” L ike Melville’s Usher, we dust our volumes with a global handkerchief. News comes to us from afar. From the Netherlands, for example, Arne od Weegh writes on March 15: Yesterday the Book Supplement of our major newspaper NRC Handelsblad (www.nrc.nl) ran a review [of a new translation of Moby-Dick in Dutch] over the first two pages, written by Charlotte Mutsaers. . . . The review is titled “Revenge is Salt,” . . . subtitled “Moby-Dick is a University in the Appearance of a Book.” The picture of Melville on the second page appears in color in the paper. For comparison, the review is followed by five versions of the opening paragraph [of Moby-Dick]: Melville’s original and four translations. This review is exactly what I had hoped it would be: the enthusiasm about Melville is clear, and what she says about the book is just what would arouse the reader’s curiosity about Moby-Dick. In the column next to Melville’s picture, she discusses this particular translation. It is a terrific read, but . . . and here it comes: the first translation Mrs. Mutsaers read was also splendid, and perhaps the other ones as well, so why exactly would we need a new translation if a good one is available? . . . This is where I come in. Both the reviewer and the editors seem to think that the four examples they print represent all Dutch versions of Moby-Dick, so I sent them a scan of the title pages and first paragraphs of the other two translations, published in 1979 and 1987. So the situation is even weirder: a new Dutch MobyDick has been published in every decade after the war except in the 1950s and 1990s. In my letter to the editors, I endorse the view that this makes no sense, especially since only half out of all nine novels Melville published from 1846 to 1857 were ever translated into Dutch, making up the odd number of 4 1/2 titles. The 1984 White-Jacket was abbreviated by half without any mentioning on the cover. I found out when I first saw the Library of America edition. Of the short fiction, only half was ever translated, of which only Billy C  2008 The Authors Journal compilation C  2008 The Melville Society and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 122 L E V I A T H A N A J O U R N A L O F M E L V I L L E S T U D I E S A L L A S T I R Budd is now available. My objections against another translation of Moby-Dick are counterbalanced by my calling attention to the fact that publication of the Northwestern-Newberry edition ensures that all existing translations are in need of updating, based as they are on outdated source texts. The new translation takes advantage of this accomplishment in editing, and this is one reason why it should be the first choice if you need a Dutch Moby-Dick. . . . We were pleased to hear as well from Jean Caturani in Rota, Spain, who forwarded a review (in the May 17 issue of El Pais) of a new Spanish translation of Redburn. Although most of the review is devoted to Redburn, the writer, José Marı́a Guelbenzu, asks in concluding why the opening words of the Spanish edition of Moby-Dick translate the verb in “Call me Ishmael” in the plural rather than singular form. To whom, asks the reviewer, is this invitation addressed? To a “confraternity of listeners? To an assembly? No.” The only person Melville addresses is “the individual reader.” Why, then, not translate “Call me Ishmael” with the singular verb? Finally Paweł J edrzejko in Katowice, Poland, writes on June 14 of a gala event following from the Melville Society’s 2007 international conference: Held on April 23rd, “A Whale of a Day: Herman Melville at the Library of Silesia in Katowice, Poland,” was the first of a series of events...