China and the West

Liang, Shiqiu. Guan yu Shashibiya de fan yi [On translating Shakespeare]. [ID D23673].
Er schreibt : It was in 1931 that I first took up the task of translating Shakespeare. Since then thirty years have passed, eight of which were consumed by war. Great changes took place after the war and I was forced to move from place to place. As I was unable to settle down, my work was interrupted time and again. After all these years I have managed to prepare no more than twenty plays for publication—hardly a record to be proud of. According to my original plan the plays were to be published only after completion of the entire project. In recent years a number of friends have urged me to publish those already translated, while others have misunderstood my intentions and assumed I had already abandoned the whole scheme. In fact, I have not deviated from my original plan; but while working at a snail's pace, I had never thought of reporting on my own progress. More recently I heard that this year [1963] is the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's birth, an event which has inspirited literary enthusiasts the world over. We have felt the repercussions even here in Taiwan. Years ago Mr. Xiao Mengneng suggested that I should publish my translations, but I had always declined to do this. The occasion of this 400th Anniversary seems to have added an irresistible pressure, and so I have finally agreed to publish twenty of the plays. At the same time I feel I owe the reader an explanation and account of the whole project.
The translation of Shakespeare was first suggested by Dr. Hu Shi who took up the post of Chairman of the Translation Committee of the Board of Directors of the China Foundation for the Promotion of Education and Culture in 1930. His plans were ambitious, and the translation of Shakespeare was but one of them. The output of this Translation Committee was later published by the Commercial Press... The work of this Translation Committee gradually expanded until it came to an abrupt end at the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War. I cannot recall clearly how we planned the translation of Shakespeare. Fortunately, I managed to uncover a number of letters addressed to me by Dr. Hu, and reproducing them here in abridged form will help to provide an idea of our preliminary plans.
In fact, we never actually proceeded according to the plan. The First Annual Meeting was never held. Dongbo refused to take part in the project. Zhimo died unfortunately in November, 1931, while Gongchao and Yiduo's interests lay elsewhere. So I was left to take on this long and arduous task alone. I remember that I was living at No. 7 Yu Shan Road in Qingdao at the time. Apart from twelve hours of lectures per week in school, I devoted every spare moment of my time to the translation. At first I did not have many reference books at hand as the school was a new one and there was not much in the library. So I began to build up a small, private Shakespeare library, and in five or six years' time my collection compared favourably with that found in any schools. But what a lack of reference materials for my work in those first years! The only thing I could count upon in those days was a strong dose of enthusiasm, and the belief that by dogged effort mountains might be moved. I decided to take it step by step and work at my own speed. In this way I could at least learn something in the process. I am hardly an authority on Shakespeare and though I had read, while in college, plays like The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, Julius Caesar, Macbeth, Henry IV, and so on, my knowledge of them is most superficial. I had seen while abroad Walter Hampden's Hamlet and Warfield's Merchant of Venice and that was about all. In spite of my ignorance of the subject, and without actually realising how unqualified I was, I dared to venture upon the scheme. If all five of us had ever pooled our efforts and worked according to the original scheme, we should have completed the project long ago and in proof-reading each other have many of the errors eliminated. That we were unable to carry out the original plan is most regrettable.
The first problem I encountered in the course of translating Shakespeare was that of the choice of text. Textual problems do not exist for some literary works; but for those written in an earlier age, this problem is very common and can be crucial. Shakespeare, by Chinese standards, cannot be reckoned an early writer. He was born four centuries ago, around the end of the Ming Dynasty. And the English he used is 'Modern English'. His works, however, are chiefly dramas, and dramatic texts were not regarded as literature in those days, but rather as the property of the troupes that performed them; Thus Shakespeare never personally published any of his own plays. The sixteen 'Quartos' that appeared came from diverse sources, and were uneven in quality; some of them had been scripts provided by the troupes, others were pieced together from lines memorized, while still others originated in notes taken secretly during performances. The complete works were not published until 1623—seven years after Shakespeare's death—by two of his fellow actors. All this has complicated the textual problems of Shakespeare's plays. Furthermore, printing techniques in those days were poor. Typographical errors were multiplied by the practice of employing, in addition to a "reader", several type-setters. Moreover, Shakespeare's handwriting, as far as we know, is not easily legible. For these reasons the editing of Shakespeare's texts has developed into a specialized branch of scholarship. Since the eighteenth century there have been numerous scholars in the field who have edited and standardized the texts, divided it into acts and scenes where it had not been done, modernized the irregular spellings and supplied stage directions where they were incomplete or non-existent. The Shakespearean texts we use nowadays are the fruit of these labours. Yet in the process of editing, the specialists do not always agree, and it is common for them to offer different interpretations. Thus variant readings are frequently found in different texts. This presents no problem for the reader who can always pick and choose any modernized text he likes. The translator, on the other hand, is denied this freedom. He must choose one edition and base his translation upon it. This was quite a serious problem for me at the beginning. In Professor Kittredge's class6 we used Rolfe's edition. I have no idea why the professor had us use this version; it may be that this was an American edition that best suited the needs of the classroom. In selecting my text I did not base my choice on the number of footnotes—I would have to consult all the editions I could lay my hands on anyway, so the abundance of footnotes in any one edition did not matter to me. What mattered was the text itself. As a translator I could in no way contribute to the textual scholarship, nor would I have the time to collate the results of earlier textual specialists. The task of translating the text from one language to another was already work enough for me. So, I simply had to settle on an edition that is more popularly accepted. Finally I decided to use the Oxford text edited by W.J. Craig. This edition is widely used and is also the one on which the Yale Edition is based.
The textbook versions of Shakespeare's plays used by most schools have one drawback in common: they are abridged in one way or another. The lines deleted are usually from the so-called bawdy passages. Shakespeare had an extremely diverse audience of which the majority were 'groundlings' whose tastes were far from refined. In common with popular audiences of all ages, Elizabethan play-goers liked off-colour jokes and bawdy allusions which Shakespeare dutifully supplied. As a result hardly a play goes without mentioning the cuckold with horns on his head; even the male codpiece was made fun of. Puns referring to sexual matters are only too common. In 1818 a certain Thomas Bowdler published in England an edition of the complete works from which all the bawdy passages had been carefully excised, so that the plays could be read in any family supposedly without causing embarassment. This rtoble effort has itself become a laughing-stock. Ad-libbing and slapstick do reveal something about the background of an era and it should not really matter that much even if ribaldry is involved. This might even be a healthy sign psychologically. The Oxford Edition contains the complete, unabridged text, without any deletions, nor did I have any taboos or inhibitions in my translation. I simply tried my best to provide faithful renditions of the original. About a third of the original is in prose, and rendering this portion into Chinese prose was no great problem. However, the greater part of the text is in blank verse, that is, unrhymed iambic pentameter. Shakespeare did not adhere to this verse-form very strictly and often wrote lines with one or two extra feet. Nor did he end-stop every line ; sentences often run for several lines in succession. Thus Shakespearean blank verse actually comes quite close to prose. A euphonious 'bai hua' prose style might vaguely approximate the blank verse of Shakespeare but the distinctive rhythm of blank verse is not easily transplanted into another language. I have used prose throughout my translation. Quite frankly, I was unable to take care of the meter of the original. If a translator can fully and correctly render the meaning of the original, he has, to my mind, achieved no mean feat. Dr. Hu's suggestion that Wen Yiduo and Xu Zhimo should try to translate Shakespeare into verse—blank verse, that is—represents a very high ideal, for would it not be more colourful to translate Shakespeare into 'bai hua' verse ? Such a task must be left to the poets who have their own inspired ways with words. It is a great pity that Zhimo died prematurely, and that I-to became immersed in ancient tomes, so that neither of them could take part in the project. I would only say that my prose version is one way of tackling the job. Rhymed couplets are found in abundance in Shakespeare, especially in the earlier plays, their frequency decreasing in the mature works. The rhymes, in many cases, are forced and the couplets may sound grand, but they are, for the most part, devoid of meaning. I have done my best to reproduce them, forced rhymes and all. In short, my translation is largely prose. If some inspired translator can render Shakespeare's blank verse into Chinese verse, then he is certainly the answer to our prayer, and I should be the first to congratulate Mm. However, it should be borne in mind that blank verse is by no means the same thing as prose printed in separate lines.
I have taken considerable pains to acquire an understanding of Shakespearean meter. Is it enough to explain it by simply defining it as "iambic pentameter"? I do not think so. Shakespeare's artistry cannot have been as simple as that. I have found Percy Simpson's Shakespeare's Punctuation illuminating in this respect. Shakespeare's use of punctuation seems to have deviated from the accepted norm. In fact it is a system unto itself. Shakespeare's purpose in punctuation was to guide the actors in the delivery of their lines and to indicate the proper vocal inflexion and the necessary pauses. In accordance with this interpretation, I tried as far as possible to preserve Shakespeare's original punctuation. The result is that every sentence in the original is matched by a sentence in the translation. Sentences in the original text are used as units of translation. My translation is by no means 'literal'. Word-for-word translation would produce passages which would be unreadable in Chinese. Neither is it 'free'. Free translation may result in fluency, but the tone and rhythm will diverge too greatly from the original. In making sentences the units of translation, I may have been able to retain some of the original rhythm.
The translation of proper names can be very frustrating too. I am for using 'guo you' transliteration to represent names according to their commonly accepted pronunciation. I do not believe in the practice of shortening foreign names to make them sound more Chinese. Foreigners do possess odd and unwieldly names; why should we bother to give them Chinese names instead ? The name Shashibya (Shakespeare) is well known enough and needn't be discussed. The translation of other names, however, requires careful consideration. For help in these matters I was able to consult only two reference works: A Pronouncing Dictionary of Shakespearean Proper Names by Theodora Irvine and Shakespeare's Names: a Pronouncing Dictionary by Helge Kokeritz. In principle I prefer to follow modern English pronunciation rather than Elizabethan, and to follow Anglicized pronunciations instead of their Greek, Latin, French and Italian originals. Many people, for example, have translated Julius Caesar as General Kaisa or Emperor Kaisa. I have no idea on what these translations are based and I would rather put it faithfully as Chu-li-a-ssu-hsi-sa. As for Antony and Cleopatra, instead of giving it an attractive and impressive title like that of a movie, I transliterate the whole name as An-tung-ni yu K'o-li-ao-p'ei-t'e-la. This sounds a bit clumsy, a bit plain, I agree; but I feel much better about it. There are, of course, other names which do require translation of meaning and not transliteration. 'Bottom', the spinner, for one, I have translated as xian tuan (clew) as the name actually means 'a ball of thread or yarn'. 'Hotspur' means a 'quicktempered fellow' so I have translated it asp'i-li-huo (hothead), an epithet familiar to most readers.
Punning was a fashionable diversion in Shakespeare's day. The dramatist used puns at every opportunity and they were readily accepted by the audience. A 'pun' is simply two or more meanings embodied in the same word. For instance, the word 'light' has three meanings: 1. brightness, 2. the opposite of heavy and 3. frivolous. Or again, 'gilt' and 'guilt' are homonyms; so are 'sole' and 'soul'. When read aloud these words cannot be distinguished one from the other, and much confusion and misunderstanding result. In Shakespeare's age 'Modern English' was gradually taking shape and absorbing large quantities of ancient and contemporary foreign vocabulary. People were interested in words, and therefore also interested in word-play. From our present-day point of view, puns are acceptable if employed sparingly. Excessively used, however, they easily become tedious. In translation puns present great difficulties as they are almost always untranslatable. But, if the translator chooses to ignore them altogether, he will feel he is not being faithful to the original. So he is left with no alternative but to footnote his translation.
These are by no means the real difficulties on the linguistic side. Although it is termed 'Modern English', Shakespeare's language differs considerably from English as it is spoken and written today. A word used by Shakespeare may spell exactly the same as in modern English when in fact it had a different meaning. A moment's carelessness can easily lead to errors in the translation. Certain English words are quite complicated in meaning, having a variety of senses—radical, extended, transferred or archaic. The translator has to be continually on the alert and try to determine which meaning Shakespeare intended when using a certain word. Serious mistakes can result if, without thinking twice, he translates words according to their commonly accepted modern meaning. Problems occur all too often where no problem seems to exist. The translator will be on safe ground if he is willing and able to consult the various textual commentaries whenever necessary. It is only out of carelessness or reluctance to consult the commentaries that mistakes are made.
Translation is not considered scholarly research. That is why it is usually ignored by academic institutions. After translating twenty of Shakespeare's plays, I have come to realise that the translator, as often as not, has to involve himself in a little research work from time to time. He will hesitate time and again to put anything down, always hoping that he could understand the original more thoroughly and so lessen the chances of making regrettable errors. For this purpose he will have to consult widely the commentaries written since the eighteenth century. There are numerous annotated texts of Shakespeare available. Those I consulted most often include the Arden, Hudson, Rolfe, Yale, Deighton, Clarendon Press, Kittredge, Harrison, Craig, New Cambridge, New Variorum, Warrick and Scholar's Library editions, as well as others. Among these, the New Variorum is not only rich in its collection of textual criticisms, but also includes an abundance of reference materials. It is a pity that not all the plays have been published in this edition, while those published in earlier years now seem a little out of date. From the academic point of view, these materials can only be regarded as secondary sources, being the results of the research of earlier scholars. But these secondary references must not be overlooked. Without having absorbed them as thoroughly as possible, one can never approach the realm of primary source materials. It requires tremendous time and effort to survey this vast critical apparatus. And the translator has to do a little pondering whenever he comes across disagreements among the scholars. That is why I say the translator has to involve himself in a bit of research work.
One's reference materials should not, of course, be limited to annotated texts alone. Ideally I ought to have collected and examined all the writings that have to do with Shakespeare. But what an extravagant idea this is. I had dreamt of visiting the Shakespeare Memorial Library or the Folger Shakespearean Library—how wonderful that would have been! And I do not mean merely making a quick tour of the spot; I would want to sit down and work seriously for four or five years, making full use of the books available there. As these dreams of mine have not been realised, I have had to settle for the second best and do my utmost to collect the reference books necessary for my work. This was not too much of a problem before the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War. I was able to establish credit with a second-hand book-dealer in England. Catalogues were sent to me regularly, and I used to purchase some of the books not readily available in China. As time went by, my collection, humble as it might be, came to compare favourably with what one finds in any of our universities. For example, I managed to get hold of a large number of Shakespeare Society Transactions. Though they were fairly old publications and in shabby condition, their contents proved most valuable. After the war broke out there could be no more talk of such things. I remember that while in the hinterland during the war, I once heard of the publication of a "New Annotated Edition" and longed in vain to own a copy. It so happened that I managed to get hold of the relative of a friend who had a chance to visit the States and I begged him to buy me a copy. He went and he returned, bringing me a large number of gifts—but not the book I wanted. He did not even mention it. I am not trying to lay the blame on anybody; I merely want to emphasize how difficult it was to obtain reference books in those days. After coming to Taiwan empty-handed, I worked very hard to catch up on the Shakespearean scholarship of the previous decade. Research in this field had not stopped in England and America, and books kept coming out in amazing quantities while my own studies had lapsed into dormancy. Yet in seeking to buy the necessary books I ran into many difficulties: my own budget was limited; then there were the foreign exchange restrictions; when I tried to buy books through my school I encountered a lot of red tape and incredible inefficiency. Once an American friend came to my aid and asked me to make up a booklist. I leapt for joy and immediately sent him the list. It was only after a very long time that I received his reply which, when I read it, left me with a wry smile: "I am sorry, your booklist was submitted to our Government but not approved, and the reason given was that all the books were about an 'English' author."
As for the twenty plays I have translated, the first to be completed were Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear, Othello, The Merchant of Venice, As you like it, and The tempest. After I had finished these, the China Foundation sent them to the Commercial Press to be printed. So these plays-came out between May and November 1936. At that time there was a Mr. Wei Jue at the Commercial Press who, after examining my translation of Othello, made a few suggestions which I received through Dr. Hu Shih, accompanied by this letter:
Of course I did not mind "scholarly discussions", Dr. Hu's courteous request was most touching. As we all know, there is no such thing as 'perfection' in translation work. So long as there are no serious errors in the translation, one ought to feel a modicum of satisfaction. If there are those who can point out mistakes before the whole thing goes to press, the translator can but thank them wholeheartedly. I went through those few suggestions made by the Commercial Press and readily agreed to the changes, which would improve the tone of the translation — in all but one place. To my surprise, when the book came out, all the places in question were revised, including the one that I had decided should stand. Guan Qitong of the China Foundation wrote to me concerning this matter in the following letter dated 5 January, 1937: "Othello has been published, and I enclose ten copies. The Commercial Press tried to be clever and inserted an extra 'not' — the second word in line 9 on page 6, thereby making the meaning altogether different from that of the original. You ought to write them a letter of protest so that this will not happen again."
I did not write a letter of protest, as I understood that the editor had acted out of goodwill, even though the extra negative spoiled the passage. The Press had already been most helpful in pointing out a few mistakes in the translation. There were doubtless many others but I am nevertheless very grateful for their suggestions.
At the beginning of the Sino-Japanese War, Zhang Zigao and later Ren Shuyong took charge of the Translation Committee. I was notified that the Committee was not able to accept more than one Shakespeare play each year. In fact, I was unable to finish a play each year. At first I only completed Twelfth night which was published in Hong Kong in September, 1939. Then I translated A midsummer night's dream which I sent to the Commercial Press immediately after the war. The type was set and I finished correcting the proofs, but the play was not printed. This was because of the alarming rate of inflation at the time, I was told, and because the price of paper had increased many times. Blank paper became valueless as soon as anything was printed on it. So, publication was shelved for the time being. Later I brought the proofs to Taiwan. After the war I finished both parts of Henry IV, the first part of which was published by Ming Hua Bookstore in Taiwan. The other plays were translated one after another after I came to Taiwan.
As the twenty plays I have translated were done over a wide span of time, their format suffers one inconsistency, and that is there are fewer footnotes in the earlier translations and more in the later translations. I had imagined at the beginning of the project that, as the translations were intended for Chinese readers, I should do my best to make them comprehensible and readable without the help of footnotes. However, after I had completed several plays Dr. Hu suggested that I should put in annotations, so I inserted some where they were most needed. As I carried on with my work, my interest in footnotes grew and so their number gradually increased. I have no time now to go over the translations again thoroughly, so all addenda and revisions will have to be left till the publication of the complete corpus.
Finally, I should add a word of explanation on the illustrations I have used. They are all taken from The Complete Works edited by Charles and Mary Cowden Clarke, which was published about 1864 and includes some 300-odd etchings. Xiao Mengneng owns a copy of this edition. The reproduction of these etchings has done a great deal to enliven my volumes and I would like to express my thanks here to Mr. Xiao for his kindness in this matter.