[XangadsX]

The Emigrants is my first approach to W.G. Sebald. For some time I had been reading very enthusiastic comments about his work, but for some reason I had postponed reading him. I had this book sitting on my shelf for months! Now that I have read him, well, if only this one book so far, I concur with those who have praised Sebald to the skies. The Emigrants is indeed a very good book. I am not sure how to define it: is it a novel, a collection of stories, a memoir? The book is sold as fiction, so I assume Sebald must have hinted that it was indeed fiction, or that, based on real life events and lives, he had written some fictional stories. Fact or fiction, ultimately who cares. The Emigrants is a story of memory and loss. Narrated in the first person by Sebald himself (or not exactly him but the events coincide with his own life), he re-creates four lives of German Jews who were forced to emigrate before, during or after one of the two world wars. All four tried to survive in diffrent countries and spent many years trying to forget, apparently leading reasonably successful lives. But their lives, or worse their minds, had been damaged beyond repair. No matter how many years had passed, these individuals still suffered the consequences of Holocaust. Memory would eventually catch up with them and ultimately claim them as victims, either driving them to commit suicide or to seek extintion through electroshock, or to suffer guilt and depression.

All this is told with great control, detachment and a fine sense of irony, which makes the effects of the horrendous events that occured to these people all the more compelling. And, above all, I was impressed by reading a most beautiful prose style. Praise should go too to the wonderful English translation by poet Michael Hulse, with whom Sebald collaborated closely. Sebald seamlessly blends his first person narration into indirect speech and then again into the first person point of view of each protagonist. Powerfully descriptive, detailed to the point of exaperation, I haven't read this kind of English writing in a while. Long-winded, even old-fashioned elegant sentences. Nineteenth century stylists such as De Quincey come to mind. Or Henry James, or Borges, or to name someone from our times, Banville, to give you an idea.

The book is very good, great at times, but it falls short of being a masterpiece. The stories seem to flatten out at the end and become anticlimactic. But maybe this was Sebald's purpose all along.

The book also reminded me to a certain extent to Damilo Kis's A Tomb for Boris Davidovich, a book of similar structure but related to the Stalin years.

If anybody else read The Emigrants, I would very much like to read their own comments.

[iceleliewBync]

I've read books by Sebald, but not this one. I think you describe his style very well.

[KevinDonae]

The book also reminded me to a certain extent to Damilo Kis's A Tomb for Boris Davidovich, a book of similar structure but related to the Stalin years.

This is exactly what I was gonna tell you. I read Kis book a few months ago and your descriptions goes side by side with it. The difference as you mention is that this is Jews and world wars and Kis is about Socialism through Europe.

Now I have a doubt. In what language do you read translations? Spanish, English or it depends to what is closer to the original language? I asumme it's the last one, but anyway let me know.

[XangadsX]

This is exactly what I was gonna tell you. I read Kis book a few months ago and your descriptions goes side by side with it. The difference as you mention is that this is Jews and world wars and Kis is about Socialism through Europe.

Now I have a doubt. In what language do you read translations? Spanish, English or it depends to what is closer to the original language? I asumme it's the last one, but anyway let me know.

I liked Sebald's book better than Kis's, not because of it's subject matter but because of the way it was written.

With regards to work in translation, my choices vary. German, Dutch or Nordic and maybe Russian and Japanese languages I prefer to read in English, whereas Portuguese, Hungarian and Romanian I would prefer to read in Spanish. Having said that, however, it also depends on the reference I have about the specific translator. Writers like Grass and Bernhard, for instance, have an award winning Spanish translator in Miguel S?enz. But for Sebald I wouldn't miss Hulse's translation. Hulse is himself an award winning poet so he is bound to write beautiful prose. Another thing: I try to avoid 'second degree' translations, as so often happens with some Japanese literature in Spanish. For Kawabata and Murakami I'd go for English versions. Murakami is known to work closely with his three English translators. Kawabata also had a great English translator, Edward Seidensticker, who lived in Japan for many years. Seidensticker was even mentioned by the Nobel Academy as having greatly contributed to Kawabata's cause for the award. On the other hand, Kenzaburo O? has very good translators into Spanish. I could keep going about translations but this is not the proper thread. I hope this addresses your question.

[KevinDonae]

I liked Sebald's book better than Kis's, not because of it's subject matter but because of the way it was written.

With regards to work in translation, my choices vary. German, Dutch or Nordic and maybe Russian and Japanese languages I prefer to read in English, whereas Portuguese, Hungarian and Romanian I would prefer to read in Spanish. Having said that, however, it also depends on the reference I have about the specific translator. Writers like Grass and Bernhard, for instance, have an award winning Spanish translator in Miguel S?enz. But for Sebald I wouldn't miss Hulse's translation. Hulse is himself an award winning poet so he is bound to write beautiful prose. Another thing: I try to avoid 'second degree' translations, as so often happens with some Japanese literature in Spanish. For Kawabata and Murakami I'd go for English versions. Murakami is known to work closely with his three English translators. Kawabata also had a great English translator, Edward Seidensticker, who lived in Japan for many years. Seidensticker was even mentioned by the Nobel Academy as having greatly contributed to Kawabata's cause for the award. On the other hand, Kenzaburo O? has very good translators into Spanish. I could keep going about translations but this is not the proper thread. I hope this addresses your question.

Very interesting and wise methods you use. You seem to know a lot about translations and translators. I guess you'll be my guide in my serveral doubts wether if a translations seems to be good or not. Some texts don't even say if they are direct translations or not, so this is a problem.

From what I've heard Hungarian literature runs away close from Germanic literary circles, so the only doubt I had from your comments is why read Hungarians in Spanish? I think It'd be easier in English.

[XangadsX]

From what I've heard Hungarian literature runs away close from Germanic literary circles, so the only doubt I had from your comments is why read Hungarians in Spanish? I think It'd be easier in English.

Hehe, I do my research, my friend!! First, I'm not so sure that Hungarian stems directly from Germanic origins, but I agree it sounds closer to English than to Spanish. I chose Spanish however, at least in the case of S?ndor M?rai, because I learnt that most of his publications in English were translated from already poor German translations. Remember M?rai was banned from publishing in Hungary so most of his novels were smuggled into Germany and then translated there, and then in Canada.

A good translator is almost as important as the original writer. Not that a brilliant translator will improve on a bad writer, but a faulty translation can certainly ruin a good book. We used to have excellent translators in Argentina, particularly from the French. To think that Simone de Beauvoir was translated by Silvina Bullrich, and Marguerite Yourcenar by no less than Julio Cort?zar. Those were the good days!!