|
|
|
|
Articles
|
|
|
Articles |
Translating Classic PlaysTranslations of ancient plays usually have one of two faults: either they try to stick as closely as they can to the original so that the language sounds stilted and they are virtually unactable, or they are so modern that they lose the original's flavour and we feel that we are reading a modern play. So anyone who undertakes to produce an acting version of a classic faces real problems. Take the play's structure, for instance. Classic tragedies have dialogue interspersed with choral odes, the dialogue being in the ancient equivalent of Shakespeare's iambic pentameter, whilst the odes are in a lyric meter. Does the would-be translator attempt to maintain these differences? Should, in fact, it be a verse translation or modern prose? And what of the Chorus itself? Post-classical theatre allows a "chorus" of one man, addressing the audience directly (such as the Prologue in Henry V) whereas classical tragedy has a group speaking (or singing) in unison, with a chorus leader who will also be an actor, speaking to the main protagonists. How does the modern adapter deal with this? Greek tragedies were performed in huge outdoor theatres by actors wearing platform-soled boots and masks which, at times, incorporated a kind of megaphone. The style of writing and performing, therefore, is declamatory. Modern theatres, however, are very intimate in comparison. Should the translation mirror the original or should the whole style be changed to suit modern theatre? And what about the plethora of references to a mythology which was part of the culture of the original's audience but which is, at best, only half-known (and probably less than half-understood) by the majority of today's audiences? Should it be kept in its entirety? If not, how much should be missed out? And we must not forget that the whole world view of the original writer and his audience is completely foreign to the modern writer and his. A classical scholar may, by dint of immersing himself in the literature and history of his period, be able to begin to think like the Greeks or the Romans, but it is totally impossible for the average modern theatre-goer. Ideas which, for the original audience member, would be part of his daily life - in fact, would be the tenets by which he lived - are totally foreign to the modern audience. Can it be done? You would be forgiven for asking if, in fact, it is actually possible to produce a translation which is faithful to the original and actable! The simple answer has to be that it is not. We cannot hope to look at any classical play through the eyes of the original audience, any more than we can look at Shakespeare's plays in the way that his audience did. The best we can hope for is that the translation will have something to say to the modern world. Now let's turn to a modern version of Seneca's play and see whether its author is successful in bringing the play alive for us in the year 2000. Next page A Modern Acting Version Articles Indices:
|
|
|