10 Comments

I am really in love with the way Lydia Davis writes, and I am also full of admiration for this translation. Her translation approach brings the text alive, which for me, was absent in the other, previous translation (forgive me, I forget the name of the translator, but use to have a copy). Others I know, including some reputable readers and publishers, prefer that one better. They read this presumably in their youth. There is nostalgia in that. But I don't find room in Proust for my nostalgia. I agree, these books may be appreciated in a more profound way as you get older. There are so many reasons. As long as we have, though, academic programs that attack great literature like a box of chocolates that must be consumed quickly, this issue will remain.

Expand full comment

Good commentary Thérèse. I have at least four volumes of the old translation. After finishing the Davis one, I was thinking of reading the older translation, but now reading through the new editions. And afterward, I'll read the older ones. Comparing the old with the new would be a fascinating adventure. But yeah, Proust is something. I never thought of Proust as nostalgia while reading the work. It is more regarding how memory unfolds in one's mind/brain and how one sees the world filtered through various thinking patterns. If I can swing it time-wise, I want to focus on Proust for the rest of the year.

Expand full comment

I too have read the old translation that was the only translation for such a long time. I haven’t gotten around to Lydia Davis one but I admire her writing so much that I must read it. I’m not 95 yet but 85 ought to be sufficient. Thanks Tosh!

Expand full comment

Start reading Larry! Lydia Davis is awesome.

Expand full comment

I read the previous translation of À la recherche back in the '90s. (I was curious, partially because Monty Python had used it or Proust as a punchline more than once.) I loved it. I hope that I find the time before I depart the etage to reread it in the Lydia Davis translation. Chilean director Raúl Ruiz did a great adaptation of Le Temps retrouvé in French in 1999.

Expand full comment

I need to see the Ruiz film. I saw the other one with Alain Delon and Jeremy Irons. I thought that was good. They say Proust can't be filmed, but I don't know. There is something cinematic about Proust, and it won't replace his text/thoughts, but cinema can adopt a version, and that version doesn't have to be the only one. There's room for more.

Expand full comment

I certainly think Proust is filmable. I also saw Swann in Love, and I like that, too, but the Ruiz is better.

Expand full comment

A permanently mysterious masterpiece. Elusive and elegant reverie.

Expand full comment

The elusive quality is a big plus for me.

Expand full comment

I mean the nostalgia of the reader and the translation they have read . . . I don't think of Proust as nostalgia either. The nostalgia of the reader's version of Proust controlling their preferences of translation.

Expand full comment