Magin_Edward-thesis

28
Continuing down the list, the poem that is an imitation of the original has fewer
constraints than the metapoem. The poet of an imitation takes freedom to change various
aspects of the poem as desired, and it is no longer considered a valid interpretation of the
original. It may seemingly have some interpretive qualities; however, it has strayed too
far to be considered a true evaluation of the original’s semantic content (Holmes
1988:23). Imitation poetry is revisited in § 2.2.4.1.3 on re-creative translations.
After imitation is the poem ‘about’ a poem and the poem inspired by a poem.
These poems are devoid of representative features of the original. While they may still
possess some semantic content found in the original, the writer crafts a poem that is so
estranged from the theme and intent of the original that the connection between the two is
very loose.
2.2.4.1.1 Prose translation of a poem
Prose translations of a poem may be broken down into various forms, such as
“literal” and “unbound literary” translations. What is common to all of its forms is that
they are all written using prose (Holmes 1988:23). Some people, particularly linguists,
find prose translations, such as literal or interlinear versions, useful.
E. Talbot Donaldson (1975:xv-xvi) writes that “only a prose translation, made
with no other end in mind than fidelity to the original, can bring out the distinctive
qualities of the work. To make it a modern poem is, inevitably, to make it a different
poem.” Similarly, John Middleton Murry (1969:129) supported prose translation, saying:
Poetry should always be rendered into prose. Since the aim of the
translator should be to present the original as exactly as possible, no fetters
of rhyme or metre should be imposed to hamper this difficult labour.
Indeed they make it impossible.
Contrary to this opinion, the German philologist and translator Ulrich von
Willamowitz-Moellendorff (1992:33), believed in only translating poetry into verse form.
Writing with regard to the translation of Homer into prose, he says that the translator
“must divest himself of his jewels, in other words lose all the color of life.” In truth, von
Willamowitz-Moellendorff did not think Homer was translatable into German, because