Geeta Khadka

Murari Madhusudhan Thakur, who has published several books and translated Tulsidas' Hunumanbahuka from Hindi into English, has recently published Laxmi Prasad Devkota: Selected Poems. But being a gold medalist, and hailing from a 'most illustrious family of scholars dedicated to the study and teaching literature' does not seem to make a person the most suited to translate Devkota. Even for a native speaker, translating from Nepali into English is a difficult task. It is therefore very important for interpreters to realize the complexity of such an undertaking. It is not easy to interpret meanings without knowing the essence and feel of what is being said. Devkota, like the English Romantic poets, sought to rise above the lethargic customs of daily life, he was very conscious of earthly problems, and the main subject of his poetry was humanity itself. Poetry came to him as naturally as "the leaves of a tree" emerge. Thus, a good reading of this celebrated Nepali poet requires an eye and taste for his complex expressions, deviant structures, and inventiveness.

Several foreign scholars have now translated Devkota's poems, the most well known of which is David Rubin's effort. Translating Nepali literature into English was a subject of interest for Devkota too. A desire to be known outside Nepal was a strong motivating factor, as well as the fact that he was himself well versed in literature written in foreign languages, especially in English and French from the West, and Hindi and Bengali from India. As early as 1956, six years after Nepal's interaction with the outside world, the writer felt the need to internationalize Nepali writings. In his introduction to the translation of some well-known Nepali poems, he writes, "The present translations are in English, because of its extensive use in India, especially in the Deccan and the different parts of Asia and the world." Devkota, who had a good command of English, was one of the greatest native translators of Nepali poems into English. He translated several of his own poems, as well as the poems of other writers, into English, and published them in the mid-50's in the bilingual literary periodical Indreni. His own proficiency as a translator makes it problematic for non-native translators to grasp the essence of his poetry.

Thakur's translations, and the poet's own translations of these same poems, give some insight into the challenge of translating Devkota. These insights may be considered in light of translation as a creative practice, or as an effort to break from what Devkota asks of translation: respecting the "limits set by differences in the genius of two different languages." Devkota uses English for a creative rendering of his poems, and as such, these translations require special treatment. His translations are very close to Nepali, and he conveys through translation a concept of his, and his native poets', values. His translations of his own poems are transcreations, which come from the depth of his inner being and his Nepaliness.

Though Thakur has done a commendable job, and must to be appreciated for accomplishing such a task, I take the liberty of criticizing the rush to publish such an important work without more careful study. His haste to publish the book has led to some very gross mistranslations. He has also liberally used the poet's own translation, adding minor changes and major flaws. Thakur might have done a better job if he had read Devkota's poems with a native scholar or a writer. Instead, he has opted for the easier, more literal aspect of translation. In spite of 'knowing Nepali very well and publishing some original articles in the language' he has failed to translate Devkota's creativity. The question involved is not his English, but his authenticity. How authentic is Thakur's translation of the poems that the poet has himself translated? I would like to review Thakur's translation by examining them alongside Devkota's.

A precise understanding of the work is necessary for a good translation. Devkota gives his readers more space, and allows a greater range of possible responses. Thakur, however, strictly follows the method of literal translation, with often uses the poet's translations liberally. Several examples of the differences between the two follow. To begin with, in Nepali, Devkota uses exclamation marks at the end of practically each line, as does Thakur in his translation. Yet the poet's own translation of "The Lunatic" uses full stops instead of exclamation marks.

Then, in both translations, the first six lines of "The Lunatic" are exactly the same, while the other lines have little or no changes. Yet in this poem, Thakur is quite unable to capture and fathom the depth of what the poet is saying, and at times mistranslates the feelings and expressions of the poet. His changes do not render the same effect of the poet's own translation. For example, 'Those things I touch-' (Devkota) and 'I touch things' (Thakur) covey quite different things. While Devkota experiences the sounds, visions, and fragrances whose existence the world denies, Thakur's 'I touch things' lacks intensity and reads very stiffly. The poet sees 'a flower in the stone-' and contemplates it, while Thakur sees a 'flower in the stone/In the moonlight.' When the poet says, ' Ripple by ripple' he shows the movement of the river and the reader can feel and visualize the water. 'Ripple on ripple,' (Thakur) creates a sense of stagnation, and the translation becomes hurtful to the eyes and the ears! Devkota:

'They exfoliating, mollifying,
Glistening and palpitating,
Rise before my eyes like tongueless thing insane,
like flowers,
A variety of moon birds.

Thakur's translation of the same lines is:

They burst into leaf, mollified,
Glistening, palpitating,
They rise before me like mute insane creatures,
Like flowers, a variety of chakor-blossom!

Though the translator has used the same adjectives, 'exfoliating,' 'mollifying,' 'glistening,' and 'palpitating,' 'unintelligible,' and 'ineffable,' the essence and the intensity of the poet's imagination is missing.

The poem "Spring" provides another opportunity to compare Thakur's translation with Devkota's. The poet conveys an urgency, in vivid and pulsating rhythms:

Earth-rainbowing, hare maddening,
Bee-buzzing, bird-quickening,
Pulse-palpitating, heart-agitating

This vision and pulsation, Thakur is unable to capture in his translation:

Making a rainbow of the earth, making the hare mad,
Making the bee to buzz,
Quickening the birds, the pulse itself,
Stirring up the heart.

However, in spite of these flaws, Thakur has also accomplished a good degree of success. Though he is not the first to fill 'a long- felt need for the poetry of the great poet in a world language,' he has contributed towards this. It is not easy for a non-native speaker to perfectly translate one of the greatest poets of Nepal, but Thakur deserves to be congratulated for the broad range of Devkota's poetry that he has chosen, and the actual translation that he has accomplished.

(G. Khadka is a Reader at the Tribhuvan University Department of English, Kirtipur)