| re: New York Times editors are becoming a whisper | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 10:04 pm EST 02/22/24 | |
| In reply to: New York Times editors are becoming a whisper - ShowGoer 10:05 am EST 02/22/24 | |
|
|
|
| I really dislike calling almost anyone an "Ibsen whisperer." I think I wouldn't even want to call even Rolf Fjelde, Michael Meyer or William Archer "Ibsen whisperers." (Yeah, Archer's translations are archaic and perhaps not always ideally accurate, but his importance in the history of Ibsen is English is immense.) Maybe Eva Le Gallienne because of her combination of acting and directing Ibsen over a long period of time (and not just two plays) and doing her own translations or really adaptations since I think she did not speak Norwegian (and even if they don't hold up well). With Herzog, however excellent her own writing may be, it seems to me especially wrong since by her own admission, she rewrites Ibsen's plays. (Yes, translation always involves rewriting, it's intrinsic, but there's rewriting to make something sound clear in English, then there is making intentional and important changes.) I love how she's so sure that Ibsen has given her permission to change or eliminate major and crucial things in these two plays. I'm not going to comment on the question about Times editors and copy editors right now except to say that I think the decline is probably real but not as extreme as some might think. The Times was never perfect. No newspaper is. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | New York Times editors are becoming a whisper - ShowGoer 10:05 am EST 02/22/24 |
| Next: | re: New York Times editors are becoming a whisper - singleticket 10:23 am EST 02/23/24 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.029405 seconds.