8 ms·

I seem to end up blowing my own trumpet on every classic book thread on HN, but if you’re looking for a nice and libre ebook of Crime and Punishment (Constance

I seem to end up blowing my own trumpet on every classic book thread on HN, but if you’re looking for a nice and libre ebook of Crime and Punishment (Constance Garnett translation) I put one together for Standard Ebooks, with bonus astounding Edvard Munch cover. https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/fyodor-dostoevsky/crime-and-punishment/constance-garnett https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/fyodor-dostoevsky/crime-an...

sva_ 5y ago
Personally, I really liked the translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky. But it is also the only version I have read.
- orthoxerox 5y ago
  Their translation has been found to have many faults as well. It's like the speech of Ahti from Control: a literal translation of the source that adds "Russian character" to everyone, obscuring actual differences between the characters.
- tfcata 5y ago
  There are seven in-print translations of Crime and Punishment (and another six that are out-of-print). Which one is best depends on who you ask, or what you're looking for. The Garnett translation is itself considered a classic, and is in the public domain. The trendy one is Pevear and Volokhonsky. But there are other well-regarded versions to consider. This page lists them all and has extracts and links to articles to aid comparison. https://welovetranslations.com/2020/04/25/whats-the-best-translation-of-crime-and-punishment/ https://welovetranslations.com/2020/04/25/whats-the-best-tra...
  - quesera 5y ago
    That's an interesting article -- thanks for posting. One thing that struck me: two of the translation samples included the (correct/reasonable?) names for the street and bridge (Stolyarnyi Lane, Kokushkin Bridge). The others replaced the words with S-----i Lane, and K------n Bridge (or S. Lane etc). I think I understand the problem. Cyrillic alphabet doesn't map to Latin alphabet, and there was no established English-language translation for the names in question. The two that attempted it even had slightly different spellings, akin to the problem we see with many Arabic names in English today. This makes a big difference in readability, to me. The setting is supposed to be foreign and a bit unfamiliar to excultural readers, but K-------n looks like an error, a misprint, or an "(unintelligible)" in a transcription. That becomes part of the story, and it isn't intended as such by the author. For this and other reasons, my vote goes to Sidney Monas, 1968. I'll add that note to my long and ever-growing TOREAD list. :)
    - oh_sigh 5y ago
      I think it is just the opposite, and I'm not sure how much Dostoevsky thought about excultural readers. The setting is supposed to be familiar, or at least feel familiar, to many of the readers, to the point where certain names are redacted to give the feeling that the author is "protecting the innocent", or avoiding accusations of libel, because you are actually reading a true story and not something made out of whole cloth. The first line of the original is (asterisks mine, indicating where Dostoyevski intentionally did not write the name of a street or bridge): "В начале июля, в чрезвычайно жаркое время, под вечер, один молодой человек вышел из своей каморки, которую нанимал от жильцов в **С — **м переулке, на улицу и медленно, как бы в нерешимости, отправился к **К —** ну мосту." In English: "On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in S. Place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards K. bridge."
      - quesera 5y ago
        I see. Well that changes things completely! I assumed that the redactions were not in the original, and that the translators were avoiding complexity by presenting the English-speaking audience with a digstible form. I guess I underestimated the translators, or the reading public. Thanks for the correction. PS: I did not mean that Dostoevsky intended excultural readers to feel unfamiliar, but that excultural readers should expect (and maybe prefer) a certain amount of unfamiliarity in foreign works. I thought the translators were insulating their readers from it, which felt inauthentic. I'm even more bothered by the idea of the translators "filling in the blanks" that were intentionally placed by the author. Curious that both translators who did so, used roughly the same names for each -- perhaps they are the real names that we know the author was referencing? Still, that's a bit presumptuous, I think.
Nasrudith 5y ago
If they are all referals to quality libre versions of public domain books, we can certainly forgive the braggartry.
- giantg2 5y ago
  I was going to say the same thing. Giving me free stuff? Brag all you want.
2sk21 5y ago
This is a wonderful resource, thanks for posting.
jxcl 5y ago
If you’re interested in reading Russian literature, do yourself a favor and avoid the Constance Garnett translations. Her main goals were speed and volume of translations, rather than to actually make the translated works a pleasure to read or keep them true to the original author's intent. > “The reason English-speaking readers can barely tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky is that they aren’t reading the prose of either one. They’re reading Constance Garnett.” > Garnett’s flaws were not the figment of a native speaker’s snobbery. She worked with such speed, with such an eye toward the finish line, that when she came across a word or a phrase that she couldn’t make sense of she would skip it and move on. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translatio...
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
  If Dostoyevsky is a pleasure to read, you have a bad translation. It is not a pleasure to read in Russian. His language is rather difficult. Source: I'm Russian and have read Dostoyevsky.
  - rkuska 5y ago
    The Brothers Karamazov is probably the only book I never finished reading. I since have never tried to read anything from Dostoyevsky and was wondering whether reading his book in Slovak language (my native language which is relatively close to Russian and as such should provide a better translation) would help me (I bought english print at airport). It eases my mind a bit knowing it is difficult also in the language the book was written in.
    - jfk13 5y ago
      The Brothers Karamazov is one of the few books I've started but abandoned without finishing. Perhaps it was related to the particular translation I had (I don't remember details of it now), but it just wasn't working for me. Crime and Punishment, on the other hand, I found utterly compelling, and will probably re-read some day (which is a status few books achieve in my world).
m-p-3 5y ago
Standard Ebooks is such a great project, a big thank you to all the volunteers.
jonnycomputer 5y ago
Yeah you do. But this thread isn't about you. So, I find it pretty irritating.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

sva_ 5y ago

Personally, I really liked the translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky. But it is also the only version I have read.

orthoxerox 5y ago
Their translation has been found to have many faults as well. It's like the speech of Ahti from Control: a literal translation of the source that adds "Russian character" to everyone, obscuring actual differences between the characters.
tfcata 5y ago
There are seven in-print translations of Crime and Punishment (and another six that are out-of-print). Which one is best depends on who you ask, or what you're looking for. The Garnett translation is itself considered a classic, and is in the public domain. The trendy one is Pevear and Volokhonsky. But there are other well-regarded versions to consider. This page lists them all and has extracts and links to articles to aid comparison. https://welovetranslations.com/2020/04/25/whats-the-best-translation-of-crime-and-punishment/ https://welovetranslations.com/2020/04/25/whats-the-best-tra...
- quesera 5y ago
  That's an interesting article -- thanks for posting. One thing that struck me: two of the translation samples included the (correct/reasonable?) names for the street and bridge (Stolyarnyi Lane, Kokushkin Bridge). The others replaced the words with S-----i Lane, and K------n Bridge (or S. Lane etc). I think I understand the problem. Cyrillic alphabet doesn't map to Latin alphabet, and there was no established English-language translation for the names in question. The two that attempted it even had slightly different spellings, akin to the problem we see with many Arabic names in English today. This makes a big difference in readability, to me. The setting is supposed to be foreign and a bit unfamiliar to excultural readers, but K-------n looks like an error, a misprint, or an "(unintelligible)" in a transcription. That becomes part of the story, and it isn't intended as such by the author. For this and other reasons, my vote goes to Sidney Monas, 1968. I'll add that note to my long and ever-growing TOREAD list. :)
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    I think it is just the opposite, and I'm not sure how much Dostoevsky thought about excultural readers. The setting is supposed to be familiar, or at least feel familiar, to many of the readers, to the point where certain names are redacted to give the feeling that the author is "protecting the innocent", or avoiding accusations of libel, because you are actually reading a true story and not something made out of whole cloth. The first line of the original is (asterisks mine, indicating where Dostoyevski intentionally did not write the name of a street or bridge): "В начале июля, в чрезвычайно жаркое время, под вечер, один молодой человек вышел из своей каморки, которую нанимал от жильцов в **С — **м переулке, на улицу и медленно, как бы в нерешимости, отправился к **К —** ну мосту." In English: "On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in S. Place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards K. bridge."
    - quesera 5y ago
      I see. Well that changes things completely! I assumed that the redactions were not in the original, and that the translators were avoiding complexity by presenting the English-speaking audience with a digstible form. I guess I underestimated the translators, or the reading public. Thanks for the correction. PS: I did not mean that Dostoevsky intended excultural readers to feel unfamiliar, but that excultural readers should expect (and maybe prefer) a certain amount of unfamiliarity in foreign works. I thought the translators were insulating their readers from it, which felt inauthentic. I'm even more bothered by the idea of the translators "filling in the blanks" that were intentionally placed by the author. Curious that both translators who did so, used roughly the same names for each -- perhaps they are the real names that we know the author was referencing? Still, that's a bit presumptuous, I think.

Nasrudith 5y ago

If they are all referals to quality libre versions of public domain books, we can certainly forgive the braggartry.

giantg2 5y ago
I was going to say the same thing. Giving me free stuff? Brag all you want.

2sk21 5y ago

This is a wonderful resource, thanks for posting.

jxcl 5y ago

If you’re interested in reading Russian literature, do yourself a favor and avoid the Constance Garnett translations. Her main goals were speed and volume of translations, rather than to actually make the translated works a pleasure to read or keep them true to the original author's intent. > “The reason English-speaking readers can barely tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky is that they aren’t reading the prose of either one. They’re reading Constance Garnett.” > Garnett’s flaws were not the figment of a native speaker’s snobbery. She worked with such speed, with such an eye toward the finish line, that when she came across a word or a phrase that she couldn’t make sense of she would skip it and move on. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translatio...

Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
If Dostoyevsky is a pleasure to read, you have a bad translation. It is not a pleasure to read in Russian. His language is rather difficult. Source: I'm Russian and have read Dostoyevsky.
- rkuska 5y ago
  The Brothers Karamazov is probably the only book I never finished reading. I since have never tried to read anything from Dostoyevsky and was wondering whether reading his book in Slovak language (my native language which is relatively close to Russian and as such should provide a better translation) would help me (I bought english print at airport). It eases my mind a bit knowing it is difficult also in the language the book was written in.
  - jfk13 5y ago
    The Brothers Karamazov is one of the few books I've started but abandoned without finishing. Perhaps it was related to the particular translation I had (I don't remember details of it now), but it just wasn't working for me. Crime and Punishment, on the other hand, I found utterly compelling, and will probably re-read some day (which is a status few books achieve in my world).

m-p-3 5y ago

Standard Ebooks is such a great project, a big thank you to all the volunteers.

jonnycomputer 5y ago

Yeah you do. But this thread isn't about you. So, I find it pretty irritating.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]