Dralyuk:
I absolutely loved Dralyuk's lecture -- in my comments from last week, I asked how the writing style we saw in the article we read, which was so exacting and creative in its descriptions, would translate to his speech, and I honestly believe his spontaneous descriptions were just as, if not more, poignant than the ones he put in writing -- I don't know that I really have anything much to say about this, just that his descriptions/explanations of Nemirovskaya's poetry were so excellent, and it almost always felt like he was just completely hooked into what was essential about each poem, and because of that was also maybe even more tuned into the thread/common theme that bound them all together. It just felt super theoretically rich.
Nemirovskaya's "Eves" and what Dralyuk had to say about it, or maybe the whole schema of discarded objects or objects and empathy, I think lends itself so nicely to the topics we have for this weeks readings. I think the implication there in her poems and in Dralyuk's translation and talk, (or the theoretical implication I believe is there) that in order for one to see another as a subject, they must also see them as an object, is really pointed for a discussion about gender and translation. I wish I could refer to a more specific implication, but I can't really make out more of a relation between gender and translation than stating that there is one still -- I think the turn to Derrida and a deconstructionist approach in a lot of the readings is giving me a hard time trying to piece it all back together to put out a coherent thought about gender and translation, and overall I don't feel that I have very much to write about our readings for this week because I couldn't parse out a core question or problem, so I'm excited to see if I might be able to find something of that semblance in our discussion today.
No comments:
Post a Comment