Cesar Vallejo: Trilce: Clayton Eshleman at SFU on February 28, 1992 part 2 of 2 #744

CLASSIFICATION

Swallow ID:
5351
Partner Institution:
Simon Fraser University
Source Collection Label:
Reading in BC Collection
Sub Series:
Reading in BC Collection

ITEM DESCRIPTION

Title:
Cesar Vallejo: Trilce: Clayton Eshleman at SFU on February 28, 1992 part 2 of 2 #744
Title Source:
cassette and j-card
Language:
English
Production Context:
Documentary recording
Genre:
Speeches: Talks
Identifiers:
[]

Rights

Rights:
Copyright Not Evaluated (CNE)

CREATORS

Name:
Eshleman, Clayton
Dates:
1935-
URL:
http://viaf.org/viaf/79046419
Role:
"Speaker", "Reader"

CONTRIBUTORS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Image:
Image
Recording Type:
Analogue
AV Type:
Audio
Material Designation:
Cassette
Physical Composition:
Magnetic Tape
Storage Capacity:
T00:42:00
Extent:
1/8 inch
Track Configuration:
2 track
Playback Mode:
Stereo
Sound Quality:
Excellent
Physical Condition:
Good
Other Physical Description:
Black and white clear jewel case with J-card

DIGITAL FILE DESCRIPTION

Channel Field:
Stereo
Sample Rate:
44.1 kHz
Duration:
T00:30:37
Size:
31.1 MB
Bitrate:
32 bit
Encoding:
WAV for master files and .MP3 for online files
Channel Field:
Stereo
Sample Rate:
44.1 kHz
Duration:
T00:30:34
Size:
31.1 MB
Bitrate:
32 bit
Encoding:
WAV for master files and .MP3 for online files

Dates

Date:
1992-02-28
Type:
Performance Date
Source:
J-card

LOCATION

Address:
8888 University Dr, Burnaby, BC, Canada
Venue:
SFU
Latitude:
49.2767
Longitude:
-122.9178
URL:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/102254132

CONTENT

Contents:
(Tape Two One) 007 Tape 2 begins with reading by student of #9 031 Eshleman notes, along with #4, verse #9 is the most difficult to translate. He reads 067 Jorge Garcia reads #10 084 Eshleman reads English translation of #10 113 Reading ends 117 Eshleman is asked to read his own poetry, but he declines, announcing his evening reading as a place to hear his poetry. He refers instead to a presentation he has prepared on Vallejo’s work 129 Eshleman is thanked and question period is opened. Eshleman refers students to his translation notes, including disagreements by Ortega and himself 154 Poem #25, is sound orientated and Eshleman discusses the possibilities of translation through sound or meaning 162 Discusses differences between Ortega’s belief that the text is idiomatic rather than concerned with syntactical constructions, that Vallejo is constructing new words with suffixes and prefixes; and the opposite opinion of others (Aerico Ferrari and Alberto Escobar) 175 Eshleman says English translation tends to agree with Ferrari’s opinion and Spanish text has called for some invention in the translations of the neologisms. This was the root of disagreement that led to Ortega leaving the project of translating Trilce 188 Jorge Garcia questions Eshleman’s translation of “Manana Manana” as ‘tomorrow’ instead of ‘morning’ 219 Question about ‘Beethovian’ flats changed to ‘grandiose B flats’ in number 1. Eshleman discusses the problems in translation of text because Trilce is not referential. Aspejo believes verse 1 referred to embarrassing prison experience in the latrines 264 Eshleman notes the need to find words that are as antiquated to the English reader as the Spanish word used by Vallejo is to the Spanish reader 270 Question regarding Vallejo’s word play. In verse one he accents “tanta” which normally doesn’t carry an accent. How does Eshleman deal with this? Eshleman asks if there is any other literary tradition for this 306 Question about the use of ‘era era’ as verb or noun. Suggestion that era could mean ‘fertile land that is prepared for sowing’ and that Vallejo’s word play could involve multiple meanings. Garcia disputes any agricultural reference 348 Garcia argues that Vallejo’s rich vocabulary is not free to be translated; the internal contextualization of the poetry will help the reader cancel out the meanings that don’t belong. The reader has to try to cancel out false meanings in order to decode the poem 361 How does Eshleman translate sounds? Eshleman says he almost hesitates to explain what he did in #25, but he does 390 End of Side 1 Tape Accession #744 Two 007 Side 2 (tape 2). Question about the relative difficulty of translating different poets 011 Eshleman talks about travelling to Mexico and Japan with volumes of Neruda and Vallejo, and his decision to do a translation of the European poetry of Vallejo as a translator’s apprenticeship 066 Question regarding Eshleman’s relationship to the language of Spanish as it pertains to the translator’s ego 072 Eshleman said he chose Vallejo, not the Spanish language because of the inspiration brought about by Vallejo’s poetry. Eshleman gives some background to his connection to Vallejo and Mexico 104 This is a poet to poet relationship as opposed to that of professional translator. Eshleman works with professional Spanish translators because of his lack of thorough knowledge of the language. This makes a certain kind of translating possible, because he wouldn’t be writing poetry if he were to spend the time studying Spanish 126 Question whether it is more appropriate to work with a co-translator whose language is the same as the poet’s, in order to deal with the issue of translator as colonizer 130 Eshleman counters that professors and bi-lingual people are some of the worst translators. He uses the example of Belitt 150 Question about the fifth poem and translation of “mi amor” to”amour” 165 What kind of influence did Vallejo have on Eshleman’s own works? 167 Eshleman says the time spent on Vallejo has been a form of homework. Who are you going to read and what is your relationship going to be with these people? 190 Tape appears to cut off Eshleman’s above discussion and fades in halfway through a comment by Jorge Garcia. Garcia is arguing that while Pablo Neruda has beautiful poetry, Eshleman has picked the great poet, in terms of working structurally with the language 198 Eshleman recounts anecdote about Octavio Paz in response to Garcia’s point 211 Thanks to Eshleman 214 Side 2 ends
Notes:
SFU BC Readings formatting

NOTES

Note:
the length of the digital file's side 1 is T00:30:37 and side 2 is T00:30:34, but the performance only takes 29 minute on side 1 and 13 minute on side 2 and the rest of audio is empty
Type:
General
Note:
Liner Notes: Clayton Eshleman SFU, February 28 1992 side 1: 29 minute side 2: 13 minute part II #744

RELATED WORKS

Tools