-,
, ,
.
:
? ,
,
. ,
-
- ,
.
, ,
,
.
, , . , . , , -. , , .
, . , . , , : , .
. , 1987 . . , , . , .
, , . , ,
, . , , , . , , , , -. 1700 , . 2000 . : , , 1500 .
- : , , , , , -, . , . , . , , , . , . .
|
|
|
* * *
Ages ago/Long ago/Way back when/when I was starting to study the history of art in Paris, I said to my professor that I was very interested in/fascinated by/much taken with twentieth century painting. He looked at me disapprovingly and asked, "Do you want to become a serious art historian/expert/critic or an ordinary/run of the mill/humdrum scribbler/pencil-pusher/mediocre writer?" I understood all that/everything/what that was about/and when the time came to defend a doctoral dissertation/thesis, I chose/opted for the art of the Italian Renaissance. Today it's unbelievable/hard/ impossible to believe that only/some thirty years ago abstract painting was considered as something unworthy of/not worth/underserving of/attention, and that was the view not only/just/in academic circles/among scholars/ academics. When I first tried to organize an exhibit of Malevich's works in France 1 encountered no understanding whatsoever/no one understood me, including/on the part of people who have since changed and now determine the (course of/direction of the) development of French culture.
I started my research with Kandinsky, and studied German, since the painter had lived in Bavaria, and there was a lot of material on him there. I taught in America and in England, and therefore know English well. But I live and work in France, and so, naturally, I write in French. However, as a Slav, I consider my knowledge of Russian as a great advantage it makes it possible for/lets/me study the original/firsthand sources.
The more I studied/The deeper I got into/The more I delved into Russian art, the more I was attracted to the mysterious/enigmatic figure of Kazimir Malevich. I felt like a wanderer/explorer, before/in front of/to/whom a marvelous/superb/beautiful unknown/unexplored continent had opened up/had revealed itself. Fortunately, I rather quickly grasped/understood the most important thing: a personality/ individual of that magnitude/greatness/scope must be understood as a whole/in his entirety/as an integral human being/in all of its aspects, and not just/only through (his) painting.
My work was inhumanly/monstrously/devilishly/horrendously/ unbelievably/nightmarishly complicated/complex in all respects/in every which way. I did not have access to official Soviet sources, and I got into the holdings/back rooms of the Russian Museum only in 1987. Later 1 was able/managed to work with Malevich's texts in the Central State Archive of Literature and Art. Finally, the times changed and everything became much simpler. And so, step by step the contours of his persona/personality became clearer to me/ emerged more clearly/delineated themselves more clearly.
I worked some people think for too long a time. But once you've decided to do a really honest job/to do the job with real integrity/to do a thoroughly conscientious piece of work, you're absolutely obliged/bound/duty bound to investigate everything, not to miss out on/overlook any details. I even subjected the most important works of Malevich to technical analysis; to establish once and for all/to lay down absolute criteria for authenticity/what was genuine/I studied an unbelievable/incredible number/quantity of fakes, and analyzed even the tiniest/most unremarkable/imperceptible details of his artistic devices/techniques. My catalogue is ready/done/fmished, and I hope it will help/be of assistance/use in organizing exhibitions at which Malevich's work will be shown/exhibited in a completely/totally new/different way/light. The catalogue includes approximately/about 1700 paintings, drawings, and print sheets. There are more than 2000 pages of text. Funny thing/it's amazing/weird/astounding/really odd: many years ago it seemed that/looked as though/appeared that there wasn't enough material, and today there's a monograph of 1500 pages, and I could/add an equal number of pages/just as many more/double its size.
|
|
|
Malevich's artistic thinking/smacks of/is reminiscent of/is tinged with alchemy/has something of alchemy to it: it is so metaphorical that it seems as though a visible transformation of energy, essence/ substance and form is taking place, in which everything is taking on a different quality/qualitatively changing, moving into "space-time," into a fourth dimension. We now better understand his aesthetic reaction, his norms and sensitivities/sensibility. Probably for that reason it is now somewhat easier for us to deal with/connect to/relate to/understand/Malevich and it's possible to write slightly more accurately about him. We're not moving (farther) away from Malevich; indeed/ on the contrary,/we're moving towards/coming closer to/him. But not as quickly/as it seems to some people/as some people think. Grasping/(a true) understanding (of)/penetrating his creative legacy/heritage/opus/work demands enormous intellectual and moral efforts.
Nakov is a Slav, but not a Russian, and Russian is not his native language. He is a little hesitant, though very enthusiastic about his subject, and some of his expressions may sound a bit awkward in both Russian and English. The interpreter should retain the proper academic/artistic terminology along with the informal and enthusiastic tone.
:
I) -, "a long time ago" is the most neutral expression for this. "Ages ago" is slightly colloquial, and "way back when" is highly informal.
2) the word does not necessarily
have to be translated: "and not just among academics/scholars" will do and
is shorter.
3) "an all-round view" is too informal
for a discussion of an artist. "From all sides" is awkward and not idiomatic.
"As a whole" or "in his entirety" are short and stylistically appropriate.
4)
"Monstrously" will do but a word such as
"horrendously" or "nightmarishly" is much more idiomatic. "Unbelievably"
or "incredibly" are stylistically more neutral choices. "In every which way"
condenses the long expression with , saving time and words. A
literal translation, "in terms of parameters," does not work.
5) , ... "once
you've decided" takes care of , and attempts to translate the
gerund literally will lead to an awkward sentence. "To do a really honest
piece of work" is fine for " ."
6) the colloquial expression "funny thing" in
English will cover this; "It's a" before "funny thing" is not needed but
can be added to make the sentence slightly more structured. Otherwise
"It's amazing" or "It's odd" are adequate renderings.
|
|
|
7) while there's nothing wrong in saying
"I could add just as many pages," what Nakov means is "I could double
its size" or "I could write twice as much," both of which are shorter.
8) ... here's another good
example of "starting nominative." Beginning the sentence with
"Malevich's artistic thinking" rather than "In Malevich's artistic thinking"
leads to a much smoother syntactic structure: "Malevich's artistic
thinking... has something of alchemy to it" will do if the interpreter does
not think of more "interesting" constructions such as "smacks of," or "is
tinged with."
9) the
problem here is the verb , which obviously cannot be rendered
literally. The idea is of understanding or relating to the content and nature
of the artist's creative legacy, i.e. his paintings.
