What do you think?
Rate this book
Legends from Serene Lands: Classical Vietnamese Stories
The stories were written in a highly rhythmical and somewhat nostalgic style of French. The Vietnameseborn French novelist Marguerite Durashas argued that: "translationis something that is more like a musical performance, rigorously personal and even, if necessary, deviant". She insists that "musical errors are the most serious mistakes possible". I have tried to capture something of Pham's musicality in my own translation into English and hope that readers will enjoy this book.
127 pages
First published January 1, 1968
13 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 6, 2014
I can't say much about the style as these are basically old tales and they develop rather than being created per se. Some are good some not, it is basically a hodge podge of stories (with well known legends regarding history and astronomy [one reminds me of a Korean tale I once read] and stories explaining the origins of figures of speech) and I think they could have been written down in a better order.
However what I can say about this book is that there are lot things that are, at the very least, odd. It started with the first story already when I wasn't sure whether the third part in the chapter was a comment by the author or not, since these were all supposed to be just written down stories of old. However it turned out it was comment, since other stories had them as well and the problem is that there is nothing except context, and even then barely, to distinguish them from the actual story. Only in the cases when the author clearly spoke about his own family and history was it clear but apart from that it was pretty difficult.
Apart from that the editor/translator already said that the author had left out and changed things so I wonder why certain Vietnamese terms were kept, just like the order of names, and others not. Why not go all the way? And here is another problem: the translation. Like I said some Vietnamese terms were kept, like tien, and others not. I constantly read the word "genie" and thought nothing of it, especially since the author used "gods" as well. However during the later stories it was clear that "genie" could not fit, I think they were lesser deities, and that was odd, why chose that term? "Genie" is so much linked to the Arabian Djinn that the usage of this term for Vietnamese deities, or whatever they were, seems a pretty bad choice, practically designated to me misinterpreted, especially since they used "spirits, ghosts" and "demons" as well. And one time I even wondered what animal they were referring to: one story spoke of beavers bringing their eggs to safety. Is this meant to say these "beavers" laid eggs? And even if no, there are only two species of beaver and none of them is even remotely near Vietnam as far as I know. Were they in the past? If yes the egg thing is still odd. If it is a translation error then I wonder what sort of animal would cause that confusion. I can somewhat understand when one uses "raccoon" instead of "raccoon dog" but these here seems just strange.
Even stranger then in one story when the names of the two brothers were confused, using the name of the older brother when clearly the younger was meant.
So I would say if you want to read it, keep in mind that these might not be good translations respectively a good writing down of those stories.
However what I can say about this book is that there are lot things that are, at the very least, odd. It started with the first story already when I wasn't sure whether the third part in the chapter was a comment by the author or not, since these were all supposed to be just written down stories of old. However it turned out it was comment, since other stories had them as well and the problem is that there is nothing except context, and even then barely, to distinguish them from the actual story. Only in the cases when the author clearly spoke about his own family and history was it clear but apart from that it was pretty difficult.
Apart from that the editor/translator already said that the author had left out and changed things so I wonder why certain Vietnamese terms were kept, just like the order of names, and others not. Why not go all the way? And here is another problem: the translation. Like I said some Vietnamese terms were kept, like tien, and others not. I constantly read the word "genie" and thought nothing of it, especially since the author used "gods" as well. However during the later stories it was clear that "genie" could not fit, I think they were lesser deities, and that was odd, why chose that term? "Genie" is so much linked to the Arabian Djinn that the usage of this term for Vietnamese deities, or whatever they were, seems a pretty bad choice, practically designated to me misinterpreted, especially since they used "spirits, ghosts" and "demons" as well. And one time I even wondered what animal they were referring to: one story spoke of beavers bringing their eggs to safety. Is this meant to say these "beavers" laid eggs? And even if no, there are only two species of beaver and none of them is even remotely near Vietnam as far as I know. Were they in the past? If yes the egg thing is still odd. If it is a translation error then I wonder what sort of animal would cause that confusion. I can somewhat understand when one uses "raccoon" instead of "raccoon dog" but these here seems just strange.
Even stranger then in one story when the names of the two brothers were confused, using the name of the older brother when clearly the younger was meant.
So I would say if you want to read it, keep in mind that these might not be good translations respectively a good writing down of those stories.
Displaying 1 of 1 review