Talk:Catullus 16
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I did the literal translation very quickly, so anyone should feel free to fix it up. I just didn't want to use a copyrighted version so I did one myself in about fifteen minutes. Billy Blythe 18:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Contrary to popular belief, Sacha Baron-Cohen did not write the gangsta version. Billy Blythe 18:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Regarding sources
For those of you who haven't been to graduate school, I assure you that everything contained in the first two paragraphs is common knowledge that does not need to be cited. Billy Blythe 05:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- While not many things found in graduate school are considered common knowledge, I think I've found some suitable references for most of the intro paragraphs. The only problem I'm having is finding something for the Loeb Classical Edition: it's not online, and since the article refers to it specifically, I think we should cite it specifically. Since you mentioned it especially, i assume you have the book; might you look up the page # for that? Thanks, Sophy's Duckling 08:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- Never mind. Found something on the library's website that said that lines had remained untranslated b/c of obsecenity. Sophy's Duckling 08:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Identity of Furius and Aurelius
A Furius and an Aurelius are also mentioned in Catullus 11 as companions of Lesbia. Does anyone know whether there is enough scholarship to suggest they are the same? Sophy's Duckling 09:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I suspect whatever would be found would be highly speculative. Billy Blythe 13:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Found something. Gilbert Lawall (http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~glawall/) and Bruce Arnold (http://home.mtholyoke.edu/acad/misc/profile/barnold.shtml) assert that they are the same (pg 78, Love and Betrayal: A Catullus Reader). I think given that it's written by two experts in such a well-known, well-reviewed book that serves as a basic summary of Catullus scholarship, most people do consider them to be the same. Will add a sentence to the article.Sophy's Duckling 08:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Translation
I went through and compared the translation Billy Blythe made in the article with translations online (which are protected by copyright) and with dictionaries. The translation we have now is literal and therefore is not an analysis, and it is substantiated by all other references, which are cited accordingly. Therefore, I do not think the translation in its present form is original research or in copyright violation and so I removed the tag. Sophy's Duckling 09:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- I am the one who added the tag. WIth the additional scolarship now added (thanks), I have no objection to the tag's removal. If Billy Blythe doesn't mind, I would highly recommend adding the translation to Wikisource as well, since it is effectively already GFDL'ed. --KGF0 ( T | C ) 07:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! I added it there, I think it was one of the first things I did with BillyBlythe's version of the article. Sophy's Duckling 01:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
While I strongly disagree with the changes in the translation I made, I really applaud the Duckling's efforts on this entry. Really good work. I am an expert level translator, and have been considered as such by numerous professors and academics. I have both the technical skill and the creative fire to create a good translation of a poem, and I can make a literal translation sound decent. What's missing from the traslation that's out there now is the actual punchy impact of the poem. Also, we don't use proleptive adjectives in English, which is what "hardened dicks" is. Catullus is literally telling these guys that he's going to fuck them up the ass and force them to suck his dick. It should be that raw. It reads as that raw to me in Latin, so why shouldn't it read just as raw in English? Isn't Wiki not supposed to be censored? It seems to be okay to show a picture of a smegma covered glans penis, but getting truly literal with Catullus is wrong? I hope that's not the position of anyone editing this article. My most recent translation, which is in the history, is better than what's out there now, both in technical and literary aspects. I'm going to wait, and then in a while I'm going to change the translation to a better one that is equally raw to a British and and American audience. "Bugger" means nothing in America, and using it is lame censorship. That's like translating "podex" as "fundament" when it really means "asshole." Billy Blythe 23:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, I'm sorry. I'll change back it to "fuck you up the ass" &c. I changed the last line to meet the first because it's the same Latin and since you started out with bugger, I thought that was your preferred. Sophy's Duckling 00:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- About "bottom-man Aurelius and cocksucker Furius". I think bottom-man describes Furius better b/c the cinaede or whatever literally means catamite, posh talk for "the one who takes it up the ass". The only thing the dictionary is turning up for "pathice" is "lustful." I assume it means in an especially negative manner, like "kinky" or "lecherous", but I haven't been able to turn up anything that implies submission...Not sure how much the dictionary is censoring, though. Sophy's Duckling 01:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- The dictionary should not be censoring at all. I just changed "fuck you like a boy" to "fuck you in the ass". There have been some minor changes to the words 'pedicabo' and irrumabo' that don't reflect their actual meaning. It seems like it is an attempt for a modern idiom; however, in taking modern idiom - e.g. throat-fuck - some of the meaning is lost. The neologism is self-explanatory, but it is not common. This is clearly presented latin; it does not need to be clouded by strange diction. The verb irrumare denotes forced oral sex, and the verb pedicare means to fuck in the ass. There is not much room for syntactical interpretation or modern idiom and slang here. This would be universally understood in Roman audiences, and although vulgar translation is perfectly appropriate, colloquial language and slang really isn't. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.190.253.87 (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC).
- About "bottom-man Aurelius and cocksucker Furius". I think bottom-man describes Furius better b/c the cinaede or whatever literally means catamite, posh talk for "the one who takes it up the ass". The only thing the dictionary is turning up for "pathice" is "lustful." I assume it means in an especially negative manner, like "kinky" or "lecherous", but I haven't been able to turn up anything that implies submission...Not sure how much the dictionary is censoring, though. Sophy's Duckling 01:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestions
Firstly, I agree with Billy Blythe: Wikipedia is not censored nor is it bowdlerized. Second, I moved the references out of the header (where they do messy things to edit summaries and links) and into the table, since they are presumably for the English Translation and not for the source text anyway. Third, I think it would be nice if we could beef up the text around the translation, since this is, after all, an encyclopedia rather than a source-text repository, which is what Wikisource is for. Fourth, I'm glad to see it was made available there as well—I'll have a look at it later, but I did want to note (since I was working on this a while ago) that the translation alone should be in the "en" English namespace, and the original should live in Latin "la", with the usual interwiki links between language versions. I have logins in both places if anyone wants a hand with that, though it might take a while since I'm going out of town. Finally, thanks for keeping me aprised via my User_talk; much faster and easier than perusing my watchlist. --KGF0 ( T | C ) 18:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] irrumabo et pedicabo: my two cents'
Translating obscenities is a fool's game, I think, but (or so?) here I go: the future active verbs notwithstanding, isn't the (American) English idiom better rendered, "Fuck you and suck my dick"? Just a thought. Ifnkovhg (talk) 11:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Ifnkovhg and thanks for your suggestion!
- I know what you mean about feeling foolish; I find myself mortified, blushing and laughing every time I look at this poem! However, based on my reading of the available technical literature, pedicabo has the specific meaning of male-on-X anal sex, which isn't necessarily conveyed by a simple "fuck you". That's why I chose the more explicit "fuck you up your ass and down your throat". There's a nifty chiasmus in the first two lines, did you notice? Of course, the "up" and "down" aren't in the original Latin, but I thought they were the best English idiom and made a neatly matching pair for the chiasmus. More generally, it'd be good if the translation were something that an angry man today might actually say, so that students will feel the force of the poem. For example, I'm a little uneasy that "fudge-packed Furius" is not modern usage, but it was an alliteration that I couldn't pass up. ;) What do you think? I'm not really attached to any one version; perhaps we can find a better translation together? Willow (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Multiple translations?
I feel that there's a place for both types of translations of Catullus: a literal, line-by-line version which is exact but may be convoluted and poorly comprehensible to English speakers, and a looser translation that is immediately understandable and conveys the spirit of the poem, even if it doesn't remain faithful word-by-word and line-by-line. I'm not attached to my own translation, but I feel that the present literal translation doesn't really capture the poem and readers would benefit from something more direct and vivid. But that might just be me; what do other people think? Willow (talk) 05:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)