However, the same usage also appears in both "Peace" and "Self-Surrender," neither of which are about Vishnu. The question for me became what are they trying to imply with the word God? In the minds of most people reading these translations it will conjure up images of a supreme deity who not only dictates how we are to behave, but sits in judgement on that behaviour. Even if there is a god above others in a pantheon that's not the role they play. Couldn't there have been a better way of referring to whomever it was they meant by that pronoun to ensure that those connotations were avoided?
Having read an adaptation of The Ramayana I enjoyed "The Mission Of The Goose" and was looking forward to reading the balance of the poems included in the book. Maybe it's being unreasonable on my part, or overly sensitive, but I found the use of the capital "G" god pronoun so questionable, I was too distracted to give myself over to simply enjoying the poetry and appreciating them for the works they were. Perhaps it's also a sign that I'm unable to overcome years of conditioning which tell me that God is the bearded guy in the clouds who smites us down if we misbehave. However, if I, who am not an adherent to any of the monotheistic religions can't overcome that — how could those who are?
It's the responsibility of translators when working in another culture to ensure they don't impose, whether on purpose or by accident, their own beliefs or ideas. Whether or not Bronner and Shulman intended to imply there was a similarity between the monotheistic traditions of the West and Hinduism, they did so by the use of one word. As a result, what had started off as an enjoyable adventure in trying to learn more about the poetry of an early and fascinating period of world history, turned into me questioning the veracity of what I was reading to the point of giving up in frustration. Perhaps we should leave the translation of works in other cultures to them and stick to our own in the future. That would sure save a lot of confusion.
Article comments
1 - Suzan Abrams
I have enjoyed numerous translation works especially that of Middle-Eastern & Italian fiction & ancient Persian poetry and derived immense pleasure from them. You can't tar all translators with the same brush just because you struggled with one who to you, appeared ill-equipped. By all means, exercise your free will to stick to your own culture. But let us exercise our wills individually. It doesn't mean that your future loss of ability to enjoy international writing should become ours too.
2 - Jennifer Bogart
Interesting review Marcus - picking up some light beach reading are we? ;)
I've read the works of another Hindu author - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and he also refers to a Hindu god as "God" in his works, though I think in his case it was intentionally deceptive, as he was pushing TM as a 'religion-free' religion. He was definitely trying to make some ecumenical bridges that would brings folks over into his camp.
In any case, interesting isn't it, how we get this picture of God in our mind about being a big bearded guy in the sky? I had the same feeling as a child, and haven't yet been able to shake it, but as I read the Bible for myself, I see that it clearly says no such thing. Interesting to say the least. In fact we're told that when God spoke to the Hebrews from out of Mount Sinai they saw no form, neither man, nor woman, nor beast, nor bird, and as such they should make no representation of God to worship. We're also told that He's a spirit (yes, typically male pronouns, but in some instances of His name in Hebrew we find elements of the male and female, also check Genesis 1:27, He created man in His image, both male and female).
Okay, so maybe that's a bit off-topic, but you might find it interesting to think about.