Pre-Publication discount returns

I see that the pre-publication discount (a reduced 10%) is back on a new release:

The Spanish Civil War - Hugh Thomas
http://www.foliosociety.com/book/SWR/spanish-civil-war-thomas

looks like a good book, but would be interesting to hear the thoughts of those who've read it.

>1 nbCleo: I have sought a good book on this topic for some time so I hope that others rate it highly. I note the publication price is given as £99 and if I add it to my basket I get £105.95 incl. P&P. Where is the discount - did you get a mail-shot or e-mail offering 10% off?

> 2

Are you a member? If I add the book to my basket, it is listed £89 plus I get the Dictionary of Humorous Quotations. By the way, I highly recommend the work of Hugh Thomas.

It is certainly a good book, long regarded as a classic - hence the FS edition, I suppose - but now about fifty years old. A newer alternative is The battle for Spain by Antony Beevor. My recollection is that Beevor had access to sources not available to Thomas. Is this right, Antonio?

> 4

You ask a very difficult question, Alan. You are right in saying that the Thomas book is older, but I have a soft spot in my heart for it because it was banned for a long time in Spain, and it opened a study of the war from a fresh, sensitive, critical point of view that tried to be fair (if that's possible in a war). The book had an enormous impact in Spain when it was translated and published. I believe that the Spanish Civil War has been the subject of hundreds of historical studies here in Spain and abroad, from many angles, and I don't think the subject is exhausted. Beevor is also available in Spanish but I have not read it. It is as you say a later work. Essentially, there has to be some measure of repetition; many aspects are questions of emphasis, and I believe that little remains to be really discovered that would change an appreciation of the horror of a fraternal war.

Having said all that (which doesn't really answer your question, sorry), I applaud the publication by the Folio Society. One point to be taken into consideration is the apparent effort to collect newer images for illustration. I will certainly purchase the book... that's for sure.

This pre-publication discount is nice but ..... seems more like to me of "hey let's raise the price retail price and then give a fraction of a discount." This might be 10% off, but to me it looks more like 20% more expensive, compared to similar two volume sets in the last couple years.

>6 brother_salvatore: Yes and no: the last three I have were full-priced at £79.95 for the History of Japan, £95 for A people's tragedy, and £89.95 for Reformation.

>7 affle: I paid the intro discount of $140 for A Peoples Tragedy versus $179 ($199) for the new Spanish Civil War. The current US retail for Japan is $140, Reformation is $165, Religion and Decline of Magic is $150.

>8 brother_salvatore: Interesting. The Spanish Civil War book is relatively expensive in the US, compared with the UK: the US dollar to GBP ratios for these 5 books are Japan 1.8, Religion etc 1.9, Reformation 1.8, A people's tragedy 1.8, but The Spanish Civil War 2.0. May be to do with the price the FS is paying for US copyright permissions?

As it's never very clear from the FS website which edition of a particular book is being used, I enquired about The Spanish civil war. This is the answer:

'Thank you very much for your message. Our edition of The Spanish Civil War is based on the fiftieth anniversary edition published by Penguin in 2012: that edition incorporates various corrections collected since the first edition was published. We ourselves have made a few minor corrections to the 2012 edition too, in consultation with the author.'

This needs some comment: the book has seen rather more than 'various corrections' since the first edition - it has been revised, and is currently in its fourth edition. Secondly, the anniversary edition seems not to be now available, either new or secondhand, so it's hard to check what the FS are doing. I think, but can't confirm, that the anniversary edition is the current fourth edition, with an extra preface by Thomas. Can anyone shed light?

> 10

Alan: Check this link. It's the look inside view of the Kindle book which includes the preface to the anniversary edition

http://www.amazon.com/Spanish-Civil-War-Hugh-Thomas-ebook/dp/B00BMF1UR4/ref=sr_1...

>11 drasvola: Thanks, Antonio - I never look at the kindle stuff...

>11 drasvola:

Thanks for the link Antonio. I can now try a sample on my kindle before deciding whether to buy.

Ford Madox Ford's Parade's End has just appeared--with a whopping 12% discount:

http://www.foliosociety.com/book/PND/parades-end-ford

Oh, and some obscure book titled War and Peace by some toff named Tolstoy or Tolstoi (in the Pevear and Volokhonsky translation)--discount back down to 10%:

http://www.foliosociety.com/book/WP2/war-and-peace-tolstoy

>14 podaniel: I know nothing about Parade's End but the commissioned illustrations look fantastic, eleven per volume. And fifteen illustrations per volume in War and Peace with a truly stunning binding. Folio really are pulling the stops out with production values.

>17 EclecticIndulgence: I've been a member quite a while now - some decades - but it seems I've been most inattentive. I have the first FS edition of War and Peace, two volumes, which was subsequently reprinted in a single volume, and then reprinted in a leather cover as a limited edition, but still the same text block and illustrations. That edition appeared 43 years ago, Rosemary Edmonds was the translator, and Felix Topolski the illustrator. I haven't noticed any other editions in that time, certainly none using the Constance Garnett translation.

Assuming I haven't missed many new editions, it doesn't seem to me all that laughable to produce a second version, using what is a very well regarded modern translation, with some new illustrations, after such an interval of time. It's quite a famous book, after all.

Sigh, to many FS volumes of interest for me, my wishlist now counts 70 volumes of the ones that are still for sale at their homepage :-(

>14 podaniel:&15 Both put on my wishlist. And most likely will remain on the wishlist for a long time to come, if not forever.

I’m so happy to see the new 2 vol War and Peace! Ordered straight away. I prefer 2 vols to single one.

>14 podaniel: Re Parade's End

Thank goodness they've gone with the well-researched and corrected text of the Carcanet Press edition. Anything less would have been a waste of time. I'm not all that enamoured of the illustrations at first sight, but I think they'll grow on me. I've only just got hold of the Carcanet Press paperbacks, but it looks as if they're due for an upgrade already! Mind you, as FS (rightly) concentrates on reading editions, I doubt they'll reprint all the editorial background material which makes the parent edition so valuable.

>23 EclecticIndulgence:

Five separate editions matches Rubaiyat (see link below), but as two of the Rubaiyat editions are almost identical, then War and Peace may have a valid claim to the new record.

https://www.librarything.com/topic/153831#4081908

I have two of them - the earlier two volume edition and the LE. That is enough War and Peace for me, so I will be passing this one by. I have read War and Peace twice (once about 20 years ago when I got the two volume edition, and then again a couple of years ago when I got the LE), and I suspect that I will not do so again in my lifetime. Great book, but it is a major undertaking, and life is too short with so many other books to read!

I think I am 75% sure I will get the new FS edition of War amd Peace, I already have two editions, a three volume standard edition, and the three volume from "The Great Books of the Western World" series from Franklin Library which is the one I really wanted the most.

I first had regret missing the War and Peace LE from FS when I first found out about it a few years ago, but the size of the volume made my regret fade away as I prefer multi-volume editions of this novel.

No brainer for me given more book funds. I'm always interested in new translations of world literature, especially something as monumental as W&P and with the good thinks I've heard regarding the translators. But I'll probably have to pass due to budget constraints.

O God,I'm really tempted by this edition of War and Peace!! (But I hardly have the money)
I had no idea the FS was publishing this book again.
Incidentally I am reading Anna Karenina right now....
One day I'll have it!

Ah! War and Peace! Just noticed it. Anyone deriding the new edition is missing out on the importance of the translation. Pevear and Volokhonsky are masterful.

Must. Have. I will find the money.

Not having a copy of W & P has been bothering me. I guess I found a use for my 10% coupon - expiring at the end of the month - and my $20 survey voucher. Down to $140 already.

>28 Jason461: I completely agree about the translation--that's why I mentioned it. I believe this is the first Pevear and Volokhonsky translation that FS has done. Hopefully, it will be followed by many, many more.

And I read War & Peace in their translation just a couple of years ago and thought it was outstanding. Indeed, having just read it is what is holding me back from ording the FS War & Peace right now (although I'll probably succumb to FAD).

> 30 - I've read several of their Dostoevsky translations, along with their Anna Karenina. Theirs is the only AK version I've read, so I have nothing to compare it to, but their Dostoevsky's are far above the Constance Garnett translations I'd read before.

I have their translation of War and Peace, in the Vintage hardcover edition, but haven't tackled it yet. It is that which is holding me back - I'm not one to have multiple versions of the same work (space limitations, and funds limitations). But for those not in such a position, I am a willing enabler - the new FS version looks wonderful.

Pevear and Volokhonsky are also the translators for Folio's Master and Margarita, which was actually the reason I didn't buy it and bought the Everyman Library edition instead (an unusual decision for someone so infected by FAD as I have been in recent years) - I greatly prefer the EL's Michael Glenny translation which flows much more naturally (for me) than the more literal P&V.

I don't know War and Peace, but perhaps comparing these two paragraphs from M&M is illustrative:

(a) P&V version:

"Having returned Woland’s gift to Margarita, Azazello said goodbye to her and asked if she was comfortably seated, Hella exchanged smacking kisses with Margarita, the cat kissed her hand, everyone waved to the master, who collapsed lifelessly and motionlessly in the corner of the seat, waved to the rook, and at once melted into air, considering it unnecessary to take the trouble of climbing the stairs."

(b) Glenny version:

"Having returned Woland’s present to Margarita, Azazello said goodbye to her, enquiring if she was comfortably seated; Hella gave her a smacking kiss and the cat pressed itself affectionately to her hand. With a wave to the master as he lowered himself awkwardly into his seat and a wave to the crow, the party vanished into thin air, without bothering to return indoors and walk up the staircase."

P&V are generally more literal, sticking to the Russian syntax and punctuation as faithfully as possible, whereas Glenny is much freer and feels less like a translation. Glenny seems clearer to me: in the last sentence, in the P&V version there is confusion as to whether it is the master or 'everyone' who waved to the rook/crow and melted into air/vanished; in the Glenny version it is quite clear.

Horses for courses!

#32

I didn't like that translation either, which is a pity, as Peter Suart's illustrations make it a very special edition. I haven't read Glenny's version but I do prefer his in the example you give. For instance, it's nice that Hella's kiss is followed by the cat "pressing itself affectionately..." and not by yet another kiss.

I would just add to what I said on a personal note at >32 cronshaw: that I think different styles of translation can suit different authorial styles. Obviously there's a vast difference in style between Tolstoy and Bulgakov, and perhaps Pevear and Volokhonsky's philosophy of translation is better suited to nineteenth century Russian realism.

I prefer literal translations. Translators should simply translate and not try to improve the original text. If an author wants to repeat eight times in a row the word "kiss", then the translator should not try to use eight different synonims instead. Translators should not betray authors...

> 36

I don't believe you really mean that! Are machine translations the best? One thing is to respect the stylistic intent of the author (literality may work), and another to convey the message intended (literality may be awkward). Employing both to find the 'proper' mix is the art of translation.

Besides, one would have to look at the original before passing final judgement. Something about the phrase Glenny used for the cat's movements make me think he didn't invent it.

#37

"Machine" is the word. P&V's Bulgakov translation rang very mechanical to me. (I never finished it...)

I was hoping to see a translated version of War and Peace by Aylmer and Louise Maude,especially because the FS used their translation for the Folio edition of Anna Karenina.But well the FS has it own reasons why it went for the Pevear and Volokhonsky translation.I have no doubt that their translation will be great too.

> 36 I'll defend gatxito. P&V point out in their introduction to Tolstoy's War & Peace (or maybe it was Anna Karenina) that he would use the same word or phrase over and over again and so they respected his authorial choice and preserved that repetition in their translation. They have some interesting commentary on why he may have done that (besides sheer sloppiness--always a good bet with nineteenth century authors).

#40

Cronshaw's examples refer to Bulgakov, not Tolstoy.

Vague preference here for P & V in the section quoted. I can't say there seems to me the slightest confusion in their version as to who "waves to the crow", etc., when the master has only just "collapsed lifelessly and motionlessly", hardly a meaningful condition unless maintained for a little time at least.

It's a fantastic book. He's a brilliant historian. I remember being utterly absorbed, which is high praise for any work of history.

There's a short article by P (of P&V) on translating, Tolstoy mostly, in the new Folio magazine. Members can find it online.

Edited to add the key bit of information, after senior moment.

Judging solely by the short paragraph cited above I'd go for the P&V's translation as well. My Russian is a bit rusty but Glenny's translation seems inaccurate.

I know someone who is a lecturer at Harvard University. She is a Chinese and read W&P in Chinese translation before. She asked a Russian literature professor about the English translation and was told that she should go for Maude's and avoid P&V's as it's "still born".

#46

Do you have the original excerpt? Please post it. I can't get to my Russian M&M.

P.S. As Antonio already noted, "accuracy" isn't the sole or the most important concern in literary translation.

The original:

"Вернув Маргарите подарок Воланда, Азазелло распрощался с нею, спросил, удобно ли ей сидеть, а Гелла сочно расцеловалась с Маргаритой, кот приложился к ее руке, провожатые помахали руками безжизненно и неподвижно завалившемуся в угол сидения мастеру, махнули грачу и тотчас растаяли в воздухе, не считая нужным утруждать себя подъемом по лестнице."

It seems to me that Glenny either fails to grasp some of the subtler nuances or has made the editorial decision to add/omit some details (for example by not telling us that the Master is inert and lifeless, or by using the over-complicated "the cat pressed itself affectionately to her hand" to say that the cat kissed Margarita's hand).

On the subject of accuracy vs. readability, I beg to differ. In the end I'd rather read the most faithful rendition of the original text, not attempts to improve on it.

>49 kotarana: Thanks for that. From what you indicate P&V are clearly more literally faithful. I personally find their English quite unnatural, but I agree that it's not good for a translator to frankly invent text either.

#49, 50

Thanks for the quote.

From what you indicate P&V are clearly more literally faithful.

Actually, that is not the case--regarding the kissing, Glenny is more faithful to the letter of the text, and, more important, he is more faithful to Bulgakov's style, which is far too elegant for such wooden-eared repetition. This is exactly why I doubted there was a duplication in the original.

It seems to me that Glenny either fails to grasp some of the subtler nuances

Ha, it is actually the opposite--Glenny pays respect to the subtler nuances in the description of the cat's action. Hella exchanged smacking ("juicy") kisses with Margarita, but the cat's action is only implied--similar, for example, to "he leaned over her hand". The gesture is signified but not determined, there may or may not have been a kiss. The point is that Bulgakov (and Glenny) nicely varied the scene--perfectly fitting to the last the different characters of Hella and Behemoth--whereas P&V just steamroll over it.

#49

On the subject of accuracy vs. readability, I beg to differ. In the end I'd rather read the most faithful rendition of the original text, not attempts to improve on it.

Well, first, perhaps "accuracy" is not the best term to use, since one can completely falsify the meaning of a text by literal translation. In short, there are multiple types of "faithfulness" one has to keep in mind at the same time, even if they can't always be served at the same time. Ideally, a translation would convey a text--what is said, what happens--without gross invention, but it would also convey the meaning, and, just as important, the style of the author.

Going by this and other examples of their work, P&V are not translators I would trust with literary translation... I am now wondering too about the vaunted "clarity" they supposedly brought to old classics.

>51 LolaWalser: ... and doubly thanks for that insight! I remember when I read this work with a reading group in central London two years ago that the Glenny translation was strongly recommended over the P&V, with the person leading the discussion being a Russian speaker very knowledgeable about Russian literature (not any relation to Glenny I believe!).

The whole field of translation seems strewn with mines and different readers will have their own preferred paths to cross it.

Translation is difficult, but the difficulties are of an invigorating kind--different minds and sensibilities create translations of diverse appeal. Given translators of equal linguistic competence, the final arbiter is taste, that most subjective of characteristics.

I forgot to say, regarding the second part of the sentence, that I agree with kotarana (and P&V) in preferring the literal "lifelessly and motionlessly" description of the Master's stance to Glenny's "awkwardly". I seriously doubt Glenny made this choice because he didn't know the words. ;) Supposedly, this is where "taste" enters in, with Glenny preferring to tighten the phrase, probably because it gave better music to his translation--at the expense of the visual.

That said, his "party" is much better than P&V's "everyone", and I'd say the same for his "without bothering to return indoors and walk up the staircase."" vs. P&V's clunky "considering it unnecessary to take the trouble of climbing the stairs."

Thank you, Lola, for introducing nuances among accuracy, faithfulness and meaning. If you add style to them you realize just how difficult a literary translation is, and how much time is devoted to a choice of words or combination of concepts. On top of everything what is Russian style or English style... don't they change over time? Are they 'compatible;' do they depend on language? Very enjoyable discussion. My sphere of limited competence connects English and Spanish.

Translation is another thing that "feeds" my multi-edition sickness (like illustrations, bindings, etc.) when it comes to favorite works. The Master and Margarita is a favorite of mine, so if the FS or another fine press came out with a different translation I would be tempted to buy it. Similarly, I am tempted by the P&V W&P as I have only read W&P in the older FS edition (translated by Rosemary Edmonds).

Multiple translations obviously add to my already enormous to-read list, especially when they are epic sized like W&P. I have the new Proust translations to get through at some point, as well...a serious, but joyful task.

#51

"Hella exchanged smacking kisses with Margarita" is correct but you'll find this bit came from the P&V's version. Glenny's choice "Hella gave her a smacking kiss", doesn't seem particularly faithful to the letter of the text in this instance.

"Glenny pays respect to the subtler nuances in the description of the cat's action."

Really? While I'm inclined to give him credit for trying to vary the scene and avoid the repetition, I don't think his phrase of choice conveys the meaning at all."Приложится​ к ее руке" is the same as "почтительно поцеловать руке", meaning "the cat kissed her hand to demonstrate courtesy, respect (NOT affection)". If there was a kiss or not is frankly immaterial. Behemoth's action would have been to take Margarita's hand and lean over it (just as you suggest), so "leaned over her hand" would have been fine. However, "pressed ITSELF affectionately" suggests somewhat different scenario where the cat's entire body is pressing against Margarita's hand which is not the case.

An engaging discussion, no less for our assorted tastes and preferences in the use of English than for the various priorities concerning the requirements of a good translation.

My expressed preference for P&V in the quoted section rests primarily on what to me (and obviously not to Lola!) is the distinct superiority of "considering it unnecessary to take the trouble of climbing the stairs" , which to my mind and ear is flowing and natural, to "without bothering to return indoors and walk up the staircase", which I fancy might all by itself be enough to alert me to the fact that I was reading a translation.

Perhaps where we come from, literally or metaphorically, will play some significant part in determining what sounds right to us and what sounds forced. For better or worse my days have been spent in England and the English prose I find most consistently satisfying and rewarding is probably Walter Landor's, though his manner is of course of its time if not of a slightly earlier one.

#57

Glenny's choice "Hella gave her a smacking kiss", doesn't seem particularly faithful to the letter of the text in this instance.

As I argued before, literalness isn't necessarily a quality, quite the contrary. Glenny's version is fine enough. The overall point I was making for preferring it was that it nuances the contrast between what Hella and the cat did. Just like the original does.

"Приложится​ к ее руке" is the same as "почтительно поцеловать руке"

No word or phrase are ever exactly the same as another. "Поцеловать" means to kiss; in "приложится​ к ее руке" the kiss is merely alluded to and need not be a kiss at all, just a gesture signifying a (courtesy) kiss. (But I'm not sure I see your point since "почтительно поцеловать руке" isn't in the text?)

Still, if anything, with "поцеловать" we see yet another Russian variation on "to kiss"--perhaps suggesting further that a good translation ought to make more of an effort at representing the nuances? Just a thought.

However, "pressed ITSELF affectionately" suggests somewhat different scenario where the cat's entire body is pressing against Margarita's hand which is not the case.

But "приложится​" means to press against something. Literally, as it happens. The root verb is "приложить", meaning to add, to put to and so on; the reflexive verb indicates "adding" oneself to something, adhering to something, physically or spiritually. The associations are different to those evoked by plain "to kiss". I can only speculate about Glenny's reasoning, but his choice isn't outside the realm of the possible regarding either the symbolic or literal meaning.

#58

De gustibus and all that... Vive la différence! :)

I have received The Spanish Civil War, and what a magnificent set it is! I had the very first edition translated into Spanish, a book that caused an enormous impact on its readers in Spain. This edition, corrected and expanded, incorporates photographic material from newly researched sources. There are many books written on the Spanish conflict, but Hugh Thomas wrote a classic.

Any news of the Poirot set that should be published this April?

>61 gatxito:

Oh damn it.

I completely forgot that Poirot's coming round the bend....

Set sale or Poirot? Poirot or set sale?.... I suppose that depends upon which novels/short story collections are included, mind. (I'll be stunned if Orient Express isn't included!)

>61 gatxito:

Did some sleuthing, and according to a post here late last year: "Folio Society tweeted that they will be publishing Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile, The ABC Murders & The Mysterious Affair at Styles."

Tempting, as I quite love Orient Express, Death on the Nile, and Styles....