An Essay Toward a History of Shakespeare in Norway Part 9

By the simplicity of Venus Doves,

and to anyone but a Landsmaal fanatic it seems ridiculous to have Theseus tell Hermia: "Demetrius er so gild ein kar som nokon."

"Demetrius is a worthy gentleman," says Shakespeare and this has "the grand Manner." But to a cultivated Norwegian the translation is "Bauernsprache," such as a local magnate might use in forcing a suitor on his daughter.

All of which goes back to the present condition of Landsmaal. It has little flexibility, little inward grace. It is not a finished literary language. But, despite its archaisms, Landsmaal is a living language and it has, therefore, unlike the Karathevusa of Greece, the possibility of growth. The translations of Madhus and Aasen and Eggen have made notable contributions to this development. They are worthy of all praise. Their weaknesses are the result of conditions which time will change.

J

One might be tempted to believe from the foregoing that the propagandists of "Maalet" had completely monopolized the n.o.ble task of making Shakespeare accessible in the vernacular. And this is almost true. But the reason is not far to seek. Aside from the fact that in Norway, as elsewhere, Shakespeare is read mainly by cultivated people, among whom a sound reading knowledge of English is general, we have further to remember that the Foersom-Lembcke version has become standard in Norway and no real need has been felt of a separate Norwegian version in the dominant literary language. In Landsmaal the case is different.

This dialect must be trained to "Literaturfahigkeit." It is not so much that Norway must have her own Shakespeare as that Landsmaal must be put to use in every type of literature. The results of this missionary spirit we have seen.

One of the few translations of Shakespeare that have been made into Riksmaal appeared in 1912, _Hamlet_, by C.H. Blom. As an experiment it is worthy of respect, but as a piece of literature it is not to be taken seriously. Like La.s.sen's work, it is honest, faithful, and utterly uninspired.

The opening scene of _Hamlet_ is no mean test of a translator's ability--this quick, tense scene, one of the finest in dramatic literature. Foersom did it with conspicuous success. Blom has reduced it to the following prosy stuff:

_Bernardo_: Hvem der?

_Francisco_: Nei, svar mig frst; gjr holdt og sig hvem der!

_Ber_: Vor konge laenge leve!

_Fra_: De, Bernardo?

_Ber_: Ja vel.

_Fra_: De kommer jo paa klokkeslaget.

_Ber_: Ja, den slog tolv nu. Gaa til ro, Francisco.

_Fra_: Tak for De lser av. Her er saa surt, og jeg er ddsens traet.

_Ber_: Har du hat rolig vagt?

_Fra_: En mus har ei sig rrt.

_Ber_: Nu vel, G.o.d nat.

Hvis du Marcellus og Horatio ser, som skal ha vakt med mig, bed dem sig skynde.

_Fra_: Jeg hrer dem vist nu. Holdt hoi! Hvem der.

(Horatio og Marcellus kommer.)

_Horatio_: Kun landets venner.

_Marcellus_: Danekongens folk!

_Fra_: G.o.d nat, sov G.o.dt!

_Mar_: G.o.dnat, du bra soldat!

Hvem har lst av?

_Fra_: Bernardo staar paa post.

G.o.d nat igjen. (Gaar.)

It requires little knowledge of Norwegian to dismiss this as dull and insipid prose, a part of which has accidentally been turned into mechanical blank verse. Moreover, the work is marked throughout by inconsistency and carelessness in details. For instance the king begins (p. 7) by addressing Laertes:

Hvad melder _De_ mig om _Dem_ selv, Laertes?

and two lines below:

Hvad kan _du_ be mig om?

It might be a mere slip that the translator in one line uses the formal _De_ and in another the familiar _du_, but the same inconsistency occurs again and again throughout the volume. In itself a trifle, it indicates clearly enough the careless, slipshod manner of work--and an utter lack of a sense of humor, for no one with a spark of humor would use the modern, essentially German _De_ in a Norwegian translation of Shakespeare. If a formal form must be used it should, as a matter of course, be _I_.

Nor is the translation itself so accurate as it should be. For example, what does it mean when Marcellus tells Bernardo that he had implored Horatio "at vogte paa minutterne inat" (to watch over the minutes this night)? Again, in the King's speech to Hamlet (Act I, Sc. 2) the phrase "bend you to remain" is rendered by the categorical "se til at bli herhjemme," which is at least misleading. Little inaccuracies of this sort are not infrequent.

But, after all, a translator with a new variorum and a wealth of critical material at hand cannot go far wrong in point of mere translation. The chief indictment to be made against Blom's translation is its prosiness, its prosy, involved sentences, its ba.n.a.lity. What in Shakespeare is easy and mellifluous often becomes in Blom so vague that its meaning has to be discovered by a reference to the original.

We gave, some pages back, Ivar Aasen's translation of Hamlet's soliloquy. The interesting thing about that translation is not only that it is the first one in Norwegian but that it was made into a new dialect by the creator of that dialect himself. When we look back and consider what Aasen had to do--first, make a literary medium, and then pour into the still rigid and inelastic forms of that language the subtlest thinking of a great world literature--we gain a new respect for his genius. Fifty years later Blom tried his hand at the same soliloquy. He was working in an old and tried literary medium--Dano-Norwegian. But he was unequal to the task:

At vaere eller ikke vaere, det problemet er: Om det er strre av en sjael at taale skjaebnens pil og slynge end ta til vaaben mot et hav av plager og ende dem i kamp? At d,--at sove, ei mer; og tro, at ved en svn vi ender vor hjerteve og livets tusen stt, som kjd er arving til--det maal for livet maa nskes inderlig. At d,--at sove-- at sove!--Kanske drmme! Der er knuten; for hvad i ddsens svn vi monne drmme, naar livets laenke vi har viklet av, det holder os igjen; det er det hensyn, som gir vor jammer her saa langt et liv' etc.

K

Much more interesting than Blom's attempt, and much more significant, is a translation and working over of _As You Like It_ which appeared in November of the same year. The circ.u.mstances under which this translation were made are interesting. Fru Johanne Dybwad, one of the "stars" at the National Theater was completing her twenty-fifth year of service on the stage, and the theater wished to commemorate the event in a manner worthy of the actress. For the gala performance, Herman Wildenvey, a poet of the young Norway, made a new translation and adaptation of _As You Like It_.[38] And no choice could have been more felicitous. Fru Dybwad had scored her greatest success as Puck; the life and sparkle and jollity of that mischievous wight seemed like a poetic glorification of her own character. It might be expected, then, that she would triumph in the role of Rosalind.

[38: _As You Like It_, eller _Livet i Skogen_. Dramatisk Skuespil av William Shakespeare. Oversat og bearbeidet for Nationaltheatret av Herman Wildenvey. Kristiania og Kbenhavn. 1912.]

Then came the problem of a stage version. A simple cutting of Lembcke seemed inappropriate to this intensely modern woman. There was danger, too, that Lembcke's faithful Danish would hang heavy on the light and sparkling Norwegian. Herman Wildenvey undertook to prepare an acting version that should fit the actress and the occasion. The result is the text before us. For the songs and intermissions, Johan Halvorsen, Kapelmester of the theater, composed new music and the theater provided a magnificent staging. The tremendous stage-success of Wildenvey's _As You Like It_ belongs rather to stage history, and for the present we shall confine ourselves to the translation itself.

First, what of the cutting? In a short introduction the translator has given an apologia for his procedure. It is worth quoting at some length.

"To adapt a piece of literature is, as a rule, not especially commendable. And now, I who should be the last to do it, have become the first in this country to attempt anything of the sort with Shakespeare.

"I will not defend myself by saying that most of Shakespeare's plays require some sort of adaptation to the modern stage if they are to be played at all. But, as a matter of fact, I have done little adapting. I have dusted some of the speeches, maltreated others, and finally cut out a few which would have sputtered out of the mouths of the actors like fringes of an old tapestry. But, above all, I have tried to reproduce the imperishable woodland spirit, the fresh breath of out-of-doors which permeates this play."

Wildenvey then states that in his cuttings he has followed the edition of the British Empire Shakespeare Society. But the performance in Kristiania has demanded more, "and my adaptation could not be so wonderfully ideal. _As You Like It_ is, probably more than any other of Shakespeare's plays, a jest and only in part a play. Through the t.i.tle he has given his work, he has given me the right to make my own arrangement which is accordingly, yours truly _As You Like It_."

But the most cursory examination will show that this is more than a mere "cutting." In the first place, the five acts have been cut to four and scenes widely separated, have often been brought together. In this way unnecessary scene-shifts have been avoided. But the action has been kept intact and only two characters have been eliminated: Jacques de Bois, whose speeches have been given to Le Beau, and Hymen, whose role has been given to Celia. Two or three speeches have been shifted. But to a reader unacquainted with Shakespeare all this would pa.s.s unnoticed, as would also, doubtless, the serious cutting and the free translation.

A brief sketch of Wildenvey's arrangement will be of service.

[Transcriber's Note: The summary is given here exactly as it appears in Ruud's text. Note in particular Wildenvey's I, 2, and Shakespeare's II, 1.]

Act I, Sc. 1.

An open place on the road to Sir Oliver's house.

The scene opens with a short, exceedingly free rendering of Orlando's speech and runs on to the end of Scene 1 in Shakespeare.