My AT group was split on which translation of Requiem was a better fit to Anna Akhmatova’s original piece. I originally felt that Thomas’s translation offered a more accurate depiction of the original work, bringing sophistication and confusion at the same time. It brought up more questioning and analytical thinking than the Anderson piece. However, Anderson’s translation felt more personal and raw, sticking to a rhyme scheme found in most poetry while being more comprehendible to a native English speaking audience. For instance, the opening lines of “not where the sky’s dome….my own people were” was a lot easier to understand in Anderson’s translation, being direct while sticking to classic methods of poetry writing. However, due to the complexity found in Thomas’s translation, I found that one more appealing (ex: “I need to kill and kill again my memory, turn my heart to stone…)” making me think more and longer about each word choice. It felt like free verse and more metaphorical in its prose. Ultimately, Thomas was more professional in his approach while Anderson sought the personal emotion found in Requiem’s original writing.
! Poets held a lot of power politically that is normally unfound in most countries, which lead to a lot of them being held in prisons or killed.
? Where else does art hold a lot of political meaning (other countries and eras) and how how does nonfictional writing/ fictional novels under the social realism compete in accurately depicting these harsh experiences?