Monday, September 2, 2013

Inga Ābele’s High Tide

Inga Ābele’s High Tide, which I read in Kaija Straumanis’s translation from the original Latvian Paisums, is one of those complex-feeling books with a complex-looking structure that turns out to be fairly simple at its core. High Tide is “about” (it feels particularly odd to say that about a book like this) all the big stuff: love, death, family relationships, and societal change… and ways to recover from—or at least deal with—all of the above.

Which isn’t to say I’m exactly sure what I read: the back cover blurb of High Tide tells me it’s written in “more or less reverse chronological order,” which feels about right, but the novel is so poetic and abstract in some ways (especially in the beginning) and so up-closely brutal (at times) in telling stories from the life of its main character, Ieva, that High Tide left me, to borrow more metaphors from the ocean, feeling like I was sitting on a narrow beach with waves encroaching. I do like the beach at high tide even if low tide feels more comfortable. There’s more space. But it’s less interesting.

Some of the waves in High Tide are pretty big: Ieva comes of age in the late eighties, when the Soviet Union was collapsing, and she’s a teenage mother whose husband, Andrejs, doesn’t share her interest in books. He does, though, come to enjoy Greek mythology in prison, preferring it to Christianity because you get to keep your guilt. (I loved this...) That prison term, by the way, is for shooting Ieva’s boyfriend, Aksels, dead. That’s the basic story—well, that along with Ieva’s distant relationships with her daughter, her mother, and, to a lesser degree, her grandmother—so you may be relieved to know Ieva does okay for herself in the end. Which the beginning of the book.

Ābele’s structure for High Tide means the book reads almost like a mystery: thematically, the reader wants to find out what happened to make Ieva who she is, and the structure is mysterious, too, because Ābele works in so many different kinds of chapters, including letters and naked dialogue. Some chapters are closely told, others not so much, but everything falls together to fill in events over the years. To paraphrase what Kaija writes in a Goodreads description, the novel is divided into sections of varying length that are assembled in a “smoothly chaotic (not unlike the tide, hmm?) structure.” In any case, the book is thoroughly absorbing, whether showing Andrejs’s post-prison romance, Ieva traveling to a conference, or terminal illness. There are just enough Latvian details to keep the setting clear but not so many that they become overbearing.

I don’t often comment at length on translations themselves but, after endless (in a good way) conversations and articles this summer about translation, I want to say I think Kaija’s High Tide reads beautifully—it’s smooth in all the right ways—and doesn’t belabor local or post-Soviet details. Sometimes it’s individual words I remember about translations… and one word that stood out for me in High Tide was “pleather,” probably because there are several Russian words for fake leather materials that cover apartment doors, get made into boots, and spawn inordinate amounts of discussion about Russian-English translation. I don’t know what the Latvian is in High Tide but was happy to see Kaija just go for pleather, a fairly new word (1982, per the good people of Merriam-Webster) that would feel too contemporary for lots of books but fits perfectly here and doesn’t break the narrative voice.

Disclaimers: I received a review copy of High Tide from Open Letter Books, thank you! High Tide is due out later this month. I always enjoy speaking with Open Letter, including Kaija, who is editorial director, about books and translations.

Up next: Jáchym Topol’s diabolically ghoulish The Devil’s Workshop, Rose Macaulay’s quirky The Towers of Trebizond, and MacDonald Harris’s comically metaphysical (so far anyway) The Carp Castle.

1 comment:

  1. I reviewed this translation as an expert reader for ALTA, finding it full of egregious mistakes and style problems. Words are mistranslated or ‘interpreted’ and are off for the context.
    The misuse of words is due to Kaija Straumanis’ not really being a native speaker: she spoke only Latvian at home, learned English in kindergarten, was forced to go to Latvian school on weekends and Latvian camp in summers, teaching herself English by watching TV.
    One would never ‘muscle on’ a jacket; one moving around a room wouldn’t ‘grab onto something, touch on something.’ Going to Riga to see a film is not an event, it’s an occasion. ‘Server’ is ‘waiter,’ a ‘domesticated’ animal is ‘tamed.’ No one would say a girl has ‘horrific’ eyes.
    Translator Ieva Lesinska, having spent only a few years in America when she was already in her twenties, translated in a poem “fat hung on branches for the birds.” She didn’t know the word suet. Neither has the facility with the English language to translate literature.
    Straumanis is lazy, substituting words which she thinks mean the same thing for words in the original. The word for ‘spirit’ is ‘gars’, for ‘soul’ is ‘dvesele’, Straumanis uses ‘soul’ repeatedly in a long passage where three times, it should have been ‘spirit.’ The image ‘heavy as marshy land’ is left out; ‘not a single molecule’ of water is lost,’ she’s left the word out, either feeling it unimportant or she didn’t proofread. Pure souls are ‘erased from the memory of the world’ along with their time, not just general time.
    Atrocious translation, I was in a state of Edvard Munch-like horror.