Archives

Dis-contenting Khayyam in the Context of Comparative Literature

Dis-contenting Khayyam in the Context of Comparative Literature. An Invitation to Translating Rubaiyat with a Focal Shift from Content to Form. Sajad Soleymani Yazdi
In: International journal of comparative literature and translation studies, 7 (2018) 1, p. 24-30

Abstract

Since its conception in France in 1877, Comparative Literature, always subject to a critique of Eurocentrism, has been in a state of perpetual crisis. In “The Old/New Question of Comparison in Literary Studies: A Post-European Perspective” (2004), Ray Chow argued for a Post-European perspective in which comparatists begin with the home culture and look outwards to the European cultures, contrary to the dominant approach of doing just otherwise. Missing in Chow’s argument is the position of translation in this post-European perspective. In the 14 years between 2004 and 2018, the grandiose claims of comparative literature have been problematized and addressed; the lay of the land, however, remains predominantly Eurocentric, as it still focuses on content disproportionately. In this paper, through a study of English translations of Khayyam’s Rubaiyat, and taking Chow’s argument further, I argue that with its commitment to transfer the form of a text as much as the content, translation studies can further help comparative literature to distance itself from Europe. To exemplify the implication of this, I suggest that a translation of Khayyam’s Rubaiyat from Farsi to English would be more faithful to the original if its translations were to focus on the poem’s form rather than the content. I argue that translating with a focus on form would foreignize Khayyam’s poetry, hence an act of resistance against cultural hegemony.

The Afterlife of Edward FitzGerald s Poem

The Afterlife of Edward FitzGerald s Poem. A Comparative Study of FitzGerald’s Rubáiyát and Housman s A Shropshire Lad. Mostada Hosseini
In: Contemporary Literary and Cultural Studies , (2018) 1, p. 19-34

Abstract

The present paper seeks to address and examine Edward FitzGerald’s globally-known poem afterlife, The Rubáiyát. Translation can serve as a force for literary renewal and innovation. For many years translation was regarded as a marginal area within comparative studies, now it is acknowledged that translation has played a vital role in literary history and great periods of literary innovation tend to be preceded by periods of intense translation activity. The significance of FitzGerald’s Rubáiyát lies in how the poem was read when it appeared and in the precise historical moment when it was published. The impact of FitzGerald’s Rubáiyát was such that on the one hand it served as a model for a new generation of poets struggling to make the skepticism and pessimism a proper subject for poetry, while on the other hand it established a benchmark for future translators because it set the parameters in the minds of English-language readers of what Persian poetry could do. The present chapter tries to show that FitzGerald’s Rubáiyát had a role in forming pre-modern English poetry, notably Housman’s poetry, in terms of form and content. Housman’s A Shropshire Lad and FitzGerald’s Rubáiyát have undeniable similarities.

Omar Khayyám on theodicy

Omar Khayyám on theodicy. Irreconcilability of the transcendental and the imminent. Mehdi Aminrazavi
In: Journal of Islamic Philosophy, 11 (2019), p. 33-44.

Abstract

The philosophical and theological thoughts of Omar Khayyām, the Persian mathematician, astronomer, and the likely author of the Rubāʿiyyāt (Quatrains), has remained a neglected area of scholarship. Much of the scholarship on Khayyām in the last few centuries has primarily been focused on his Quatrains, and to a lesser extent, on his views on mathematics and geometry. Despite Khayyām’s significance, his six philosophical treatises were not even edited nor published until recently, which is perhaps why they have remained relatively obscure. In this article, Khayyām’s dual views on theodicy are presented notwithstanding that he is the only figure we know of in the annals of Islamic intellectual history who adopted two opposite positions—simultaneously— with regard to the problem of evil. This article postulates that Khayyām’s dual positions on theodicy can only be understood if they are placed in their proper contexts; philosophically, theodicy is explainable, while on a more experiential level it is not. Conclusions may vary, depending on whether we are looking at the presence of evil from a transcendental or an imminent perspective.

 

The Impact of Power and Ideology on Edward FitzGerald’s Translation of the Rubáiyát

The Impact of Power and Ideology on Edward FitzGerald’s Translation of the Rubáiyát. A Postcolonial Approach. Bentolhoda Nakhaei
In: TranscUlturAl, 11 (2019) 1, p. 35-48

Abstract

This paper analyzes the issues raised by the change of ideology and the underlying meanings in five FitzGerald’s translations of Khayyám’s quatrains according to the theories of certain translation scholars such as André Lefevere and Antoine Berman. With regard to the fact that the British translator has given a harmonizing beauty and an epicurean flavor of his own to Khayyám’s Rubáiyát, could it be claimed that translator’s voice is louder than the author’s? From the transcreation point of view, one could wonder whether FitzGerald did maintain the intent, style, tone, and content of the Persian quatrains. Do FitzGerald’s translations evoke the same emotions and does it carry the same implications in English as Khayyám’s Rubáiyát does in Persian. In general, from a postcolonial perspective, FitzGerald’s five English translations could offer interesting and fertile ground for investigating the effects of power relationship between the colonizer and the colonized text during the Victorian age in England.

 

Edward FitzGerald’s Translation of The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám: The Appeal of Terse Hedonism

Edward FitzGerald’s Translation of The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám: The Appeal of Terse Hedonism. Asghar Seyed-Gohrab
In: Seigneurie (Ed.) 2020 – A Companion to World Literature. Volume 4: 1771 to 1919. 6 volumes. Hoboken, Wiley. Pp. 1-12

Abstract

The year 1859 is a seminal moment for both Persian and English poetry. In that year, the English poet Edward Purcell FitzGerald (1809–1883) published an adaptation of the quatrains attributed to the Persian philosopher poet Omar Khayyam, under the title The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám, the Astronomer-Poet of Persia. It was to become one of the world’s best-known poems. Although several poets before FitzGerald had translated specimens of Persian literature into English, his translations transmitted the Persian sentiments into English poetry, and have remained popular in world literature ever since. At first the translation was not successful at all, as the history of the first edition indicates. The book contained 75 quatrains and was published anonymously in an edition of 250 copies, 40 of which were bought by FitzGerald himself. With this poor start, the remaining books were sent to Bernard Quaritch’s bookshop, where they were shelved and later placed in a box outside the door for sale. In 1861, Whitley Stokes and John Ormsby discovered the book. Stokes purchased copies of the Rubáiyát for his friend Dante Gabriel Rossetti, who introduced the book to the Pre-Raphaelite circle. Its enthusiastic reception among the Pre-Raphaelites led FitzGerald to publish a second edition of the Rubáiyát in 1868 to which he added 35 quatrains. The cult of Rubáiyát was born. The Rubáiyát ran to a third edition in 1872, a fourth in 1879, and a fifth, posthumous, edition in 1889 (Karlin 2009, l–lvi). FitzGerald’s quatrains have been the source for hundreds of translations in various languages. Some 310 editions have sold millions of copies around the world.

Edward Heron-Allen and the Quilter Rubaiyat

Edward Heron-Allen and the Quilter Rubaiyat. Bob Forrest
In: The Heron-Allen Society : newsletter, (2021), 39, pp. 5-7

A short biographical sketch of Harry Quilter, producer of one the many, rare pirate editions of the Rubaiyat, issued in 1883. With some details about Potter’s efforts to gather more information about this book.