Earlier I had translated the famous song Vande Mataram into Kannada - you can see it here. Now in the backdrop of discussions about the National Anthem, this song has sprung back into discussion. My good friend Sri Sharat Bhat Seraje has put together and analyzed five translations (both Kannada and English) of this song. I am pleasantly surprised to see even my translation featuring among the translations of the likes of Sri Shikaripura Harihara and Sri Aurobindo. Among these translations, the translation by Sri Aurobindo drew my attention for many reasons. Following is the translation of Sri Aurobindo:
Mother, I bow to thee!
Rich with thy hurrying streams,
bright with orchard gleams,
Cool with thy winds of delight,
Dark fields waving Mother of might,
Mother free.
Glory of moonlight dreams,
Over thy branches and lordly streams,
Clad in thy blossoming trees,
Mother, giver of ease
Laughing low and sweet!
Mother I kiss thy feet,
Speaker sweet and low!
Mother, to thee I bow.
(Original:
वन्दे मातरम्
सुजलां सुफलाम्
मलयज शीतलाम्
सस्यश्यामलां मातरम्
वन्दे मातरम्
शुभ्रज्योत्स्नापुलकितयामिनीम्
फुल्लकुसुमितध्रुमदलशोभिनीम्
सुहासिनीं सुमधुर भाषिणीम्
सुखदां वरदां मातरम्
vande mAtaram
sujalAM suPalAm
malayaja SItalAm
sasyaSyAmalAM mAtaram
vande mAtaram
SuBrajyotsnApulakitayAminIm
PullakusumitadhrumadalaSoBinIm
suhAsinIM sumadhura BAShiNIm
suKadAM varadAM mAtaram
vande mAtaram)
Presenting this Sri Seraje explains it as a re-creation inspired by the original, reminding us of Keats and Shelly. I guess this is the most apt explanation. Though this piece is beautiful in its own right as an independent poem, I feel it fails as a translation, on many counts. It but surprises me that the likes of Aurobindo could translate the word "sasyaSyAmalAM (सस्यश्यामलां)" as "dark fields"! It is true that the word श्यम means dark, but that word acquires different hues of meanings and moods when used with different things and colours. Moreover, there is no indication of the word "field" in the phrase "sasyaSyAmalAM (सस्यश्यामलां)" - What is green can be fields, can be gardens and can be forests as well. That the poet intents to convey is "thick green" but even that translation does not touch the mood of the original. the right translation in this context should be "lush green". Though there is no mention of the word green in the original, there is a mention of vegetation (सस्य - sasya). That gives the sense of green, and it must essentially be brought in the translation.
Likewise, the original depicts the words जल, फल, मलयजसीतल, सस्यश्यामल etc as the lively dimensions of the mother. But in Aurobindo's translation these have become lifeless physical things like hurrying streams, orchard gleams, winds of delight, dark fields etc. But this is not what is intended by the poet originally. Moreover, the prefix "सु" has a world of meanings about it in Sanskrit. It is difficult to get a word with the same scope of meanings in English. Well, you can use the word "good" but that has lost much of its sense due to over-usage. So use of the adjective "good" gives but a bland translation which does not tell anything much. So, instead of aiming at covering the whole spectrum of meanings for "सु" the translator has to contend himself by choosing one meaning that aptly depicts the 'goodness in the thing in question. Here Sri Aurobindo has translated the prefix "सु" as hurrying in respect of water, and gleam in respect of fruit. But neither the flow is the measure of 'goodness in water nor is the gleam in fruits. For water it is the taste and for the fruit it is the freshness and sweetness that measures its 'goodness. Likewise, there is a unique place for a mountain breeze among the breezes. You can get a cool breeze from over the sea also, and it brings you delight as well. But that is not exactly describe the hilly breeze. So it is very important to mention the "mountain breeze" in the translation - the translation "cool with winds of delights" does not bring the cool fragrance of the mountain breeze.
And we can see the other parts of the translations as well. He translates the verse "शुभ्रज्योत्स्नापुलकितयामिनि (SuBrajyotsnApulakitayAmini - the one with nights tingled by bright moonlight)" as "Glory of moonlight dreams, over thy branches and lordly streams" It just does not touch the original anywhere. And फुल्लकुसुमितध्रुमदलशोभिनि (PullakusumitadhrumadalaSoBini) becomes a drab "Clad in blossoming trees". And instead of taking a simple translation of "One with a sweet smile" for the word सुहासिनि (suhAsini), he translates it as "Laughing low and sweet" In the first place, there is a world of difference between a smile and a laugh. Laughing low can be a suppressed laughter (signifying sarcasm) at the best. And Laughing low and sweet can not become anything but a cunning smile. Same is the case with सुमधुर भाषिणि (sumadhura BAShiNi). Instead of contending with "sweet words" he translates it as "speaker sweet and low". It is obvious that the translator has throughout been after the rhyming words like streams-gleams, delight-might, dreams-streams, trees-ease, sweet-feet, low-bow. But the price that he had to pay for these rhymes is very big - it is nothing less than the very essence of the poem!
As Mr. Seraje rightly puts, it can be called at the most a poem inspired by the original, but It is difficult to term it as a translation.
It is not very simple to translate from one language to another. Many a times word to word translation becomes a nonsensical translation. Likewise a translation of just the mood can become a sheer escapism. A good translator chooses to tread between these two extremes - he strives hard to catch the strains of the original meaning, mood, feeling, the music of words, and their rhythm etc. In doing so, many a times he resorts to word to word translation, sometimes the translation of the mood as well. But he is always aware that he would be destroying the translation if he goes after one extreme. The translation takes a beating the moment he dozes off for a moment.
Thinking on the same lines, I also tried a translation. I can't say I have scrupulously followed the principles of translation that I myself depicted above. I am sure this translation if full of all the drawbacks that are inevitable in a translation - I am aware that the brevity of the original has taken a beating here as well, and the rhymes are not exact rhymes and they are not religiously observed also. I have tried to follow them as much as possible, and where it means compromising with the mood of the original, I have given the rhymes a slip. I only hope that I have tried the best to bring the translation as near to the original as possible. I am not, in any sense claiming any comparison, let alone superiority over Sri Aurobindo's translation above. As I mentioned, it is just another translation that sprung up while thinking about the above.
To thee I bow, O mother
Rich with sweet streams, fruits so fresh,
And cool with fragrant mountain breeze,
And green, O mother, so rich and lush
To thee I bow, O mother
O thou, with nights tingled by moonlight bright
Mother, I bow to thee!
Rich with thy hurrying streams,
bright with orchard gleams,
Cool with thy winds of delight,
Dark fields waving Mother of might,
Mother free.
Glory of moonlight dreams,
Over thy branches and lordly streams,
Clad in thy blossoming trees,
Mother, giver of ease
Laughing low and sweet!
Mother I kiss thy feet,
Speaker sweet and low!
Mother, to thee I bow.
(Original:
वन्दे मातरम्
सुजलां सुफलाम्
मलयज शीतलाम्
सस्यश्यामलां मातरम्
वन्दे मातरम्
शुभ्रज्योत्स्नापुलकितयामिनीम्
फुल्लकुसुमितध्रुमदलशोभिनीम्
सुहासिनीं सुमधुर भाषिणीम्
सुखदां वरदां मातरम्
vande mAtaram
sujalAM suPalAm
malayaja SItalAm
sasyaSyAmalAM mAtaram
vande mAtaram
SuBrajyotsnApulakitayAminIm
PullakusumitadhrumadalaSoBinIm
suhAsinIM sumadhura BAShiNIm
suKadAM varadAM mAtaram
vande mAtaram)
Presenting this Sri Seraje explains it as a re-creation inspired by the original, reminding us of Keats and Shelly. I guess this is the most apt explanation. Though this piece is beautiful in its own right as an independent poem, I feel it fails as a translation, on many counts. It but surprises me that the likes of Aurobindo could translate the word "sasyaSyAmalAM (सस्यश्यामलां)" as "dark fields"! It is true that the word श्यम means dark, but that word acquires different hues of meanings and moods when used with different things and colours. Moreover, there is no indication of the word "field" in the phrase "sasyaSyAmalAM (सस्यश्यामलां)" - What is green can be fields, can be gardens and can be forests as well. That the poet intents to convey is "thick green" but even that translation does not touch the mood of the original. the right translation in this context should be "lush green". Though there is no mention of the word green in the original, there is a mention of vegetation (सस्य - sasya). That gives the sense of green, and it must essentially be brought in the translation.
Likewise, the original depicts the words जल, फल, मलयजसीतल, सस्यश्यामल etc as the lively dimensions of the mother. But in Aurobindo's translation these have become lifeless physical things like hurrying streams, orchard gleams, winds of delight, dark fields etc. But this is not what is intended by the poet originally. Moreover, the prefix "सु" has a world of meanings about it in Sanskrit. It is difficult to get a word with the same scope of meanings in English. Well, you can use the word "good" but that has lost much of its sense due to over-usage. So use of the adjective "good" gives but a bland translation which does not tell anything much. So, instead of aiming at covering the whole spectrum of meanings for "सु" the translator has to contend himself by choosing one meaning that aptly depicts the 'goodness in the thing in question. Here Sri Aurobindo has translated the prefix "सु" as hurrying in respect of water, and gleam in respect of fruit. But neither the flow is the measure of 'goodness in water nor is the gleam in fruits. For water it is the taste and for the fruit it is the freshness and sweetness that measures its 'goodness. Likewise, there is a unique place for a mountain breeze among the breezes. You can get a cool breeze from over the sea also, and it brings you delight as well. But that is not exactly describe the hilly breeze. So it is very important to mention the "mountain breeze" in the translation - the translation "cool with winds of delights" does not bring the cool fragrance of the mountain breeze.
And we can see the other parts of the translations as well. He translates the verse "शुभ्रज्योत्स्नापुलकितयामिनि (SuBrajyotsnApulakitayAmini - the one with nights tingled by bright moonlight)" as "Glory of moonlight dreams, over thy branches and lordly streams" It just does not touch the original anywhere. And फुल्लकुसुमितध्रुमदलशोभिनि (PullakusumitadhrumadalaSoBini) becomes a drab "Clad in blossoming trees". And instead of taking a simple translation of "One with a sweet smile" for the word सुहासिनि (suhAsini), he translates it as "Laughing low and sweet" In the first place, there is a world of difference between a smile and a laugh. Laughing low can be a suppressed laughter (signifying sarcasm) at the best. And Laughing low and sweet can not become anything but a cunning smile. Same is the case with सुमधुर भाषिणि (sumadhura BAShiNi). Instead of contending with "sweet words" he translates it as "speaker sweet and low". It is obvious that the translator has throughout been after the rhyming words like streams-gleams, delight-might, dreams-streams, trees-ease, sweet-feet, low-bow. But the price that he had to pay for these rhymes is very big - it is nothing less than the very essence of the poem!
As Mr. Seraje rightly puts, it can be called at the most a poem inspired by the original, but It is difficult to term it as a translation.
It is not very simple to translate from one language to another. Many a times word to word translation becomes a nonsensical translation. Likewise a translation of just the mood can become a sheer escapism. A good translator chooses to tread between these two extremes - he strives hard to catch the strains of the original meaning, mood, feeling, the music of words, and their rhythm etc. In doing so, many a times he resorts to word to word translation, sometimes the translation of the mood as well. But he is always aware that he would be destroying the translation if he goes after one extreme. The translation takes a beating the moment he dozes off for a moment.
Thinking on the same lines, I also tried a translation. I can't say I have scrupulously followed the principles of translation that I myself depicted above. I am sure this translation if full of all the drawbacks that are inevitable in a translation - I am aware that the brevity of the original has taken a beating here as well, and the rhymes are not exact rhymes and they are not religiously observed also. I have tried to follow them as much as possible, and where it means compromising with the mood of the original, I have given the rhymes a slip. I only hope that I have tried the best to bring the translation as near to the original as possible. I am not, in any sense claiming any comparison, let alone superiority over Sri Aurobindo's translation above. As I mentioned, it is just another translation that sprung up while thinking about the above.
To thee I bow, O mother
Rich with sweet streams, fruits so fresh,
And cool with fragrant mountain breeze,
And green, O mother, so rich and lush
To thee I bow, O mother
O thou, with nights tingled by moonlight bright
Adorned with woods blooming,
With those soft smiles and words so sweet,
Comforting with bounties
To thee I bow, O mother
Click here for the Kannada version of the above article.
With those soft smiles and words so sweet,
Comforting with bounties
To thee I bow, O mother
Click here for the Kannada version of the above article.
Posts
