The Shakespearean Drama in Romanian
Conf. Univ. dr. Aurel CURTUI
Universitatea “1 Decembrie 1918” Alba Iulia
In the last decades the problem of literary translation aroused an undoubtful interest with us
and the investigations in the field were widely expended. In each article or study there was
unanimously pointed out the necesity that in the process of rendering the original work the literary
translation must be conceived as a creative work. In this way new perspectives were opened for a
complex evaluation of language phenomen in a translation, specific to one or another literary work,
to one or another writer.
We consider useful such theoretical approaches for the emphasizing of a wide range of
problems and especially for calling attention to certain stylistic means through which the meaning
of literary work can be rendered into another language. For, in spite of certain doubts, a general
conclusion springs out into being, namely, the translator has to pass over the obstacles of the
differences of the two languages and to convey the whole meaning of the original with all of its
artistic beauty.
The efforts in the field of translation theory, were blended with a fruitful practical activity.
One of the major achievements in this respect is the translation into Romanian of Shakespeare’s
complete work.
The translation of Shakespeare’s Hamlet in Romanian for instance aroused the interest of
certain researchers1. Of special interest in this respect are the investigations of Vladimir Streinu2,
Dan Dutescu and Leon Levitchi3 which excel by their scholarly character and quality of linguistic,
literary and aesthetic interpretations.
Started from the preliminaries we shall attempt to reveal the specific features of the art of the
Romanian translators, their skills and abilities of understanding and interpreting the Shakespearean
text.
The act of translating from Shakespeare has a special significance and value within the
general context of assimilating and deepening the authentic world values in our culture. It is an
essential component in its active integration in the field of ideas, aspirations and interests of
European cultures and civilizations.
Versions at the beginning of the Century
During these decades Shakespeare’s works are translated by such famous scholars as Tudor
Vianu and Peter Grimm. The first translated Coriolanus in Romanian in bilingual edition, the latter
Romeo and Juliet. They also wrote brilliant critical comments meant to contribute to a proper
understanding of the Shakespearian works.
The ample and intense confrontation of various literary tendencies at the beginning of our
century caused a diminution or lowering of the interest for translation. Moreover, preferences and
inclinations for literary creations of doubtful value are noted. “The shop window of the bookstores /
See AL. Duţu, op.cit.
Al. Duţu, „Traduceri româneşti din opera Shakespeariană”, în Steaua, nr. 9, 1964, p. 39-43; Petre Grimm „Traduceri
şi imitaţiuni româneşti după literatura engleză, în Daco-Romania, Cluj, 1922-23, p. 324-377
3
„Prefaţă la Shakespeare, Tragedia lui Hamlet, Prinţ de Danemarca”, EPL, Bucureşti, 1964, p. XI-XVII
1
2
legitimately asserts Tudor Vianu - begins to be flooded by translations whose criterium of selection
is commercial value”4.
The use of the language by Shakespeare and particularly in Hamlet excels by a conciseness,
intensity and sobriety of his own which is legitimately called ”the tragedy of spirit in which the turn
of expression and the quality of vocabulary are especially explored along its other qualities” 5.
We note in Gertrude’s speech, for instance, two features, namely, the predominance of
exclamative sentences, of short and elliptical complex sentences followed by pauses especially in
her talk with Hamlet. Both devices express the intensity of emotion, the impressionable of Gertrude
facing her son who calls her to account for her thoughtless deed. For example, the queen exclaims:
“O, Hamlet, thou hast cleft my heart in twain” (Act III, sc.4, 1.157) a line faithfully rendered by “
O, Hamlet! Mi-ai sfasiat inima in doua “ (p. 113). Of special interest is the talent of the translator,
her sharp linguistic sense remarkable especially through a rich verbal invention which allowed her
to find out corresponding words and phrases for the meaning of the original. The faithful and subtle
interpretation of the English text made the differentiation possible as well as the stylistic portrayal
of the characters in the Shakespearean spirit. Such features reveal competence and skill in the art of
translation.
The Romanian version of Hamlet accomplished by Vladimir Streinu6 and Ion Vinea7 are the
best in our culture. The first one was brilliant and subtle poet, critic and a remarkeble stylist and
aesthetician while the second one a great poet, prose writer and a brilliant translator. In both cases
the translation is the outcome of a superior knowledge and appreciation of Shakespeare as well as of
a spiritual fidelity towards his artistic creeds and masterpiece.
Unique in its own way in Romanian culture is Vladimir Streinu’s bilingual version of
Hamlet8, rendered in a language “of a great concentration of expression”9. First of all we note the
translator’s endeavour to decode and render in Romanian the interior struggle and charm of
Shakespeare’s poetry. The artistical intuition of the Romanian poet and critic alows him to penetrate
and properly understand the style of the English poet and to transpose it in a high degree of fidelity
in a flexible and expressive manner in Romanian, for the translator constantly respects the principle
of faithfulness. According to Adrian Marino in this translation “the word is full, the complex
senteces thought out, the rhythm studied line by line”.10
Therefore, Vladimir Streinu’s effort to throw light on the suggestive lexical values of the
line of the original leads to esteem and respect. The translator’s method is based on a minute
analysis of the formal features of the Enlish text depending on these the meaning is transposed into
Romanian by strictly respecting the dimensions of the original.
The poetic imagination, the inborn feeling for lexical shade closely related to a profound and
thorough aesthetic judgement permit the translator to render the Shakespearean “blank verse” into
Romanian in a rhythmical nature and “musical and emotional effect of the original” 11. Frequent are
the cases in which the meaning of the line in Romanian gets the polished and pathetic grave
expression similar to that from the English text in spite of the differences between the two
languages. Here is an illustration: “In miezul plin pustiu si stins al noptii” is the Romanian
equivalent for “In the dead wasted and middle of the night” (Act I, sc. 2, 1.199).
Here is another example: Horatio’s romantic description of the dawn from the beninning of
the play: “But look, the morn in russet mantle clad / Walks, o’er the dew of yon high eastward hill”
4
Tudor Vianu, op. Cit. p.4
B. Evans, Hamlet, in „The Language of Shakespeares Plays”, London, 1966, p. 116
6
William Shakespeare, “Tragedia lui Hamlet, prinţ de Damenarca” text anglo-român îngrijit şi tradus cu o prefaţă, o
traducere şi note şi comentarii de Vladimir Streinu, EPL, 1965, p.513;
7
Shakespeare, “Teatru” în româneşte de Ion Vinea, Editura Univers, Bucureşti, 1971, p. 143-325
8
Vladimir Streinu, op.cit.
9
Adrian Marino, W. Shakespeare, “Tragedia lui Hamlet, prinţ de Damenarca”, în Steaua, nr. 6, 1965, p. 121
10
Ibidem
11
See Edgar Papu, „Ultimul Hamlet în româneşte”, în Gazeta literară, nr. 119, 1965, p. 121
5
(1. 165-166) get the same outlines in a image of expressiveness similar to the original in Romanian:
“Dar, iata, zorii-n panze cum e spuza / Se plimba-n roua rumenelor piscuri” (p.21). Adrian Marino
talks of “literary and exact equivalents”12in this translation with the intention of suggesting the
unusual language used by Vladimir Streinu in Hamlet. His words are carefully chosen depending
on the concrete significance of the word in the context. The concentrated phrases are, in the
Romanian line, polished up to the smallest shades and distinctly used.
Ion Vinea shapes Romanian language according to the requirement of Shakespearean
meaning creating the line in “an old pattern over the signs of archetypes’ style” with a minute
concentration on semantic density. Some writers among whom Vinea too, lay special stress on the
verbal aspect of a translation. In such a dramatic concept the movement of poetry and the dramatic
Shakespearean tone are somehow moved without altering however the ideas of the drama.
These lines: “Disasters in the sun, and the moist star, / Upon whose influence Neptune’s
empire stand, / Was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse”. (Art I, sc. 1, 1. 118/120) become in
Vinea’s version: ”Prapad de soare, roua-nsangerata / Si stele-n cer cu cozi de foc si astru / Cel umed
ce domnesti peste ape/ S-a-ntunecat de moarte in eclipsa“.
Perhaps some accept with difficulty “prapad de soare” for “disaster of the sun” or “s-antunecat de soare in eclipsa” for “was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse”, but as Mircea Vaida
observes “Vinea imagined poetically in the extension of the Shakespearean text”. The speech
explored with such a differentiated inventiveness by Shakespeare in order to move the wide range
of feelings of his characters finds in Vladimir Streinu’s a flexible and experienced interpreter.
The dramatic development of Polonius, for example, is supported by an appropriate
vocabulary depending on the required situation; the reponse of the personage suggests just his
character of a talkative, pedant and a flattering courtier who under the abundance of words hides his
moral emptiness so plainly emphasized by the playwright13. The true intellectual brilliance of
Polonius rests in his art of talking bombastically, in a flourished manner. He enjoys the vividness of
his words and ostentatiously practises the game of words, an artificial verbal model of expression
even when situation implies a serius attitude on his behalf.
Let us remember scene 2, Act II in wich Polonius is in a broken loose of a real verbal
coquetry. Only in the ninth line the key aspect is desplayed: “Your noble son is mad”, preceded by
an excessive rhetorical manner, abundant in synonymous repetitions such as: day = day; night =
night; time = time characterized by useless linguistic use of words through which the author
ridicules his personage. This verbal game of the character with his semantic fluctuation is rendered
with flavour and intuition by the two translators. Here is the translation of this line only, by
Vladimir Streinu: “Voi fi deci scurt – Lord Hamlet e nebun!” (p.109) and by Ion Vinea: “Voi fi deci
scurt. Prea nobilul tau fiu / E chiar nebun”. (p. 196). The poetry of the two Romanian versions is
achieved through the understanding of the meaning and its faithful poetic transposition: “since
brevity is the soul of wit” becomes a successful outcome by assonance in Streinu’s case “cum vorba
scurta-i sufletu-agerimii” and without any change in Vinea’s: “fiind scurtimea gandirii”, although it
would have been better to replace the word “scurtimea” which perhaps hinders the fluidity of the
line.
Perhaps even more relevant for the deepening of Polonius’s character and conduct are these
lines: “madam, I swear I use no art at all, / that he is mad, ‘tis true: ’tis true, ‘tis pity, / And pity, ‘tis
‘tis true: a foolish figure, / But farewell it, for I will use no art” (Act II, sc. 2, 1. 96-99).
The genuine game of words with its rhythmic structure and natural emphasis as two distinct
features of the reply are faithfully rendered in Romanian by the two poets.
So if the first translations of the Shakespearean drama annoy today in reading both through
their incoherence and development of ideas as well as though the lack of fluency of the line and
12
13
Adrian Marino, op. Cit. p. 121
See B. Evans, op. Cit. p. 120-127
reply, those from our century give the original text clarity and elegance of conciseness, its inner
power of poetic flavour.
No matter in what states the Shakespearean drama appeared in Romanian translations they
prove the persevering and permanent presence of the ideas of drama in the mind and consience of
the Romanian reader. Its dissemination in the aesthetic consciousness of various generations
recorded an ample and diversified process.
In this way through systematic translation of the Shakespearean drama and its publication in
numerous editions the ideas of this creation were always familiar to the Romanian reader.
Final remarks
Obviously, a study like this one with inevitable missings is at any time suitable for
improvement and completion. By the nature of the topic itself the most efficient orietation in an
enormous range of facts is often difficult and hard to attain in all of its fields.
Beyond any convertions of circumstance however we endeavored to outline the large
framework of the theme avoiding simple factological facts whose recording without discernment
and perspective could lead to a sterile area of cold erusition. Instead, we considered that it would be
necessary to look further to the final purpose of the paper. We strove to direct our investigation
towards those areas which seemed fuller in significance and more abundant or meaningful in critical
suggestions. Since the originality and vitality of our culture convincingly reveals itself not only in
authentic original creations but also in the way it recepted and fertilized everlasting values of world
literature and culture.
Not anyhow nor any works got the interest or attention of our writers. Beyond aesthetic
considerations there are further explanations. The destiny of the Shakespearean tragedies in our
country is particularly significant in this respect. The echoes of this dramatic creation in each
national culture is however a question of utmost importance which has drawn too little attention as
yet.
In consequence the general concept of a universal influence of Shakespeare’s drama needs a
more careful analysis and investigation.
Beyond the statements of principle, the problem calls for a few special answers. No creation
can assert its own value unless it becomes a component part of mankind’s destiny, for the life
experience it imparts and conveys is, quite naturally, received in different ways different times and
by different cultures.
That is why we have proposed to examine systematically the fate of this work in the
Romanian spiritual universe and its undeniable contribution towards generous ideas and humanism.
In conclusion the fate of the Shakespearean drama in Romanian culture has followed a
double course: one Shakespearean and the other built up in a natural manner by the Romanian
capacity for grasping and interpreting the philosophical, ethical and aesthetic meanings of this
dramatic creation. It follows that the ideas of the English Renaissance have known in this country a
distinct spiritual life, which they may not have known in other parts of the world.