Of course, you don't see the difference. J. Evola writes : "With respect to
Catholicism as a positive religion in general, I also personally witnessed the
disgraceful effects of its dissolution into emotional forms..", which,
syntactically rearranged, gives - inelegantly but literally : "I also personally
witnessed the disgraceful effects of the dissolution of Catholicism as a
positive religion in general into emotional... forms...", but it does not bother
you to mistranslate it as : "And while I recognised the validity of Catholicism
as a positive religion, I also personally witnessed the disgraceful effects of
its dissolution into emotional... forms."
We are not bothered with the fact that this translation of 'Il Cammino del
cinabro' is often approximate. The problem with it is essentially its
mistranslations, such as that which is found in the last clause of the following
sentence, which is as plain as the nose on one's face : "That book of Papini's
is a banal, apologetic book based on the most external, catechistic and
sentimental aspects of Christianity ; and yet it was the very Papini who had
previously introduced young people to the figures of mystics like Meister
Eckhart, and to esoteric works which could lead to very different horizons
through the genuine, traditionalist transcendence of intellectualistic, anarchic
individualism." (p. 12) "the genuine, traditionalist transcendence of
intellectualistic, anarchic individualism"?
"… e scritti sapienziali che avrebbero avviato verso ben diversi orizzonti, nel
caso di un vero superamento in senso tradizionale dell'individualismo
intellettualistico e anarchico" means "… and to wisdom writings/works which
could/would have lead to very different horizons, through the overcoming in a
traditional sense of intellectualistic, anarchic individualism."
--- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "Michael" <ouro_boros@...> wrote:
>
> You have retyped the passage from the Arktos edition incorrectly. It actually
reads: "And while I recognised the validity of Catholicism as a positive
religion, I also personally witnessed the disgraceful effects of its dissolution
into emotional, sentimental and moralistic forms in the context of modern
bourgeois society..." So I don't see where the difference is between your
preferred translation and what is printed.
>
>
>
> --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "Evola" <evola_as_he_is@> wrote:
> >
> > No matter how unambiguous grammatically, how clear lexically, J. Evola's
prose on Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular tends, who knows
why, to excite the imagination of some translators at the expense of the actual
content. The elegant English translation of 'Il Cammino del cinabro' published
by Arktos in 2009, which we have finally just started to read, does not
constitute an exception : the Italian author makes it clear in the first chapter
that "Circa il cattolicesimo in quanto, in generale, religione positiva, si
manifesterano anche nel mio caso gli effetti deprecabili del suo essersi ormai
ridotto a forme devozionale..." : "With respect to Catholicism as a positive
religion in general, I also personally witnessed the disgraceful effects of its
dissolution into emotional forms...", translated in the Arktos edition, who
knows why, as "And while I recognized the validity of Christianity as a positive
religion, I also personally witnessed the disgraceful effects of its dissolution
into emotional forms..." (p. 9), which is an utter misinterpration, as regards
the first clause.
> >
>