You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.21 AVERAGE
4.21 AVERAGE
Must have bookmarked over 50 pages of this book, and those were only for poems that I told myself I had to comeback and read. So much good content, to be read multiple times over a lifetime.
"Lihatlah bagaimana aku mengenal ada dari yang tiada." --Hal. 133.
Absolutely wonderful collection of poems by a 13th century Sunni Muslim/Sufi mystic. I enjoyed reading the religious perspectives Rumi put forth in his various works, as well as the general expectations he had regarding human existence.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
sad
tense
slow-paced
People have a lot of opinions about Barks as translator, and I don’t have any knowledge to speak to that. But I did love this work as is.
Brilliant and surprising, just as beautiful as I was hoping—I wasn’t expecting such graphic donkey metaphors, but he definitely utilized them to make his point.
It kind of made me like poetry and I dont normally like poetry. Rumi is great!
Coleman Barks did not speak or read Persian when he decided to "translate" Rumi. Others have compared this to translating Shakespeare while not knowing English, Dostoyevsky while not knowing Russian, or Hugo while not knowing French; I agree with all of the above. His "translations" are really more like paraphrases or interpretations if not flat-out guesses based on previous English translations of Rumi (incl. Moyne, Nicholson, etc.). Barks also skipped entire lines, combined others, and blended multiple poems into one "translation." Majid Naficy wrote that the "essential problem of Coleman Barks lies in the fact that in his version he intentionally changes Rumi."
As an example, here is a poem "translated" by Barks:
Rozina Ali wrote that "the Rumi that people love is very beautiful in English, and the price you pay is to cut the culture and religion." Removing the Islam from Rumi is akin to removing the Judaism from Leonard Cohen. It's not merely inaccurate but also incredibly offensive. Barks has no scholarly background in Islam, Sufism, Persian history, or anything at all besides a degree in literature. He was given an honourary degree from Tehran University, but that's it. All the "work" he's done "bringing" Rumi to the Western world is for naught when it's not actually Rumi he's brought.
Two English versions of Rumi that are actual translations from the original language are [b:Rumi: Hidden Music|225833|Rumi Hidden Music|Rumi|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1387712455l/225833._SX50_.jpg|52233876] (translated by Maryam Mafi) and [b:Words of Paradise: Selected Poems|265564|Words of Paradise Selected Poems|Rumi|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1173255928l/265564._SX50_.jpg|257461] (translated by Raficq Abdulla). Both of these would be more accurate than Barks's whitewashed attempt, although that bar is low. I would also recommend Jawid Mojaddedi's excellent translation.
As an example, here is a poem "translated" by Barks:
Out beyond ideasA more literal translation of the poem (c/o Persian Poetics) would be:
of wrongdoing and rightdoing,
there is a field.
I'll meet you there.
Beyond kufr and Islam there is a desert plain,This is insulting. It borders on outright Orientalism and Anglocentric cultural supremacy. Translation is not only an art but also a science, and highly political. The job of a translator is to present the work as it was in the original language, as close as is possible to the original text while being comprehensible to the audience in the target language; it's up to that audience to interpret and judge as desired. Although it is true that all translation will inherently alter the original text to some extent, as is the nature of translation itself, there are degrees of accuracy to translation, just as there are to any type of scholarly interpretation. If the translator (or "translator") does not even try to preserve an author's work in such a way that it would be recognisable as the same text, the translator has failed. What Barks has done is not the same as translating Rumi's poetry. Interpretation is not translation. This is not a translation of Rumi. You cannot have the "essential" Rumi without the religion.
in that middle space our passions reign.
When the gnostic arrives there he'll prostrate himself,
not kufr, not Islam, nor is there any space in that domain.
Rozina Ali wrote that "the Rumi that people love is very beautiful in English, and the price you pay is to cut the culture and religion." Removing the Islam from Rumi is akin to removing the Judaism from Leonard Cohen. It's not merely inaccurate but also incredibly offensive. Barks has no scholarly background in Islam, Sufism, Persian history, or anything at all besides a degree in literature. He was given an honourary degree from Tehran University, but that's it. All the "work" he's done "bringing" Rumi to the Western world is for naught when it's not actually Rumi he's brought.
Two English versions of Rumi that are actual translations from the original language are [b:Rumi: Hidden Music|225833|Rumi Hidden Music|Rumi|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1387712455l/225833._SX50_.jpg|52233876] (translated by Maryam Mafi) and [b:Words of Paradise: Selected Poems|265564|Words of Paradise Selected Poems|Rumi|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1173255928l/265564._SX50_.jpg|257461] (translated by Raficq Abdulla). Both of these would be more accurate than Barks's whitewashed attempt, although that bar is low. I would also recommend Jawid Mojaddedi's excellent translation.
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
slow-paced
slow-paced