| |
|
I said:
but I think it's not so much a question of whether they're translated or not as it is whether they're good enough to justify a translation - and, in my opinion, I believe portuguese literature doesn't meet the standards of general literature.
and Jupiter asked:
In which grounds do you justify this statement, L M Rosa?
And what are the standards of general literature?
First of all, let me tell you I narrowed the list to the creme de la creme of Portugese writers - I’m not talking about popular writers who would justify a translation in economical terms, but writers whose work is good in itself for literary achievement rather than following a profitable formula.
Because in Portugal nowadays, there are some 'rules' a writer must follow to achieve fame and money: can't be more than 250 pages; the book must have always a happy ending, a marriage being optional; it must always be a story of success; and humour and swearing are more important than characterisation, setting, plot. Basically, as long as the main character wins in the end, the book is bound to be a success. I can't find a worst formula unless I try a Harlequin novel, or the Cinderella story over and over again.
Of course, all this is an illusion: that's not how real life is, but this is what the public wants, and so that's what modern writers write; these are what I call 'hacks' because they write simply for the money.
So I’m concentrating on writers who are good for their literary craft rather than their will to please the masses.
Now, as to what I call 'standards of general literature' - for it's my opinion only, which I made from comparing portuguese with 'foreign' literature, and I’m not asking you to agree with me:
A book should deal with pertinent matters that are part of our daily lives, without minimising its relevance and exposing its true cruel reality - I’m talking books on war, drugs, child molestation shouldn't submit to hollywoodised visions just because people don't want to face reality or have a political correct conception of it -; every time a book deals with a theme that was explored by past books, it should write it from a new point of view to bring a different aspect to light and thus be independent in itself; a writer shouldn't start a novel thinking it will automatically be accepted by the public, but must nevertheless deal with subjects that might upset society, bring such subjects to the public fore for awareness, which leads me to another point: books are educational tools, devices to raise consciences and even change society.
Of course, books must also be entertaining: don't think books would sell at all if they didn't entertain; irony, sarcasm and wit à la Wilde are excellent ways of captivating the reader - and these latter qualities are what is lacking in portuguese literature, in my opinion.
This is how I see P. literature, and if you would read it you would agree: it's melancholic without being captivating - Kafka's The Process is very melancholic, but also very entertaining and didactic - it's very repetitive in that all books tackle the same subject over again - in truth, I think we're still Romantics here - and prefer the depth of feeling rather than form or intellectual ideas; it also lacks something I still haven't mentioned about the 'standards of general literature': P literature doesn't stimulate me or inspire me, it doesn't make me think beyond what I’m reading, and it's very static and devoid of passion.
You might think, Jupiter, that I’m making a bleak and unfair portrait of it all, but I can't justify my grounds until you read a portuguese book to see for yourself; perhaps then you'll disagree, I don't know, this is simply how I see it, and everyone else I know thinks otherwise.
But, to quote Grant, It didn't really grab me. |
|
|
