-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Chapman's Homer
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:10:35 -0700
From: Mike Marcus <mmkcm@COMCAST.NET>
To: <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
CC: Mike Marcus <mmkcm@COMCAST.NET>

Mike M writes:

I imagine there's been plenty of speculation on Pale Fire's 'On Chapman's Homer', relating to Keats' poem, CK's ignorance of baseball (assuming an editorial transposition -- well, he never excelled at sport), whether the Sox really did win 5-4. I suspect that there's been less ink spilled on Chapman himself, the one who performed the translation. His translation is probably not one that would have met with Nabokov's approval. 'Free' scarcely describes it, when you compare it to more literal efforts; at times it is a reinterpretation of, or commentary on Homer.

Chapman has been linked with Shakespeare's sonnets as possibly being the 'rival poet'. The only reason to mention this is that the game Nabokov concocts is between the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees, whose rivalry is legendary, and already existed when he wrote Pale Fire. The juxtaposition of a famous/notorious sports rivalry with a poetic one is not inconceivable.

The case for Chapman as the rival poet was most extensively elaborated by Arthur Acheson in his 'Shakespeare and the Rival Poet' (1903), though the evidence doesn't always support his specific conclusions throughout the book. J. M. Robertson ('Shakespeare and Chapman', 1917) came to a similar conclusion about Chapman, albeit disavowing some of Acheson's methods. Robertson (p. 12, fn) draws attention to one very interesting example of Chapman's response to Shakespeare's verse. In his play Sir Gyles Goosecappe, written about 1602 it is believed, a doctor, called perversely Veroles, is consulting with his patient. Mid-way through his speech, Veroles says
" ... do not make / Those ground works of eternity, you lay / Means to your ruin, and short being here:'

No need to try to make sense of it. But look at Shakespeare's sonnet 125, whose lines 3-4 read like this:
"Or laid great bases for eternity, which prove more short than waste or ruining".

Shakespeare first, then Chapman, compare & contrast:
Laid = lay; great bases = ground works; eternity = eternity; short = short; ruining = ruin.

Robertson commented: "The coincidence is rather curious". I suppose when one poet (Chapman) butchers another's poetry, it is curious.

Google Search the archive Contact the Editors Visit "Nabokov Online Journal" Visit Zembla View Nabokv-L Policies Manage subscription options Visit AdaOnline View NSJ Ada Annotations Temporary L-Soft Search the archive

All private editorial communications are read by both co-editors.