Crisis and Form in the Later Writing of Ingeborg Bachmann: An Aesthetic Examination of the Poetic Drafts of the 1960s
Áine McMurtry
Bithell Series of Dissertations 39 / MHRA Texts and Dissertations 84•30 May 2012
- ‘There is precious little in McMurtry’s approach and textual interpretation that invites criticism. In fact, one so often feels compelled to applaud the subtlety of these examinations, the comprehensiveness of argument, and sheer erudition of the author... With this study McMurtry has positioned herself in the forefront of contemporary Bachmann scholarship.’ — Rüdiger Görner, Modern Language Review 109, 2014, 1144-45 (full text online)
- ‘The study’s solid grounding in Bachmann research, and modern European literature in general, means that it provides a useful starting point for readers who are new to Bachmann’s work, academics interested in modern literature or philosophy, and Bachmann scholars in search of a new perspective on her work.’ — Lina Fisher, German Quarterly 2013, 110-12
Translating the Perception of Text: Literary Translation and Phenomenology
Clive Scott
Legenda (General Series) •10 October 2012
- ‘In echoing Walter Benjamin’s disapproval of the view that a translation is intended for ‘readers who do not understand the original’, Clive Scott convincingly argues in favour of translation as a literary art that helps promote the language of the source text rather than seeks to provide substitutes for it.’ — Ramona Fotiade, French Studies 68.1, January 2014, 143-44
- ‘The literary translation urged on us in this seismic manifesto is neither the creation of an object nor the reaching of a target: ‘Translation’s area of operation is not two langues, but language itself, and translation’s business is not merely to provide a version of a text, but to make the provision of that version a fruitful con- tribution to the development of the expressive potentialities of the language medium’.’ — unsigned notice, Forum for Modern Language Studies 50.1, January 2014, 130-31
- ‘The real achievement of this volume, I think, is that it pushes for an overhaul of current understanding of the task of the (literary) translator. Even readers and translators who reject some of his individual claims and particular ideas will find that the thrust of the work as a whole leaves a lasting impression. If all this does is serve to remind the translator not to translate as would a machine (word for word, from one language to another, searching for sameness), this is still a valuable contribution.’ — Mairi McLaughlin, Comparative Literature Studies 52.3, 2015, 653-56