Liza Marklund's second Annika Bengtzon novel, Studio Sex, published in the UK as Studio 69, and translated by Kajsa von Hoftsen, has now been released in a new edition and retitled Exposed.
It is not just the title that has changed. Exposed has a new translator, Neil Smith, who also translated Red Wolf.
And it shows. I've just downloaded the Kindle sample from Amazon and am comparing it with the 2003 Pocket Books (Simon &Schuster imprint).
S69 begins:
When she saw the salmon-pink panties hanging from a bush, her first reaction was one of outrage. Didn't young people respect anything these days? Not even the dead were allowed to rest in peace.
Exposed begins:
The first thing she saw was the pair of knickers hanging from a bush. They were swaying gently, their salmon pink standing out against the lush greenery. Her immediate reaction was anger. Young people had no respect for anything! They couldn't even let the dead rest in peace.
Knickers have become panties, and, tellingly, 35 words have become 48.
In paragraph three, the woman's dog - Jasper in S69, Jesper in Exposed - gives another clue to the contrasting sensibilities
S69: "The dog took a shit in the high grass next to the fence. She turned away, pretending not to see. No people were around this early in the morning..."
Exp: "The dog did a little sausage in the grass next to the railings. She looked away and pretended she hadn't seen. There was no one about at this time of day."
The woman offers her pet some dog treats.
In S69: "She gave the dog the bag's contents and put him back on the leash. It was time to go home. Jasper had had his treat. Now it was her turn - coffee and a bun."
In Exposed this becomes: "She fed the dog the entire contents of the bag, and took the opportunity to put him back on the lead. It was time to go home. Jesper had had his treats. Now it was her turn: coffee and a Danish pastry."
Oh, very interesting contrast between the two versions! Thanks for this. It is so fascinating to see how each translator has worked with the same material.
Posted by: Margot Kinberg | 06/07/2011 at 12:31 AM
Wow, those are huge differences -- I didn't realize how *much* a translator could matter.
Thanks for sharing.
Posted by: Karen Russell | 06/07/2011 at 04:06 AM
It's interesting, isn't it! I am going to spend a little while on this project over the summer. My initial impression is that Neil Smith's version is rather more creative, and is adding texture that makes the read more fluent in English. I am waiting for confirmation on this but I doubt the original refers to a "little sausage"!
Posted by: Philip | 06/07/2011 at 08:26 AM
Very interesting... it's almost as if Neil Smith's version is deliberately trying to be less crude, no?
As an aside, I've only read one Marklund novel. Is this one worth a read?
Posted by: kimbofo | 06/07/2011 at 09:35 AM
Kim, I think you would like Annika as a character, so, yes, Exposed is worth reading. I am not going to add much more on the translation until I have seen the Swedish version but I think it is more that Neil Smith is giving us what Marklund would perhaps write if she was writing in English, rather than a more faithful translation of the Swedish.
Where as I might say:" Excuse me, would you mind awfully coming in this general direction - if it is not too much trouble, of course," a polite Swede would say "Kom."
Posted by: Philip | 06/07/2011 at 01:40 PM
Interesting contrasts, indeed. To English eyes the Neil Smith versions are more readable I think (though the "sausage" is a bit precious). But in the US they do call them "panties", I've been roared with laughter at before now for using the term "knickers". I suppose it is a question of getting the right pitch for the right region.
I love Liza M's books, I think the best is Paradise but they are all good - I don't think she's all that much interested in crime resolutoins, but her accounts of Annika's and Anne's lives, and the newspaper offices (politics etc) are gripping.
This one is not one of her best but it is chronologically the first - I would think it worth reading!
Posted by: Maxine | 06/07/2011 at 06:07 PM
U.S. residents do not use the word "knickers." In fact, when I was younger, I would not even have known the word's meaning.
"Panties," or "underwear" is used over here. Even "underpants." Definitely not "knickers."
I think I like the older translated version. It's terser, more direct, less pretentious. Gets to the point right away. More like the Dashiell Hammell school of writing mysteries.
Posted by: kathy d. | 06/08/2011 at 12:50 AM