a hypothesis stemming from the previous post

What is interesting about the previous post is that the phenomenon it describes seems counterintuitive.

If you hear the phrase “Oh, you have to read Author X in the original”… wouldn’t that normally sound like a compliment? It would sound roughly like “Author X is so stylistically brilliant that no translation can do it justice.”

But the previous post suggests that the opposite might be the case. It suggests that the best writers are the ones who are so powerful that they are able to shape any language into which they are translated– just as the strongest football clubs can win on the road as easily as at home.

As a control, who do I prefer in German rather than in English? Heidegger, who is not remotely in Nietzsche’s league in terms of literary talent.

In other words, contrary to the usual opinion, it might turn out to be the highest sign of stylistic greatness if it doesn’t matter what language an author is read in.

I’m not sure exactly what that would mean, but do have a vague idea. There seems to be a notion that good style means capitalizing on the idiosyncracies of one’s native tongue. But that’s probably not true; that’s probably the sign of a mid-level writer rather than a truly great one (just as table manners are more an obsession of the middle class than of the rich). I happen to think that style is more a matter of organizing thoughts than of exploiting the resources of a given language. Surely there’s no way to translate all of Shakespeare’s idiosyncracies, yet he’s enjoyed in every language. Obviously, something comes across in those translations.