Category: Opera

  • When bad translations are good

    Today I ran across an example of a category most people don’t know about: extremely close translations for opera singers.

    I say “close” rather than “literal” because it’s not just about communicating the exact meaning, but also keeping words in mostly the same order so that you could basically nail the target sentence on top of the source sentence and they’d match up nicely. Here’s one from my own sheet music collection:

    By conventional standards, this is the worst translation ever. But it’s just what singers need if they aren’t fluent in the language of the song (which many of them aren’t, especially if they’re just starting out). They have to know what each word means so they can sing them with appropriate emphasis and expression.

    I unexpectedly ran across one of these today. I was searching for the libretto of The Merry Widow online to see how previous translators had handled a pun in the spoken dialogue. The first result was this.

    Opening lines:

    Verehrteste Damen und Herren | Most honorable ladies and gentlemen
    Ich halt es für Gastespflicht, | I hold it as duty of a guest
    Den Hausherrn dankend zu feiern, | The host of the house thankfully to fete
    Doch Redner – das bin ich nicht! | Yet, a speaker – that I am not!

    At first I thought it was just a terrible translation, because most of the libretto translations available online are intended for listeners and readers, rather than singers – in other words, they’re mostly “good” translations for people who want to read along with a recording or study the libretto as literature. I wondered if it was an MT (e.g. Google Translate) job but that didn’t seem quite right. The translator’s name appeared at the end and I looked her up – it turns out she was a language coach at Opera San Jose, which explains everything. She was not (as I initially suspected) a crazy person, but rather someone with the very specific job of helping opera singers understand their lines with maximum accuracy.

    The reason I thought it probably wasn’t MT is that machine translators never follow source-language word order that closely. So you actually can’t get an MT to do a job like that. It’s programmed to translate into normal English word order, not the very close word order needed for these learning aids.

    Here’s how 1. Google Translate and 2. DeepL render the opening lines:

    1. Dearest ladies and gentlemen,
    I consider it a guest obligation
    To thank the host,
    But speakers – I am not!

    2. Dear Sirs,
    I consider it a guest duty,
    To celebrate the landlord with thanks,
    But I’m not a talker!

    I like how DeepL assumed it was a letter.

    Anyway, both of those are terrible. But – happily for language coaches at the opera – neither of them is terrible in the right way.

  • Senta spinnt

    The Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra put on an excellent concert performance of Der fliegende Holländer (The  Flying Dutchman) last week. Soprano Melody Moore brought the house down with her powerful singing and her spirited characterization of Senta.

    Speaking as someone with a degree in Complaining About Wagner, I must admit I really like this opera. It’s probably my favorite Wagner opera — and yes, I know that means I’ll never win the Wagner Snob of the Year award, but that’s OK. Superfans who attain enlightenment by boring themselves to death at Tristan und Isolde or Parsifal are welcome to it.

    One line jumped out at me from the spinning scene (go to 46:00 if it doesn’t take you straight there):

    Mary, who’s trying to keep the girls on task, says to Senta:

    Du böses Kind! Wenn du nicht spinnst,
    vom Schatz du kein Geschenk gewinnst.

    (You naughty girl, if you don’t spin,
    you’ll get no gift from your sweetheart. )

    It’s mildly amusing because in modern colloquial German, if someone “spins” it means they’re crazy. Du spinnst = you spin = you’re nuts! (Whereas in Wagner’s time a crazy person was “toll” but nowadays that would mean they’re cool.)

    I wondered how the best free machine translator, namely DeepL, would handle this. Behold:

    If you’re not crazy, from the treasure you don’t win a gift.

    And Google Translate says: If you are not crazy, from the treasure you win no gift. (wrong and awkward)

    This is a reasonable error for MT to make because it’s entirely possible that every single time it’s encountered “du spinnst” in a text, “you’re crazy” has been the correct translation. But it’s still wrong. I tried giving it some more context in case it had been programmed to recognize names from classic literature:

    MARY (to Senta): You evil child! If you are not crazy, from the treasure you don’t win a gift.

    No luck. You’ve probably also noticed the other big error here: “Schatz” does mean “treasure” but in this context it means “sweetheart.” In a similar vein, DeepL translates “I love my sweetie pie” as “Ich liebe meinen süßen Kuchen” (with “süße Torte” and “süße Pastete” as equally clueless alternatives).

    It’s interesting to consider how much effort you, as a human, have to expend to understand what is going on in this scene and determine what the correct translation of “du spinnst” would be — practically none. Whereas the best MT, despite its speed, has no idea what a spinning wheel is, no concept of how and why words acquire new meanings over time, and no ability to think, “Is this a proverb? Is it from a fairy tale? An opera? I’d better check.”

    And actually, you might come out of The Flying Dutchman thinking Senta’s a little crazy. But DeepL doesn’t think at all.

  • Medieval love poetry: sexier than you might think

    Richard Wagner mined most of his opera plots from medieval sources. Here’s an intro to Tannhäuser:

    Legend has it that back in 1207 or so, Landgrave Hermann of Thuringia invited the most accomplished minstrels in the land to battle it out at the Wartburg castle in Eisenach. In German they call this the Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg and the proper name for a medieval German minstrel is a Minnesänger. Here’s the original group photo, with Hermann and his wife Sophie above, and the Minnesänger below:

    http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/cpg848/0434

    If you’re familiar with Wagner’s Tannhäuser, you know that the title character gets invited to this party and scandalizes everyone by expressing incorrect opinions about love. But Tannhäuser wasn’t actually invited — he belonged to a younger generation with a different party scene. In the original story, the offense was caused by Heinrich von Ofterdingen praising Leopold of Austria over Landgrave Hermann.

    Now, if you were invited to show off your poetic talents at a castle, what would you say to your host, who took the time to organize this event and spent untold amounts on extra firewood, beer, small animals, and larger animals to stuff the small animals into? “Leopold of Austria really puts you to shame”? Of course not! You have better manners than Heinrich von Ofterdingen.

    But manners aside, you’re probably not very interested in whether Hermann or Leopold was doing a better job of ruling a chunk of central Europe. So Wagner made a smart move here: he had the singers fight over love rather than politics.

    He did this by combining the Sängerkrieg legend with that of Tannhäuser. Tannhäuser was a real person; between 1245 and 1265, he wrote a number of bawdy lyric poems with a light, ironic perspective. A “penitential song” is also attributed to him, and the Manesse manuscript (a famous repository of medieval German poetry and source of the group photo above) shows him wearing the garb of the Teutonic Order:

    Tannhäuser in the Codex Manesse (http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/cpg848/0523)

    These real-life elements laid the groundwork for the Tannhäuser legend: the poet finds his way into Venus’ mountain lair, where endless sensual delights await. Eventually, jaded by hedonism, he repents but the Pope denies him absolution. Tannhäuser despairs of forgiveness and returns to the infamous love den, there to await God’s final judgement on the Last Day.

    In the late-medieval/early modern ballads, that’s it for him. In the opera, he is saved by the prayers of Elisabeth, a character inspired by Landgrave Hermann’s daughter-in-law St. Elizabeth of Hungary.

    Wagner took a dualistic approach to this tale. In his version of the Wartburg poetry slam, the good poets advocate a purely spiritual love and Tannhäuser, the debauched poet, is the only one among them who does not regard sexual intercourse with prudish horror. This take has a few problems. For one thing, it creates a simplistic plot with little real human interest.

    Wagner’s perspective was basically post-Christian, so he found it easy to imagine the medieval mind as committed to unbearably sharp distinctions with no grey areas, venial sins, or Purgatory. But a Christian society understands that only a tiny spiritual elite will throw themselves into thorny bushes to banish lustful thoughts, or refuse to participate in any conversation that does not revolve around The Divine Bridegroom. The rest muddle through ambiguously, hoping that the elite will do some of the heavy lifting for them.

    Medieval sources reflect this ambiguity. The epic Parzival by Wolfram von Eschenbach has a moral structure under which real people could live; Wagner’s Parsifal does not. Tannhäuser suffers from the same difficulty.

    As Sir Denis Forman, once deputy chairman of the Royal Opera House in Covent Garden, put it, “Wagner was not a believer and wrongly thought that the spirituality which had inspired Bach’s B Minor Mass, the painting of the Florentines and Dante’s Inferno could be used by any good pro as a mechanism to wheel out a holy plot. Which it can’t, because when false piety is rumbled there is nothing left but kitsch. That is why the pilgrims trudging to and from Rome are cardboard figures, why Elisabeth is no more than a nutcase, why the Minnesängers are a comical band of prefects at a pious public school and why Tannhäuser himself is a ludicrous figure.” (And Sir Denis was a Wagner fan.)

    A ludicrous figure

    Another problem is Wagner’s portrayal of medieval love poetry. In the opera’s second act, the poets are asked to define the nature of love, whereupon they sing solemnly of unsullied fountains and cold stars whose purity they would defend with their last drop of blood. Even before Tannhäuser admits to having dwelt in the Venusberg, the other poets threaten him with swords just for mentioning “soft flesh” and “enjoyment in happy desire.” Angels and ministers of grace defend us!

    Many people still have this idea of medieval courtly love — that you were supposed to honor your beloved so much you wouldn’t dream of touching her. But we really get this idea from Wagner and other dreamy Romantics like Hoffmann and Novalis. Although the Minnesänger discouraged casual hookups, the love they encouraged did also aim at physical consummation.

    A handful of examples: Tristan and Isolde engage in flagrant acts of adultery, and author Gottfried von Strassburg treats it as an exemplary relationship with an aura of divinity. Wolfram von Eschenbach wrote dawn songs in which illicit lovers end up so tangled that “it would exhaust a painter’s talent to represent them”.  Walther von der Vogelweide’s references to sex are often coy – “a little bird will keep our secret”; “let us break these flowers together” – but he’s also happy to inform us about the time he spied on a young lady stepping out of her bath. The humor in one of his poems hinges on a woman’s failure to understand what a love affair entails. In response to the man’s explanation that, “You should give a man your body in exchange for his. Lady, if you want mine, I’ll give it away for such a beautiful woman.” She responds, “I can’t think of anyone whose body I would want to take – that sounds like it would hurt him.” Mm.

    They did like songs about worshiping unattainable ladies from afar, but they weren’t recommending it as an ideal — they were just seizing the chance to write mopey rhymes.

    Minnesang was a morally dubious art form by strict Christian standards. Although individual churchmen sometimes acted as patrons for them, the Church generally disapproved of wandering entertainers. The music pretty much died at Landgrave Hermann’s court after his pious successors Ludwig IV and St. Elizabeth took over. They took a dim view of courtly love poetry with its potential to incite lust and its emphasis on ephemeral worldly things.

    So the idea that Tannhäuser could scandalize a group of Minnesänger by praising carnal love is pretty silly. Far from being a guardian of moral purity, your average Minnesänger was probably hoping that when the time came he’d just scrape into Purgatory.

    Tannhäuser has its good points. The hysterical chastity is tiresome and it’s a travesty of medieval culture; but of course what draws audiences to it is the music, not the medievalism, and on that point I really can’t complain.

    The Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg, as imagined by Moritz von Schwind