What Can We Learn From King James?
by MICHELE GIBSON
EDITOR: Three centuries after the investiture of the final compilation of the Adi Granth as our living, perennial and only Guru; and more than a century after Sikhs in large numbers began to make their home in different parts of the globe, we as a worldwide community are face-to-face with two crucial questions:
First, do we need a 'definitive' translation of the Guru Granth Sahib in the lingua franca of much of humanity today - namely, English?
A number of good translations are now freely available, not only in English, but also in many of the world's major languages. But there is general consensus that a more ambitious and collective project needs to be undertaken to produce a 'King James' -style version - if I may be allowed to use the term as an adjective - which captures the meaning and message, beauty and poetry, song and music, mysticism and spirituality, of the original 1430 pages ... as far as it is humanly possible ... in the full glory of the English language. Not to replace the original in any way whatsoever, but to provide an aid, a key, a door, an introduction - to the endless riches of the Guru.
Second, how do we go about it?
Before we even begin to seek the answers, we need to understand the ambit and import of the questions themselves.
The exercise we will invariably have to embark upon is not entirely novel or unique to the human experience. As already alluded to above, we have the precedent of the renowned 'King James' translation of the Christian Bible - one of several such ventures - which was undertaken around the very time that Guru Arjan set about to compile the Adi Granth.
The 'King James' project was plagued by every human weakness and challenge imaginable: ego, arrogance, ambition, selflishness, politics, power-play, fraud, betrayal, dishonesty - all were present in the mix. And so were the best traits of human nature: dedication, commitment, scholarship, selflessness, spirituality, mysticism, and the desire to serve God and the greater good.
The result - though it took seven long years and forty-eight souls to tackle the usual hurdles and minefileds - was finally accomplished in 1611, when it was released with considerable pomp and ceremony by King James, at whose behest the job had been undertaken.
And it was a masterpiece. It is, four centuries later, arguably the greatest work in the English language. It guided Shakespeare's pen and, even today, it shapes the way you and I wield the English language.
Michele Gibson has studied the early 17th century King James project in detail and has compiled for us hereunder a brief history of the said translation.
It is not a process that can be or should be emulated in its entirety, but the summary below will enlighten us on the challenges we face if we do embark on this journey. Can we mimic some of the steps and stages and, at the same time, avoid the pitfalls?
WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM KING JAMES?
Translation is more than a function of identifying the equivalency between the words that represent external phenomena. Words themselves range in their ability to stand in for 'things' versus 'ideas' versus 'indescribable being'. In addition, language is alive, it ages, matures, grows and prunes. Yet our most important needs, collective consciousness, regard for the earth, or faith, are difficult enough to convey in a mother tongue, let alone find synonymous substitutes for them in a second language.
The King James Bible was not the first attempt to translate words from ancient languages, Hebrew and Greek, into similar words in a fledgling English. The translators were advised to freely utilize synonyms in order to advance the new language. They were encouraged to consult earlier English translations to achieve this, and they did. The Geneva bible, the Tyndale bible and the Coverdale bible all served as references for the task.
The translators themselves were a mixed group of academics and clergy, many with experience in teaching or preaching in Hebrew or Greek; poets, orators and philosophers by hobby, and eventually, on a stipend from the crown. Their own agendas and interpretations were constricted by their need to collaborate and compromise. Heavily edited and scrutinized by bishops, the privy council and by King James himself, and with the Archbishop of Canterbury secretly reviewing/ revising the end result, the 'Authorized Version' is, in a way, a pre-authorized one.
Before the translation work began, the group responsible were read the 'rules' on the expectations for the work which was to come. The translators were separated into groups, assigned readings, and set about their task, and the task took many years. In the pulpits, the bishops encouraged anyone with extensive knowledge in the area to submit their comments, concerns, and insights. For the academics, the work of teaching was sidelined for the new role. The translation is, in theory, inspired by a democratic process with a grass roots call for submissions.
The end result is an inspiring scripture and a work of literature that ultimately becomes a classic. This may be due to the beauty of the original work and the assumption that the translators got it right, every time. It may be as a result of sheer slogging, day and night, and such commitment that their sincerity augments every line. It may be that it is impossible to corrupt a book that has been inspired by God!
What is more likely though is that there was enough mature acquired knowledge at the table and in the field, and, though confined by a number of prescribed restrictions on academic freedom, enough raw intention and genuine love for the work in its original form that they knew, intuitively and collectively, what they were reaching for. The bible moves the soul to reach for a sense, and an entity, which is uplifting and humbling, inspiring and supporting, heart breaking and earth shattering at the same time. Surely, when one has been moved to faith, one remembers where it was that it took you, in any language.
The translators all hailed from the same general region. They may also have been selected for the moderation in their views. What results is a moderate interpretation, in a fairly homogenous dialect with the cadence of the sermon of a puritan preacher; the work referenced most often was the Geneva bible - the bible inspired by the presbyterian break away from the Church of England. From the perplexing and mystic hands of the bishops, and the Bishop's Bible, into the longing hands of the average citizen, comes the King James Version.
Inspiring poets and writers for centuries to come, unifying the language of four distinct nations and placing the bible into the hands of the masses, the King James Version displaces the Bishop's bible and the Geneva, but not without the backing of law, and the threat of treason.
But can scripture be translated into different languages under such limitations? What is lost if you strive for moderation? Does the moderate view actually grapple with and solve the doctrinal issues or is it just practical to try to please as many as possible? The work may be beautiful due to the sincerity of the translators and the voice of the original work, but does it achieve truth? Is truth to be achieved through scripture if scripture is buoyed by metaphor to inspire rapture, or does a concrete equivocation between languages reduce its mystical value?
The idea for the translation of the King James bible and the limits placed on the people responsible for it are interesting in and of themselves; politics, economics and ego all play a factor in this remarkable book, which - remarkably - resulted in a masterpiece. The inspiration of God and the sincerity of the goal is believed to elevate the work above the human limitations and, with the spread of English, it eventually inspires many more than the Hebrew and Greek original.
The desire to keep scripture accessible to as many as possible is inherently good, and if there is a cost in the process, hopefully the truth is so vast and fundamental that it beams through, regardless of the incidental symbols we choose to transport the sound of any given language.
April 6, 2010
http://www.sikhchic.com/history/what_can_we_learn_from_king_james
by MICHELE GIBSON
EDITOR: Three centuries after the investiture of the final compilation of the Adi Granth as our living, perennial and only Guru; and more than a century after Sikhs in large numbers began to make their home in different parts of the globe, we as a worldwide community are face-to-face with two crucial questions:
First, do we need a 'definitive' translation of the Guru Granth Sahib in the lingua franca of much of humanity today - namely, English?
A number of good translations are now freely available, not only in English, but also in many of the world's major languages. But there is general consensus that a more ambitious and collective project needs to be undertaken to produce a 'King James' -style version - if I may be allowed to use the term as an adjective - which captures the meaning and message, beauty and poetry, song and music, mysticism and spirituality, of the original 1430 pages ... as far as it is humanly possible ... in the full glory of the English language. Not to replace the original in any way whatsoever, but to provide an aid, a key, a door, an introduction - to the endless riches of the Guru.
Second, how do we go about it?
Before we even begin to seek the answers, we need to understand the ambit and import of the questions themselves.
The exercise we will invariably have to embark upon is not entirely novel or unique to the human experience. As already alluded to above, we have the precedent of the renowned 'King James' translation of the Christian Bible - one of several such ventures - which was undertaken around the very time that Guru Arjan set about to compile the Adi Granth.
The 'King James' project was plagued by every human weakness and challenge imaginable: ego, arrogance, ambition, selflishness, politics, power-play, fraud, betrayal, dishonesty - all were present in the mix. And so were the best traits of human nature: dedication, commitment, scholarship, selflessness, spirituality, mysticism, and the desire to serve God and the greater good.
The result - though it took seven long years and forty-eight souls to tackle the usual hurdles and minefileds - was finally accomplished in 1611, when it was released with considerable pomp and ceremony by King James, at whose behest the job had been undertaken.
And it was a masterpiece. It is, four centuries later, arguably the greatest work in the English language. It guided Shakespeare's pen and, even today, it shapes the way you and I wield the English language.
Michele Gibson has studied the early 17th century King James project in detail and has compiled for us hereunder a brief history of the said translation.
It is not a process that can be or should be emulated in its entirety, but the summary below will enlighten us on the challenges we face if we do embark on this journey. Can we mimic some of the steps and stages and, at the same time, avoid the pitfalls?
WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM KING JAMES?
Translation is more than a function of identifying the equivalency between the words that represent external phenomena. Words themselves range in their ability to stand in for 'things' versus 'ideas' versus 'indescribable being'. In addition, language is alive, it ages, matures, grows and prunes. Yet our most important needs, collective consciousness, regard for the earth, or faith, are difficult enough to convey in a mother tongue, let alone find synonymous substitutes for them in a second language.
The King James Bible was not the first attempt to translate words from ancient languages, Hebrew and Greek, into similar words in a fledgling English. The translators were advised to freely utilize synonyms in order to advance the new language. They were encouraged to consult earlier English translations to achieve this, and they did. The Geneva bible, the Tyndale bible and the Coverdale bible all served as references for the task.
The translators themselves were a mixed group of academics and clergy, many with experience in teaching or preaching in Hebrew or Greek; poets, orators and philosophers by hobby, and eventually, on a stipend from the crown. Their own agendas and interpretations were constricted by their need to collaborate and compromise. Heavily edited and scrutinized by bishops, the privy council and by King James himself, and with the Archbishop of Canterbury secretly reviewing/ revising the end result, the 'Authorized Version' is, in a way, a pre-authorized one.
Before the translation work began, the group responsible were read the 'rules' on the expectations for the work which was to come. The translators were separated into groups, assigned readings, and set about their task, and the task took many years. In the pulpits, the bishops encouraged anyone with extensive knowledge in the area to submit their comments, concerns, and insights. For the academics, the work of teaching was sidelined for the new role. The translation is, in theory, inspired by a democratic process with a grass roots call for submissions.
The end result is an inspiring scripture and a work of literature that ultimately becomes a classic. This may be due to the beauty of the original work and the assumption that the translators got it right, every time. It may be as a result of sheer slogging, day and night, and such commitment that their sincerity augments every line. It may be that it is impossible to corrupt a book that has been inspired by God!
What is more likely though is that there was enough mature acquired knowledge at the table and in the field, and, though confined by a number of prescribed restrictions on academic freedom, enough raw intention and genuine love for the work in its original form that they knew, intuitively and collectively, what they were reaching for. The bible moves the soul to reach for a sense, and an entity, which is uplifting and humbling, inspiring and supporting, heart breaking and earth shattering at the same time. Surely, when one has been moved to faith, one remembers where it was that it took you, in any language.
The translators all hailed from the same general region. They may also have been selected for the moderation in their views. What results is a moderate interpretation, in a fairly homogenous dialect with the cadence of the sermon of a puritan preacher; the work referenced most often was the Geneva bible - the bible inspired by the presbyterian break away from the Church of England. From the perplexing and mystic hands of the bishops, and the Bishop's Bible, into the longing hands of the average citizen, comes the King James Version.
Inspiring poets and writers for centuries to come, unifying the language of four distinct nations and placing the bible into the hands of the masses, the King James Version displaces the Bishop's bible and the Geneva, but not without the backing of law, and the threat of treason.
But can scripture be translated into different languages under such limitations? What is lost if you strive for moderation? Does the moderate view actually grapple with and solve the doctrinal issues or is it just practical to try to please as many as possible? The work may be beautiful due to the sincerity of the translators and the voice of the original work, but does it achieve truth? Is truth to be achieved through scripture if scripture is buoyed by metaphor to inspire rapture, or does a concrete equivocation between languages reduce its mystical value?
The idea for the translation of the King James bible and the limits placed on the people responsible for it are interesting in and of themselves; politics, economics and ego all play a factor in this remarkable book, which - remarkably - resulted in a masterpiece. The inspiration of God and the sincerity of the goal is believed to elevate the work above the human limitations and, with the spread of English, it eventually inspires many more than the Hebrew and Greek original.
The desire to keep scripture accessible to as many as possible is inherently good, and if there is a cost in the process, hopefully the truth is so vast and fundamental that it beams through, regardless of the incidental symbols we choose to transport the sound of any given language.
April 6, 2010
http://www.sikhchic.com/history/what_can_we_learn_from_king_james