Pizarnik’s Árbol de Diana
To my best knowledge, there have been only two full translations of Alejandra Pizarnik's Árbol de Diana; that is, Graziano (1987) and Bassnett (2002). Now I shall add my version of The Tree of Diana to the mix.
I am so much more comfortable with the ancient religions than I am with the modern ones. Pizarnik seems so too. It is the goddess Diana, the face on the other side of the mirror, the shadowy "other" she keeps searching for. The Encyclopedia Mythica has this to say about Diana:
Originally a goddess of fertility … [Diana] was worshipped mainly by women as the giver of fertility and easy births. Under Greek influence she was equated with Artemis and assumed many of her aspects. Her name is possibly derived from 'diviana' ("the shining one"). She is portrayed as a huntress accompanied by a deer. Diana was also the goddess of the Latin commonwealth.
Never mind how difficult this poem is to translate. Never mind the psychological borders one must cross in order to begin to understand what it is Pizarnik attempts to communicate. One must start by listening. Slavoj Zizek compares Pizarnik's poem with Plato's Theory of the Cave, concluding1:
… Recall Nietzsche's complaint in Thus Spoke Zarathustra (Prologue, 5): "Must one smash their ears before they learn to listen with their eyes?" Is this complaint about the difficulty of teaching people how to listen not ambiguous? Does it mean that it is difficult to learn to listen with one's eyes, or that it is simply difficult to learn to truly listen? In other words, if we follow Wagner's Tristan (who, while dying, shouts: "I see her /Isolde's/ voice"!) and accept, as one of the definitions of modern art, that one has to listen to it with eyes, does this mean that one can truly hear (hear the silence, the silent Message-Thing covered up by the chatter of words) only with one's eyes? Is, consequently, modern painting (as it is indicated already by Munch's Scream) not a "sound of silence", the visual rendering of the point at which words break down? And, incidentally, this is also how the critique of ideology (whose Platonic origins one should unabashedly admit) functions: it endeavors to smash our ears (hypnotized by the ideology's siren song) so that we can start to hear with our eyes (in the mode of theoria).
This is only the first eighteen stanzas of the poem. I will conclude the rest tomorrow when I have more time. Still, how ahead of her time was Pizarnik? Or perhaps I should say, how easy would she be able to slide into our conversations, our discourse, had we let her in? Compare all this with a quote from Gina Franco, who writes in her blog:
The kids are watching Labyrinth. Am noticing this little turn of phrase (gaze?) for the first time:
"Your eyes can be so cruel
Just as I can be so cruel"What the eyes I. "I can't live within you."
Yes, I should conclude this as follows: what curious orbs, smash our ears so that the ancient primal force can be let in, so we can start to hear once again.
I should.
| Árbol de Diana Alejandra Pizarnik |
The Tree of Diana translated by ZJC |
|---|---|
|
1. 2. 3. cuídate de mí amor mío 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. |
1. I have jumped from my body to the dawn. I have left myself fixed to the light I sang the grief of what is being born. 2. 3. caution, my love 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. |
- The translation of this on-line essay is not mine, so I did not bother to "clean" it up, rather I found the translation itself a curious tool in and of itself [back]