Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Group 2: Baylee W., Martin J., Rebecca G., Simon E., Suzie A.

Please select comments and follow the Letter Guidelines for your posts to the exchange.


Martin J., Chalmers said...

Hello Group!

My name is Martin and I study mechanical engineering at Chalmers University of Technology. The course 'Fiction for Engineers' is my first genuine literature course at an advanced level and I love how different it is from the normal day differential equations and mechanics.

I’m going to start with discussing the poem 'Track' or 'Tracks', and it gets interesting at once since even the title differs between the two translations. The Swedish word is the same in singular and plural form so it’s hard to know which to use. The feeling I get from the poem is one of twilight, the feeling of being half asleep or drop dead tired, staring out on a night scenery. Things blur and disappear. If I was to copy and paste my favorite translation of the poem it would be a mixture of both. I think Swenson’s start “Night, two o'clock: moonlight. The train has stopped in the middle of the plain” feels better than Bly’s but in the next sentence Bly’s “flickering coldly” matches my picture of the Swedish version better. Overall the language is very figurative. It’s easy to get a picture of the scene in your head. It’s remarking that none of the translators use “she” since it is a she that goes so far into a dream “that he'll never remember he was there” in the Swedish version.

I would also like to say a few words about 'Breathing Space July'. When I read the Swedish version I get the feeling of a summer day in the Swedish archipelago. Nostalgia from childhood days, half sleeping to the sound of the wind in the maples, hit me so hard I had to check for hammocks on eBay. I think Bly’s division of the text into three parts feels most natural. I’m having a hard time getting a grip of the last part though. Sometimes the English versions are easier to understand since they can give another angle of things and from Bly’s version “will fall asleep at last inside the shade of his blue lamp as the islands crawl like huge moths over the globe” is the only one that gives me a “mindpicture” that does makes some kind of sense. I see someone falling asleep in a room with a terrestrial globe lamp where the continents shade the blue ocean light like moths. Do you have a different picture?

Looking forward to hear from you!

Best regards,
Martin J.

Simon. E. Chalmers said...

Greetings members of group 2,

My name is Simon and I'm a third year computer science/engineering student at Chalmers, Sweden. My previous exposure to poems have been very limited so this is mostly new ground for me.

I'll try to convey what I got out from reading “I det fria” (In the Clear / Out in the Open)
First it's notable the there is two different titles for this poem. The Swedish sentences “I det fira” can be described as something being out, being unbound. Something can be release into the “fria”. I personally think that Out in the Open is a better translation, both as a direct translation but also taking the whole poem in consideration.

In the first part I feel that there is a huge contrast between nature and human.
Each time something from nature is mentioned, something man made will act as a counter part. “Woods are silent abandoned houses[..]” and “[..]the mushrooms [..] they look like objects and clothing left behind by people who've disappeared.”
This theme can also be applied in the third part. Where a man sits out in the open on a field (nature) and in an instances the a plane (man made) has casts its shadow over him.

I think these two following translations in the second part actually contains quite different meaning:
“Over there evil and good actually have faces.”
I get the feeling that over there, it exists people/organizations that take an absolute stance. They problems are simpler, reduced to black and white.

While in “Where you are, evil and good have opposite faces.”
the focus has shifted and it's now here (where the author is I presume) that evil and good is somewhat mixed, kind of a grayish zone. No mention of anyone taking stances.
The first translation is more in line with the Swedish original, but I'm interested to hear what you as native English speaker think about the differences between this two sentences. I'm also interested in how you interpret what the roots and numbers stand for in “For the most part with us it's a fight between roots, numbers, shades of light.”

Looking forward to reading your replies.
- Simon

Rebecca Gnosa said...

Dear Group Two,
Hello! My name is Rebecca. I don’t really know what to say about myself… I’m a first year student, majoring in Secondary Education. I want be an English teacher when I finish all of my studies. I hope you’re all doing great! This project is pretty nifty in my opinion, so I hope you guys enjoy it as much as I do :)

I want to start by commenting on the poem Track or Tracks. The translation by Robert Bly is much more appealing to me than the one by May Swenson. I feel like Bly’s word usage better communicates a setting and a real feeling … “bright points” just doesn’t sound as good as “sparks of light.” Bly’s translation has a more effective flow than Swenson, and conveys a sense of coldness that really makes the reader feel alone. Not necessarily “lost”; I don’t get that from the poem. If you’ve ever waited for the bus at night, I sort of get that feeling from Bly’s translation. It’s like, you know where you are, and maybe where you’re going, and you are alone but it’s okay to be a little sad. It is in this poem that I can smell the earth of the field and feel the chilled breeze. And in the other one, even though hers very nearly the same poem, it’s just not as touching to me. Swenson’s is disjointed and literal and thus, plain.

As far as form goes, it seems again to me, that Bly wins. His poem is more consistent to Transtromer’s awkward break in the third stanza, apparently on the word “swarm.” May Swenson just completely ignored that style in her translation. I would assume that the style is important, either to the poem itself or to the author. Maybe Swenson is trying to make the poem her own a bit? It is hard to tell which translator is more on par with the original, though it seems like “synranden” means horizon? Haha

Everyone is probably going to comment on the Track poems… I hope someone does I Det Fria. It was long, but I liked it. I just didn’t feel like talking about it. Maybe next time? Anyway, Best wishes!

Until next time,
Rebecca Gnosa

Baylee W., Clemson said...

Hi Group!

My name is Baylee and I am a freshman majoring in English at Clemson University. I am currently in a World Literature class, which is why I am doing this project.
I’m going to talk about the third poem with the four English translations. The first difference in the translations I noticed was the title. In Borei’s translation there is no title, whereas in the other translations they are either titled “Breathing Room: July” or “Breathing Space July.” Borei’s lack of a title leaves room for the readers to find the main idea of the poem for themselves. There is also a difference in the translations with titles. Swenson gives the poem the title “Breathing Room: July.” The colon in the title is intended to make the reader pause between “breathing room” and July. The use of the word “room” instead of “space,” which Fulton and Bly’s translations use, makes the area in the poem seem smaller than in the other two titles.
In Borei’s translation, “who” is used in the beginning of every stanza. The word “who” might refer to the poet not knowing who the person in the poem is. I also noticed that in the Swedish version “den” is used at the beginning of every stanza. I’m not really sure what “den” means in Swedish, but there is a similarity with the stanza’s beginning with “den” and “who.” Fulton and Bly’s translation refer to the person in the poem as “the man.” I believe this makes the poem more personal because it is about “the man,” one man. In Swenson’s translation, the poem does not seem to clarify who is in the poem. She refers to the character in the poem as “he” and “his,” but the use of these words make me feel like there is no real definition of who is in the poem like there is with “the man” in Fulton and Bly’s translations.
Overall, I like this poem. I think it is interesting how there can be many different interpretations of one poem when it is translated.

Looking forward to discussing the poems!

Suzie A, Clemson said...

Greetings Group Two!
My name is Suzie. I’m a freshman English major at Clemson University, and I’m interested in teaching English at a high school level once I’m finished with school. I’m more of a creative writer than anything else. I absolutely LOVE poetry and prose, so I’m really excited about this project.
I want to discuss the poems Track and Tracks. The translations are both relatively similar, but I find it interesting that a few of the discrepancies in word choice change the tone completely, and they also give away the translators’ style of writing.
“flickering sparks” v. “twinkling points” : Bly uses the first phrase, while Swenson chooses to use the second. The idea that the sparks are flickering conveys an image of light that is dying, and adds to the idea of sickness. On the other hand, the image of points that are twinkling has a gentler, more hopeful ring to it. Bly’s word choice suggests that the person experiencing the sickness has lost his/her grasp on his/her memories, whereas Swenson’s choice of words makes lend a fondness to the “former days.”
“entirely motionless” v. “perfectly still” : Bly’s diction implies a sort of deadness in reference to the train, as though it has not only stopped moving, but probably will not move again (at least any time soon). Swenson describes the train as perfectly still, which suggests a sort of peace that has befallen the train.
“strong moonlight” v. “full moonlight” : Strong moonlight conjures up an image of a bright moon with no clouds; a sort of blaring moonlight. However, full moonlight conveys the idea that the moon is there in total and its presence is obvious.
Bly’s diction gives way to the harshness and the desperation of the poem, while Swenson’s diction is softer and offers a more optimistic view of the subject’s situation. The one thing I would like to explore here is whether or not you all think that the diction is simply a personal choice or if it’s somehow connected to the genders of the translators.
Well, that’s all for me, for now! Can’t wait to discuss this all with you! :)
Suzie A.

Simon. E. Chalmers said...

- Letter 2 -
Hello everyone, I hope all of you are well.
It seems like most of you took a liking to the “Track(s)” poem, so I'll start off by sharing my reflection on your comments.

Sidenote: “synranden” literally means: at the edge off how far one can see, kind of implying that someone or something is looking, with some empathizes on sight/see/understanding. While “horisont” (the Swedish version of horizon) is more of the exact phenomena (or far away), where heaven and earth meet.

“The one thing I would like to explore here is whether or not you all think that the diction is simply a personal choice or if it’s somehow connected to the genders of the translators.” Suzie A.
I must confess that this idea never occurred to me and I think the gender places a minor role and it's more about the upbringing and education that changes the overall impression of the two translations.
May Swenson translation is in my option more faithful (on a word to word basis) to the original poem., could this been consequence of the fact that Swedish was her first language and English the second?
Robert Bly had ancestors from Norway, but it seems like English is his primary language.
Norwegian people has in general no problem reading Swedish, but still there could be somethings things added or lost while going the longer way through Swedish → Norwegian → English.

Regarding Breathing Space July
“ The word “who” might refer to the poet not knowing who the person in the poem is.”, Baylee W.
This is an interesting observation that I didn't not think of when I read the poem. I think the Swedish version and Sven Borei translation does not aim at a specific person in the poem at all. It's more a at set of relations, if a then b.
E.g. Who lies on his back under the high trees => is also there.
Who stands down by the docks => squints towards water.
While the other translations uses the same single person (the man) through out the poem.
How do you think about replacing “Who” with “He who”? Would that change anything?

“I see someone falling asleep in a room with a terrestrial globe lamp where the continents shade the blue ocean light like moths.” , Martin J.
I see a boat moving over the sea (but since speed is relative it would feels like the islands are moving) and the blue lamp is the sea reflecting the light from the sun. Total tranquility.

Best Regards
Simon E.

Letter 2 - Martin J., Chalmers said...

Glad påsk or Happy Easter!

Thank you for all the great letters! It is really interesting to read what all of you have analyzed. This is my last assignment before Easter break so I’m feeling really good!

Again, I will start off with considering “Track” or “Tracks”. I agree with both of you, Rebecca and Suzie, on how the interchange between two similar words can change ones feelings of a poem dramatically. The “twinkling bright points” sounds almost stultifying when compared to “flickering sparks of light”. It is almost as if Swenson is painting the picture of the scenery in my head with crayons while Bly is painting with aquarelle.

I saw that you noticed the word “synranden” Rebecca. One could say that it is a synonym to the Swedish word “horisont” which directly translates to “horizon” but I think that “synranden” translates better to something like “as far as your eyes can see” or “the edge of your vision”. I guess it’s practically the same thing but “synranden” somehow emphasizes the visual.

Over to “Breathing Space July”! Baylee, I really liked your passage about “who”, ”den” or ”the man”. Hopefully we can figure it out! I think the problem with the translation here is the difference in our languages use of definite article. “Den” is the definite form of “En”, like “The one” is the definite form of “One”. This forces an extra syllable into a word written in definite form which can be problematic, especially when translating poetry where syllables can be of such importance. If one were to translate the poem directly, taking no consideration to the flow or feeling to the poem, I think “the one” would be most appropriate. Since poems are all about flow and feeling though, it doesn’t surprise me that it is used by none of the translators. I think Boreis version skips the “den” altogether and goes directly on “som” and I am undecided on whether I like it or not. I think the Swedish version has this uncertainty that you speak of in Swensons version Baylee and I think that it is easier not to define “the one” in Swedish since you in Sweden are “lying on back” or “lying on the back” rather than “lying one your back” or “lying on his back”. How do you guys interpret the last part of the poem? I’m having a hard time understanding it.

Best regards,

Rebecca Gnosa said...

Dear Group Two,
I really appreciate everyone’s responses being in on time! Go us! Everyone’s thoughts seem pretty coherent too, awesome.

I’m glad there were comments on “I Det Fria” I read it again, and it really is my favorite from the selections. I totally agree with there being a definite contrast between the first part and the second two, but really it might go farther than that with, I guess, “man v. nature”, “man v. man”, and then “man v. self” with their religious reflections. It seemed to me that the first part was the result of being “driven out,” so the three parts just tell a story and we come in half way through. So he got a letter, was irked by it, and went out into the woods to reconnect his dots.

On the differences between “over there” and “where you are”: even those small word changes really decide how the rest of the poem is taken. I read the first one, the “Where you are, evil and good have opposite faces” onto “With us…” assuming the author to be speaking to whomever he got the letter from, or in response to them, even if they’ll never hear it. That keeps with the quick-yet-controlled sense of infuriation I get from the first translation. So it is like he’s saying “it’s easier for you. Where I am, it’s a whole different world” which is pretty neat, because the poem starts off in the woods—something natural, and then the translations allude to a city, where “nature” is controlled from little offices. So there’s a whole distinction between worlds.

More on those, to respond to Simon, I agree with your take on the two translated sentences, though personally, I didn’t really think of it when I read them. “Where you are, evil and good have opposite faces” and “Over there evil and good actually have faces.” I like that you took it to mean that the problems where “you” is are reduced to black and white. The speaker seems to think that makes his/her world easier, and simple compared to their world where it may be hard to decide what shade of grey a problem is…if that makes sense. I like that interpretation. But then, in Bly’s translation where the problems “actually have faces” it seems like the author is envious, or in awe of that world. It makes me think that whatever problems the author has in his world are not limited to things with “faces”… meaning that deciding what or who to trust is much more difficult…. So to explain in colors! From Swenson’s translation, I understand the two worlds to be Black and White versus Shades of Grey. And in Bly’s translation, the world with a face is perhaps a clear picture, compared to the complicated world, where it would be like looking through a kaleidoscope.

Wow, I wrote a lot. Oops. A few ending comments: Thanks for explaining “synranden” and “horizon” to me! It is really cool that you guys can kind of give us a look into comparing the Swedish and the English between the poems. It must give you a completely different view to look at, knowing where the translations actually come from. Anyway, thanks much for projecting with us! It’s been a great exchange :)
--Rebecca G.--

Baylee W. said...

Letter 2

Hello again group!

I enjoyed reading about everyone’s ideas about the poems. I realized a few things about the poems that I had not thought of. It seems that the “Track” poem was a little popular.

I am first going to respond to Martin’s comment on the “Track” or “Tracks” poem. I agree that May Swenson’s translation gives a better feel at the beginning than Robert Bly’s. Swenson’s translation seems to have a better flow. I also think Swenson’s ending “Two o’clock: full moonlight, few stars” flows better than Bly’s “2 o’clock: strong moonlight, few stars.” Describing the moon as “full” gives a better image of the setting of the poem. “Strong” describes the character of the moon rather than its physical appearance, which I do not think describes the imagery of the poem.

Each translation of the first poem describes the lights of the town differently. Bly describes the town lights as flickering whereas Swenson describes them as twinkling. I think flickering implies that the lights are going out. It is as if the lights are not very welcoming because they are “flickering coldly.” Twinkling implies that the lights are welcoming and will continue to stay on.

I also agree with Rebecca that it seems that May Swenson is trying to make the poem her own by failing to stick to the Swedish format of the poem. I’m not sure what the significance of the break in the third stanza of the first poem is. The poet may be trying to emphasize an idea or image that Swenson has neglected in her translation. This shows that translations of literature do not always do the original works justice. Important ideas the author is trying to emphasize can be lost, which pretty much defeats the purpose of the author creating his own work of literature.



Suzie A, Clemson said...

*Letter 2*
Hi, Group!
I’m really sorry that this is almost a day late. My schedule’s been pretty crazy as of late.
First, I’d like to say that I really enjoyed reading everyone’s responses to the original letters. I was particularly interested in the discrepancies between the original Swedish poems and the translations that we have to read. I have no knowledge of the Swedish language, so I only have the translations to go by. Martin and Simon, I envy your obvious advantage there. :)
Rebecca—you mentioned in your first letter that in the first poem (Track/Tracks), you believed that Bly took the cake, as far as the form of the poem was concerned. After scanning the poems again, I have to agree with you there. He managed to stay true to the form of the original and I overlooked that the first time. Nice job!
Simon—Thank you for exploring my idea about the genders of the translators. I’m glad that you were able to offer some background information on them, because I failed to look into that as I was first reading. I agree that gender doesn’t play as big a role as the upbringing of the translators now in retrospect. I liked Swenson’s version of the poem better to begin with, and I was happy to know that her translation was more closely related to the original Swedish than Bly’s.
There was a lot of discussion about the last of the poem. This may be a bit of a longshot, but when I first read the poem, I thought maybe Tomas was talking about God as the “who.” After closer examination, I’m kind of convinced that he may have been referring to the wind. I don’t know exactly what you all think about that, so it would be nice to get your thoughts in the next round of letters.
I’m anxious to hear from you all again. Enjoy your weekends!
Suzie A.

Letter 3 – Martin J., Chalmers said...

This last letter will be written in iambic pentameter.

“Describing the moon as “full” gives a better image of the setting of the poem. “Strong” describes the character of the moon rather than its physical appearance, which I do not think describes the imagery of the poem.” –Baylee

I agree that describing the moon as full is better than describing it as strong, but do you feel the same when it comes to describing the moonlight and not the moon itself? Is “full moonlight” something you could say naturally in English? Something that you hint that I also agree strongly with is that the imagery of Tranströmers poems is important. His language is very high-coloured and it feels like he is describing a picture in a beautiful way.

“This may be a bit of a longshot, but when I first read the poem, I thought maybe Tomas was talking about God as the “who.” After closer examination, I’m kind of convinced that he may have been referring to the wind.” –Suzie

This was a bit of an eye-opener for me. First I rejected the idea directly since I thought it was obvious that the “who” was anyone who “lies on his back…” or “stands by the docks…” but after some re-reading I realized that it might as well be the wind. I’m not convinced though but I definitely see your point.

One of the most interesting things that I’ve realized with this exchange is that the tiniest change in words or flow can change the feeling of a poem completely. Poetry must be among the most troublesome things you can translate. I think that to succeed in translating poetry you need to build a translation in close contact with the original author and have a give and take relationship since you’re both experts on your own language. Another thing I find interesting is the questions a poem asks and the answers it gives. When you read a poem some things feel obvious and some things feel unclear and I think that it differed between the translations. Like in “Andrum: Juli” I found it obvious who “who” or “den som” was, but in the English versions it was more a matter of interpretation. This opened up my mind to interpret it differently in Swedish as well, but then I started to overanalyze it and before I knew it I ended up with only questions and no theories. One thing is for sure, it’s hard to know if you get exactly what an author wants to say with a poem, but I do not see this as something negative since a part of the magic will always lie in the eye of the beholder.

I chose to illustrate my feelings of the poems “Spår” and ”Andrum: Juli” by finding some pictures that I think captures the mood of them.

“Andrum: Juli”:

First stanza:
Second and third stanzas:

Maybe not exactly this picture but it captures the bluish twilight that I sense in the poem.

Oh and about the iambic parameter thing and considering the date, in Sweden we have a tradition and a childhood verse which goes something like:

April, April you silly herring
I can fool you with anything

Thank you for this exchange!

Happy Easter,

Kayla W said...

Hello again to everyone!
After reading everyone’s first responses I definitely saw the trend of people choosing to discuss “Track” or “Tracks” and the conclusion of the sense of solitude and loneliness. I really enjoyed reading about Katherine’s observation on the use of the words flickering and twinkle. Although I did not ever notice the logistics behind the different words when I first read through the poems, I can definitely see the reasons why choosing two different words would be logical. I do agree with Katherine’s point that these words convey two different attitudes for the poem, and this being in the first stanza sets up the tone for the rest of the poem.
Matti’s translation of the words “fevery dream” and “open space” were very interesting to read and I really enjoyed his visualization he included with it. While reading both of these translations I pondered the lines about going so deep into a dream and the “sickness” one may feel from the extreme sense of solitude. I thought Matti did an excellent job in breaking these stanzas down into a picture that one can easily visualize and gain a sense of what the poet was trying to accomplish. His comment on realizing one’s insignificance in such a big world inducing solitude is exactly what I think the poem is trying to accomplish.
Commenting on Andy’s post was something I also noticed when reading through the translations of “Track(s).” Andy talks about how Robert Bly’s translation is a lot more ambiguous than May Swenson’s. That was something I noticed as well in more than one area. I thought in exemplifying the ambiguity that Bly’s translation has by using the line of where the train stops was successful. Swenson’s detail in saying the train has stopped in the middle of the field, although it does not say where the field is, is a lot more detailed than Bly’s “stopped out in a field.”

P.S. Sorry this is so late, I never realized til I received an email today that it didn't post on the original due date!

Simon. E. Chalmers said...

Letter 3

Greetings, it has been a very interesting read so far.
Here are a couple more of my thoughts about the poems.

I think that Suzie:s comment about the differences between “entirely motionless” (Robert B.) v. “perfectly still” (May S.) changed how I interpreted the poem significantly. The idea that “entirely motionless” implies deadness, a perhaps unnatural (and definitive) stop in the flow of things while “perfectly still” painted a more peaceful picture where the stop was always intended.
“Tåget står fullkomligt stilla.” could of course be translated in both ways, but in Swedish we have better ways to say “entirely motionless”; “helt orörlig” which Tranströmer did not use. Which leads me to the conclusion that “perfectly still” is a bit more along the lines with the original poem.
Robert B. also uses the “flickering light“ as some of you has commented on previously; which is also quite depressive/dark while May S. versions is a bit brighter.

While I only figured the “man v. nature” part of “I det fira”, Rebecca took it a couple of steps further with:
“man v. nature”, “man v. man”, and then “man v. self”, being the three sections of the poem.
I'm however wondering if “man v. men” or “man v. society” would fit the second part better.
“man v. man” gives me the feeling that very man has to fend for himself, while the poem uses “..they..“ which creates a feeling of a group of people, probably a whole society. I don't know if this is nitpick but I hope it could at least create an discussion.
And I don't think that it's any accident that the cross in the last part is described as a cross seen in a church. It could been one of two things, first the cross symbolizes a burden that someone has to carry which actually fits the poem nicely. Secondly it could just be a references to religion as one of the thing the man is facing which is also plausible. I'm feeling a bit stuck here so I'll move on.

As I mentioned in my first letter, my experiences with poems are very limited. But with all your interesting discussions I think I have gained new insights. I'm really fascinated that something can be translated in so many different ways, leading to totally different interpretations, and how hard it must be to stay true to the original authors words. The only way to succeed is probably to have a continues dialog with the original author.

A picture that cross my mind when a read the second part of the “I det fria” was
a very powerful image where you can see a man standing up against the many faces of “evil”.

I also though about Pale Blue Dot by Carl Sagan and
how insignificant we are against nature (I det fira), how small a person is and how beautiful the earth is (Andrum).

Best Regards to you all.

On a side note (since this post was quite long), I wonder why the Track(s) poem was the most discussed poem? Was it your favorite, or was it easy to read into? Out in the open is longer so there is more to work on, but harder to unify ones theories (since there are more places where it could fail) while I think that Breathing Room was more compact, and frankly a bit hard to grasp (at least the first times I read it).

Rebecca Gnosa said...

Dear Group Two,
So this last one is the response to the Project. I noticed there were a few other posts in direct reference to the poems, but I would rather just talk about the assignment. I talked to a few of the other students in my class, and we commented on how odd it was that our English majors class was set up with a School for Engineering. Of course, I figured the English majors would have been I guess more into the project that the engineers. In my experience, science majors are not very good at poetry, and they’re even worse at comparing more than one poem! With that being said, I was pleasantly surprised by the insightful comments that the Chalmers students made. Really, I thought you guys were quite adept at the whole poetry thing. One of the more interesting aspects of this project was the translation between the poems, and those differences. I feel that you guys got to have a much different assignment than we Clemson students did. You were lucky that you understood both the Swedish versions and the English versions and could comment of them. It was really great to get to read that comparison, so thanks for touching on that in your comments!

As for the pictures, I obviously think in an imaging sort of way. Colors are usually the first thing I think about in word-association. It’s weird… anyway, I made the reference to a picture in my Tracks description when I was talking about now loneliness isn’t actually so bad. And Jeez, I found the MOST perfect picture… and it’s on Flickr… so I can’t use it… but the link to that one is, if you want to see what I was talking about before, only I imagined a little less orange. Instead, I chose another one which might be posted to the site eventually. It’s a picture of dark grass silhouetted against a blue night sky, and a light between them, and it’s pretty neat because it’s at an angle? Yeah. I like it. But I think it’s relevant to one of those lonely feelings I was talking about, and it captures the literal description in the poem as well as I could find. Reading Track, I felt cold. I felt like the dew would have settled on the grass in the field; the light from some far off place casting a strange glow to the sky above it. It’s almost like a quiet exhilaration to imagine; which is still something you can get when you’re alone. This picture is a nice one-person perspective too. So it fits all around.

To end, I would like to say that I enjoyed working with all of you. Your comments really helped me get a rounded view of the selected poems, and I hope again, that I was of some use to you as well. Thank you :)

-Rebecca Gnosa

Who was Kayla?

Suzie A, Clemson said...

Letter 3
For the final time—Hello Group 2!

It has been an absolute pleasure working with all of you. Martin and Simon, for your first class in literature, the two of you have done swimmingly. I was very impressed by your ideas and you interpretations of the poetry. In addition, it was nice to have your perspectives on the poems because the rest of us lacked knowledge of the Swedish language. Thank you so much for participating in this collaboration. Your ideas, opinions and your general participation were so valuable to our development of further understanding of the poetry. I wish you both all the best in the future, and I hope that you will study a little more literature while you are in school. You are two very insightful individuals.

Bailey and Rebecca—It was so nice to hear your ideas outside of class. I know that sometimes a classroom can be stifling and a little intimidating when it comes to sharing, but you ladies have some wonderful things to say, and I was so happy to read what you had to say about the poetry. It was really nifty to see perspectives from fellow Americans and classmates and to compare them to my own as a student in the same class. It was also interesting to note that we were all very taken by Martin and Simon and their translations of the poems. I look forward to seeing and hearing more from you in class and we near the end of this semester. :O)

For my image, I chose a photograph that I took about a week ago. I was exploring the woods with some friends and I was just flabbergasted by the beauty of the woods and the lake. The photo reminded me of the poem Andrum: Juli (Breathing Space: July). I was thinking about the image of someone laying on their back and looking up at the trees; someone becoming one with their surroundings. That’s how I felt that day. I was being absorbed by the nature around me. It was beautiful. I forget how magical those moments can be sometimes. In any case, the water and the trees mentioned in the poem were what made me choose my particular image. I hope you enjoy it.

It’s been swell working with all of you. I hope that all your semesters end well and that you find yourselves doing the things you love over your summer holidays.

All the best,
Suzie A. , Clemson