Frou Frou

At reference 1 I alluded to the fact that a Russian reading about a seagull might read in a different way, might experience that reading in a different way from an Englishman. Our experience of seagulls is extensive and includes lots of sea. Seagulls live beside the seaside, at least on the whole. Seagulls is Butlin's. Whereas a Russian, particularly a land locked Russian from the interior, hundreds of miles from any holiday capable seaside, might more usually, if not exclusively, experience seagulls beside the lake. A lake side bird rather than a sea side bird. An example of a cultural difference complicating the business of translating - with that particular adaptation largely avoiding the whole of this particular business.

Since then, we have been watching an old BBC adaptation of 'Anna Karenina', another Russian story (see reference 2), far and away the longest of the four adaptations which we now own, a chuck out from Epsom Library, and yesterday we got to the episode where Vronsky crashes out of a steeplechase with a broken horse.

The adaptor explains that what happened was that Vronsky applied the whip before the fatal jump when he should not have, causing the horse to change pace and footing at the wrong time, thus getting over the obstacle but crashing on landing, breaking her back. We also get the no-longer dashing but almost tearful Vronsky explaining to Anna, a little later, how this has been something of a life-changing event for him.

Now it is a long time since I have read the novel, but I did not remember this lot. I just remembered being rather puzzled by it all and moving on - there not being anyone to hand to ask at the time - and I did not think to pursue the matter later.

However, while I no longer have a paper copy, I do have a Kindle copy and Kindle comes with a search feature. I am able to call up all twenty or so occurrences of the phrase 'Frou Frou', all fairly close together and closing with the bit where Vronsky walks away from his about-to-be-dead mare. The only explanation we got was that Vronsky had shifted awkwardly in the saddle as the mare went over the last obstacle and I do not think the matter is mentioned again. We cross over onto the lengthy Kitty track, omitted from the adaptation.

So the adaptor has taken liberties. He has retained the all-important rider error but otherwise he has floated away on fancies of his own, unlicensed by the text. But is he justified by the fact that the Russian audience of Tolstoy's day would mostly have had long and intimate knowledge of horses? They would know how a serious horseman would feel about his horse and would know all about the sort of things that could go wrong in a race of this sort. They didn't need all the i's to be dotted and the t's to be crossed - but we do. So given that the television adaptor does not have the benefit or option of footnotes in the way of an Arden Shakespeare, he has just done the best he can in the space (and budget) available.

I associate to the novel of Trollope in which the pretty young heroine climbs into the trap and drives it ten miles up a country lane to succour a troubled neighbour, rather in the way now that she might climb into her car for the same purpose. She certainly knew enough about horses to be quite confident about driving a pony and trap a good way from home; something I would not care to do, despite my hours of riding lessons as a child.

Time to consult an expert.

PS: reading on from this incident I was reminded of what a good writer Tolstoy is and what a good book this is. Any television adaptation is going to be a very feeble substitute.

Reference 1: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/seagull.html.

Reference 2: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075476/.