Hi!

I have found 2 German translations, which differ from each other
( The Blue Bottle )
I have the English original as well,
but since my English isn't very good, i'm still not sure...

Version 1 :
sundials were just fallen down, pebbles are just the ground, sundials were fallen into
Version 2. :
sundials were broken into pebbles, pebbles are parts, that were sundials before

Could anyone tell me, which one is correct ?

Thanks in advance

Soran
macross.de


[This message has been edited by Soran (edited 08-23-2002).]

No one want to help me ?
Or the question is so dificult ?
Or the question does not belong to resources, and get ignored as spam ?
I really need the answer,
how to read the book if you dont know the meaning of the first sentence ?

I'd be happy to help, I'm just not familiar with the story. If you can tell me where it is (I bare my ignorance to all!), I'll try to take a look at it.

It is from "Long after midnight", the first story ( "The Blue Bottle" ), the first sentence
it's one of my favorite storys, may be even THE story...

[edit] guess the idea wasnt too good... [/edit]

Would you like me to post the first passage
( say first 7 lines ) ?

Is it really impossible to be sure about
interpretation of this sentence without context ?


[This message has been edited by Soran (edited 08-23-2002).]

I've got the book. I'll try and look at the story in the next day or two.

Sorry for my ignorance.

You arent ignorant at all,
you would not answer otherwise

Thanks. One thing I love about this Bradbury site is that I get challenged to get to some of Bradbury's more recent work. One of my favorite postings in here somewhere dealt with the "Laurel and Hardy" stories. When I was "forced" to go read them, I found that I really enjoyed them. If you go through a bunch of these various postings, you'll find that I often have to go read or re-read a story before I can give input. I know Dandelion (someone for whom I have great respect, based on his/her entries -- whoever he/she is) seems to do the same thing. A question comes up, he/she does some research, and then comes back with great stuff. I tend to take an exegetical approach directly from his writings, others go out to secondary sites/sources and research multiple perspectives on his work. Others are able to contribute based on personal experiences with him. While I have met him close-up, in person once, and attended a lecture he gave in Pasadena, I am impressed with the level of personal interaction some people have had with him. There are many others who post on this site who are so much more knowlegeable on Bradbury than I am. But, I think can probably say (in all due modesty) that I think I may rank up there pretty high in the impact his writing has had on my life. In ninth grade, it was all Mad Magazine and a preoccupation with halter tops; but after reading "Farenheit 451", I became an inveterate reader. I have Masters degrees in both English and Philosophy. This education is DIRECTLY due to the impact Bradbury's writings have had (and continue to have) on my life. I'll try to look at the Blue Bottle this weekend.

The first question is the easiest . . . the original english is:

"The sundials were tumbled into white pebbles. The birds of the air now flew in ancient skies of rock and sand, buried, their songs stopped. The dead sea bottoms were currented with dust which flooded the land when the wind bade it reenact an old tale of engulfment. The cities were deep laid with granaries of silence, time stored and kept, pools and fountains and quietude and memory. Mars was dead."

Whichever German translation is closest to this is the most correct.

The meaning of the story broadens the meaning of the first sentences.

A preliminary reading establishes a similar description of
Mars that Bradbury has in many stories and in several vignettes/stories in The Martian Chronicles. It is an ancient land with a certain poetry in it's deadness. There is also a "spirit" in the land where there is some vestigial remains of the soul of the Martians -- even though it is buried under thousands of years of dust and weathering.

As they shout to bring down old structures to make it safe to enter the ancient cities, the fragility of the remains is highlighted. (Like Beck is fragile, at some level)

The sundial's wearing into pebbles through years and years of erosion is a clear reference to the passage of a long period of time. The conclusion of the paragraph is actually in the single sentence that follows it: "Mars is dead." There is no measured time, there is no vitality, there is no sound of birds. It is lifeless.

The quest for the Blue Bottle represents a couple different things throughout the story. At one point, we are told it is any dream that any person has; and that the bottle's contents will vary with each person's dream. In another case, it is the fullfillment of the yearning and longing in many (not all) men for answers to questions about life and its meaning.

The fact the the contents and promise of the Blue Bottle are speculative and not known with firmness -- the idea that it could hold anything -- is what drives men to seek it out.

There is a class of men that don't seek it out. There are men for whom the big "meaning-of-life" questions don't hold any compelling power. They live in the moment, and/or hold on to established belief systems (religion, God) as adequate answers to their questions. These are the ones designated as happy in this story.

The only happiness for the seekers (those for whom the questions are overwhelming) is in the peace from insecurity, doubt and yearning -- and, in the story's resolution, it seems that the only end to that yearning is death.

In the end, Beck knowingly opens the bottle and has a few moments of peace (and, we assume, eternal peace after that) as he dies and then vanishes into dust.

Craig, who lives in the present and is not plagued with this constant seeking and dissatisfaction, sees the blue bottle as a container of Bourbon and drinks with joy and happiness. He is not wrestling with doubt, he lives in the moment, and the big life questions are resolved in the traditional answers developed by the race of man over the years.

Also, for Beck, meaning is found in the quest itself -- not the bottle. In a couple passages, Beck hopes NOT to find the bottle. The seeking is what matters to him. But the Catch-22 for him is that the quest, by definition, is an irresolution. The only resolution is in death. We would have to conclude that the arrival of death ends the quest. But he has said the quest is where meaning is. So the question is whether or not Beck has actually found peace.

The beginning of the story sets the scene in the ancient nature of Mars. It sets us up for Beck to vanish into the dust, as well. The sundial represents man's measurements of time, and the lack of a bird's song seems to represent a lack of true life.

Anyway (to paraphrase Mr. Bean), that's what I think it means.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
The first question is the easiest . . . the original english is:

"The sundials were tumbled into white pebbles. The birds of the air now flew in ancient skies of rock and sand, buried, their songs stopped. The dead sea bottoms were currented with dust which flooded the land when the wind bade it reenact an old tale of engulfment. The cities were deep laid with granaries of silence, time stored and kept, pools and fountains and quietude and memory. Mars was dead."

Whichever German translation is closest to this is the most correct.

The meaning of the story broadens the meaning of the first sentences.

...

Hi Mr. Dark !

I'm very sorry, but it looks like you did not understood me.

I asked you, if *I* should post the english text for you,
since i had the english original.

Background and meaning of the story is interessant too,
but this is not what i was asking about

Actually my question was related to understanding of Bradbury only if
it is not possible to give one correct interpretation of the first sentence
with or without context
if you speak english perfect.

I only want to know does "tumbled into white pebbles" means that sundials are fallen on the ground
( without telling us whether broken or not ),
or it tells us that sundials lie on the ground in form of "pebbles",
so actually not sundials anymore,
but pebbles, that were sundials before

The answer i was awaiting ( and still hope for ) was only:
a) fallen on pebbles ( lying on pebbles )
or
b) broken in small pieces ( became "pebbles" )

I Think it is "B" because that would best capture the sense that the crumbled sundials had turned into pebbles over long years of erosion.

I grew up going to beaches in southern California. We would always see pieces of glass that had, over time, been eroded into smooth, round colored "rocks". I think the reference to sundials being turned into pebbles is in reference to the fact that the sundials broke up and were turned into pebbles through the weathering process of erosion. This emphasizes the sense of the ancient nature of the cities/planet. The sundials are not just broken, they are worn and eroded, over time, into small pebbles.

That's what I think about that.

Thank you
I'm glad you think so, i also like the second interpretation.

The problem is -
the translation with the good interpretation is from the old translation,
i think it is only available with antique books !

The new translation is so bad ( imo ),
i could not recognize the story anymore;
well, the storyline is the same,
but the feeling - i could not believe i was so exalted about it many years ago -
until i found another translation

I'm not talking just about one sentence,
it's all the story...
( i'v read only one, but i regret, i read even so much in this translation,
it just leaves a bad mark )

Is there any control by Ray Bradbury
which translations are published,
so he could stop the one, he don't like ?

As far as I know, Bradbury speaks no language other than English fluently enough to be qualified to judge any translation as good or not.

heh
Sure i mean not controlling of his own
( not just becasue he may not speak the language good enough,
but it's would take precious time ),
but he should have agents competent enough to see obvious
( and my example IS obvious bad translation,
no need even to read the whole book... )

But COULD he stop publishing of badly translated book
or the rights are sold somehow,
so somebody else decides ?

To be honest, I'm not sure if he could control the publication of his books in all countries. I'm certainly no expert, but I don't believe international copyright laws can be policed in certain countries. Unfortunate, I know, but that's what I'm led to believe.

-Greg Miller

When I spoke of unauthorized editions in the thread about cover art, I referred to something I read long ago, that he'd never been paid for the Russian editions, although he was aware of them. It would be nice to include any edition of his works, with his name on it, in such a collection--authorized or not. If necessary, "bootleg" materials could go in a separate section.