The poetic, the personal and the political

This contribution provides a comparative analysis of two Dutch translations of “L’Internationale”, one made by Henriette Roland Holst in 1900 and the other by Ernst van Altena in 1981, respectively. The comparison is relevant for two reasons: (1) the latter translation can be considered a reaction to the former; and (2) each translator paid particular attention to the literary rather than the musical characteristics of the source text. The lyrics are therefore given a prominent place in the analysis; at the same time, we also dwell on the multimodal dimensions of the text. Roland Holst’s version was clearly meant to be sung. In her translation, she added a number of forms of address, which make the text more personal. She also adapted the text to make it less party-political and incitive. Finally, her lyric can be considered more poetic than the original. Alternatively, the tenor of van Altena’s translation is more concrete and informal than the source text. He provides another view on the original, but one that is not necessarily less mediated one, contrary to what he has suggested in public reflections. The result is a hybrid form comprising a demarcation strategy with regard to Roland Holst and his preliminary wish of rendering the source text as completely as possible.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
chronotopos – A Journal of Translation History
Published
2025-05-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.70596/cts172
Primary Topic
Comparative and World Literature
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The poetic, the personal and the political

Elke Brems, Francis Mus
chronotopos – A Journal of Translation History
Comparative and World Literature
article

The poetic, the personal and the political

Elke Brems, Francis Mus
article en

Abstract

This contribution provides a comparative analysis of two Dutch translations of “L’Internationale”, one made by Henriette Roland Holst in 1900 and the other by Ernst van Altena in 1981, respectively. The comparison is relevant for two reasons: (1) the latter translation can be considered a reaction to the former; and (2) each translator paid particular attention to the literary rather than the musical characteristics of the source text. The lyrics are therefore given a prominent place in the analysis; at the same time, we also dwell on the multimodal dimensions of the text. Roland Holst’s version was clearly meant to be sung. In her translation, she added a number of forms of address, which make the text more personal. She also adapted the text to make it less party-political and incitive. Finally, her lyric can be considered more poetic than the original. Alternatively, the tenor of van Altena’s translation is more concrete and informal than the source text. He provides another view on the original, but one that is not necessarily less mediated one, contrary to what he has suggested in public reflections. The result is a hybrid form comprising a demarcation strategy with regard to Roland Holst and his preliminary wish of rendering the source text as completely as possible.

chronotopos – A Journal of Translation HistoryVol. 6(1)
Ghent University (BE), KU Leuven (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Comparative and World Literature
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.