Compare Denham’s preface: “Poesie is of so subtle a spirit, that in
pouring out of one Language into another, it will all evaporate;
and if a new spirit be not added in the transfusion, there will
remain nothing but a
The “new spirit” that is “added” with this translation method
involves a process of domestication, in which the foreign text is
imprinted with values specific to the target-language culture.
D’Ablancourt called it
without offending the delicacy of our language and the correctness of reason. […] Often one is forced to add something to the thought in order to clarify it; sometimes it is necessary to retrench one part so as to give birth to all the rest.
Henry Rider reverted to a clothing metaphor in the preface of his 1638 translation of Horace:
Translations of Authors from one language to another, are like old garments turn’d into new fashions; in which though the {50} stuffe be still the same, yet the die and trimming are altered, and in the making, here something added, there something cut away.
Denham’s formulation used a similar metaphor while nodding toward the classical author with whom D’Ablancourt pioneered the free method:
as speech is the apparel of our thoughts, so are there certain Garbs
and Modes of speaking, which vary with the times […] and this I
think Tacitus means, by that which he calls
Denham’s advocacy of free translation was laden with a nationalism that, even if expressed with courtly self-effacement, ultimately led to a contradictory repression of the method’s parallels and influences, foreign as well as English:
if this disguise I have put upon him (I wish I could give it a better name) fit not naturally and easily on so grave a person, yet it may become him better than that Fools-Coat wherein the French and Italian have of late presented him.