I've heard of translated before, but the term "abridged" I haven't in my years of reading.
I was so proud of myself I thought I was finally on the verge of crossing off number two on my bucket list: "To complete a thick classic lit." It was on page 142 of "The Count of Monte Cristo" when I closed the book and analyzed the front cover more thoroughly. "Translated and abridged by Lowell Bair," it read. I've heard of translated before, but the term "abridged" I haven't in my years of reading.
Just like any other average person who doesn’t know the answer to a random question, I turned to Google. Abridged is by definition “to shorten by omissions while retaining the basic contents,” according to Dictionary.com. Omissions? Basic contents? My self-satisfaction turned into a feeling of self-disappointment. I wasn’t reading the original version of “The Count of Monte Cristo,” but rather a shortened one with “basic contents.”
“Maybe they’re choosing the parts that work best out of context, or in a limited (classroom) context,” Berglund says. Perhaps abridged versions are made to be “most accessible to people who haven’t read the rest of the book, or that fit with a theme in the course or anthology.”
In one instance, Berglund’s class read “Tom Jones,” and she told her students that they could skip the narrative of “The Man of the Hill,” an inset story of about six chapters, because it “has no ultimate bearing on the rest of the novel.” In addition, she assigns all of "Taming of the Shrew," but she doesn't lecture on the subplot. As a professor, she objectively presents material that can be discussed in a finite amount of class time.
In one instance, Berglund’s class read “Tom Jones,” and she told her students that they could skip the narrative of “The Man of the Hill,” an inset story of about six chapters, because it “has no ultimate bearing on the rest of the novel.” In addition, she assigns all of "Taming of the Shrew," but she doesn't lecture on the subplot. As a professor, she objectively presents material that can be discussed in a finite amount of class time.
It is typical that in high school, students are obligated to read classic literature, some of which are very long. For the average high schooler, it can be extremely daunting. In college, one is given even more reading material especially if they decide to major in English literature. Do teachers prefer abridged or unabridged texts?
“I can’t speak for high school teachers, but I prefer not to teach abridged works. I would rather teach fewer texts in their entirety,” Berglund says. “That being said, I do, sometimes, teach abridgements, particularly in survey courses.”
Publishers wouldn’t make abridged versions if they were bad entirely; therefore, they shouldn’t always be looked down upon. There are some cases in which they are helpful. Berglund argues that abridged versions are best to be taught at introductory level courses rather than advanced level courses or “if the text is being used as a supplement to another text.” One instance in which a text is used as a supplement is if one is writing an essay comparing two pieces of writing. Suppose the thesis is focused on morals and the writer decides to mention "The Count of Monte Cristo" and discuss how it is similar and different to that of "Atonement" by Ian McEwan.
“It is essential that students know the text is abridged, if the version [they are given] was abridged by the publisher (as opposed to the professor who tells the class they can skip certain sections),” Berglund says.
Comments
Post a Comment