Чёрт, хорошо же я всё-таки тогда написал. Сейчас перечитал - понравилось. Опять-таки, готов подписаться:
What a pity, then, that no brave soul has volunteered to produce the
exact, literal, ugly, and unreadable podstrochnik (literal translation)
of Shakespeare in Russian, akin to Nabokov's podstrochnik of Pushkin!
Surely, this is what we've been missing all along, choked by the
unbearably rhyming sonnets as rendered by Marshak, or unbearably
metrical and flowing Hamlet as rendered by Lozinsky or Pasternak!
All educated Russians will flock to that ugly literal edition of
Shakespeare at once and will start comparing it to the treacherous
and dishonest previous translations with many a happy chuckle. We'll
even sacrifice the treacherous (and fortunately scarce) non-literal
translations of Shakespeare by Nabokov.
What Pushkin actually wrote is a novel in verse, in Russian. The only
way to know what he wrote is to read it, in Russian. To believe that
any translation, "literal" or otherwise, could reproduce the work
in a very different language really faithfully, is silly and naive. To
dismiss poetic translations for being unable to do that is to attack a
strawman. To claim that a literal translation faithfully reproduces
a work of poetry (as opposed to a housing contract) is to betray