Questions about Sinclair Lewis

Introversion · Sep 4, 2019

(Mods, if there's a better home for this, please move it there! I wasn't sure where it belonged.)

Disclaimer: I mostly read science fiction or fantasy. But very occasionally, I decide that I should venture out and read something else, usually "a classic". Recently I decided that I should try Sinclair Lewis. I picked "Babbit", and gave it a go. I has questions now...

Babbit is written in a very quirky style. Example paragraphs below, which are just a few pages into the novel. And I'm asking myself: Self, can you really wade through an entire novel of this? And self answers: probably not.

Sinclair Lewis' "Babbit" said:
There changed into nothing of the massive inside the aspect of the person who turned into starting to rouse at the napping-porch of a Dutch Colonial house in that residential district of Zenith called Floral Heights.

His call changed into George F. Babbit. He became forty-six years old now, in April, 1920, and he made nothing specially, neither butter nor footwear nor poetry, however he changed into nimble inside the calling of promoting houses for extra than people could have the funds for to pay.

Ohhhhhh-kay.

Was there a better choice I could've made to discover Sinclair Lewis than "Babbit"?

Is this just an affection for this one novel, or does he always write like this? I know Lewis was American-born, so I presume English was his primary language, but this novel reads like it was run through Google translate a few times -- English to Korean to Russian to English, maybe.

Was this intentional? I've never read anything else from an American author of this period who writes like this -- "for extra than" rather than "for more than" -- so what's the dealio?

Did Amazon sell me a bum Kindle copy? Is this a joke?

Am I just a dunce who needs to be spoon-fed nothing but literary baby-food??

Lakey · Sep 4, 2019

I do not know what edition you got from Amazon, but I think perhaps you did get one that was corrupted by autotranslate. Take a look at the text on the Gutenberg Project website (link) -- it's a lot more coherent. Corresponding excerpt:

There was nothing of the giant in the aspect of the man who was beginning to awaken on the sleeping-porch of a Dutch Colonial house in that residential district of Zenith known as Floral Heights.

His name was George F. Babbitt. He was forty-six years old now, in April, 1920, and he made nothing in particular, neither butter nor shoes nor poetry, but he was nimble in the calling of selling houses for more than people could afford to pay.

AW Admin · Sep 4, 2019

Yeah, that's a corrupt copy. Babbit is weird, but it's still on the standard English spectrum.

Stytch · Sep 4, 2019

"a corrupt copy"

...WTF...

Is this a thing that happens somewhat regularly on digital devices? I don't kindle or nook or e-read, so I have no idea. But that's terrifying.

lizmonster · Sep 4, 2019

Stytch said:
"a corrupt copy"

Generally I assume it's bad OCR.

In this case? Lewis wrote in English, but "have the funds for to pay" vs. "could afford to pay" isn't an OCR error. That sounds like a different translation - or, indeed, an edition that was translated back to English from another language.

Lakey · Sep 4, 2019

lizmonster said:
Generally I assume it's bad OCR.

In this case? Lewis wrote in English, but "have the funds for to pay" vs. "could afford to pay" isn't an OCR error. That sounds like a different translation - or, indeed, an edition that was translated back to English from another language.

Yeah, this isn't an OCR thing. Bad OCR gives you errors like "um" instead of "urn," that sort of thing. This is definitely a retranslation. Here's my theory: With texts that have entered the public domain, it's not uncommon for random enterprising folk to use the self-publishing machinery to push out their own editions and sell them for cheap. And there is no quality control on such editions whatsoever. So what probably happened here is that someone who is not a native speaker of English got a hold of a translated text in their own language, pushed it through a translator back to English, and threw it up on Amazon for 99 cents or something.

:e2coffee:

AW Admin · Sep 4, 2019

Stytch said:
"a corrupt copy"

...WTF...

Is this a thing that happens somewhat regularly on digital devices? I don't kindle or nook or e-read, so I have no idea. But that's terrifying.

Sometimes it's because of bad uncorrected OCR; that's less common these days to see more than an occasional word that's off.

In this case, someone ran the text through a text editing program, or translation program, probably hoping to evade copyright.

It's a good reason to only buy from legitimate publishers or use something like Gutenberg.org for public domain texts; they are clear about their sources.

Introversion · Sep 4, 2019

Okay, thanks, all! I was hoping it was something like that, good to get confirmation.

I've returned it as "defective content", and have been refunded the cost. I'll see if I can find a better copy.

AW Admin said:
It's a good reason to only buy from legitimate publishers or use something like Gutenberg.org for public domain texts; they are clear about their sources.

Is there a way to know? Amazon's listing for the copy I purchased says, Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC. Does that imply nothing more than that Amazon was the broker for selling me a copy someone else had uploaded? I feel so naive! :tongue

Questions about Sinclair Lewis

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!

Lakey

professional dilettante

AW Admin

Stytch

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen