“And There Was Night”: An Evaluation of Language through Hugo’s Poem
Marly Hazen

For hundreds of years, Christianity has enriched France's literary traditions and values. From the ancient writings of the Gospels to the more modern teachings of John Calvin, the people clung to their religious writings with deep reverence and absolute acceptance. Perhaps this is part of the reason why Victor Hugo's Et Nox Facta Est was so shocking - not shocking that so prominent an author would choose a religious subject, but rather, that he would write sympathetically for the devil. This was a daring move for one to make, especially in 19th-century France, where religious differences between the Roman Catholics and the Calvinist Huguenots had been the source of strife for centuries, where religious tolerance was inconceivable. Hugo's boldness in publishing such a piece is complimented by the work's creativity, insight, and overall literary beauty. Section VIII is a prime example of Hugo's ingenuity regarding diction, syntax, and of course, imagery; however, different translations depict this heavenly work in different lights, a significant aspect when realizing that many religious works in this culture were accepted to the letter.

Hugo’s formal diction, both eloquent and empathetic, striking in any translation, is a major source of distinction between the two versions of the poem. Mary Ann Caws, the translator for the anthology’s copy of the text, uses language that is both more poetic and more epic than the words of Brooks Haxton, the translator of Selected Poems.

Unique, appropriate word choice by Caws gains a force unmatchable by Haxton. For example, while Haxton translates a part of Hugo’s work into “like the distracted outcry of the dying” (Haxton 101), Caws chooses to describe the same piece as “Sharp, clamorous like one dying in delirium” (Caws 855). At first glance, Caws’ interpretation of the line does not appear to be too different than Haxton’s. Upon closer review, however, “delirium” (Caws 855), one simple word, brings with it connotations of chaos, overwhelming confusion, and powerlessness. Those connotations are ideas often projected upon the souls of the damned, the souls forever trapped in the bedlam of hell – lost, helpless. The ability of a single word to add more insight and significance to a work truly conveys the power of language.

In poetry, syntax is a key rhetorical strategy. Variations in sentence structure can sometimes be as valuable as the words themselves, as different types of sentence styles can communicate different aspects and evoke different responses from the reader. Caws utilizes an unusual but simple style to swiftly express her purpose, while Haxton prefers a piece-by-piece poetic analysis.

Caws’ exclamations of immense intensity – “Coal of a world put out! torch blown out by God!” (854) – provide for the reader’s emotional response and character connection. These brief lines also provide descriptive imagery of setting and circumstance. Unfortunately, such personal reactions and perceptions cannot be equaled in Haxton’s only exclamation, the pale expression of desolation, “Despair! It vanishes!” (101).

In contrast to Caws’ direct style, Haxton writes in small doses, full of appositives, participial phrases, and somewhat superfluous adjectives. Both syntax styles communicate the same basic meaning, and both allow for poetic structure, yet the forms in their simplest composition dramatize two different aspects – Caws seems to highlight the desperation of the situation, while Haxton seems to present the events as a gradual inevitability. Thus, the syntax is able to suggest the passage of time in two different manners, both affecting the tone – Caws’ syntax implies anxiety, while Haxton’s syntax suggests hopelessness.

In regards to imagery, a major difference is that Caws puts emphasis on personifying objects, while Haxton does not. Caws writes how the dying star is rebellious, a fighter, how it “refused to die without insulting the night” (855) and about its “spitting its lava in the shadow’s face” (855). Conversely, Haxton notes how the same star “erupted” (99). This is not a word used to personify; rather, it is used to explain natural wonders, such as volcanoes. Consequently, Caws’ translation makes the landscape seem more living and vivid, an integral part of the story, while Haxton provides the scenery as background to the story.

All in all, the incongruence of languages appears to create difficulties in translation. Two translators’ observations and opinions can affect the outcome of the translation – whether the translation becomes more personal or objective, vivid or calm, and of course, possible changes in tone. For Caws and Haxton, diction, syntax, and imagery each played important roles in the distinction between translations, and each helped to form the translations’ unique literary identities.

Works Cited

Caws, Mary Ann, trans. “Et Nox Facta Est.” Hugo, Victor. The Norton Anthology of World Literature. Vol. E. 2nded. Ed.

Sarah Lawall. New York: Norton, 2002. 850-56.

Haxton, Brooks, trans. “Et Nox Facta Est.” Hugo, Victor. Selected Poems. New York: Penguin, 2002. 98-101.

<<< Return to Journal Contents