Image: Philip Pullman
A friend sent me a link to this
article in The Telegraph in which author Philip Pullman bemoans the fact
that with the rise of modern translations children are no long brought under the literary influence of the venerable King James Version. He also laments the loss of the old Book of
Common Prayer. The article is drawn from
this BBC interview of
Pullman with Michael Rosen. Here’s an
excerpt:
Speaking of the demise of the King James Bible and the
Book of Common Prayer, the author said: “I do regret that children don’t have
this experience of language which is grand and stately, and above their heads
if you like.
“Because it gave me an immense amount of pleasure to hear
the cadences and rhythms of these great prayers.
“I whisper along with them at times, just for the
enjoyment of the words, and it’s something I wouldn’t be without. If it was cut
out of me I’d miss it terribly.
“How can we give children that sense these days when they
seldom see a King James Bible, they go to churches – if they go to church at
all -where there’s a modern service book whose language is rather flat and
dull?”
Pullman is President of an organization called the Society
of Authors and he is best for the His
Dark Materials trilogy of fantasy novels.
The interesting thing is that Pullman’s novels have been criticized
as a negative presentation of religion in general and of Christianity in
particular. Why then does he laud the
influence of the KJV? He recognizes its
literary superiority.
The interview reminded me of the chapter on “Acclaim for
the King James Bible By the Literary Establishment” in Leland Ryken’s The Legacy of the King James Bible (see my
review of this book here) in which Ryken notes:
It will come as no surprise that English and American
authors as well as literary critics, prefer the King James Version. I suspect,
though, that the vehemence with which they prefer the KJV will come as a mild
shock. The problem that I faced in composing this chapter was avoiding
overkill. I have accordingly kept the chapter brief. I will note in passing
that I do not remember ever having encountered a member of the literary establishment
who preferred any English Bible other than the KJV (p. 160).
It seems that that the KJV is praised as passionately in the
English department as it is cried down in the Religion department.
Along these lines, see also the poet T. S. Eliot’s 1962 review
of the New English Bible in the Sunday
Telegraph in which he described that modern translation as “an active agent
of decadence.”
JTR
No comments:
Post a Comment