The publication of any new version was, and is, typically greeted with a chorus of disapproval, as critics proclaim the obvious superiority of the original. But as Norton points out, the KJV itself did not meet with immediate acceptance: “However fine the English of the translators . . . now seems, no one in their time appreciated it. It was all too obviously poor, if it was worth considering at all.” Indeed, the goal to which the translators aspired was not literary felicity, but utter faithfulness to the meaning of the original. If that meant a particular sentence would sound clunky to the modern ears of 1611, so be it. It is a tribute to their faithfulness, and to the power of the Hebrew and Greek originals, that the KJV has not only outlasted its critics, but become enshrined as a masterpiece in its own right.
Such humility about translations—from someone who has clearly devoted years to studying their minutiae—is quite in the tradition of the KJV translators themselves. They were not self-consciously artistic as they set about their work; but while they were humble about their task, there is nothing modest about their accomplishment.




Comments