Studia Islandica - 01.06.1994, Síða 65
63
On close examination saga rhetoric is found to be sur-
prisingly formalized and especially in Laxdæla saga it is of
central importance for the overall effect. The use of exten-
sive ambiguity, antithesis, metaphor, foreshadowing devic-
es, repetition, parallelism, and the careful construction of
key passages of direct speech are only a few examples of
the highly developed and artistic language found in
Laxdœla saga which presents very real challenges to the
translator.
Appreciating the orientation of the narrative, especially
with regard to the degree of objectivity, pseudo-objectivity
or rhetorical distance maintained by the narrator is a ques-
tion of prime importance for the translator. He must be con-
scious of the saga rhetoric in order to prioritise these same
functions in translation. If the means used to achieve them
are transferable, the task is relatively easy; if not, substi-
tutes must be considered.
While presenting at least a semblance of impartiality the
saga author is anything but uncommitted; both his portray-
al of the conflict and of its resolution demonstrate his high-
ly moralistic view of society.
Despite many gestures borrowed from the heroic tradition, the
underlying outlook is not heroic, as has often been argued, but
social. Whereas the heroic fable emphasizes individual feats with-
out social considerations, the saga emphasizes reconciliation. The
heroic lay breaks off at the height of the disaster, the saga resolves
the conflict and reconstructs the peace. (Andersson 1978:157)
These stories, concludes Andersson, are not merely
“blood-curdling tales of reckless heroes, but stories of tem-
porary breakdown in a normal society” (1978:157). It can
scarcely be a coincidence that the social disintegration por-
trayed in the sagas mirrors the course of contemporary
events in Icelandic history: the breakdown of the Common-
wealth and the eventual submission of the Icelanders to
Norwegian domination in 1262.