



The first English translation of Väinö Linna’s Unknown Soldier (1957) was heavily abridged and edited for international audiences. About one third (!) of the novel was cut, including much of the dialect speech, humor, and social criticism. These changes altered the tone and made the book resemble a conventional war story and many scholars therefore view it more as an adaptation than a faithful translation. This is not a conventional war story, this is something much deeper and wider. I think it’s the best book ever written by a Finn.
The 2005 translation by Liesl Yamaguchi was the first complete version based on the original 1954 Finnish text. It preserved the characters’ distinct voices and the novel’s social and cultural depth, and is widely regarded as the first translation that reflects Linna’s original intention. So choose Unknown soldierS not Unkown soldier.
I have read it 23 times. Tulta munil! Fire to the balls!
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1rixxbg
Posted by MonikonPerfekti
6 Comments
Yes I read the 2005 translation and I also give this a 5/5. It’s just about perfect and it is superior to books like Catch 22.
Unknown soldiers is a great book, I have it at home and I loved reading it
Read it in Russian. Liked it. Now I doubt how complete the translation was. I like it for the POV; it’s more common for me, as a Russian, to read about the other side. And it’s very interesting to read as a good example of non-mainstream (not Russian, English, or French) literature.
We watched the long-form cut of the movie (the 5-part TV version) and really enjoyed it. Reading it is on the list for sure.
I have a sour relationship with this book since it was crammed down our throats when I was in school.
It’s not a bad book, far from it. Won’t read it ever again.
What makes 57 horrible?