I have become obsessive-compulsive. (aka Let's Talk About Books and Translations!)

2. I buy cheap, so that's more often paperback.

3. No, unless you know some experts to ask.

4. Occasionally. I like Constance Garnett's Dostoyevsky, for instance, and a class writer doing the translation (say Adair's trans. of Perec) is an incentive, and I did deliberately choose to read the Scott Moncrieff Proust, but it's rare.

"..I came across this memorable passage: 'A man condemned to death
doesn't care that he is standing at the edge of a precipice, for he
has already renounced life.' Here the translator attached an
asterisk, and his note informed me that his interpretation was
preferable to that of a rival Sinologist, who had translated the
passage thus: 'The servants destroy the works of art, so that they
will not have to judge their beauties and defects.'"

Borges goes on to say that a "mysterious scepticism" slipped into his
soul, not unreasonably. I read the above review in English, so I was reading a translation of Borges's words anyway.

2. Do you buy hardcover or softcover? Paper. Almost all the time: I'm not made out of money! Also most of what I like to read is in translation, and thus likely to be out in paper anyway. Yesterday, though, for the first time in a while, I found myself interested enough in a new clothbound book to pick it up right away (Gary Schteyngart).

3. Is there any easy way of figuring out the best translation of a book? (a) Read reviews; there are whole web-accessible journals dedicated to literature in translation. Google up anything you're interested in reading and I'm sure you'll find some opinions on the work. (b) Compare the tone of different translations: open up the same portion in each and see which one reads better for you. This is a great thing about translations -- it's like you get to pick the author's tone!

4. Do you even pay attention to who translated? Typically not. The only time it becomes an issue for me is when an author I enjoy has different English translators -- with Haruki Murakami, for instance, a switch of translators resulted in a noticeable shift in "Murakami's" style. Much of what I read in translation is modern fiction, though, so there's usually only one translation -- this doesn't leave a lot of room for complaint.

3. Is there any easy way of figuring out the best translation of a book? There are different ways of measuring the 'best'. The best can be the best text in itself. Or the best can be the most faithful to the original style and meaning. The former is easy to figure out. If you are qualified to decide the latter, however, you don't need to read translations.

4. Do you even pay attention to who translated? Yes. I read all of Dostoevsky by the same translator cos I thought he was terrific. When I was reading 'The Master and Margerita' I was thinking all the time, "I bet I would like this more in a better translation". My favourite translator of Baudelaire (Walter Martin) I suspect might be one of the least faithfull to original meaning - because his translations take on original metre and they even rhyme - but he's still my favourite. Translators have to be fantastic writers. They're never invisible. The product really is a collaboration.

2. I buy both hardcover and softcover, new and used. It depends on how long I think I will keep the book. I buy and sell more books than I keep. But I have many books I bought 25 years ago, too. I churn my library a lot.

3. If more than one translation is available for comparison, I compare them, often by seeking out the same passage in each. This helps to clarify the translator's chosen style. In prose, this often reveals the subtleties of translator's ear for good English prose. In poetry, this immediately reveals the sort of considerations the translator elevated and demoted in making the usual compromises necessary to translate poetry.

4. I always pay attention to who translated, in case it is someone whose work I already know.

I recently read that the only existing english translation of Lem's "Solaris" is considered horrible (it's actually a translation of a french translation of the original!) and it's one of my favourite books in the world. I'd love to see a new attempt.

I will tend to regard the content of an ugly book as less interesting, and am drawn more strongly to literature from a publisher with a consistent design aesthetic (so, often the big ones publishing old books). for philosophy, less like that, but still design matters a surprising amount.

I have two copies of swann's way, and two copies of moby dick (one partly begun), yet am seriously considering buying other copies (with the same translator of proust, even) because I don't like the books.

However, I basically pick my translations by a few good reference points - for classics, Clifton Fadiman's translation recommendations in the back of the "Lifetime Reading List" have never let me down (and he occasionally picks some rather hard to find ones). I have a good friend who is a Humanities prof at a distinguished institution who owns EVERYTHING (including half of Henry James' personal library itself) who can usually help with the rest. For anything that I need a quick reference, I usually look around online for advice (Amazon, webpages for the author, etc).

This question has become pertinent ever since I started Camus' The Plague (trans. Stuart Gilbert), which strikes me as almost florid in its prose, especially in comparison to the copy of The Stranger I read.

I have it in French, but uhh.. its just too beyond my very basic grasp :(

i still think it's one of the best books ever.