This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The leader of the Creators is the "Daddy" ("Папа"), not Sikorski. Sikorski is one of Creators and the head of the institute where Maxim works in the end. In the Russian version he says "Call me Rudolf", which, in connotation with Sikorski's words in the "Beetle...", proves that it was, indeed, him. The name "Страна Отцов" (Land of the Fathers/Creators) is used five times throughout the book, though I think only Maxim himself uses it. --Koveras☭ 08:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Strange. My book makes it seem like Strannik is the leader. I think that Papa is mentioned once, but only in passing, and he never actually appears in the story. There's one scene where another Creator is walking around the institute and sees pictures of Strannik everywhere- photos of him doing various things, even caricature drawings. Then this guy in the photos is the one who ends up being "Ernst". Maybe I missed something. Or maybe the version translated to English is a different one than the standard Russian version that you have? I know there have been a few different ones over the years...
I still haven't read "Beetle", maybe that will answer some of my questions. Thanks- Staecker 11:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
It is, indeed, strange, for each chapter in the Russian book ends with a dialogue between Papa and other Creators about, among other things, Maxim's doings. Well, the description of Strannik (who is also the head of the institute) matches that of Rudolf Sikorski in "Beetle"... I have no idea why he is called "Ernst" though. There were two versions of the "PoP" in Russian: the old one cut by the Soviet censors and the uncut one published after Perestroika. In both versions, Strannik is dubbed "Rudolf", though Strugatsky originally wanted to name him "Pavel Grigorievitch"... --Koveras☭ 14:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Originally, in Russian book, there were Unknown Fathers not the All-powerful Creators. This is from censorship. Post-Soviet edition use the Fathers. Freelance Search Group is better than Independent Reconnaissance Unit, but it isn't only Search group, it's Research Group. Another names seems to be translated good enough. But Strannik isn't Ernst anyway! He's Rudolph Sikorsky. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Who is the cunt who keeps on sticking the anti-communist labels on everything made in USSR? Just fuck off!!!
English Names: Unknown Fathers vs All-Powerful Creators
Agreed with all changes save for chancing Unknown Fathers to All-powerful Creators. While the later is the accurate translation of the term used in the censored version, the original version used Неизвестные Отцы, which does, in fact, translate as "Unknown Fathers." The 1992 edition reversed most of the changes brought on by the censors, including the above-stated one. Given that this was the only published edition the authors actually approved of (the original uncensored version was never published), I strongly believe that the terms used in that version should take precedence over the ones used in any other version. --Strannik 18:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't respond earlier- I think that we really need to stick to the "Creators" translation, since it is the only published (thus verifiable) translation of the name. Adopting our own translation would constitute original research. Of course I think that we should explain in detail in the article that the Russian name was changed, but I don't think it makes sense to use our own translation when an official translation exists. It's a tough issue, though, so of course I'll go with the consensus. Staecker 17:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I fully support Staeker on the issue. --Koveras☭ 18:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Given that my information derives from a printed source - the preface of the edition of Prisoners of Power I own. It may not be an English-language source, but it's a valid source nonetheless. That said, as far as translations go, I tend to defer to the translations, even if I disagree with them. However, I think this isn't so much a matter of translation as it is the matter of both honoring the authors' intent and being up-to-date. When the English translation was written, it was the only version of Prisoners of Power/Inhabited Island available in open market. However, that is no longer the case. The 1992 edition has affectively become the definitive edition of the work, since, if nothing else, all subsequent re-printings of the novel mirrored it. What I'm trying to say is that I'm not comfortable with the English-language version of the article reflecting a dated view of the work in question, even if it's the only version available in English-speaking countries. --Strannik 23:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)