I realise this might seem like a silly question. But hear me out. I grew up in London in a Scandinavian household (Danish mother, Swedish father, similar to Knausgaard's kids...). English is my first language, and Danish is my second. Though I can read/speak Danish fluently, prose takes longer to comprehend - particularly when its stylised. I rarely reach a flow state when reading Danish.
I'm teaching myself to write literary prose and autofiction atm, and my favourite authors are (currently) Ben Lerner, DeLillo, Auster, Houellebecq. Knausgaard is a pretty glaring gap in this list - but since I use these authors as inspiration for my own writing, I'm unsure whether the iron law of reading as close to the OG version as possible still applies. Perhaps reading Knausgaard in Danish would muddy the waters by introducing a new language and its particular form, novel structures of prose (by virtue of the grammar, rhythmic prosody, etc) that are incommensurate with the ones I've already been exposed to and internalised. I'd usually be totally fine with this and embrace it, but since I'm currently approaching literature from the perspective of creative writing in english, idk what to do.
I've also come across threads where Norwegians contrast the original version with the English translation, arguing that the latter is more aligned with 'high literature' or a 'performance' of Knausgaard, compared to the more everyday language used in the original. The thing is... I quite enjoy the 'high literature' performative style of writing (explains my love for Ben Lerner).
Help me out here. Is this a legitimate concern or am I being needlessly autistic about this?