Pardon my French: translations of Proust

Finished the Lydia Davis translation of "Swann's Way" and last night read a little "chapbook" I have containing three of her short essays on translation - I read her essay on problems in translating Proust, made me wonder how anyone, let alone 3 people, have succeeded in translating Proust into English. I did not in any way, while reading Davis's translation, attempt to compare her work with Moncrieff's, which I'd read about 10-15 years ago, but I definitely felt her translation was fluent and beautiful and (relatively) easy to read - perhaps helped, too, in that I'd already read the novel and had a sense of which characters and events were vital and which were more peripheral - though we obviously do not read Proust for the events. But seeing her notes on her own translation makes it clear to me that her work has more fidelity - Moncrieff's is beautiful but more ornate than Proust, and for some reason he felt he had the liberty or the right to embellish. Proust did not embellish, despite his extremely long and complex sentences - part of the beauty is the simplicity and clarity of the language in conveying some extremely complex and unusual thought processes. Need we go any further than in comparing the very titles of the work under Moncrieff and under Davis et al. (others translate the next 6 volumees)?: A la recherche des temps perdus (pardon my French misspellings if any) under Moncrieff becomes the well-known Remembrance of Things Past - a beautiful phrase, it's from a Shakespeare sonnet - but Proust is not quoting Shakespeare and his narrator is not sitting passively simply remembering and Proust specified the word "perdus," i.e., lost, not just past, and "temps," i.e., time, not things. Davis et al. get the title accurately as : In Search of Lost Time, conveying the action of the narrator/writer and the sorrow of "lost."