/lit/ - Literature

Pope you retard

>>16731917
Bump cause I’d like to know as well.

>>16731917
read it in the original greek

Translate it yourself.

>>16731917
>>16731997
Depends on how much you care about accuracy and which, if any, poetic rendering speaks to you the most. There's no ultimate best answer for everyone, you need to sample a few and figure it out for yourself which one is the most pleasurable to read. If you want accuracy, you also need to figure out what exactly you want from accuracy, because different approaches sacrifice different things. Most importantly, don't get bent out of shape over the details, pick any of the popular translations and get to reading, if it doesn't work, pick another.

>>16731920
Gay
>>16732000
>>16732003
Fuck off

>>16732033
Babby’s first intro to foreign language.

bum[

>>16732033
Retarded. If you’re OP you’re even worse. How many times have you been dropped on your head you smooth brained cock catcher. Stop asking others about translations and do your own research. Otherwise you just come off as a weak-kneed bald chested brainlet.

Read them both and report back

>>16732003
Based. Just reading it in Greek isn't enough. You should first translate it in dactylic hexameter, and then memorize both the original and the translation

>>16731917
We have this same thread every single solitary day.
Illiad: Fagles
Odyssey: Lattimore
Aeneid: Fagles
You won't actually understand the 'art' until you read it in Greek.
Also start with Coulanges and Hamilton before you read the Illiad in the first place.

>>16731917
You read it in the Greek you absolute fucking scumbag

Clyde Pharr has a lovely textbook called Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners. You can find a PDF with no effort or find a used copy for less than a solitary box of kleenex that you use jacking off on 4chan instead of learning a new language. It will guide you gently through the basics of classical Homeric Greek entirely through the first book of The Iliad, at the end of which you should be able to approach the other books without great difficulty and even learn them by memory if so you please. The whole process should take no more than a month with committed effort, sharpen both your mind and your tongue, and take as no more time than one might piss away playing video games every day. Or one can read it in the Fagles translation and learn much about the Iliad and nothing of it itself. It's your choice :^)

>>16732473
I will add that doing such is much more engaging than reading Fagles' dreary translation, through which one only learns the facts of the poem and none of the art, and so approaching Homer properly on his own terms might not take more time than mishearing him through translation. The only question is one of acumen.

>>16732473
>Or one can read it in the Fagles translation and learn much about the Iliad and nothing of it itself.
what do you mean by this?

>>16732613
To read poetry in translation is only to learn about the poem and never to make contact with the genuine article itself.

>>16732619
Right but is there something especially deficient about the Fagles translation?

>>16732642
Not beyond that it's a translation.

>>16732429
>different translators for iliad and odyssey
stoo being retarded, stick with one translator per author if possible

>>16732816
Translator zealotism is crige as fuck
Do yourself a favor and read the BEST translation which is
Iliad: Fagles
Odyssey: Lattimore
Aeneid: Fagles

>>16732473
>>16732494
>Clyde Pharr has a lovely textbook called Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners.
Good shit anon, downloaded and made a pot of coffee to get started.

>>16732846
>Iliad: Fitzgerald
>Odyssey: Fitzgerald
>Aeneid: Fitzgerald

fixed

>>16732846
its not zealotism its consistency, faggot

>>16733060
"consistency" == limited point of view.
Don't constrict your mind to a single interpretation, ESPECIALLY when Lattimore's Odyssey is SUPERIOR to Fagles'

>>16733083
if op wants multiple interpretarions he should read both fagles and lattimore so he can compare them, but if he reads different translators for different works the first time around he will mistake some translation quirks of the authors for stylistic differences between the books and disregard some stylistic differences as translation quirts.

>>16733113
>implying there is any artistic value in a translation
You do realize translations are just the extended edition of the Wikipedia summary right anon? If you want the read THE ILIAD you have to actually read it in, y'know, greek.

>>16733116
if you think theyre basically the wikipedia summary, why dont you suggest just buying a boxed set to save money?

>>16733130
>buying
I haven't bought a god damned thing to consoom for over a year. All I buy is food. I haven't spent any money on books since I was 18 and fell for the college meme. libgen dude get
FAGLES ILIAD
LATTIMORE ODYSSEY
FAGLES AENEID
all for free and you're good to go :) Desu senpai ngl

>>16733137
even then it would probably take less time to download them all from the same author, or even quicker just to get an abridged version

>>16733145
The difference 5 seconds of typing makes is more than made up for by the significant increase in the quality of Lattimore's Odysses as compared to Fagles.
Fagles is doubtless better than nothing but given both are less than a minute away from being in your library
A) grab both obviously
But B) for a fresh reader of Homer I HIGHLY suggest you stick to the consensus for "best" (ID best balance of literal meaning with poetic effect) which has been repeatedly confirmed
Fagles Iliad
Lattimore Odyssey
Fagles Aeneid.

>>16733153
>Fagles Iliad
>Lattimore Odyssey
>Fagles Aeneid.
You keep saying this but I've heard completely different elsewhere - Lattimore for Iliad and Fitzgerald for Odyssey.

>>16733184
Well Fagles Iliad keeps the most literal story possible while adding his own poetic flourishes. HOWEVER Fagles overuses this poetic effect a bit too much in the Odyssey which is why the more conservative LATTIMORE offers the superior translation.
As for the Aeneid, it's Fagles hands down.
Fitzgerald on the otherhand takes so many liberties with the original that I would be more comfortable calling it something entirely different from the Odyssey as we know it in the traditional sense. It's a fine piece of writing, but for the serious student wishing to focus exclusively on the words of HOMER not Fitzgerald I find his translations to be cumbersome and un-helpful.
The CONVENTIONAL suggestion is to read Fagles' Iliad, followed by Lattimore's SUPERIOR Odyssey and finally Fagles' Aeneid.

>>16733153
why do you care about the "best balance" when you consider it basically a longer wikipedia article?

>>16733277
Imagine NOT using the BEST translation and just using Fagles' Odyssey when Lattimore's Odyssey is SUPERIOR
>but muh consistency
That's the thing, it's NOT consistently good
Fagle's trilogy is rated below:
Iliad: 8
Odysses: 6
Aeneid 10
While Lattimore's Odyssey scores a 7 (or 8 if I'm being generous)
Ultimately until you read them in GREEK you will never truly understand the brilliance of homer but using
Fagles Iliad
Lattimore Odyssey
Fagles Aeneid
You can get a fairly complete picture of the story Homer was trying to tell.

>>16731917
As is often true, the older the better.

>>16733290
Isn't Fitzgerald generally considered the best Odyssey

Chapman. The first English translation.

>>16733304
Do you even know Greek, or anything about Homeric verse? To rhyme where Homer doesn't is a desecration.

>>16733304
only one of them begins with wrath... how disappointing