/lit/ - Literature

Homer

Alexander Pope

Fagles. dont listen to the others, everything else is google translator tier or just plain outdated

>>6667862
Anyone who says this unironically is retarded.

>>6667855
Depends; if you want an attempt at a poetic approximation, Fitzgerald is pretty good, and while retaining what Homer actually wrote, at that. Fagles has some flavor, and some nice rhythms, but after a while, he gets awfully boring and loses his touch; Stanley Lombardo tops him in that respect, though Fagles is not bad. Just be aware that with that latter two, you're not quite reading Homer.

Probably the most accurate rendering is that of Lattimore. Even he misses at points (I don't think I've encountered any translator who doesn't have some issue); but all in all, he's much closer to the Greek than any of the others. Arguably, one can say he's better for study than for pleasure reading.

>>6667864
stfu

>>6667922
What would be the best choice for a mixture of pleasure and study?

>>6667878
Nope. Sure, Pope's work is incredibly unfaithful, but it's like the KJV: a beautiful work full of quotable sublimity approximating the aesthetic quality of Homer's own work. It has its place to be recommended.

>>6667931
Fitzgerald.

Fagles.

>>6667931
Definitely Fitzgerald.

Fagles gets to be a hassle if you ever look at anyone referring to Homer by the line numbers (if it's not in fact Fagles's translation they're quoting from or referring to). They're completely confused.

Lattimore, Pope and Fagles depending on what you want

Fitzgerald > Murray > Fagles >>> everything else

On a related note, whose translation of Metamorphoses or the Aeneid would you say is the best?

Lattimore for accuracy. Fagles for readability.

Apparently the new B. Powell translation of the Iliad is great too but I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

>translations

>>6668558
I've read the entire Iliad and Odyssey in Greek as part of my degree. Even so, having an English translation is invaluable.

>>6668591
For an undergraduate degree?

>>6668597
Yep. Classics at Oxford.

>>6668602
Damn, my shitty state school doesn't have a single undergraduate course on Homeric Greek. They have one on Thucydides though which I find odd.

>>6668558
Oh i'm sure you are fluent in 8 languages

This whole >translations meme would work if most of you actually new ancient greek

>>6668609
Maybe you're the odd one out.

>>6668608
I just took "Greek" at school which included a whole range of stuff. Homeric to 4th century. The differences really aren't that significant.

>>6668036
>Nope. Sure, Pope's work is incredibly unfaithful, but it's like the KJV: a beautiful work full of quotable sublimity approximating the aesthetic quality of Homer's own work. It has its place to be recommended.

I'm glad you say this. I just got the most beautiful leatherback copy of the Pope translation from some person's yard sale. And it's in near-perfect condition.

Apparently Fagles didn't actually translate from the original text. He just took other people's work and chopped it up, then repackaged it. Funny thing is, he actually did a decent job. Just goes to show.

>>6668609
Well, there was a general a while back where a bunch of us were learning ancient Greek...

>>6667855
I do.

Lattimore if you want the most accurate verse, Pope if you insist on poetry.

who for kierkeggard?
Lowrie or hannay?
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9988.html

>>6667855
I've read the Lombardo translations, and they're fairly accessible. They definitely do a good job of maintaining some of the rhythm, so once I get immersed, I enjoy it a lot.

>>6671008
I thought the Hong translations were considered to be the best, although Hannay certainly isn't too bad.

pope

Is Fitzgerald easy to read and understand for someone who's not that into literature?

>>6671031
Homer in general is pretty accessible, in that he doesn't employ any complex literary devices.

>>6671026
no opinion on the one I want to get?
and hongs are the academic standard but out of my range

>>6667855

Is the B&N translation good for the Iliad?

>>6671031
Yes, very much so.

>>6667855
I personally like Richard Lattimore, and also cause Fitzgerald liked that translation.

>reading translations of poetry

I got warners version of the pelopponisian war, and didn't know lattimore did one.
Did I screw up?

>>6671728
Should have got the Landmark edition.

>>6671728
That Lattimore is a different one, but yes, it is the best translation of Thucydides around.

The Landmark edition is very helpful, with all of its maps and margin summaries. The use both it and the Lattimore when I study Thucydides.