/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.9681066]

Am I alone in thinking that this is boring as shit? I admire the flow of the narrative and the ingenuity of the retelling of greek myths but it's so dull to me. I already know most of the myths and the smaller ones are nothing more than anecdotes or stories to bridge the gap in the chronology.

Maybe I'm reading it at the wrong time in my life or maybe I expected something totally different, but I can't "get into" the book when I read it and it feels like a chore.

[Anonymous No.9681070]

Try Amores and Are Amatoria my friend.

[Anonymous No.9681074]

Well fuck you OP, I read it a week ago and thought it was fantastic

[Anonymous No.9681082]

>>9681074
Can you describe what you liked about it? I was really looking forward to it when I started but just kinda lost steam.

[Anonymous No.9681088]

>>9681066
>retelling of greek myths
I was considering reading this before delving into Shakespeare. Is a background in Greek mythology necessary to understand this work? I haven't read much Greek mythology beyond the Iliad/Odyssey since high school

[Anonymous No.9681136]

>>9681088

It's often the case that autists will tell you to read a guide to Greek mythology like Edith Hamilton's or Robert Graves. However this is only good advice 'if' what you're intending to do is 'start with the greeks.' And this is so because it's assumed that your motivational drive comes from an interest in Greek culture/beginning the western cannon, thus, interest will keep you motivated through the tedium of the material.

However, as you're a couple of degrees separated from this base level of interest in the Greeks (you want to read Ovid primarily to give you insight/enjoyment in 'your' primary interest, Shakespeare), I would say just supplement any confusing parts of Ovid with wiki articles. Your reading will be a lot more flexible, and you'll always only be a step or two away from your main interest, so you'll be more likely to carry it out.

But hey, whoah, not calling you a pseud or nothing. In fact, for fun, I think you'd have a lot of fun reading Arthur Golding's translation of Ovid. Why? Because its the translation Shakespeare read himself (and was influenced by - even alluding/quoting it in his works). The language is a little stiffer than even Bill Shakespeare, but will go toward the lengths you're actually pursuing (again, insight into Shakespeare). Plus, you have guys like Harold Bloom and Ezra Pound saying its one of their favorite books and their favorite translation of Ovid. Sure it might not be the most "accurate" translation (Hell, Golding mentions Jesus a couple of times), but it might be the prettiest. Think how the prettiest translation of Homer is the wildly inaccurate, though Gorgeous Alexander Pope

[Anonymous No.9681152]

>>9681082
I find Ovid's retelling of the Greek myths more enjoyable over his Geek counterparts, for example I prefer his version of the Flood over Theogny. As for the ones that stood out to me, Niobe, The Transformation of Cadmus, and the Doctrine of Pythagoras. The one with Pythagoras is pretty much the central poem of the entire text.

[Anonymous No.9681214]

If a book bores you, put it down.

[Anonymous No.9681221]

>>9681136
Thanks for this. Great insight, anon.

[Anonymous No.9681255]

Interesting this book came up in the thread. I was shopping for the right translation this afternoon, but I didn't feel certain enough to pick one. What would you recommend -- or better yet, how would you categorize the different translations of the Metamorphoses? For reference, I study classics as well.

[Anonymous No.9681263]

I've read sections in Latin and that's where the entertainment really is. I imagine it's pretty dry in English because you can't appreciate his control of the language which makes the original stories so enjoyable.

[Anonymous No.9681309]

Yeah, I've read parts in Latin too. I think the biggest challenge for the translator must surely be conveying the epic's humor.

[Anonymous No.9681362]

>>9681221

No problem anon, we're all eager to learn

>>9681255

Again, it would depend what your interests are.

Are you interested in the myths in and of themselves, and just like them in one big source with the added bonus of literary value/beauty? Then you want a "clear," "contemporary" translation. The reading will be easy, and the poetry should hold.

Interested in Ancient Rome? The world that Ovid inhabited?

Ideally you're getting one of those cool translations with a side-by-side text comparison (so when you inevitably begin learning Latin, this trusty bad boy will be sitting on your shelf. Don't forget your Whelock).

Are you reading Ovid for it's Shakespearean influences?

See above

[Anonymous No.9681379]

I'm most interested in a balance between one that stays true to the text and one that endeavors to instill it with the same tone and grace achieved by Ovid in Latin. Think in the middle between a Lattimore and a Pope. Any suggestions?

[Anonymous No.9681407]

Who told it better?

[Anonymous No.9681453]

>>9681362

Your best bets are between Mandelbaum and Martin. Perhaps Simpson


1993: MANDELBAUM

My soul would sing of metamorphoses.
But since, o gods, you were the source of these
bodies becoming other bodies, breathe
your breath into my book of changes: may
the song I sing be seamless as its way
weaves from the world's beginning to our day.

2001: SIMPSON

My mind leads me to something new, to tell of forms changed to other bodies. Gods,
inspire this poem I've begun (for you changed it too), and from the first origin of the
world spin my song's fine thread unbroken down to my own time.

2004: MARTIN

My mind leads me to speak now of forms changed
into new bodies: O gods above, inspire
this undertaking (which you've changed as well)
and guide my poem in its epic sweep
from the world's beginning to the present day.

[Anonymous No.9681475]

>>9681453

Shit, meant>>9681379

[Anonymous No.9681494]

>>9681379
>Think in the middle between a Lattimore and a Pope. Any suggestions?

Can't help with modern day translations, but for references to Ovid in English, there is Caxton's version, which is a translation from the French. If you have trouble with Early Modern English, like Chaucer, this might not be the best route, but the stories as translated in this were the standard from the late 15th Century

Then there is an early 18th Century translation, mostly Dryden, but parts of it are Pope. It's advertised as done by a collection of hands, and since it has Dryden and Pope is probably not what you're looking for.

However, between those two is something that might interest you, if you can manage Shakespeare- the Golding translation. It's what Shakespeare read.

It's not heroic couplets so it's not quite like the Dryden, Pope, etc version, and it's probably your best bet to in2 slightly esoteric references in English. Especially because Spenser read it too not just Shakespeare.

A translation would be hard to keep everything intact, so I'd err on what it does for your English Ovid references than your Latin Ovid references. It's hard to translate a lot of the double entendres, so that's a "Learn Latin" for me.