Stanley Lombardo Reads Iliad Book I Post by swiftnicholas » Wed Jan 19, 2005 5:27 pm I was hoping that somebody could comment on the accuracy of Stanley Lombardo's reading of Iliad Book One.
Although it has probably been superseded by later prose translations, I like Andrew Lang's translation of the Iliad. I have yet to read his translation of the Odyssey, having read the Fitzgerald translation instead. Personally, comparing the prose from the Lang Iliad to the Fitzgerald Odyssey ( I'll concede somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison ), I prefer the Lang to the Fitzgerald. I have never read the Pope translation of the Iliad straight through, having just read portions when the mood strikes.
It is a good poetic translation, though not as clear as the prose translations; and therefore best read after one of the prose translations IMO. I think we've gone over this ground before, but since you asked: 1. I think anyone who really loves Homer will not be content with just one translation but will want multiple translations. The two epics are so different in character, I do not find a single translator who has satisfied me equally when he has translated both poems. We have debated lengthily what makes a 'faithful' translation, and haven't come up with a definitive answer. I tend to take the approach that the best translation is usually the best recreation of the work in the language into which it is translated, and as in religion, 'faithfulness' is a matter of trying to be faithful to the spirit of the original, not to a literal translation of the words (which can sometimes be impossible).
Given that criteria, I like Fagles' translation of best of the half-dozen I've read, and have to call a draw between Fitzgerald's verse, and T.E. Lawrence's prose, translation of. To comment further, especially in light of my third criteria above, I have to say that the version of I find most pleasurable to read is one that is flatly rejected by most scholars and critics today, Herbert Bates' school edition in verse. It is unfortunately abridged; that is one of the reasons it isn't seriously considered today. The other reason is that it is versified in iambic tetrameter (horrors!
Not even good English iambic pentameter, let alone Homer's 'rolling' hexameters). To most, that makes it NOT a 'faithful' translation. But as Bates pointed out in his introduction, Homer's dactylic hexameters make for heavy lines in English. Classical Greek is lighter and the way the accents fall permit great speed of line, whereas in English the initial stress followed by two weak syllables is plodding in comparison. (Think of the opening of Longfellow's -and if Longfellow was anything, he was a highly skilled versifier).
The English language seems best suited to iambs. To achieve the kind of speed that Bates felt was characteristic of the original, he used a verse form that is not what most think of when they think of long narrative poetry. Judge for yourself if you think it works: TELL ME THE TALE, MUSE, OF THAT MAN OF MANY CHANGES, HE WHO WENT WANDERING SO FAR WHEN HE HAD PLUNDERED Troy’s sacred citadel. And many The men whose cities he beheld, Whose minds he learned to know, and many The sorrows that his soul endured Upon the deep the while he strove To save himself from death and bring His comrades home. Of these things now, Daughter of Zeus, O goddess, tell us, Even as thou wilt, the tale. Ere this Those others who escaped death’s stroke Had reached their homes at last, delivered From battle and the sea. But him And him alone—though still he longed For home and wife—the nymph Calypso, A mighty goddess, kept imprisoned Within her hollow caves, and longed To make him there her husband.
No, Not when the day came when the gods Granted, as circling season passed, That he might once again return To Ithaca—not even then, With those that loved him, might he find A rest from strife. And all the gods Felt pity for him, all but one— Poseidon.
Still, with wrath unceasing, He strove against the good Odysseus Until he reached his home. (compare with Fagles) Sing to me of the man, Muse, the man of twists and turns driven time and again off course, once he had plundered the hallowed heights of Troy. Many cities of men he saw and learned their minds, many pains he suffered, heartsick on the open sea, fighting to save his life and bring his comrades home. But he could not save them from disaster, hard as he strove- the recklessness of their own ways destroyed them all, the blind fools, they devoured the cattle of the Sun and the Sungod wiped from sight the day of their return. Launch out on the story, Muse, daughter of Zeus, start from where you will – sing for our time too. (and Fitzgerald).Begin when all the rest who left behind them headlong death in battle or at sea had long ago returned, while he alone still hungered for home and wife.
Her ladyship Kalypso clung to him in her sea-hollowed caves- a nymph, immortal and most beautiful, who craved him for her own. And when long years and seasons wheeling brought around that point of time ordained for him to make his passage homeward, trials and dangers, even so, attended him even in Ithaka, near those he loved. Yet all the gods had pitied Lord Odysseus, all but Poseidon, raging cold and rough against the brave king till he came ashore at last on his own land. Not knowing classical Greek, I can't say with any certainty, but it seems to me the translators who used the longer lines have used more words than necessary to fill out the lines.
At any rate, I still say that it's pretty hard to say 'this is the best translation.' So far I’ve read only the Fitzgerald translations of and, which I enjoyed for the readability and the way he makes the story flow, however I am keen to try some alternative translations. An extensive list of English translations of both works with links to samples and even full texts can be found here: Some reflections from an English Professor on the more popular translation by Fagles, Fitzgerald and Lattimore are here: The article by Prof. Harris includes some interesting thoughts on the lengths of lines in translations compared to the original. Too bad we can't get a little DMP from De Selby and ask Homer ourselves in some underwater cave.
Sorry, can't help but interject something from what I'm reading when an opportunity presents itself. Fagles' Iliad was great. How about Chapman though? Perhaps, we shouldn't think about the best per se, but marvel at the sheer variety and invention.
Studying ancient Greek is an anachronistic activity. Can anyone arrive at a true understanding of it, its meanings, its sounds?
Not to mention the process of transcribing the oral technique onto paper x number of years ago. Studying ancient Greek is an anachronistic activity. What an odd comment! Studying pretty much any literature more than a generation or so old faces us with a comprehension gap because our values and associations are not the same as the author's. Homeric Greek seemed alien to the inhabitants of Periclean Athens - every bit as antiquated as Chaucerian English seems to us.
Even the values enshrined in the Homeric epics were alien in classical Greek times - the culture of gift exchanges and the culture of honor. I don't think classical Athens was much better placed than we are to understand the cultural depth of the Homeric epics - but that didn't spoil their enjoyment of them just as great tales. 'that didn't spoil their enjoyment of them just as great tales' Precisely. And the translation that permits the greatest enjoyment for the reader today is, for me, the preferred one.
The fact that I can read and understand and in the Old English, and Chaucer, Langland and the works of the Pearl Poet in the original doesn't mean I could, if transported back to those days, swap stories, or even make myself understood, to those poets. But I can appreciate the music of their verse with my limited knowledge, and have seen that no translation I've ever read can do justice to that music, and can only substitute music of its own devising.
I think this is the best any translation can hope for, when it comes to poetry, and I wish I had the opportunity when I was young to learn classical Greek and Latin so I would have a better appreciation of Homer's and Virgil's music. But the stories can be just as enjoyable, and just about every published translation of the Homeric epics I've read-over a dozen-seems to tell the same stories. Those sounds are probably closer to the poetics than an English translation, but I believe there's more evidence for the way Latin sounded. Again, we are also assuming (quite incorrectly) to have an accurate transcription of Homer, who, to complicate things, was part of the oral tradition and as such probably altered or varied his performances. Furthermore, a standardized text of Homer was commissioned in the 2nd century AD carried out by a small group known as the Alexandrine grammarians.
There’s no way to know how much was removed, or had been added along the way. So even if there was a Homer, and some of what he’d done was recorded, it’s safe to say the works as we have them now are the combined efforts of a multitude of individuals, for better or worse. I’m not suggesting that it’s not worthwhile to study ancient Greek, but if you want to get closer to an author in their native language, studying French, Russian, etc. Is a better bet. Even then, it’s not without issue.The bickering commentary is enlightening. The Iliad is an amazingly coherent work, only the Rhesos episode ostensibly unrelated to the remainder and generally not included in the standard texts. So it is likely that it's the work of one man.
I have a vision of someone saying 'OK, Homer, we've got this fantastic new-fangled writing invention, give us your best story in its longest exegesis.' After all, performing the Iliad would take a week minimum - who could afford that? I wonder if Rhesos was the equivalent of a bonus track; a bit of Homer that hadn't been included so someone shoehorned it in. One point to note is that the Iliad's plot is very simple; Achilles goes on strike and gets revenge for his dead friend.
That's sustained over 500 pages. Whereas others within the epic cycle go through all sorts - Memnon, Troilos, the wooden horse, the death of Paris, Neoptolemos and so on - in a tenth of the time.
Homer knew how to make a little go a long way. Interesting that you like the Rieu translations-my very first comparative literature teacher in college couldn't standD them! She thought they were just too slangy and inappropriate in their diction (I remember she used to snort about the translated passage 'And you, Menelaus, you good old redhead!' She was in her 70s then, and a Smith graduate who had a classical education and could read Latin and Greek, so I suspected she had SOME knowledge of what the original was like (although now I realize that because one may have read in the original doesn't mean one can catch subtleties of style, which must only come after a deep immersion in all the extant works in ancient Greek).
At any rate, I also like George Palmer's prose translation of, though not as much as T.E. How much is lost in a prose translation, though, for the sake of clarity and fidelity? From the article Stephan68 cited above by Prof. Harris, one can see that a verse translation usually takes some liberties with the text to meet the requirements of poesy. A prose translation needn't do so, but the music is sacrificed.
Still, the music of a translation isn't the same music as the original text anyway, so what's the advantage of a verse translation, if all you are interested in is the story? 21 I think your teacher had a point. I have a fondness for Rieu because it's the first translation I read (during a holiday to Greece when I was 13). I believe that the philosophy behind Rieu's trsanslation was to produce a Homer for the masses. In fact, it was one of the first Penguin paperbacks to be released. The Loeb prose translations are a reasonable alternative (translated by AG Murray). They are less sensational than Rieu if you prefer a more sedate and dignified Homer.
But I can't get over my bias for a verse translation - it somehow seems a more authentic way to read Homer, even if the music is not the same as the original. If anyone is interested in the Pope translations both are available from EP in gorgeous editions from the 100 Greatest Series. The and posts above made me think of an evasive answer Bilbo Baggins gave to the trolls in: (Troll): 'Before we throw you in the stew, answer this.
Are any of the translations close to Homer?' (Bilbo): 'Yes, lots. No none at all, not one.' Since the stories originated in the oral tradition and were passed along through many 'bards' after Homer (if there was a Homer), it makes it even more impossible to know whether one has come close. I'm thankful that we have the stories and epics we do from the oral tradition of different cultures but in a sense a story 'dies' once it is written down, in that it stops growing as it did when passed along orally.
It's a snapshot of a once living thing. The original Homer might have been a bit perturbed to hear how his epic was being recited at it's last oral performance before it was written down. So in a way, reading the many different translations and versions is like seeing different performances. Some you like, some you don't, and you are surprised when your friends favor the ones you don't. 'in a sense a story 'dies' once it is written down, in that it stops growing as it did when passed along orally.
It's a snapshot of a once living thing' Very pertinent point, jveezer. How many times have I gone to small venues, listened to one of my favorite traditional jazz bands blow up a storm, have bought one of their CDs that had the particular song I liked best, then been sorely disappointed. The execution may have been flawless (with editing, it probably was), but it missed the mark totally in excitement levels. I'm no expert, but here is my tuppence worth. I have read in full the Fitzgerald translation, The Cecil D Lewis translation and I have used the H. Rushton Fairclough translation for assistance in reading Virgil in Latin as a parallel translation.
I find it hellishly difficult to come down firmly on one side or the other. It may just be sentiment (as it was my first read of the Aeneid) but I liked very much the impression Fitzgerald gave me, and similarly so with his translations of The Iliad and The Odyssey. Studying ancient Greek is an anachronistic activity As works of epic poetry, the Iliad and Odyssey can only fully be appreciated in their original language, with the poetic metre and alliterations intact. Translation can only ever communicate the gist of these masterworks. There is certainly nothing anachronistic about studying the ancient language except that insofar as we ignore doing so, we kill the original art. I will grant you that any modern performance of the text would no doubt carry a thick modern accent to the ancient ear. But, then, it is written in an Ionian dialect, so would you also then claim that an ancient Syracusan (or Ithican!) greek-speaker would not have access to the original language just because they speak a different dialect?
Do you prefer Pope, Fitzgerald, Fagles, etc.? Pope's works are not translations, but English poetic works inspired by the original.
I don't think that Pope's poems can really be on the list of legitimate translations, which is not to say that they don't deserve to be appreciated as works in their own right. Fagles has been well received.without a shadow of a doubt, Lattimore is considered the best English Iliad and Fitzgerald the best English Odyssey.
Worth looking into. For anyone who's interested.the bookseller Edward R. Hamilton is selling the Iliad and Odyssey set as publishd by Chester River Press for $111.95. Original price was $350.00.
A set I own and like, but bear in mind (for the persnickety types) tis a Pope translation. The bookseller is very reliable, but his packaging can lead to rubbed books or slipcases. I've never seen him provide packing material around a book inside the box. The catalog I have calls for free shipping as well through year's end, although it appears that the inserted order form is required for that benefit.
If interested, take a look. The translation quoted in is by Ian Johnston ETA: it's not. I'm reading the Odyssey in the Butler prose, gotten the paperback because it was in a local store, and also I'm checking Johnston's translation. Because I started with the Butler I prefer that, although the Johnston certainly is a good read. Fagles just doesn't work for me, yet.
It also struck me (like mentioned) I'm just 'listening' to different performances of the same song, since Homer is said to be a bard, and each performance must have been different, even by himself. The differences lend themselves to repeated reading of the story, something I'm normally hesitant about, requiring at least a decade between rereads to make sure the details are sufficiently foggy to be surprised once more. Iliad: Lattimore ('faithful'). Fagles ('dynamic'). Buttler ('accesible').
Pope ('grandiose') Greek alongside Lattimore is not that crazy and you get better: Easiest: Free audiobook. ML Cohen is the man: Odyssey: Fiztgerald ('poetic'). Fagles ('balanced'). Buttler ('accesible'). Pope ('grandiose') Greek alongside Huddleston's is not that crazy and you get better: Easiest: Fagles audiobook read by Sir Ian McKellen. Worth every penny.
As much as I love and admire the FS Editions, I find the Fagles Paperback Deluxe very practical and satisfying too. Read it out loud if you can. Even better, create a group and read a Chapter(Book) to each other. In a nice place.
I'm aware it is a bit too ambitious and stereotyped to describe translations with just a word, but wanted to make it brief. Thanks a lot for the tip. I'll try Verity's as soon as I can (so many books.). I'm always up for an Iliad re-read. I just went through the video. Very interesting. Thanks again.
Funnily enough, just yesterday I was strolling while listening the 'brutal' voice of Cohen that fits Iliad's vibe so well: 60 Also, you probably realised the author of the article is Crespo, the translator of Clasicos Gredos' Iliad. My Greek is extremely rusty these days, so I usually don't check if this or that word is dative or genitive anymore. I just read the modern fragment first to get the gist of it and then I clumsily read out loud the greek to see how it sounds. (many of the words you end spotting after a while, as Homer tends to repeat words and expressions).
If you really want to go down to business with every word instead, then Chicago's Homer tool is a life saver. But I don't have the time nor the inclination for this nowadays, apart from the odd, occasional, brief fragment.
Just got the Verity's one. I'm mid-way and I'm loving it. I can't put it down. It is very clear and modern.
And it reads very fast. It feels more like a recent, original work than a translation. Sometimes I miss more poetic versions but it still manages to retain quite some poetry in such an easy read. Personally, my favourite Iliad was Lattimore's but I was recommending Fagles or Buttler first to most people. I might still prefer Lattimore's 'spirit' but it looks like I'll be recommending Verity's first to most people now. Many thanks boldface for the great suggestion. Without it, I would have missed this gripping read.
Agreed - my reading of the Terms and Conditions was admittedly a bit cursory, but the relevant criteria I could find referred to commercial solicitations being unwelcome here, and this chap seems not to have been making any attempt to sell anything. I noted his recommendation, though I'm happy with the Homer I know, primarily E. Rieu and occasional hours with a Loeb, and I was glad to be able to alert my wife, who herself translated a few books of the Iliad a while back, to his current project. Guess I'm a bit late to this thread, but the Lattimore translations are by far my favorite among them all. His is the closest to the original Greek version.
Fitzgerald is out cause his is barely a translation because he adds too much to it that wasn't in the original text. And Fagles is acceptable, but he tries to simplify things too much by making his own interpretation of certain words that may have meant to be a bit more ambiguous or multi-layered. Lattimore's version keeps the ambiguity of Homer's wording intact. Like his translation of the beginning of Odyssey where he translates Odysseus as a man of 'many ways', which can mean both, goes through many unexpected paths, but also as a man who's resourceful and multi-talented. This is closer to the original meaning. Fagles instead interprets the text by stating that he's a man of many twists and turns, which really only touches upon half of the meaning of the original text. I'd love to see Folio do a version of Lattimore's Iliad and Odyssey.
But I think it's a long shot. Just checked out the first 7 verses and it looks very readable, although maybe a bit loosely translated for me.
For example: πολύτροπον (resourceful, of many plans) becomes 'complicated', which is far more negative than the Greek; αὐτῶν γὰρ σφετέρῃσιν ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὄλοντο, (they perished/were destroyed through their own sins/faults) is not translated at all; τῶν ἁμόθεν γε, θεά, θύγατερ Διός, εἰπὲ καὶ ἡμῖν (From anywhere, goddess, daughter of Zeus, tell us this too) becomes 'tell the old story for our modern times. Find the beginning.' Which seems to break the fourth wall way too much, emphasising the amount of time between the story and now. A good copy to read if you're interested in following the story but do not want to suffer through overly litteral (or poetic) translations.
The use of meter in a translation is a nice touch, though it seems somewhat forced and requires serious thought to read properly for me (though that may also be attributed to me not being used to English iambic pentameters). E.g.: 'Find THE beGINning' simply cannot be the intended emphasis. FIND the beGINning would be way more natural.
The pentameter has less space unfortunately: it contains 10 syllables whereas the dactylic hexameter can have anywhere between 12 and 18. This means there is less space to convey the message of the original, meaning the translator has to slash parts to adhere to the original line spacing. Personally, I still prefer the Dutch translation by H.J.
De Roy van Zuydewijn, which has the benefit of using the original meter and being faithful to the original, both in storytelling and in word order. To me, it manages to encapsulate some of Homeros' magic without becoming stuffy or unreadable. For English, I would personally prefer a non-poetic translation so that it does not have the syllable restrictions, or a poetic translation that does not pretend to follow the original line numbers too closely (cf. Golding's translation of Ovidius' Metamorphoses) so that it doesn't require slashing/line filling. Thanks for the insight.
I did wonder about the emphasis put on adhering to the original line spacing and why it seemed to be such a big selling point, and how that restriction affected the translation. I have read the Iliad before (don't remember which translation) but this is my first foray into the Odyssey so I am quite enjoying the story for now! Of course, I hope to read more translations in the future and a lifetime goal I have for myself is to learn both Latin and Ancient Greek. I apparently have high hopes for my self teaching abilities, ha! For my studies, I translated parts of the Odyssey and Iliad (roughly 4-5 books from each, ca.
700 lines/book) directly, making a literal translation. That translation, even for a classicist, is very tough reading. A literary/published translation will probably bring you more pleasure. Not trying to burst your bubble, but: It took me 2 years of university level Greek/Latin to read Homeros at 2 pages/hour and Vergilius at 1.5/hour. I'm a bit quicker now, though not anywhere near to fluent reading level. Few scholars are.