9 Comments

The Lattimore translation remains for me, as does my love for _The Iliad_.

Expand full comment
Dec 22, 2023·edited Dec 22, 2023Liked by John Halbrooks

Thanks for this considered judgment, John. I'm happy for it in part because it helps me decide to stick with Lattimore in my next reading. Or maybe I'm just using it for confirmation bias. :)

Also, I was reviewing translations in preparing for the War and Peace slow read. I came upon, on my own, the site that @Simon Haisell recommends to help people choose: https://welovetranslations.com/2021/08/31/whats-the-best-translation-of-war-and-peace/

I have the decades-old translation by Rosemary Edmunds, now out of print, and I wanted to see, again, if I should be tempted to another. I ended, again, confirmed to stick with it. A primary reason is my wish to be drawn into the historical-cultural world of the original work, not to have the work brought into the present. I sought that in choosing the Lattimore translations of Works and Days and the Theogony I'm currently reading. Some of the more current and popular W&P translations, like the Briggs, seek that updated sensibility and I don't want that. I already had that sense about Wilson and The Iliad. (You can tell me if I'm overstating the case there.) In the passage you offer for comparison, the slower, grander, more solemn cadence of the Lattimore is very much to my point.

BTW, on Tolstoy again, the Edmonds translation is often identified as a 1957 translation. However, my Penguin Classics edition is a 1978 revision by Edmonds. She notes that it's based on a 1962-63 definitive revision for the Russian collected works. She writes that it includes 1885 corrections founded in misreadings of Tolstoy's awful handwriting and insertions, and his own careless if not somewhat indifferent editing of his own work. I should think other English translations post '63 were based on that revision, but I know that a couple of popular translations actually start from the 1923 Maude translation.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Jay, I’m using the Norton critical edition of w&p, which is a revision of the Maude--for the simple reason that I have it on my shelf. But I look forward to comparing translation choices in the coming year.

Expand full comment

I'm reading the Samuel Butler 1898 prose translation of the Iliad in the Great Books at the moment. I do have a copy of Wilson's Odyssey which I was planning on comparing with the Great Books version. I agree that it's a testament to the enduring value of Homer that the epics continue to be translated anew. I'm curious how much fans of the new translations think they enhance the meanings and relevance of the ideas contained in the Iliad and Odyssey?

Expand full comment
author

I’m not sure about specifics, but I know that there have been both complaints and praise for Wilson’s updated language. It seems that each generation makes its own Homer, or Homers.

Expand full comment

I think it speaks to the profound impact of Homer's work that we are still getting new translations. I read the Iliad in high school but have no idea which translation it was. I am looking forward to reading it again in the new year. Translation is an artform of its own and it is interesting to see the creative choices the translator makes.

Expand full comment
author

Agreed: a good translator of a poem must be a good poet. I look forward to your thoughts on the poem as you reread.

Expand full comment

John - I saw this article yesterday. Not sure if you saw it but thought it might be of interest to you.

https://www.americamagazine.org/arts-culture/2023/12/22/interview-emily-wilson-iliad-246769

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Matthew--will check it out.

Expand full comment